The All Rounder Debacle - Who can fill that No.6 spot for Australia?

[OzBomber]

The All Rounder Debacle - Who can fill that No.6 spot for Australia?

http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,6425838,00.jpg
Australia's tail has been more than handy this summer.

Australia has come to a road block when looking for an all rounder. Should we be playing one is the real question.

Ever since the Ashes of 2005 when Andrew Flintoff dominated against the Australians, the selectors have been hell bent on finding a Freddy that can bowl and regularly take wickets, while also making runs with the bat. Symonds looked the part after a couple of seasons of success, but the IPL and a number of off field discretions seem to have put his mind elsewhere.

This summer we've tried a number of all rounders, but they have either struggled or are injured. Shane Watson had a very good tour of India, picking up 10 wickets at 32 and making 172 runs at an average of 24.

But he was dropped for Andrew Symonds after a poor test against New Zealand at the Gabba. Symonds has been nothing special as well in his return from the 'Gone Fishing' saga. In 4 tests against both New Zealand and South Africa, Symonds has come up with 167 runs at an average of 24 and just the 1 wicket for a total of 57 runs. The selectors added more confusion to the debacle when Symonds was chosen over Watson even though he needed surgery on his Knee. Then the news that Watson was out for 6 months with stress fractures in his break.

Who should fill that number 6 position though? Victorian Andrew McDonald was chosen to make his debut at Sydney, adding more confusion as to why we need an All Rounder to fill that number 6 position.

We also have many sole batsmen who are looking for a spot in the Test team. Marcus North is the form middle order batsman in the Sheffield Shield at the moment, having scored 485 runs with 2 centuries in 12 innings at an average of 43.49.

Michael Klinger is the best batsman in the comp this summer and could always move down the order. He has scored 906 runs with 4 centuries at an average of over 90 this season. He might be just what we need to stop our lower order collapses.

Many others who could come into the side as a batsman include Callum Ferguson (380 runs this season at 38), Lee Carseldine (346 at 49), Rob Quiney (311 at 44) and Nick Jewell (377 at 41).

The other only option is to play 5 bowlers and move Haddin up to 6. This not a bad idea because the tail have very much wagged this season; the last 5 wickets averaging 183.13 in the 2 series against New Zealand and South Africa (Up until the 1st innings of the 3rd test). Mitchell Johnson, Brett Lee, Nathan Hauritz and Peter Siddle have all showed that they can bat, which is more of a reason that they could bring Hilfenhaus in to try and take 20 wickets to win a test.

Australia is in a real mess at the moment, unable to take 20 wickets, and unable to make over 200 with less than 5 wickets lost. Whatever happens, Whether we keep trying with McDonald, go for an extra batsman or an extra bowler, Australia has a lot to do to become the force they once were.From my blog, Aussie Blitz (http://aussie-blitz.blogspot.com/).

[Ricketts]

Hopefully not another allrounder.

[red+black]

Hopefully not another allrounder.

I agree. Pick 6 strong batsmen. Katich and Clarke have shown some ability to bowl, and as such, should be told that they need to practice their bowling for times when they may be called upon.

There is little we can do about our current predicament. Thankfully MJ is in career-best form, but with Lee and Clark injured, we are in a tough spot. I am not Lee's biggest fan but I have nothing against him and I would bring him back when he's fit.

I guess what I am saying is that the #6 spot should go to the best middle-order batsman in the country who is not already in the team. If the best batsmen just happens to be an all-rounder, great, if not, well, his primary responsibility is to bat.

[abs_of_STEELE]

David Hussey.

[Blue Dimension]

Ashley Noffke for mine, now that Watson is injured. Not sure when he gets back but if he can put in a couple of performances, and if Mcdonald doesn't pull through in this test... you'd have to think he's a big chance to tour.

[The Governor]

I think the Australian selectors have to bite the bullet and pick Moses Henriques.

A new era has to start and he is the ideal man to bat at number 6.

A new batch of younger players is coming through the system and it is about time to blood these young players.

If you recall back in 1991, John Benaud, Lawrie Sawle, Steve Bernard and Trevor Hohns blooded a young SK Warne. IN 1992, they blooded Damien Martyn; 1993: Michael Slater, Brendan Julian, Paul Reifel and Glen McGrath.

IF Andrew McDonald plays well during this test match, the selectors should stick with him.

But, in my opinion, Moses Henriques is going to be a better allrounder than Shane Watson, and Moses' ability rivals a young Jacques Kallis many years ago.

I would not play a no 6 batsman etc. I would play Moses and bat Haddin at 7.

Phillip Hughes
Simon Katich
Ricky (C)
Michael Clarke
Michael Hussey
Moses Henriques
Brad Haddin
Mitchell Johnson
Stephen Smith (NSW Leggie)
Peter Siddle
Stuart CLark

[Gunnar Longshanks]

In recent weeks, there's been a lot of talk about Australia needing to "rebuild" by investing in youth and "fast-tracking" young talent.

I am skeptical of it, because I don't think that necessarily helps us win the next series, which is still the priority.

But in some respects, the debate over the number six position is a bit of a test case for those who want Australia to swing the pendulum towards youth.

