View Full Version : Why isn't Phil Hughes playing in the 1 day team?
courtjester
7 Apr 2009, 09:34
Why?
Belnakor
7 Apr 2009, 12:13
because his record in domestic ODI is shit.
SydneyDon
7 Apr 2009, 12:35
because his record in domestic ODI is shit.
Nice Oxymoron;)
because his record in domestic ODI is shit.
Ignoring the terrible wording in this post, it's not shit.
18 matches, 555 runs @ 37.00. Sure the strike rate could be worked on a bit, but he's a naturally attacking batsman who should be in the team at the moment.
Smokey_22
7 Apr 2009, 13:31
because his record in domestic ODI is shit.
Actually his ODD record is solid, for a 20 yo.
ATM there isnt room for him, as a top order batsman. I suspect his time will be coming soon though.
Belnakor
7 Apr 2009, 13:39
ODI/ODD pfft :)
I'd give him a run infront of Marsh, Marsh is ****ing overrated.
Marsh is great. Has a good record too.
DoubleO7
7 Apr 2009, 13:47
The only the thing I see holding Hughes back is his low strike rate. The way Michael Clarke is going I wouldn't hesitate in giving Hughes a call up.
Rather just see him focus on Test cricket.
Bradesmaen
7 Apr 2009, 15:00
Chris Rogers deserves a call up before Hughes surely.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
7 Apr 2009, 15:14
He will play ODI cricket very shortly, at this point i feel the selectors dont want to have to burden him with lots of cricket.
Blue Dimension
7 Apr 2009, 17:34
because his record in domestic ODI is shit.
ODI/ODD pfft :)
I'd give him a run infront of Marsh, Marsh is ****ing overrated.
So first you say he isn't in the side because his record is 'shit' when he averages 37 in 18 domestic OD matches.
Then you go and say he should be in the international side ahead of Marsh...ahead of Marsh who you've accused of being overrated when he's scored 5 50's in 14 ODI's and averages 43.
Absolute mind boggling logic there :eek:.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
7 Apr 2009, 17:48
I think the main reason is that the selectors are wary of too much too early.
He is still very young, is going to play a short stint in county cricket soon.
If he were to be play in this series of ODI's then he'd be going straight to the Pakistan series after this one which may well impact on his chances of getting county game time in English conditions.
The selectors have a juggling act to make here, i think they made the right decision.
I don't think for a second that the opening combo of Haddin and Clarke will lead us to the next world cup, but at this point in time Marsh is injured so it is a combo that is being tested out.
I think Haddin could be a decent ODI opener, im not sure about Clarke to be honest? Clarke is at his best when his playing conventional cricket shots along the carpet, as soon as Clarke starts trying to belt shots through the field in the air then his in trouble, having him open might inadvertently make him go back to that habit he was into earlier in his career.
I think Clarke can also struggle to rotate the strike, especially with the field up, in turn this builds pressure and at this stage in his career i feel his response to that is too lash at anything full and wide which has bought about his downfall in recent times.
He is still very much a developing batsmen, i think opening isn't his position.
You want your openers to be naturally attacking batsmen capable of rotating the strike as well as hitting out. Haddin complies to that criteria, whether or not his a long term option is another matter. I feel Marsh/Hughes will take us to the WC as the opening combo.
I feel James Hopes is the best option to parnter Haddin at the top of the innings, he is a natural hitter who is equally adept at going over the top or along the carpet, he opens for Queensland so has experience with the white new ball, which can move alarmingly in the right conditions especially early on.
courtjester
7 Apr 2009, 18:36
So first you say he isn't in the side because his record is 'shit' when he averages 37 in 18 domestic OD matches.
Then you go and say he should be in the international side ahead of Marsh...ahead of Marsh who you've accused of being overrated when he's scored 5 50's in 14 ODI's and averages 43.
Absolute mind boggling logic there :eek:.
I thought the same thoughts BD, but I just couldn't be arsed taking it up....
Well said BD.
bombersno1
7 Apr 2009, 20:46
I feel James Hopes is the best option to parnter Haddin at the top of the innings, he is a natural hitter who is equally adept at going over the top or along the carpet, he opens for Queensland so has experience with the white new ball, which can move alarmingly in the right conditions especially early on.
If FIT, Shane Watson is the best partner for Haddin. I have no doubts for that at all. Can play a long innings at a good strike rate as well, can hit big as well.
i'd rather hughes than Marsh, but what has Marsh done wrong really?
I dont know if thered be a role in the middle order for him some day.. I reckon he'd be quite suited to #4/5
I think the main reason is that the selectors are wary of too much too early.
He is still very young, is going to play a short stint in county cricket soon.
If he were to be play in this series of ODI's then he'd be going straight to the Pakistan series after this one which may well impact on his chances of getting county game time in English conditions.
The selectors have a juggling act to make here, i think they made the right decision.
I don't think for a second that the opening combo of Haddin and Clarke will lead us to the next world cup, but at this point in time Marsh is injured so it is a combo that is being tested out.
I think Haddin could be a decent ODI opener, im not sure about Clarke to be honest? Clarke is at his best when his playing conventional cricket shots along the carpet, as soon as Clarke starts trying to belt shots through the field in the air then his in trouble, having him open might inadvertently make him go back to that habit he was into earlier in his career.
