View Full Version : Hussey to leapfrog Hodge
Minkus_Swan
5 Mar 2005, 17:24
What do you make of it victorian fans??? I still wouldn't rule out Katich for the opener spot instead of Hussey.
MIKE Hussey may leapfrog Brad Hodge to make his Test debut next week if Matthew Hayden is ruled out of the first trans-Tasman Test in Christchurch.
http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,12449647-39115,00.html
haha that would be great :D
Are you sure it didn't say David Hussey?
What do you make of it victorian fans??? I still wouldn't rule out Katich for the opener spot instead of Hussey.
Nothing wrong with Mike Hussey as an opener ahead of Hodge.He is an opener,where as Hodge has rarely done it in Milk Matches.Hussey should be in the side ahead of Katich.Then Hodge should be in ahead of Katich.
guess_who
5 Mar 2005, 17:39
Nothing wrong with Mike Hussey as an opener ahead of Hodge.He is an opener,where as Hodge has rarely done it in Milk Matches.Hussey should be in the side ahead of Katich.Then Hodge should be in ahead of Katich.
Yes. good call. Nothing against Hussey.
Bentleigh
5 Mar 2005, 17:43
As he should.
Hussey is a proper opener.
SorryIHammerChicken
5 Mar 2005, 18:03
As he should.
Hussey is a proper opener.
hussey isn't a proper opener.
he can open though, unlike Hodge.
Hussey is a versatile player who you could rely on to bat anywhere. admittedly, his stats as an opener (in one day games at least) are average compared to him batting at 4 or 5, but if Hayden was injured, you would probably go for Hussey as he is in form. However, I would still prefer to see Maher, Rogers or Elliott replace Hayden.
Bentleigh
5 Mar 2005, 18:06
hussey isn't a proper opener.
he can open though, unlike Hodge.
Hussey is a versatile player who you could rely on to bat anywhere. admittedly, his stats as an opener (in one day games at least) are average compared to him batting at 4 or 5, but if Hayden was injured, you would probably go for Hussey as he is in form. However, I would still prefer to see Maher, Rogers or Elliott replace Hayden.
Elliot & Maher is pointless. We are trying to deveolp players for the future.
Rogers, although looks a talent isnt up to test standard yet. I wouldnt have him in front of Hussey, Katich or Hodge.
And mate, in the long form of the game Hussey is an opener who can also play middle order.
hussey isn't a proper opener.
he can open though, unlike Hodge.
Hussey is a versatile player who you could rely on to bat anywhere. admittedly, his stats as an opener (in one day games at least) are average compared to him batting at 4 or 5
Don't give a toss where he bats in limited overs matches. He is an opener in the longer version of the game, and should bat in that position, if required, ahead of Katich. Say no more.
hussey isn't a proper opener.
he can open though, unlike Hodge.
Hussey is a versatile player who you could rely on to bat anywhere. admittedly, his stats as an opener (in one day games at least) are average compared to him batting at 4 or 5, but if Hayden was injured, you would probably go for Hussey as he is in form. However, I would still prefer to see Maher, Rogers or Elliott replace Hayden.
Hussey's a specialist opener in the longer form of the game.
Don't be confused by the fact that he likes to bat down the order in one-day games.
eddiesmith
5 Mar 2005, 18:58
Gotta love this, when we need a test opener in Melbourne, they call up Katich. Now they need a test opener that would see a Victorian get his first test cap in the middle order whilst Katich opens, they call in Hussey
Pro NSW double standards
Nothing against Hussey, but why did they call in Katich when Langer was doubtful but now that Katich is in the side, they call in an opener? Its just more bull******** to stop Hodge getting a game
Bentleigh
5 Mar 2005, 19:01
Gotta love this, when we need a test opener in Melbourne, they call up Katich. Now they need a test opener that would see a Victorian get his first test cap in the middle order whilst Katich opens, they call in Hussey
Pro NSW double standards
Nothing against Hussey, but why did they call in Katich when Langer was doubtful but now that Katich is in the side, they call in an opener? Its just more bull******** to stop Hodge getting a game
Langer
Hussey
Ponting
Martyn
Clarke
Hodge
Gilchrist
Warne
Gil'pie
Kaspa
McGrath
You reckon?
year of the roo
5 Mar 2005, 19:12
Langer
Hussey
Ponting
Martyn
Clarke
Hodge
Gilchrist
Warne
Gil'pie
Kaspa
McGrath
You reckon?