If we're to replenish our side with young players, maybe the number six spot is an obvious place to start?

I think Symonds and Watson will both get further chances.

But let's say that Watson can't stay fit. Let's say Symonds has done his dash.

The next batch of mature all-rounders probably aren't up to it. Hopes and White? No thanks.

So surely, if we're committed to including an extra bowling option, and we're equally keen to bring in some young players, isn't this a tailor-made opportunity to tick both those boxes?

If fast-tracking young players is such a great idea, why shouldn't we push Henriques or Butterworth into that spot?

If those demanding we re-commit to youth aren't prepared to make the case for young players in this discussion, what circumstances are they waiting for?

Is the philosophy of "getting them in there young" limited entirely to promoting Phil Hughes?

[Blue Dimension]

In recent weeks, there's been a lot of talk about Australia needing to "rebuild" by investing in youth and "fast-tracking" young talent.

I am skeptical of it, because I don't think that necessarily helps us win the next series, which is still the priority.

But in some respects, the debate over the number six position is a bit of a test case for those who want Australia to swing the pendulum towards youth.

If we're to replenish our side with young players, maybe the number six spot is an obvious place to start?

I think Symonds and Watson will both get further chances.

But let's say that Watson can't stay fit. Let's say Symonds has done his dash.

The next batch of mature all-rounders probably aren't up to it. Hopes and White? No thanks.

So surely, if we're committed to including an extra bowling option, and we're equally keen to bring in some young players, isn't this a tailor-made opportunity to tick both those boxes?

If fast-tracking young players is such a great idea, why shouldn't we push Henriques or Butterworth into that spot?

If those demanding we re-commit to youth aren't prepared to make the case for young players in this discussion, what circumstances are they waiting for?

Is the philosophy of "getting them in there young" limited entirely to promoting Phil Hughes?

Who would you go with Gunnar, if you had to pick a player with youth on their side (not necessarily proven statistics wise) for the number 6 spot?

[Willow_2000]

David Hussey for sure. Not the worst bowler around either so he could bowl part time like pup.

edit: Just remember poor old catfish. Why doesnt James Hopes name get thrown around?

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Who would you go with Gunnar, if you had to pick a player with youth on their side (not necessarily proven statistics wise) for the number 6 spot?If the condition is that they must be an all-rounder, I reckon Henriques is the obvious choice.

Butterworth would also be considered.

I'm not saying these guys would immediately shine at Test level.

But if we want an extra bowling option in the top six, and we want to bring on a young talent, then these guys seem to be in the ball park.

If they could average 30-35 with bat and ball, would that not be an OK result?

[blues_gibbzy]

let a bowler have it were making runs consistently(surprisingly) why not who needs an all rounder have 4 quicks and a spin bowler should help us take 20 wickets

[Blue Dimension]

If the condition is that they must be an all-rounder, I reckon Henriques is the obvious choice.

Butterworth would also be considered.

I'm not saying these guys would immediately shine at Test level.

But if we want an extra bowling option in the top six, and we want to bring on a young talent, then these guys seem to be in the ball park.

If they could average 30-35 with bat and ball, would that not be an OK result?

Reckon if they're young, with growth to come, you could almost give more leeway in the hope that they improve over time from their international experience.

Henriques would be my choice if we're going for a young all rounder. Don't rate Butterworth at all personally.

Would be interesting to see if the selectors did take a gamble like that though!

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Don't rate Butterworth at all personally.
Averages 26 with bat and ball at FC level. He's 25.

If you want a young all-rounder, that's pretty close to the mark.

Absolutely smashed it in the 06-07 Shield final, which was just his fifth match.

Ponting rates him.

[Blue Dimension]

Averages 26 with bat and ball at FC level. He's 25.

If you want a young all-rounder, that's pretty close to the mark.

Absolutely smashed it in the 06-07 Shield final, which was just his fifth match.

Ponting rates him.

I know it's a totally different game, but from the time's i've seen him bowl in the Ford Ranger cup he doesn't really strike me as a guy who'd be so effective going up a level.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Do we stick with an all-rounder?

Or pick a straight-up batsman?

Do we promote Haddin to six and pick five bowlers?

Do we take a chance on a kid?

Or go with someone with more runs on the board?

Is Symonds still the man? Will he be fit? maybe he's done his dash?

[OzBomber]

I think this should be discussed in here (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=530934).

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I think this should be discussed in here (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=530934).
Do you have a poll?

[OzBomber]

Do you have a poll?Does it really matter? I can just ask weevil to add one to mine.

[Cleavy]

I think this should be discussed in here (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=530934).

Do you have a poll?

Gunnar'd! :p

[Flashhh]

They should have played Hilfenhaus in Sydney as they won't get 20 wickets playing the bowlers and McDonald.

For the future though, I think it depends of team balance. If we have 5 strong bowlers who can take 20 wickets comfortably then play an extra batsmen but if not then maybe another bowler is needed.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I know it's a totally different game, but from the time's i've seen him bowl in the Ford Ranger cup he doesn't really strike me as a guy who'd be so effective going up a level.Well, that's the risk of picking a young player, isn't it?

That's what happens when you fast-track someone. You take a punt.

