South Africa in Australia Dec 2008-Jan 2009
- Thread starter IanG
- Start date
formula1man
International Cricketer
I prefer the look of the old helmets. Haydos always used them didn't he?
I reckon Tait drops his pace on purpose for more accuracy. He is very handy with the older ball with the reverse swinging yorker. Sadly for Hilfy I just don't see a spot for him with our full strength side unless they drop Hopes and even then Lee is still to comeback.
Bad decision in my opinion. Should have left out White or Hopes, preferably both. White's role has been defined as a specialist batsman/finisher and he's certainly nowhere near that. Hopes on the other hand if not opening the batting, is effectively a specialist bowler and he's nowhere near that.
Since Lee and Johnson have been away, Hilfenhaus has been the rock of Aussie bowling next to Bracken (who has transformed into a holding bowler ONLY looking to dry the runs, and not taking wickets at all).
Since Lee and Johnson have been away, Hilfenhaus has been the rock of Aussie bowling next to Bracken (who has transformed into a holding bowler ONLY looking to dry the runs, and not taking wickets at all).
formula1man
International Cricketer
Im am certain we could come up with a better side then this, even with our injuries. What would be your full strength side?
mine.
1. Watson
2. Marsh
3. Ponting
4. Symonds
5. Clarke
6. M. Hussey
7. Haddin
8. Tait, Hauritz D.Hussey (depending on situation)
9. Johnson
10. Lee
11. Bracken
I still think Clarke isn't needed but he should be 5 not 4. I would prefer Mike 5 Dave 6. But oh well.
Warner and Dave reserve batsmen, while Hopes reserve all rounder, Ronchi Reserve keeper, Hilfy reserve bowler
mine.
1. Watson
2. Marsh
3. Ponting
4. Symonds
5. Clarke
6. M. Hussey
7. Haddin
8. Tait, Hauritz D.Hussey (depending on situation)
9. Johnson
10. Lee
11. Bracken
I still think Clarke isn't needed but he should be 5 not 4. I would prefer Mike 5 Dave 6. But oh well.
Warner and Dave reserve batsmen, while Hopes reserve all rounder, Ronchi Reserve keeper, Hilfy reserve bowler
Left_Hander
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Online Cricket Games Owned
I think Haddin could be opening batsmen in place of Watson. I feel that Haddin is wasted at 7, he is a Warner/Gilly type player probably a little more orthodox in his approach. There is no way D. Hussey would come in at 8 because we would only play 3 specialist bowlers and Hussey/Clarke/Symonds would have to bowl 20 overs between them (if Watson doesn't play)
mattfb
Chairman of Selectors
Oh, hey Steve Rixon
But I do agree with you and Rixon. Haddin has the potential to open.
formula1man
International Cricketer
ok then.
1. Haddin
2. Marsh
3. Ponting
4. Symonds
5. Clarke/D. Hussey
6. M. Hussey
7. Watson
8. Tait, Hauritz (depending on situation)
9. Johnson
10. Lee
11. Bracken
???
with ponting wanting to rotate workloads in ODIs, then Hussey can replace Clarke at times and Hopes with Watson, Hilfy as a bowler, Ronchi with Haddin.
1. Haddin
2. Marsh
3. Ponting
4. Symonds
5. Clarke/D. Hussey
6. M. Hussey
7. Watson
8. Tait, Hauritz (depending on situation)
9. Johnson
10. Lee
11. Bracken
???
with ponting wanting to rotate workloads in ODIs, then Hussey can replace Clarke at times and Hopes with Watson, Hilfy as a bowler, Ronchi with Haddin.
angryangy
ICC Chairman
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2004
Yeah, if there is some advantage to not being Tait, Hilfenhaus didn't really find it in endurance. His final spells were 1/31 (3.3) and 0/37 (3.0). Tait was more consistent as the game wore on in the 1st ODI. In fact, he was only hit for two boundaries.
I would still keep Clarke and Symonds at 4 and 5. It has been a good partnership just needs Clarke back in form.
Only problem with that lineup is will Watson bowl again and he is wasted down at 7 but Haddin is also wasted down there so lose lose situation. If Warner performs in these last few games then I would keep him at the top as well.
aussie1st added 1 Minutes and 50 Seconds later...
Also got the wicket to spark the collapse in the 1st ODI I think it was. With a bit more fitness who knows how much more dangerous Tait will be. Probably bowling longer opening spells and coming back at the death with more pace.
At full strength, this Australian team needs a few key ingredients to make work.