Well that's what it should be, but expect a vastly different line-up after the selectors have had their chance to ******** things up.
eddiesmith
5 Mar 2005, 19:15
Thats what it should be, but after the negative ******** every time Katich misses out, I doubt he will. They really should have just opened with Katich and played Hodge as well.
Now if Ponting gets injured, they will probably call in someone else to replace him.
Bentleigh
5 Mar 2005, 19:17
They really should have just opened with Katich and played Hodge as well..
Na.
I dont mind if Katich opens in fook around cricket but in the real stuff you need real openers.
eddiesmith
5 Mar 2005, 19:29
But why the hell did they call up Katich as an opener in Aus? It makes no ********ing sense, except for that, A victorian was the next best choice so they chose Katich, now a Victorian would get a game if they used katich so they brought in Hussey. Its a conspiracy
Bentleigh
5 Mar 2005, 19:40
Hodge hasnt done much wrong. Its a good problem to have for the selectors.
I know Hodge is a gun outfeildsman. What is he like up close?
SorryIHammerChicken
5 Mar 2005, 19:45
Hussey's a specialist opener in the longer form of the game.
Don't be confused by the fact that he likes to bat down the order in one-day games.
touche.
bentleigh, you're right about blooding some players who can play for the next 4-5 years such as Hussey, Maher's time is probably past him, too many others in front of him, even though he is a similar age to Hussey.
year of the roo
5 Mar 2005, 19:52
touche.
bentleigh, you're right about blooding some players who can play for the next 4-5 years such as Hussey, Maher's time is probably past him, too many others in front of him, even though he is a similar age to Hussey.
M.Hussey is 1 year younger than Maher and Hodge.
Bentleigh
5 Mar 2005, 19:56
M.Hussey is 1 year younger than Maher and Hodge.
You'd expect Hussey to be in the selectors thoughts for the future for the next half dozen years or so.
Hodge has just scored too many runs domesticly not to be in the mix.
As good as Maher has been do you reckon he has a future in the Test or ODI side?
year of the roo
5 Mar 2005, 20:46
You'd expect Hussey to be in the selectors thoughts for the future for the next half dozen years or so.
Hodge has just scored too many runs domesticly not to be in the mix.
As good as Maher has been do you reckon he has a future in the Test or ODI side?
My point is that if Hussey and Hodge apparently have a future in the game then why doesn't Maher, whom is of similar age and has made similar amounts of runs? I wouldn't pick him over the other 2, but I don't see why he is automatically discounted by you.
Bentleigh
5 Mar 2005, 20:50
My point is that if Hussey and Hodge apparently have a future in the game then why doesn't Maher, whom is of similar age and has made similar amounts of runs? I wouldn't pick him over the other 2, but I don't see why he is automatically discounted by you.
Like I said, great player over the years but i just dont feel like the selectors are going to look at him over the likes of Clarke, Watson, Hussey, Katich, Hodge.
What Mahers average at domestic level over the last couple seasons? Surly not in Hodges league?
if Hayden doesnt come up i would much rather see Hussey at the top of the order, and have Katich slot in at 5 or 6, meaning Hodge misses out unless the selectors feel Hodge is ahead of katich in that case Katich misses out
better team balance IMO with Hussey, who opens regularly at first class level compared to Katich who bats high up but isnt a regular opener
But why the hell did they call up Katich as an opener in Aus? It makes no ********ing sense, except for that, A victorian was the next best choice so they chose Katich, now a Victorian would get a game if they used katich so they brought in Hussey. Its a conspiracy
Was starting to wonder where you'd gone, eddie- figured this news would bring you back from the pub....does itr really matter, though, since the Vics are history in the Shield- unless Jimmy does something very bizarre tomorrow (not out of the realm of possibility)....
Hodge was almost certainly going to be the extra guy...let him enjoy what being on tour is like and catch the sights around Christchurch....
eddiesmith
5 Mar 2005, 22:36
QLD could do with the outright result as well, they win and they have almost secured a home final thanks to WA ******** performance v SA. If Maher was smart he would set the Vics plenty of overs so they have a chance to get wickets
Theres no doubt Hodge is better than Katich. But of course Katich only moved to NSW to play Test cricket, it was in his contract. Maybe Hodge should move to NSW seeing as their middle order is so ********, it would be amazing how within a few weeks he would finally get his first match for Aus and never be dropped for another 4-5 years
QLD could do with the outright result as well, they win and they have almost secured a home final thanks to WA ******** performance v SA. If Maher was smart he would set the Vics plenty of overs so they have a chance to get wickets
Theres no doubt Hodge is better than Katich. But of course Katich only moved to NSW to play Test cricket, it was in his contract. Maybe Hodge should move to NSW seeing as their middle order is so ********, it would be amazing how within a few weeks he would finally get his first match for Aus and never be dropped for another 4-5 years
Hey, eddie- you really don't give the NSW batting the respect they deserve- thornley has done very well this year, and Haddin is regularly amongst the runs- if not for Gilly, he'd surely be in the Test side at this point...and Jaques is an excellent player...even Phelps can put up the runs on occassion....but maybe it is the only way Hodge can get a game....but I thought the selectors were biased towards Queensland- what happened to that?