It would be great if we could just wait for the emergence of a 23-year-old all-rounder, who also happened to be the best option at the time.

[Audacious]

get rid of the all rounders. Unless they are in the brilliant mould of Kallis than they should not be played.

A specialist bowler or batsman any day of the week. Right now we cant take 20 wickets so a bowler we should have.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Geez, someone has already gone for Other.

I thought this was a pretty exhaustive list.

[tomemy]

Andrew McDonald is a good choice i think, his batting for the Vics the last couple of seasons has been great and his bowling is improving every season and hes a brilliant fielder. Why not give him the chance to cement the number six position?

[bombersno1]

Gunner, is Watson going to be fit, isn't his back gone?

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Gunner, is Watson going to be fit, isn't his back gone?Some people would like him there as a specialist bat.

Not me.

[krisholio14]

Well, that's the risk of picking a young player, isn't it?

That's what happens when you fast-track someone. You take a punt.

It would be great if we could just wait for the emergence of a 23-year-old all-rounder, who also happened to be the best option at the time.

I've seen a bit of Butterworth this year and I liked the look of him.

I don't know why people are so quick to write Macca off.

I remember a bloke who went on to play 150 odd tests for Australia who wasn't ever the most elegant looking batsman out there, and who also took more than a while to truly find his feet at test level. But what he was was a scrapper, and that, to me, can be just as important at number six as having a bloke like Symonds (or a Flintoff) who has the ability to occasionally blast an attack off the park.

Macca is a scrapper who will value his wicket, and that is something that I think the Australian side sorely needs right now as it tries to find the right blend in the top order.

I thought he also bowled well today. Kept it tight, gave the fast bowlers a spell and showed occasional hints of swing. For the fifth bowling option, it's better that what Australia have been getting in recent times.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I remember a bloke who went on to play 150 odd tests for Australia who wasn't ever the most elegant looking batsman out there, and who also took more than a while to truly find his feet at test level.Are you talking about Jesus?

[bombersno1]

I'd be hesitant to do that. I recon the selectors would rather him get himself right for the Ashes as he'll play a big role in England. The more I think about this the more I am leaning towards a Luke Butterworth at 6 or at least trying him at 6.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I'd be hesitant to do that.Me too.

But I no longer underestimate how much some people love Watson.

[grizzlym]

Geez, someone has already gone for Other.

I thought this was a pretty exhaustive list.

my guess is they could have sprung for Michael Hussey at 6. I might be wrong, but he doesn't appear to be one of the choices.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

my guess is they could have sprung for Michael Hussey at 6.That would be a bit strange.

But it is BigFooty.

[AGC]

I really think the selectors need to stop trying to "force" upon an all-rounder into the test cricket side. The top 6 batters at least need to be world class batsman. To survive in test cricket- every individual needs to be "world class" at one aspect of the game.

Look at Kallis- if he suddenly had stress fractures in his back- he would still be one of the first picked SAF batters. If Flintoff couldn't bat- he'd still be in England's pace lineup.

On the other hand- trying to bat Watson at 6 is ludicrious- he's just not that good as a batsman. Having said that- I think if Watson can regain full fitness and bowl like he did in India- he could bat at number 8 and be a specialist bowler.

The way that he has performed would suggest the Mitch Johnson could fill the "all rounder" spot that we need- and our tail has enough class (in that Johnson, Siddle and Hauritz can all hang around)- that I feel the need for an all-rounder isn't as pertinant.
Where we are being hurt is the weakness of our batting- and that has cost us dearly in the two recent series against india and SAF.

Look at India's top 6 in the last tour: Gambhir, Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, Ganguly and Laxman- with Dhoni to follow at 7.
The SAF top order (aside from McKenzie- who you'd expect to be ousted for Prince)is also very stable.

Compare that with our linup containing McDonald in the top 6 or even Symonds or Watson. None of them (in test cricket mind you) measure up to the number 6's in the other challengers linups. If we are serious- we need to have another world class batter at 6. At 29- North looks a bit old- but still is a good prospect. He has done enough of an apprenticeship in Test Cricket and in County cricket- and he can bowl some good off-breaks.

[Cotchin 9]

Play a batsmen like North or Dave Hussey.

Why do we need McDonald? He bowls straight up and down medium pace at around 125-130 km/h. Ponting and Hussey could do that. Now i'm not writing off McDonald and I probably should be giving him time but we need a quality batsman at number 6 and if they can bowl handy off spin like Hussey or North then it is a bonus much like JP Duminy.

[Ricketts]

Still think Symonds is in the best 6 bats in the country. He'll be back.

[grizzlym]

That would be a bit strange.

But it is BigFooty.

Maybe, but it is a legitimate choice.

[bombersno1]

Me too.

But I no longer underestimate how much some people love Watson.

I rate him big time and he is our best all-rounder but I don't feel you can pick him on batting ability alone especially when he'll be limited at best in the field. He is not Ponting class in terms of batting and if we have learnt anything from this series, we can't play 80% fit players.

Gunner, how do you feel on Butterworth at 6?

[Mario the Lothario]

Do we stick with an all-rounder

Johnson should be the all rounder at seven.