Successful opening partnerships in ODI cricket generally require an aggressor and an ultra aggressor. Over the years we've seen the following:
Jayasuriya and Dilshan
Gilchrist and Hayden
Sehwag and Gambhir
Gayle and Misc
McCullum and Ryder
etc
With all the players on the left being the 'ultra aggressors' usually scoring at a lightning strike rate and changing the balance of the game. Then on the right you have the 'aggressors' who still score very fast compared to a lot of the players on the team, but less so because they play the anchor role and try to bat through the innings. At the moment we have Marsh opening, and he just seems to have no fluidity in his innings with a strike rate of about 75. That kind of thing was suited to maybe 10-15 years ago with a real rock at the top of the innings but not so anymore, the game has changed. That's why Warner would be such a cornerstone if he could come good, he could provide us with a Gilly-esque start and change the game for us. To partner him would be Watson because he brings balance to the team and can play the aggressive anchor. Hence opening combination is:
Warner
Watson
Ponting
Now I'm also in favour of the Haddin opening theory because yes he is wasted that low and can strike a ball very cleanly and he adds impotice to the innings. But I guess we can only pick him there when/if Warner fails.
Now as I said before with the middle order you need that formula we had back in 2006 when Martyn was still playing, so it's just a straight swap for Hussey
D. Hussey
Symonds
Clarke
M. Hussey
Haddin
Which is perfect because at the moment, Clarke is coming in too high and probably can't stand the pressure hence only averaging mid thirties since the 2007. That's obviously made worse by the fact that our opening combo is currently green and likes to lose wickets early so if he bats 4, has to come in even earlier which is not good.
Finally with the bowlers, we have to have systematic selection system where we pick from a pool of bowlers rather than just by random from the domestic scene. IMO this should be the pool when everybody is fit;
Lee, Bracken, Johnson, Clark, Hilfenhaus, Tait, McGain. Now obviously the first three positions are already nailed down with
Lee
Johnson
Bracken
Hilfenhaus/Tait/McGain
so the hard part is just deciding if the last specialist bowler is a spinner or quick which is relatively easy.
To summarise we get:
Warner
Watson
Ponting
D. Hussey
Symonds
Clarke
M. Hussey
Haddin
Lee
Johnson
Bracken
Hilfenhaus/Tait/McGain
An almost perfect squad with 4 specialist bowling options so we shouldnt' get situations where we struggle to bowl out sides, and also a Watson to come in and keep it tight with maybe Hussey and Clarke to also chip in with with a couple if need be. That batting lineup is probably the most solid in world cricket (bar SA who've got Bradman in their team).
Successful opening partnerships in ODI cricket generally require an aggressor and an ultra aggressor. Over the years we've seen the following:
Jayasuriya and Dilshan
Gilchrist and Hayden
Sehwag and Gambhir
Gayle and Misc
McCullum and Ryder
etc
With all the players on the left being the 'ultra aggressors' usually scoring at a lightning strike rate and changing the balance of the game. Then on the right you have the 'aggressors' who still score very fast compared to a lot of the players on the team, but less so because they play the anchor role and try to bat through the innings. At the moment we have Marsh opening, and he just seems to have no fluidity in his innings with a strike rate of about 75. That kind of thing was suited to maybe 10-15 years ago with a real rock at the top of the innings but not so anymore, the game has changed. That's why Warner would be such a cornerstone if he could come good, he could provide us with a Gilly-esque start and change the game for us. To partner him would be Watson because he brings balance to the team and can play the aggressive anchor. Hence opening combination is:
Warner
Watson
Ponting
Now I'm also in favour of the Haddin opening theory because yes he is wasted that low and can strike a ball very cleanly and he adds impotice to the innings. But I guess we can only pick him there when/if Warner fails.
Now as I said before with the middle order you need that formula we had back in 2006 when Martyn was still playing, so it's just a straight swap for Hussey
D. Hussey
Symonds
Clarke
M. Hussey
Haddin
Which is perfect because at the moment, Clarke is coming in too high and probably can't stand the pressure hence only averaging mid thirties since the 2007. That's obviously made worse by the fact that our opening combo is currently green and likes to lose wickets early so if he bats 4, has to come in even earlier which is not good.
Finally with the bowlers, we have to have systematic selection system where we pick from a pool of bowlers rather than just by random from the domestic scene. IMO this should be the pool when everybody is fit;
Lee, Bracken, Johnson, Clark, Hilfenhaus, Tait, McGain. Now obviously the first three positions are already nailed down with
Lee
Johnson
Bracken
Hilfenhaus/Tait/McGain
so the hard part is just deciding if the last specialist bowler is a spinner or quick which is relatively easy.
To summarise we get:
Warner
Watson
Ponting
D. Hussey
Symonds
Clarke
M. Hussey
Haddin
Lee
Johnson
Bracken
Hilfenhaus/Tait/McGain
An almost perfect squad with 4 specialist bowling options so we shouldnt' get situations where we struggle to bowl out sides, and also a Watson to come in and keep it tight with maybe Hussey and Clarke to also chip in with with a couple if need be. That batting lineup is probably the most solid in world cricket (bar SA who've got Bradman in their team).
Similar threads
- Poll