As for the Shield final- Queensland are in such shocking form, wouldn't matter where we play....we don't deserve the win...NSW deserve the spot....
eddiesmith
5 Mar 2005, 23:12
NSW are getting smashed by Tassie, they dont deserve it. It could still be QLD v NSW at the GABBA as WA have lost form as well
QLD could do with the outright result as well, they win and they have almost secured a home final thanks to WA ******** performance v SA. If Maher was smart he would set the Vics plenty of overs so they have a chance to get wickets
Um, no.
If Maher is smart, he'll shut Victoria right out of the match.
Making the final is more important than hosting it. And if NSW and Victoria are denied wins tomorrow then Queensland are into the final.
Queensland can worry about hosting rights next week when they play WA.
eddiesmith
5 Mar 2005, 23:44
Given the amount of rain received today, 350 wont be a very easy target to reach, the ground will be the slow and the pitch wont be as flat. There is 112 overs atleast tomorrow, bat for 22 and make another 120 and set them 450 off 90 overs. At 5 an over they will go for it, and you leave plenty of time for wickets.
Maher cant rely on Tassie winning tomorrow, if NSW win, then QLD are shot. If QLD shut Vics out, whats to stop them turning around next week and handing NSW 6 points and ********ing QLDs season.
The tassie v NSW game will be no clearer by the time Maher needs to make a choice. I hope they dont try for a result, shove it up those arrogant assholes if they are so ********ing stupid, go NSW. If QLD are so hell bent on stopping Victoria and miss the final themselves then, up theres.
They only need 1st innings points to stop Victoria next week if Vics win this one, they will need an outright against WA if NSW win tomorrow and next week. QLD surely aint that stupid
silky-smooth
5 Mar 2005, 23:48
Face it eddie. No matter what equation you come up with, Victoria won't win.
Place in the final this year for Victoria: GAWNNNNNNNNNNN.
Sorry to break the news.
By "plenty of overs" I thought you were implying he'd set Victoria something gettable. Which he shouldn't do.
But yeah, I could easily see Maher declaring with a lead of 450-500.
eddiesmith
5 Mar 2005, 23:59
I know the Vics are gone, but so could QLD be if they shut the Vics out to much tomorrow
silky-smooth
6 Mar 2005, 00:08
OK top three as it sits...
1. WA (36 points)
2. QLD (34 points)
3. NSW (28 points)
Seeing there won't be a result (Vic-Qld), SA win or draw against WA, and assuming NSW beat Tasmania (unlikely, but still)... the ladder would be this heading into the final round...
1. QLD (36 points)
2. WA (36 points)
3. NSW (34 points)
NSW play Victoria in the final round - and assuming they beat your beloved Bushrangers outfit, the ladder will be...
1. NSW (40 points)
2. QLD (36 points)
3. WA (36 points)
Which means the winner of the QLD-WA game (Rd 10) progresses to the final.
So whether Queensland win or draw the game against Victoria currently makes no difference. They'll make the final whether they win next week. They could win this week and lose the next week - and they'd be out. They could draw this week and win next week and they'd be in.
If they want a home final, they need to win tomorrow. I'm sure making the final is all they're looking at and will be trying to close this match out to get Victoria out of the race (one less team to handle with in the final round).
eddiesmith
6 Mar 2005, 00:24
They win this week, and they dont need to next week, all they need is first innings points.
Screw Victoria and they may just lay down next week and hand NSW 6 points
So whether Queensland win or draw the game against Victoria currently makes no difference.
Whoa hang on. I don't think its essential that Queensland win tomorrow; but this statement goes a bit far. What if next weeks match is drawn with WA taking 2 pts? That puts them on 38 pts.
Then result for Queensland tomorrow makes all the difference - 36 if they draw, 40 if they win.
eddiesmith
6 Mar 2005, 00:31
Whoa hang on. I don't think its essential that Queensland win tomorrow; but this statement goes a bit far. What if next weeks match is drawn with WA taking 2 pts? That puts them on 38 pts.