I think Clarke can also struggle to rotate the strike, especially with the field up, in turn this builds pressure and at this stage in his career i feel his response to that is too lash at anything full and wide which has bought about his downfall in recent times.
He is still very much a developing batsmen, i think opening isn't his position.
You want your openers to be naturally attacking batsmen capable of rotating the strike as well as hitting out. Haddin complies to that criteria, whether or not his a long term option is another matter. I feel Marsh/Hughes will take us to the WC as the opening combo.
I feel James Hopes is the best option to parnter Haddin at the top of the innings, he is a natural hitter who is equally adept at going over the top or along the carpet, he opens for Queensland so has experience with the white new ball, which can move alarmingly in the right conditions especially early on.
In the short to medium term I can see Haddin holding down an opening spot - he's looked settled there and is scoring nicely. For the rest of this series whoever partner's him is makeshift be it Clarke or Hopes.
Come our next ODI series (vs Pakis?) either Marsh or Watson should be partnering Haddin. While Haddin's going ok i wouldn't move him. Shore up our middle order with Clarke and maybe Symonds.
Hughes eventually will get his chance. He's gonna be an awesome ODI/T20 player and has shown flashes of brilliance in both forms already. Has the creative shots and footwork to find the gaps and keep the scoring tempo up.
Belnakor
8 Apr 2009, 15:36
So first you say he isn't in the side because his record is 'shit' when he averages 37 in 18 domestic OD matches.
Then you go and say he should be in the international side ahead of Marsh...ahead of Marsh who you've accused of being overrated when he's scored 5 50's in 14 ODI's and averages 43.
Absolute mind boggling logic there :eek:.
Both bat too slow, i just think Marsh is a shit guy in general.
Bennycoff
8 Apr 2009, 16:19
No need at the moment, he has many years of ODI cricket ahead of him, just let him focus on the test game first and score some ODD runs as well.
Punchy Bassett
8 Apr 2009, 16:26
Be it Hughes or Marsh when fit, we need one of them in the team, the batting is awfully unbalanced at the moment, get one of these two in, drop Clarke to David Hussey's spot who can be shifted to drinks carrier.
courtjester
8 Apr 2009, 18:56
Both bat too slow, i just think Marsh is a shit guy in general.
Why would you even say that, unless you are trolling?
To say someone is a "shit guy in general" is pretty f**king harsh mate. Unless you want to back that up somehow maybe shut up.
Blue Dimension
8 Apr 2009, 21:57
Both bat too slow, i just think Marsh is a shit guy in general.
Have you even seen Hughes bat for NSW or are you just making these assumptions based on his strike rate?
As I've mentioned in several threads before, Hughes's ODD strike rate is a result of a couple of reasons reasons.
* He's played the anchor role for NSW as their team collapsed several times over the course of a couple of seasons.
* He's batted alongside David Warner, of whom he hasn't had the need to bat aggressively, more so just rotate the strike.
As anyone would have seen in the Tests, he is a more than aggressive enough Batsman to be playing OD cricket.
His performances in the domestic 20/20 games when given a go have been very good. His innovative hitting, specifically square of the wicket has been a highlight.
As for Marsh...I'd say bowlers around the world would beg to differ.
both bat too slow, i just think marsh is a shit guy in general.
wtf??
Belnakor
9 Apr 2009, 13:27
not trolling, the guy is a tool, he went to willeton highschool one school across for me.
Cousin Jed
9 Apr 2009, 13:29
Fair enough but this thread is about Phil Hughes not whether Marsh is a shit guy or not.
courtjester
10 Apr 2009, 05:45
Fact is this current one-dayer is showing how fragile Australia's top order is. If we really wanted to win surely we'd be taking in a side that looked like this surely:
Hughes
Haddin
Ponting
Symonds
Ferguson
Hodge
Hopes
McDonald
Johnson
Lee
Hauritz
I'm fed up with both Husseys.
Kane McGoodwin
10 Apr 2009, 14:27
If FIT, Shane Watson is the best partner for Haddin. I have no doubts for that at all. Can play a long innings at a good strike rate as well, can hit big as well.
Agreed. Really hope Watson can get over his injury woes, which means not over-bowling him on his return.
Hughes time will come, but he is only young - let him concentrate on the longer form of the game 1st (which is more important), where his record is currently better. Tests & ODI's are different games, so horses for courses on selection. Just because you are deserving to play in one, doesn't mean you should be a walk-up start for the other.
Kane McGoodwin
10 Apr 2009, 14:31
Fact is this current one-dayer is showing how fragile Australia's top order is. If we really wanted to win surely we'd be taking in a side that looked like this surely:
Hughes
Haddin
Ponting
Symonds
Ferguson
Hodge
Hopes
McDonald
Johnson
Lee
Hauritz
I'm fed up with both Husseys.
lol Hodge? Don't think you will find the selectors will be thinking the same way. Also, can't see them picking McDonald in ODI's either. I agree with D Hussey, but Mike is still deserving in the team.
1. Haddin
2. Watson
3. Ponting
4. Clarke
5. Ferguson
6. Symonds
7. Hussey M
8. Hopes
9. Johnson
10. Hauritz
11. Bracken
courtjester
10 Apr 2009, 15:52
Lol...as stated in another thread, I publicly apologise to Mike Hussey, who has been in sterling 1 day form...