Pick a batsman at 6, I like D.Hussey.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Maybe, but it is a legitimate choice.Sure, the same way polygamy is a "legitimate choice" in Utah.

[krisholio14]

Are you talking about Jesus?

Gunnar you know what i'm talking about. He used to drive that blue car. :D

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Gunner, how do you feel on Butterworth at 6?That would be a big call.

I would be reluctant to go down that path - I don't think he's done enough.

But there are plenty of people who want us to go young, and want us to fast-track someone - maybe they'd be happy to see Butterworth brought in.

Butterworth averages 26 with bat and ball at FC level. Ponting rates him. How many better young all-rounders are there in the country?

[abs_of_STEELE]

Hussey all the way.

[bombersno1]

Butterworth averages 26 with bat and ball at FC level. Ponting rates him. How many better young all-rounders are there in the country?

That is the way I see it, if they are so hellbent on getting an allrounder in the side, if Watson is unfit (he is the best one), then I believe Butterworth is the next best bet.

[Cotchin 9]

Why did we need to include McDonald? I'm a fan of him at the Vics, but I think guys like Hussey and North are better batsman than him.

And would Mike Hussey do about the same job as McDonald with ball? Agree/Disagree?

[Gunnar Longshanks]

That is the way I see it, if they are so hellbent on getting an allrounder in the side, if Watson is unfit (he is the best one), then I believe Butterworth is the next best bet.Certainly, I can't think of many who are inarguably ahead of him.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Why did we need to include McDonald? I'm a fan of him at the Vics, but I think guys like Hussey and North are better batsman than him.It's all about having a fifth bowling option.

And would Mike Hussey do about the same job as McDonald with ball? Agree/Disagree?Disagree.

Hussey is an absolute part-timer.

McDonald has taken 15 wickets at 23 this season, and has 94 wickets at 30 over his FC career.

Hussey isn't on that level.

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

Play Mitchell Johnson at 6 and Haddin at 7....... or Haddin at 6 and Johnson at 7. That leaves 4 spots to find bowlers good enough to help Johnson get 20 wickets a match.

Our biggest problem at the moment is finding an outstanding spinner and the spearhead replacement for Brett Lee(as well as a replacement for Hayden).

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Play Mitchell Johnson at 6 and Haddin at 7.......Some people.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Gunnar you know what i'm talking about. He used to drive that blue car. :DHe had long hair and wild ideas.

[Cotchin 9]

It's all about having a fifth bowling option.

Disagree.

Hussey is an absolute part-timer.

McDonald has taken 15 wickets at 23 this season, and has 94 wickets at 30 over his FC career.

Hussey isn't on that level.

Yes I know but, Hussey is around that 125 km/h mark and McDonald was just bowling straight up and down today, much like what Hussey would do.

[bombersno1]

Certainly, I can't think of many who are inarguably ahead of him.

Plus as you have said Ponting loves the way he plays. The only other option (if fit) would be Noffke and it would be an absolute gamble to pick a guy with no cricket form for an important tour. Brett Geeves may be another option, but he is not an allrounder, more a bowler that can bat.

[krisholio14]

He had some crazy ideas about love and peace.

He also didn't do what other people thought was right either ;)

[bombersno1]

Yes I know but, Hussey is around that 125 km/h mark and McDonald was just bowling straight up and down today, much like what Hussey would do.

Most realise that McDonald was NOT the right option. He is just average in both areas.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Yes I know but, Hussey is around that 125 km/h mark and McDonald was just bowling straight up and down today, much like what Hussey would do.Mate, Hussey is a park bowler.

McDonald has at least taken a few FC wickets.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Brett Geeves may be another option, but he is not an allrounder, more a bowler that can bat.We're still talking about candidates to bat at six in the Test side, right?

[bombersno1]

We're still talking about candidates to bat at six in the Test side, right?

Well in that case Brad Haddin would bat 6. But I have not seen enough of Geeves to comment. He could bat 8 after Johnson if they went down that track.

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

Some people Better than Butterbean........ what's he done?

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Better than Butterbean........ what's he done?Butterworth averages 26 with bat and ball at FC level.

That's pretty respectable.

[bombersno1]

26 with the ball is better than McDonald or Clark when he came into the test side..

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

Butterworth averages 26 with bat and ball at FC level.

That's pretty respectable

Johnson averages 26 with the bat and 28 with the ball in Test cricket. That's very respectable. Better than Symonds or Watson for mine.

Haddin averages 39 with the bat in Test cricket and can keep a bit too.

I'd rather Johnson at 6 than McDonald. He's unlikely to be Test standard as a batsman or a bowler...... let alone both, which is what we want in an allrounder.

[Cotchin 9]

Mate, Hussey is a park bowler.

McDonald has at least taken a few FC wickets.

Yeah I guess, I can never win against you ;):p.

[bombersno1]

Butterworth potentially could easily be a test all-rounder, it would not be the worst option

[DIG]

Still think Symonds is in the best 6 bats in the country. He'll be back.

Totally agree.

[krisholio14]

Johnson averages 26 with the bat and 28 with the ball in Test cricket. That's very respectable. Better than Symonds or Watson for mine.

Haddin averages 39 with the bat in Test cricket and can keep a bit too.

