View Full Version : Hogg to play - a good move?
What do people think of the decision to play Brad Hogg as the All-Rounder ahead of Ian Harvey and Andrew "The Hack" Symonds?
It is a bold move to go with a spinner on pitches not renowned for being spin friendly and it could blow back in their faces or it could turn out to be a masterstroke.
What do people think?
Good move. He is a far better player than both Harvey and the Hack.
ScouseCat
5 Feb 2003, 15:28
Brad Hogg deserves the opportunity to start in the World Cup side but if he is unable to get wickets then I wouldn't be surprised to see Ian Harvey given a chance.
GoEagles
5 Feb 2003, 15:43
Good move in my books. He takes more wickets than Harvey and Symonds and is scoring more runs than them too.
Langer's_Babe
5 Feb 2003, 16:02
i think its pretty good that have let brad hogg play
catattack
5 Feb 2003, 16:26
Yeah good move. He's in great form at the moment with bat and ball, so keep him in the team as the all-rounder!
ScouseCat
5 Feb 2003, 17:04
Originally posted by GoEagles
Good move in my books. He takes more wickets than Harvey and Symonds and is scoring more runs than them too.
The only thing that worries me about playing 2 wrist-spinners in limited overs matches in South Africa is what can happen in the night time over there... the "dew" factor.
Nige_Bix
5 Feb 2003, 17:09
I'm all for it! -might even help Shane to have another wristy turning the other way!
Richmondfan#1
5 Feb 2003, 18:17
I'm happy with the decision. Symonds does not deserve to be in the Aussie team, stick to the A's. And correct me if I'm wrong, but Ian Harvey seems to have done little of late and isn't in the best of form.
With the late form of Hogg, he deserves to be in the side - regardless of uncertainties about the pitch.
mattyc2422
5 Feb 2003, 19:28
Why don't they just play Michael Clar.....oh... nevermind.:rolleyes:
Originally posted by mattyc2422
Why don't they just play Michael Clar.....oh... nevermind.:rolleyes:
If Michael Bevan doesn't come up,that could happen.
Hogg has to play ahead of Symonds.
Well he's not Symonds and he's not Harvey, so thats two things Hogg's got going for him.
definetly a risk, but his fielding and enthusiasm in the field is invaluable. has shown he can play, like the others, just if he can be consistent, which the others are not...
I hope Bevo comes up...good luck to him...
As for Hogg, I agree with the majority in that he should be rewarded for his good form. It may be a bit of a risk but he should deliver, and like ScouseCat said, Harvey could always be played if Hogg doesn't perform.
Originally posted by ScouseCat
The only thing that worries me about playing 2 wrist-spinners in limited overs matches in South Africa is what can happen in the night time over there... the "dew" factor.
Stop worrying. None of Australia's 6 first round matches are night.
Kenny_01
6 Feb 2003, 04:09
Yes, he should definitely play.
raiderman00
7 Feb 2003, 14:39
Who said that Hogg has the job, i mean the sun wrote and Article and he has been playing practise matches but that doesen't prove anything. I think you should play Harvey ahead of Hogg as i can't see Hogg getting wickets.
Ps does anyone know how to stop people tracing u on Mirc
Interesting to see Brad Hogg had 50 taken from his 8 overs last night in the warm-up game.
That can't be a good sign, not with the pitches he is likely to encounter in the tournament.