Then result for Queensland tomorrow makes all the difference - 36 if they draw, 40 if they win.
Exactly, you cant rely on a 6 point match every week. Its best to take the outright whenever you can, dont bypass it and hope you win next week
silky-smooth
6 Mar 2005, 00:38
Whoa hang on. I don't think its essential that Queensland win tomorrow; but this statement goes a bit far. What if next weeks match is drawn with WA taking 2 pts? That puts them on 38 pts.
Then result for Queensland tomorrow makes all the difference - 36 if they draw, 40 if they win.
It's 2am and I've been mortified. OK so the game does make all the difference tomorrow, but it is not entirely essential they win it, nor should they risk handing victory to Victoria with a dodgy declaration to try and win it themselves.
What they need to do is close out the game, stop Victoria from getting ANY chance to get an outright result.
Then next week, they head into the game either needing a first-innings win (if it is a draw) or an outright win. Pretty simple equation. Basically whoever wins or gets the first innings points next week goes through to the final.
eddiesmith
6 Mar 2005, 00:57
On a wet MCG, you could almost argue they have enough runs already to defend
eddiesmith
6 Mar 2005, 00:59
Also, it is predicted to rain, rain, rain this weekend in QLD, a outright result may not be possible. Plus, it is expected to be a wet month for QLD and NSW, so a home final would help QLD a lot. A result may not be possible for a Final in NSW, handing them the cup.
A home final is important in Pura Cup, not just the home ground, but the fact you dont have to win
Would like to see the Bulls push for a win, but can't believe they would leave any glimmer of hope for the Vics to grab tomorrow. Get the lead to 500, then see if they can withstand 90 overs from the Queensland attack....the Vics have nothing to lose, so they might as well go for it....
Don't think NSW will win- but I'll still argue with you, eddie, about their quality of batsmen- that tassie are flogging them might be more down to the bowlers they have?
OldSchool
6 Mar 2005, 12:42
Nothing wrong with Mike Hussey as an opener ahead of Hodge.He is an opener,where as Hodge has rarely done it in Milk Matches.Hussey should be in the side ahead of Katich.Then Hodge should be in ahead of Katich.
It's a smart move to keep Mike Hussey over there just in case he is needed. One of those rare cricketers who can bat anywhere in the order.
NSW are getting smashed by Tassie, they dont deserve it. It could still be QLD v NSW at the GABBA as WA have lost form as well
hahaha..
Realistically it doesn't matter who opens against NZ. They will field an attack of pie chuckers and any Aussie bastman worth their salt should score runs.
Katich deserves his spot in the team. Has done nothing wrong with the opportunities presented, especially in India when he saved the hides of some of our more highly respected batsmen. Could easily handle the opening responsibilities it Haydens place.
Hodge has been on the verge of Aussie selection for a couple of years. Has scored a mountain of runs and been more consistent at first class level than Mike Hussey. This includes both Aussie and English first class performances. Hussey has still been good, but Hodge has been better.
Following his 150 on the weekend he is in great form and deserves to step into the test team.
The Aussie selectors have made a couple of selections errors in the last couple of years, hopefully they have learnt from their mistakes (Symonds and Bracken should never have played test cricket based on ODI results). Katich will be in the team for an extended run now in place of Boof, and Hodge now deserves his chance in NZ and his tour to England.
Unfortunately with only 6 hundreds in 5 Aussie summers, Hussey has not scored enough runs.
pav_is_god
7 Mar 2005, 09:52
If Hayden can't play, then it makes sense to replace him with an opener when another one is already in the country.
quiksilva
7 Mar 2005, 09:58
Yep, i agree with you there pav, im confident he can do the job to.
SorryIHammerChicken
8 Mar 2005, 17:56
i've got nothing against Hussey, i'm a fan, but for Hodge's sake, wouldnt it ******** you off to see, say Clarke injured, and Hussey to replace him? Replacing Hayden is obvious, but if Hayden plays and another middle order batsman is injured you'd give the spot to Hodge surely?
Bentleigh
8 Mar 2005, 20:16
i've got nothing against Hussey, i'm a fan, but for Hodge's sake, wouldnt it ******** you off to see, say Clarke injured, and Hussey to replace him? Replacing Hayden is obvious, but if Hayden plays and another middle order batsman is injured you'd give the spot to Hodge surely?
Katich hasnt done alot wrong.
Hayden is fit and apparently Hussey is going home for the final shield game.
Hodge is safe, but won't get a gig unfortunately without an injury.