Australia Test squad - 2014

[western royboy]

Thats my issue with hughes it always some reason he can't be backed to perform at this level, they hid him vs the SA quicks a few summers back now they might not play him due to his spin struggles.

If the bloke needs to be protected from facing anything other than sri lankan medium pacers on our pitches then you have to question if he has a place at this level, they need to back him no matter the opposition or just move on from hughes.

Reading between the lines, they would prefer that he is allowed to consolidate at FC Level then when Rogers finishes in theory he might be right to go again. Because no one else is seemingly putting up there hand he keeps on getting recycled. The names that keep getting thrown up like Tom Cooper, Lynn and Burns are not there yet. People that keep mentioning Cossie will be disappointed, he's nowhere near it and never will be. Cameron White may not be finished yet as a Test player.

 

[Ian Dargie]

This is what I said about 4 months ago. Pretty clear I though Watson was under the pump back then and that we should be looking at replacemets...

That's clear?

It's cool – you've come around to a more sensible position. I knew you'd get there.

 

[bird_man]

That's clear?

It's cool – you've come around to a more sensible position. I knew you'd get there.

Haha, good one mate!

 

[southernswannies]

Not at all. Just an observation of how our friend has changed his tune.

Do you agree that Watson is under the pump and we should be looking at the alternatives?

If so, welcome aboard.

Of course, it's a matter of time before Ian Dargies cherrypicked stat of 31 with the bat comes out.

Watson against Pakistan: 44.1 with the bat, 17.7 with the ball.

Walks straight into the team, especially how daft the Pakistanis are at playing swing bowling nowadays.

Watsons performances against India - 32 with the bat, 33 with the ball. ALL matches played in India. Really not bad considering we get rolled every time we head over there.

Could imagine, with the Test form he's had in the past year (39.8 since the start of last years English Ashes) he'd be able to average 40 odd with the bat in the upcoming Test series. At this stage, as good as the team looks, we'd keep anyone around putting up those results.

Pups no fool, he's right to say Wattos career is certainly not over.

 

[Ian Dargie]

Of course, it's a matter of time before Ian Dargies cherrypicked stat of 31 with the bat comes out.

I don't know if you can claim it's "cherrypicked" when it spans three-and-a-half years. It's the entire second half of his Test career.

It accurately reflects his ordinary record since the start of 2011. What stat would you prefer to measure his performance over that period?

A cherrypicked stat is when you emphasise a small sample that is at odds with the bigger picture.

Watson against Pakistan: 44.1 with the bat, 17.7 with the ball.

For example, that's a cherrypicked stat.

Wow - he's got a good record against Pakistan. Because he played five of his six Tests against them in 2009-10, when he was actually in decent form. The other Test was in 2005.

But what do those numbers tell us about his performances in the four years since his last Test against Pakistan? Absolutely nothing.

You can't accuse me of cherrypicking, when I'm pointing to his overall record since the start of 2011, and then present a stat that reflects such an absurdly narrow part of that record and has literally nothing to do with anything he's done in the past four years. It's either dumb or dishonest. You choose.

Could imagine, with the Test form he's had in the past year (39.8 since the start of last years English Ashes) he'd be able to average 40 odd with the bat in the upcoming Test series. At this stage, as good as the team looks, we'd keep anyone around putting up those results.

So you don't think it's fair to say he's been short of runs - particularly when it's mattered - in recent times?

Pups no fool, he's right to say Wattos career is certainly not over.

If he's asked about it, what's he meant to say?

"Yeah, nah - he's done."

 

[southernswannies]

I don't know if you can claim it's "cherrypicked" when it spans three-and-a-half years. It's the entire second half of his Test career.

It accurately reflects his ordinary record since the start of 2011. What stat would you prefer to measure his performance over that period?

A cherrypicked stat is when you emphasise a small sample that is at odds with the bigger picture.

For example, that's a cherrypicked stat.

Wow - he's got a good record against Pakistan. Because he played five of his six Tests against them in 2009-10, when he was actually in decent form. The other Test was in 2005.

But what do those numbers tell us about his performances in the four years since his last Test against Pakistan? Absolutely nothing.