I'd rather Johnson at 6 than McDonald. He's unlikely to be Test standard as a batsman or a bowler...... let alone both, which is what we want in an allrounder.


What's your classification of test standard?

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

Totally agreeAgree but pity his bowling has gone to the pack though.

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

What's your classification of test standard? Average 25+ with bat and < 35 with ball and be able to average at least 10 overs an innings. I'll be surprised if McDonald gets many more chances but will be happy if he proves me wrong.

[sherb]

I think number six should be selected first and foremost on batting ability, so personally I would have a specialist batsman there.

It is too early for me to have Haddin filling number six, as I am not convinced of his temperament to hold down that position yet.

That would all mean that you are still relying on four specialist bowlers, with the part-timers (Katich, Hussey, Clarke and whoever no six may be, if he bowls) to take up some of the slack.

Whilst your part-timers may not be `strike` bowlers, I think that their role also includes bowling ten or twelve overs per new ball to take the pressure off the main bowlers - and hopefully taking the occasional wicket.

I don`t recall too many times over the years, even when we have had relatively inexperienced attacks, where we have resorted to selecting five specialist bowlers.

Given that, I really believe we need to maintain our team balance and acknowledge it is going to take a bit of time for our attack to sort itself out.

Whilst we have struggled with the ball of late, I think we need to put it in perspective. Battling to bowl out India in India is no shame and we are currently up against a pretty good South African batting line-up. And our most experienced bowler (Lee) has been either out of form or injured (or both).

I don`t know if selecting five specialist bowlers (or four and an all-rounder) is the best solution to what I think will be a short-term problem.

[Thommo 42]

Mitchell Johnson averages 25+ with the bat, and McDonald is a far superior batsman to him.

[krisholio14]

Average 25+ with bat and < 35 with ball and be able to average at least 10 overs an innings. I'll be surprised if McDonald gets many more chances but will be happy if he proves me wrong.

I don't see what he's done to cop the sort of criticism he's getting. Just because he isn't the flashiest or most elegant player around doesn't mean he cannot be highly effective. He's a very steady cricketer and at test level there is always a place for a good steady player.

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

Nice in theory Sherb but the reality is Braddin and Johnson have saved our bacon with the bat against the Saffies. Hayden has come to the end of the line and needs to be replaced. Hussey will come good again. BUT our biggest problem is that our bowlers have simply not been up to the task. Symonds was hardly used, Lee struggled and Clark pulled out....... leaving us way under done. We are very suss at the moment for a frontline spinner. McDonald does not look like the answer! We need another bowler who can take wickets...... it's that simple. The hard part is WHO?

[sherb]

Nice in theory Sherb but the reality is Braddin and Johnson have saved our bacon with the bat against the Saffies. Hayden has come to the end of the line and needs to be replaced. Hussey will come good again. BUT our biggest problem is that our bowlers have simply not been up to the task. Symonds was hardly used, Lee struggled and Clark pulled out....... leaving us way under done. We are very suss at the moment for a frontline spinner. McDonald does not look like the answer! We need another bowler who can take wickets...... it's that simple. The hard part is WHO?
Bowling is our biggest problem, but it is not our only problem. Look at how our top order has performed this season to see what I mean.

I reiterate, I have reservations re Haddin`s temperament and I don`t believe Johnson is ready to come in at number 7.

It would make our tail that much longer and they can`t keep saving us forever. Personally I think it would make our batting brittle.

And let`s be honest, it doesn`t matter how many bowlers we play if they don`t have enough runs behind them.

In addition to that, I am not convinced that an inexperienced/out of form five-man attack is going to be any more penetrative than an inexperienced/out of form four-man attack.

As I said, I think we are being a bit reactive when we consider the experience and form of our attack and who they have come up against.

I just really don`t like the idea of not playing six specialist batsmen. It is playing with fire in my view. The bowling will sort itself out.

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

Bowling is our biggest problem, but it is not our only problem.

In addition to that, I am not convinced that an inexperienced/out of form five-man attack is going to be any more penetrative than an inexperienced/out of form four-man attack.

The bowling will sort itself out Wishful thinking :confused:

So because we can't find another wicket-taking bowler we just ignore the problem? No Lee, no Clark, no Watson, Symonds maybe but unlikely to bowl much if he makes it, Clarke rarely used, Katich not used. Siddle??, Bollinger ???, Hauritz ???

Why not just bowl Johnson only? Both ends? Bugger it! McDonald then :eek:

[Gunnar Longshanks]

And let`s be honest, it doesn`t matter how many bowlers we play if they don`t have enough runs behind them.It doesn't matter how many runs we have if we can't take 20 wickets.

