England in Australia

[evertonfan]

Australia have license to go with 5 bowlers to be honest. All 11 of your team bar Gilly got runs. A batting line-up with the best batsman in the world, a number 9 who can get 50 and a number 10 who can smash 30+, must have some real confidence about it.

 

[aussie1st]

Well Clark just got another it's going to be hard dropping him after that effort what more hes cleaning up the tail which we usually spend a bit too long doing.

 

[cricketmad09]

Maybe Lee will get the axe in favour of Stuart MacGill?

Doesnt seem logical to drop a guy who took 7/95 odd and keep a guy who took 2/140 odd.

 

[aussie1st]

I'd still like to have a reverse swing bowler at pace maybe Tait on his home ground. Of course it's never going to happen and I can't see them dropping Lee. The only way we could play 5 bowlers is playing Lee with his extra batting abilities. But I suspect we will see Clarke and Clark make way for MacGill and Watson.

 

[Kal-El]

Maybe Lee will get the axe in favour of Stuart MacGill?

Doesnt seem logical to drop a guy who took 7/95 odd and keep a guy who took 2/140 odd.

IMO we can't go in with just 2 pacemen. So we should drop someone, preferably Lee, for MacGill and drop Martyn for Watson. But Martos undroppable due to being best buddys with Punter...

 

[aussie_ben91]

IMO we can't go in with just 2 pacemen. So we should drop someone, preferably Lee, for MacGill and drop Martyn for Watson. But Martos undroppable due to being best buddys with Punter...

You'd drop Clarke over Martyn wouldn't you? Clarke only made a half-century and came in when we were at about 450 while Martyn missed out and was in the original starting XI in the first place.

 

[brad352]

IMO we can't go in with just 2 pacemen. So we should drop someone, preferably Lee, for MacGill and drop Martyn for Watson. But Martos undroppable due to being best buddys with Punter...

...and being a better batsman than everyone competing for his spot

 

[cricketmad09]

IMO we can't go in with just 2 pacemen. So we should drop someone, preferably Lee, for MacGill and drop Martyn for Watson. But Martos undroppable due to being best buddys with Punter...

Watson may come back in, giving us that 3rd paceman option.

 

[aussie1st]

It's a no brainier that if Watson was coming in it will be for Clarke. The tough choice for the selectors will be which paceman, obviously it should be Lee but they usually are loyal to incumbents.

 

[Dez]

And why are people saying drop Brett Lee? So he didn't get a bag wickets he is a must in the Australian team.

Australia do not need Stuart MacGill and I say that they shouldn't use him at all in the series, especially by axing Brett Lee. If they need a second spinner they should consider dropping an All Rounder (Shane Watson) or a Batsman (Michael Clarke) and I say replace whoever with young Dan Cullen, not only do I think he would be a better choice as a second spinner with his Off Spin but he can also use a bat unlike Stuart MacGill.

 

[brad352]

And why are people saying drop Brett Lee? So he didn't get a bag wickets he is a must in the Australian team.

Australia do not need Stuart MacGill and I say that they shouldn't use him at all in the series, especially by axing Brett Lee. If they need a second spinner they should consider dropping an All Rounder (Shane Watson) or a Batsman (Michael Clarke) and I say replace whoever with young Dan Cullen, not only do I think he would be a better choice as a second spinner with his Off Spin but he can also use a bat unlike Stuart MacGill.

Cullen's had his token Test match, now he's looking like taking the Hauritz route. I'd think taking domestic wickets would be a bit of a prerequisite to getting picked again

 

[sifter132]

I'd still like to have a reverse swing bowler at pace maybe Tait on his home ground. Of course it's never going to happen and I can't see them dropping Lee. The only way we could play 5 bowlers is playing Lee with his extra batting abilities. But I suspect we will see Clarke and Clark make way for MacGill and Watson.

Yes I think we'll see those changes, but on present form Stuart Clark should stay. As an Aussie fan it frustrates me that Brett Lee can get loads of ODI wickets, but he struggles to perform in Tests. I wish he would learn how to bowl at Test level. When he takes the new ball first up he seem to be trying to bowl line and length which is great, but you feel that he doesn't mix up his variations very well. For example, bouncers - He either bowls no bouncers for a long period allowing batsmen to get on the front foot, or he bowls an over full of them - where he needs to bowl one an over just as a very fast surprise.

One other point is that every commentator and his dog seems to love the idea of having variety in a bowling attack. Oh pick Johnson cause he is a lefty, don't pick Clark he is too like McGrath, you need Tait for his unpredictable variety, don't pick MacGill cause then we'd have 2 leggies (the selectors are over that one now). Has anyone ever proven variety makes a real difference? And how much variety do you need in an attack? England in 2005 had 4 right arm fast medium bowlers and it didn't do their bowling attack any harm.

 

[evertonfan]

In all honesty, why should Australia even make changes to their side? I mean, why change a winning team expecially when the victory was so convincing? The only two players who should even be considered for the drop are Gilchrist and Lee as they both contributed little to the game, although Lee did get the important early wicket of KP today.

 

[cricketmad09]

And why are people saying drop Brett Lee? So he didn't get a bag wickets he is a must in the Australian team.

Australia do not need Stuart MacGill and I say that they shouldn't use him at all in the series, especially by axing Brett Lee. If they need a second spinner they should consider dropping an All Rounder (Shane Watson) or a Batsman (Michael Clarke) and I say replace whoever with young Dan Cullen, not only do I think he would be a better choice as a second spinner with his Off Spin but he can also use a bat unlike Stuart MacGill.

So you think that a guy with a FC average of 40 is a better choice than a guy with a TEST match average of 27?

And he can't bat for ****.

In all honesty, why should Australia even make changes to their side? I mean, why change a winning team expecially when the victory was so convincing? The only two players who should even be considered for the drop are Gilchrist and Lee as they both contributed little to the game, although Lee did get the important early wicket of KP today.

Drop Gilchrist? are you mad?

So what? He failed in 1 innings, plus he is in the team to do a little thing call wicketkeep instead.

 

[brad352]

In all honesty, why should Australia even make changes to their side? I mean, why change a winning team expecially when the victory was so convincing?

I don't like the never change a winning team philosophy, if there are better options outside the team you pick them regardless of what the other 10 blokes did in a given game. If we need two spinners for Adelaide someone gets the chop, and Clarke goes out because Watson's a better choice; it'd be pretty ordinary of the selectors to say "okay, we rated you above Clarke before the first Test but since we won we're not making any changes".

The only two players who should even be considered for the drop are Gilchrist and Lee as they both contributed little to the game, although Lee did get the important early wicket of KP today.

We select based on one game now?

And he can't bat for ****.

We'll pick him as an all rounder then, performs equally well with the bat and ball