View Full Version : Rate our All-Rounders
gbatman
12 Nov 2010, 15:03
Rate the All rounders in Australia...
1. Watson - AB medilast. Made consistant runs and is our best bowler.
2. McDonald - Has come of age batting wise. Is an extremely talented bowler and wicket taker as well as run stopper.
3. O'Keefe - Haven't seen much of him but has brilliant figures.
4. North - Seen plenty. Can bowl. Can't bat.
5. Hopes - An ok bowler but nothing special. A decent batsman.
6. Smith - Still developing his game but could be really good.
7. Christian - Can swing the new ball and can bat a bit.
8. M Marsh - Still raw but worth keeping an eye on.
Have I missed any one? What are people's thoughts on our all rounders?
bombersno1
12 Nov 2010, 15:37
1. Watson
2. Smith
3. McDonald
4. Hopes
M.Marsh- Is a batsman long term
North is a batsman unless you claim Michael Clarke is an all rounder!
O'Keefe- Is a bowler who can bat.
Christian is rubbish.
Port_Adelaide
12 Nov 2010, 15:46
2. Smith
3. McDonald
Seriously?? :rolleyes:
TassieSaint
12 Nov 2010, 16:01
You missed Butterworth and Geeves.
ThePuppetMaster
13 Nov 2010, 06:52
1. Watson (Brilliant player)
2. McDonlad (two recent brilliant hundreds and a very accomplished all rounder... however doubtful he will ever be able to make a big impact at international level)
3. Hopes (has played 80 odd mostly impressive ODI's, i struggle to see how he can't be in the top 3 after being Australia's all rounder fixture for the last 5 years)
4. Smith (bowling not quite up to standard)
5. Hastings (FC bowling average of 24 and batting average of 29... very much a Hopes type player)
6. Butterworth (a bit of a Hopes type)
7. Henriques (hopefully can become a test standard player, has the talent)
8. Marsh (definately not a pure bat in the long term, his bowling is very promising)
Henriques and Marsh i can see as becoming Test quality players... Hastings could make it but he may be pigeonholed as a Hopes type one day specialist
i left o'keefe out because i haven't seen him play... would prefer to only make judgements on players i have seen :thumbsu:
BarneyBent
13 Nov 2010, 07:20
Is this right nor, or at their best? Because it makes a significant difference to how I rate Hopes. He has been a solid, reliable and underrated allrounder for many years, but I think his age might be catching up to him, because his batting and bowling have taken a turn for the worse lately.
Wood_Duck
13 Nov 2010, 07:33
Christian is rubbish.
Rubbish on account of the fact that you have no idea who he is?
gbatman
13 Nov 2010, 08:29
McDonald has made two hundreds in the one match at the moment and has already made 100s this season previously. He consistantly takes wickets. He bowls accuratly and moves the ball and can bowl to a field unlike most ouf the bowlers in the australian team.
He's a far superior cricketer to North. He has come of age and is in his prome now and should be played. He was good last time he played test cricket, should never lost his place to a spud like North.
bombersno1
13 Nov 2010, 09:41
Rubbish on account of the fact that you have no idea who he is?
No on the fact he bowls pies and is a slogger. Perfect 20/20 player though as he is a big hitter.
bombersno1
13 Nov 2010, 09:42
He was good last time he played test cricket, should never lost his place to a spud like North.
Averages 10 with the bat in test cricket, there is the reason he was punted. Plus the fact is Watson is a 100 times better version!
Averages 10 with the bat in test cricket, there is the reason he was punted. Plus the fact is Watson is a 100 times better version!
Averaged 10? thats a genuine lie.
McDonald is grossly underrated. With a first class record averaging 40 with the bat and 30 with the ball over a sustained period is outstanding.
Sadly for him Watson is just better, maybe if the selectors ever took a horses for courses attitude he would be a chance. For instance at Sydney if we play 2 spinners he could come in at 6, and have the 2 spinners, 2 strike fast bowlers with Watson & McDonald for support.
Doubt this would ever happen though
BarneyBent
13 Nov 2010, 10:37
Averaged 10? thats a genuine lie.
McDonald is grossly underrated. With a first class record averaging 40 with the bat and 30 with the ball over a sustained period is outstanding.
Sadly for him Watson is just better, maybe if the selectors ever took a horses for courses attitude he would be a chance. For instance at Sydney if we play 2 spinners he could come in at 6, and have the 2 spinners, 2 strike fast bowlers with Watson & McDonald for support.
Doubt this would ever happen though
Play 2 spinners? Which 2 spinners? The only chance of playing 2 spinners in Sydney is if Smith plays, and the only way he should play is if he bats at 6.
McDonald is a greater chance of getting a gig on a helpful Gabba than the SCG.
bombersno1
13 Nov 2010, 10:47
Averaged 10? thats a genuine lie.
McDonald is grossly underrated. With a first class record averaging 40 with the bat and 30 with the ball over a sustained period is outstanding.
Sadly for him Watson is just better, maybe if the selectors ever took a horses for courses attitude he would be a chance. For instance at Sydney if we play 2 spinners he could come in at 6, and have the 2 spinners, 2 strike fast bowlers with Watson & McDonald for support.
Doubt this would ever happen though
Well 21, same point though. Looked all at sea with the bat in test cricket, and he is not getting younger.
2 spinners..dear oh me, we barely have 1 let alone 2! McDonald is done unless Watson is injured, pretty simple.
On a helpful Gabba? Three fast bowlers and Watson will always be enough and a specialist batsman would be required at 6 on a wicket like that.
I'm not saying we have two spinners good enough, or that this should or could happen. I'm just saying that would have to be the make up of the side for his to be considered as there would be no other reason to play 2 all-rounders.
bombersno1
13 Nov 2010, 11:07
Agreed, and if we need a 2nd all-rounder I would play a guy that has more potential to break a game open in Steve Smith anyway. Smith is more a test no6 than McDonald is!
Doodlesweaver
13 Nov 2010, 14:06
McDonald has made two hundreds in the one match at the moment and has already made 100s this season previously. He consistantly takes wickets. He bowls accuratly and moves the ball and can bowl to a field unlike most ouf the bowlers in the australian team.
He's a far superior cricketer to North. He has come of age and is in his prome now and should be played. He was good last time he played test cricket, should never lost his place to a spud like North.
That's why he ain't in this team. You have to be crap consistently see North/Hussey, not good consistently. I thought he was hard done by when he didn't get an Ashes test. His bowling should have been so helpful in England and god knows we needed someone who understood that the stumps are at the end of the pitch for a reason.
gbatman
13 Nov 2010, 17:51
Averages 10 with the bat in test cricket, there is the reason he was punted. Plus the fact is Watson is a 100 times better version!
Watson hasn't got his spot. North has. McDonald had a weakness to the sort ball, probably hasn't any more as he is making loads of runs and big scored to boot.
North gets a game because he is a spin all rounder i guess. But we rarely bowl him because our strike bowler is an offie.
He aerages 40 odd with the bat at first class cricket which is great since his batting has improved out of sight over the last 12 months.
The gabba won't stay a paceman's paradice, it will need someone like mcdonald who bowls medium pace and can still move an old ball on an old wicket and tie an end down... In England McDonald would have been perfect with his swing but our selectors have NFI.