[AGC]

The importance of Stuart Clark is really coming to the fore now. Previously in the McGrath and Warne era- Lee would be able to take wickets- partly because batsman were forced to go after him- as they were unlikely to get much opportunity from the other end. With Clark out of the team- world class batters like the SAF team can just let the ball go against him and attack Hauritz and such.
I don't think our pace bowling attack is as bad as people seem to think- it just lacks the experience and killer instinct to skittle teams. If the bowlers had been able to knock over Steyn (remembering that only an hour prior they had dismissed 5 other SAF batters) then Australia would have taken a lead of around 150 into the next innings- and would have most likely won the test.
From a purely short term perspective- I don't think there's much sense in putting a player like Hauritz in the side- when we're coming up against SAF in the return leg- and subsequently in the ASHES. You'd have to think that the selectors will be picking Symonds at 6- and if they do that- both Symonds and Clark (and if Ponting realises that Katich is actually a good spinner) will provide enough spinning options and will allow us to bring in another paceman.
If we line up with Clark, Siddle, Johnson and Bollinger- and then have Symonds and Clark able to bowl- I don't think we'll be able to do much better.
We just need the batsman to back it up- and that's why it's so critical that we get another top class number 6 into the lineup. WE can't afford playing Haddin there- I just feel he lacks the temprament to be a reliable number 6. Considering that HUssey has done crap all this series as has Hayden- we've done well to hang on. We cannot continue to rely on the tail bailing us out- because the Indian and SAF attacks are only going to get better!

[rickyp]

Anyone but an all rounder thanks, I think, at this time, that isn't what we need.

[Thewlis Dish]

We've been obsessed with an all-rounder ever since Flintoff in 2005, but really, he would make their side if he was McGrath with the bat. Has there been a great all-rounder in test cricket who wouldn't make the side purely as a batsman or bowler? Kallis is one of the greatest batsman of the modern era, Sobers of all time. Botham and Pollock have taken 800+ test wickets between them. On the other hand, Afridi is a great one day player but he isn't really good enough at either medium to be a consistently good test cricketer.

I think if you get sucked into picking players because they're 'handy' with the bat and ball, then you run into trouble. Pick them because they can hold down a spot on merit with the bat OR ball, and if they can then bring the other skill to the table as well, that's a big bonus. So if Watson for example is in the team, it needs to be because he can make a 100 batting at four or consistently threaten the opposition's top order. Not a halfway approach on both.

I like McDonald and think he's an excellent first class cricketer, but really, it's a wasted selection and he fits exactly into the 'handy with both bat and ball but nothing more' category.

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

Clark is very doubtful for SA tour :(

Puts the pressure on selectors if he misses out. I'm still stunned why Bracken never gets a Test look-in these days.

[Mario the Lothario]

Clark is very doubtful for SA tour :(

Puts the pressure on selectors if he misses out. I'm still stunned why Bracken never gets a Test look-in these days.

Not quick enough and not good enough.

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

Not quick enough and not good enough Clark's not quick either. Bracken is one of the few bowlers who can swing the ball and has plenty of variation in his armoury.

[Blue Dimension]

Well, that's the risk of picking a young player, isn't it?

That's what happens when you fast-track someone. You take a punt.

It would be great if we could just wait for the emergence of a 23-year-old all-rounder, who also happened to be the best option at the time.

Yes, not saying he doesn't have room for growth. What I doubt however, is that he has the tools to eventually grow into that spot at International level at all.

It's a personal opinion from what i've seen, nothing more.

[Blue Dimension]

Nice in theory Sherb but the reality is Braddin and Johnson have saved our bacon with the bat against the Saffies. Hayden has come to the end of the line and needs to be replaced. Hussey will come good again. BUT our biggest problem is that our bowlers have simply not been up to the task. Symonds was hardly used, Lee struggled and Clark pulled out....... leaving us way under done. We are very suss at the moment for a frontline spinner. McDonald does not look like the answer! We need another bowler who can take wickets...... it's that simple. The hard part is WHO?

Couldn't agree more.

He's not young, but just because Ashley Noffke has been injured and sick (cancer) does not mean he may not be an option. His batting, along with Johnson's would be adequate to hold up the lower end, and strengthen the bowling enormously.

In essense you'd be playing Johnson, Noffke, Clark (Siddle), Another paceman (Siddle, Hilfenhaus, Bollinger) and a spinner.

[krisholio14]

Yes, not saying he doesn't have room for growth. What I doubt however, is that he has the tools to eventually grow into that spot at International level at all.

It's a personal opinion from what i've seen, nothing more.

Where exactly do you think he is lacking? I watched him in both forms of the game earlier this season at the G (and have watched him on Fox also), and I liked what I saw. Looks to have a good technique with the bat, and was very lively with the ball. Certainly looked to have the raw tools to work with from where I was sitting.

[Blue Dimension]

Where exactly do you think he is lacking? I watched him in both forms of the game earlier this season at the G (and have watched him on Fox also), and I liked what I saw. Looks to have a good technique with the bat, and was very lively with the ball. Certainly looked to have the raw tools to work with from where I was sitting.

I don't know, perhaps he's been off colour the few times i've seen him.

Just felt his bowling was inconsistent. Bowls several half trackers which are punished, with not even a hint of swing.

His batting was nothing great.

He just seems like a bit's and pieces player. I have nothing against him, just the observations i've made from the ODD cricket i've seen him play in. Perhaps it's a different story in the SS...but even if it is, his inability to produce much in the shorter form gives me doubts about his ability to make that transition to International Cricket - can he handle the heat when put under the pump? Can he develop to the level that is required?

Perhaps he can, perhaps i haven't seen him at his best, in fact i doubt i have for the plaudits he's getting on this forum.

[krisholio14]

I don't know, perhaps he's been off colour the few times i've seen him.

Just felt his bowling was inconsistent. Bowls several half trackers which are punished, with not even a hint of swing.

His batting was nothing great.

He just seems like a bit's and pieces player.

Isn't that what all rounders are supposed to be essentially? ;)

I think the main problem with his batting is that he doesn't convert enough of his starts into bigger scores. To me thats more of a mental issue than a technical one.

I partly agree with your assessment of his bowling, but then, his problem is one that all the Aussie pacemen seem to have these days. Theres a four ball in every 7 deliveries.

[Blue Dimension]

Isn't that what all rounders are supposed to be essentially? ;)

I think the main problem with his batting is that he doesn't convert enough of his starts into bigger scores.

I partly agree with your assessment of his bowling, but then, his problem is one that all the Aussie pacemen seem to have these days. Theres a four ball in every 7 deliveries.

Yeah of course, by pits and pieces i mean that he's partly good at both, but not great at either. By all means i hope he can really push forward and be that player that Australia desperately needs. But i also have reservations about him at the same time.

[CrazyQ]

Please Australia, bat Johnson at 6.

[krisholio14]

Yeah of course, by pits and pieces i mean that he's partly good at both, but not great at either. By all means i hope he can really push forward and be that player that Australia desperately needs. But i also have reservations about him at the same time.

I think you have reservations because he doesn't appear to be explosive, which a lot of the great all rounders have been, and players like Flintoff and Symonds are currently.

However, I would suggest that his matchwinning effort in the 06-07 shield final suggests he's got a bit of that x-factor.

[Blue Dimension]

I think you have reservations because he doesn't appear to be explosive, which a lot of the great all rounders have been, and players like Flintoff and Symonds are currently.

However, I would suggest that his matchwinning effort in the 06-07 shield final suggests he's got a bit of that x-factor.

The fact that he's not majorly good at either of the crafts is why i have my reservations. I haven't seen the potential from the game's i've witnessed, so perhaps that's why i have that opinion.

[Grimwood]

Australia should be looking for a batsman who can bowl some good offspin to complement Clarke's slow left arm stuff.

Marcus North is the bloke who comes to mind, his 90 wickets at 44 don't sound great but it's actually better than Hauritz's 81 at 47.

Stick him in at 6 and play 4 seamers.

[sherb]

Wishful thinking :confused:

So because we can't find another wicket-taking bowler we just ignore the problem? No Lee, no Clark, no Watson, Symonds maybe but unlikely to bowl much if he makes it, Clarke rarely used, Katich not used. Siddle??, Bollinger ???, Hauritz ???

Why not just bowl Johnson only? Both ends? Bugger it! McDonald then :eek:
Another wicket taking bowler? Isn`t the problem that we don`t have enough of those at the moment? :p

A fifth bowler may add to the depth of the attack, but he isn`t necessarily going to make it more penetrative.

I am not trying to say ignore the problem, I just don`t think that a fifth bowler will fix it. And to destabilize the batting order in doing so is too big a risk in my view.

As you all but implied yourself, I think we need to get bowlers in our attack who can take wickets - rather than adding another one.

[Thewlis Dish]

Or Dave Hussey.

[sherb]

It doesn't matter how many runs we have if we can't take 20 wickets.
I am aware of that.

But our top order has been brittle this season and if that trend were to continue the tail is highly unlikely to keep bailing us out.

The bowlers need to have enough runs behind them when they bowl, that`s the only point I am making. And they may not have those runs if we weaken the batting order.

I am aware this is basically a circular argument so I won`t go any further.

Other to repeat my point that adding a fifth bowler to an impotent bowling attack is unlikely to change the situation in my view.

[the_interloper]

Clark's not quick either. Bracken is one of the few bowlers who can swing the ball and has plenty of variation in his armoury.

Gee i'd rather Hilfenhaus than Bracken, even more so than Bollinger actually. Hilfenhaus is quick, aggressive, got a nice outswinger, can't really ask for much more than that, he'll trouble good batsmen at test level.

[Simon_Nesbit]

There are a couple of different thoughtlines going through here. #1 is strengthening the batting, requiring a player who can average 40+ as Haddin doesn't add what Gilchrist did. If we could get a decent opener in place of Hayden, then this effort is lower.

From a bowling perspective, we no longer have McGrath/Warne bowling 60 overs in the day. We need to get through 90, at the moment we have Johnson and Clark (when fit) able to do there 20. Lee possibly (though I personally don't rate him anymore and haven't for years), and then there are another 30 overs.

I personally think Clarke and Katich (both entrenched for their batting) are capable '5th' bowling options with their spin variations, and on their day can provide a longer (10 overs) coverage. I put Symonds in this category, with more consistency to his bowling capacity. Essentially batsman who bowl. I feel we need two of these in the team at any time (to be the 6th bowlers, offer a changeup, etc).

Given that, the #6 essentially HAS to be a bowling option - as we are short 15-20 overs - though some development from out attack may lessen this requirement, at the moment we need someone who can bowl 10 overs a day.

Watson is obviously the key, as he's almost good enough to bat in the top 6 on his batting alone, and his bowling (from India) has the penetration to be a genuine four quick bowling option. He hasn't been able to show his ability to bowl more than 20 overs in a day, so I don't see him as a frontline seam option, especially now he has suffered further injuries.

The final contention is the 'bowling allrounder'. Like the batting allrounder above, they earn their spot on their primary attribute, and their alternative is a bonus. Johnson the leading candidate here - my worry is relying on his batting may impact on his bowling longevity.

So of the candidates listed:

Batting Allrounder (average 40+ with bat, can bowl 6-10 overs)
Andrew Symonds
Marcus North
David Hussey
Cameron White

Allrounder (30+ bat, 15+ overs)
Shane Watson
Andrew McDonald
James Hopes
Moises Henriques
Luke Butterworth

Bowling Allrounder (20+ bat, 25+ overs)
Extra Batsman (average 45+)
Phil Jaques
Phil Hughes
Brad Hodge
Shaun Marsh
Chris Rogers

Unsuitable
Michael Klinger
Luke Pomersbach


Personally, my lineup would be something like (all fit):

Katich
Hughes
Ponting
Clarke
Watson
Hussey
Haddin
Johnson
!
Clark
Hilfenhous/*

! = Either a spinner, or put faith in Clarke/Katich to bowl spin, and a 4th seamer/Lee.
* = Hilfenhous my first choice, but any number of 'potential' fast bowlers.

Given the age of the side, I would like to see one of the top 5 bats, and one of the top 4 bowlers being a 'developing' player - however given the injury to Watson (and his farcial non-selection prevoiusly) I don't think we have option at the moment. To that end we are making forced changes on form (Hayden/Lee) and injury (Lee/Clark).

In the current side, we have five players 'developing' - Johnson, Siddle, Bollinger, Hauritz, McDonald = coincidentally that's our entire bowling lineup. It's too many, and the (only) reason I want Lee back in the side. Conversely, it also gives us our best chance at finding the 'next' bowler to step up.

Until we 'find' at least one more bowler to back up Johnson/Clark, we NEED a 5th bowling option - to that end I'd be looking at the likes of Hopes again - or taking the punt and playing 5 genuine bowlers - with Johnson, Haddin and Krezja/Hauritz/etc providing some steel to the batting.

A lineup with Haddin at 6 and Johnson at 7 scares me - whether we have Hayden (retiring) or Hughes (debuting) opening - it adds a heck of a lot of pressure to the top order.

[Audacious]

Looks like Hussey is the winner. Not that it matters anyway because we all know Symonds and Hayden will have their spots in the aussie team until they retire....

[Shutty05]

I think the Australian selectors have to bite the bullet and pick Moses Henriques.

A new era has to start and he is the ideal man to bat at number 6.

A new batch of younger players is coming through the system and it is about time to blood these young players.

If you recall back in 1991, John Benaud, Lawrie Sawle, Steve Bernard and Trevor Hohns blooded a young SK Warne. IN 1992, they blooded Damien Martyn; 1993: Michael Slater, Brendan Julian, Paul Reifel and Glen McGrath.

IF Andrew McDonald plays well during this test match, the selectors should stick with him.

But, in my opinion, Moses Henriques is going to be a better allrounder than Shane Watson, and Moses' ability rivals a young Jacques Kallis many years ago.

I would not play a no 6 batsman etc. I would play Moses and bat Haddin at 7.

Phillip Hughes
Simon Katich
Ricky (C)
Michael Clarke
Michael Hussey
Moses Henriques
Brad Haddin
Mitchell Johnson
Stephen Smith (NSW Leggie)
Peter Siddle
Stuart CLark


I like your thoughts, Smith can bat as well, has taken over from poor old Casson. Moises will be an awesome player, We need Hughes, but we still need Hilfy in our team.

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

A lineup with Haddin at 6 and Johnson at 7 scares me - whether we have Hayden (retiring) or Hughes (debuting) opening - it adds a heck of a lot of pressure to the top order Are you serious. Hayden and Hussey should be grateful Haddin and Johnson stood up to the pressure they had placed on them.

Way to go is Hughes as opener and Moises Henriques as the allrounder. Slot him in at 8 behind Haddin/Johnson. Youth is what we must punt on.

[HFF_07]

We need an all rounder to bowl and bat at 6, Mcdonald is best suited at the moment, since Watson and Symonds are injured.

[CrazyQ]

There are only two world class allrounders in the world.

Kallis and Flintoff.

No more. Stop searching for one and just play 6 batters 4 bowlers and a keeper until one comes up, like Henriques.

[Rocco Jones]

Atm I would have Haddin @ 6 with all-rounder like McDonald or Watson (when he can bowl) @ 7 for the following reasons:
- Haddin is strong enough to be a specialist bat.
- Our lower order batting is stronger than our bowling depth.
- Our main struggle is to take 20 wickets.

I wouldn't go for players like Symonds, North or White in the all-rounder spot as they are just part-timers imo. The job description for the all-rounder would be to take wickets @ about 35, be able to hold up an end and average about 40 with the bat.

Of course if we have 6 specialist bats and 4 specialist bowlers tearing it up I would change the team structure, but we don't atm.