You can't accuse me of cherrypicking, when I'm pointing to his overall record since the start of 2011, and then present a stat that reflects such an absurdly narrow part of that record and has literally nothing to do with anything he's done in the past four years. It's either dumb or dishonest. You choose.

So you don't think it's fair to say he's been short of runs - particularly when it's mattered - in recent times?

If he's asked about it, what's he meant to say?

"Yeah, nah - he's done."

Maybe we have a different idea of what form means. To a lot of people, form in the past year and a bit might out weight going all the weigh back to 2011. If you want to go on about that bigger picture, is it not his career average - which is 5.5 runs higher than the stat you always bring up?

You can't force people to have the same opinion on stats as you do. In that case, someone could come a long and continually push that Xavier Doherty should be our frontline spinner in T20I because of last nights match were he got 4 wickets and continually rant on about it.

Funny you ignore my opinion on his record against India and what could come out of that on Australian pitches, rather responding to my argument as being either dumb or dishonest. Sums up your ignorance in this thread.

I think Watson failed when we've needed him a lot but chipped in times to get quick runs or build pressure on the bowlers, something I feel not a lot of Test cricketers could do. Rogers and Smith have failed just as much, perhaps Warner too in the English Ashes. No need to single Watson out. It's all just cricket.

 

[Ian Dargie]

Maybe we have a different idea of what form means. To a lot of people, form in the past year and a bit might out weight going all the weigh back to 2011.

First you accuse me of cherrypicking. Now you accuse me of using too big a sample size. Which one is it?

The point is that he has been short of runs for a long time. It's not just two or three lean series. It's a trend stretching back more than three years.

If you want to go on about that bigger picture, is it not his career average - which is 5.5 runs higher than the stat you always bring up?

Remember when Ricky Ponting was struggling toward the end? Was it relevant to keep quoting his 50-plus career average? Or was it more relevant to look at his diminished recent output over the last couple of years?

Over the second half of Watson's career, he's averaged 31 with the bat. That's ordinary.

Funny you ignore my opinion on his record against India and what could come out of that on Australian pitches, rather responding to my argument as being either dumb or dishonest.

You want to talk about his record against India? He averages 31.76 with the bat. How the hell is that a point in his favour?

Also, how did he go against them last year?

So if for some reason you think he's got a good record against India, it's because of performances from at least four years ago, isn't it?

And yes, presenting his record against Pakistan is absolutely dumb/dishonest. It relates to six matches, the last of which was four years ago. What on earth is that meant to demonstrate?

Besides, since when do you pick under-performing players because they have a good record against a particular country? If a batsman isn't scoring runs, he's in trouble. Oh, but Watson made some runs against Pakistan four years ago. So what?

I think Watson failed when we've needed him a lot but chipped in times to get quick runs or build pressure on the bowlers, something I feel not a lot of Test cricketers could do. Rogers and Smith have failed just as much, perhaps Warner too in the English Ashes. No need to single Watson out. It's all just cricket.

I'm 'singling out' Watson because his record is demonstrably worse and his trough stretches back three-and-a-half years. You don't appear to dispute that; rather, you insist it simply doesn't matter.

As for the other guys, why are you even talking about Warner? He's averaged 56 since being recalled against England. Smith, on the other hand, averages 44 since he was recalled for the tour to India and has played some pretty significant innings. Is there a real question mark over either of these guys?

And Rogers. He was recalled for a very specific reason and you'd have to say he did enough against England to keep his spot. That said, I don't think he's 100 percent nailed on. He's preferred to Hughes at the moment, partly because he is an appropriate foil for Warner.

 

[PaddyO]

Hey everyone. Ian Dargie doesn't think Watson should be in the test team because he averages 31 over a while.

Ian Dargie also thinks you're an idiot if you disagree with this.

If you've previously supported Watson being in the team, but have now realised Watson can't play injured, Ian will infer you were actually just wrong all along.

Everyone get how it works? Cool, move on...

 

[Ian Dargie]

Hey everyone. Ian Dargie doesn't think Watson should be in the test team because he averages 31 over a while.

Ian Dargie also thinks you're an idiot if you disagree with this.

If you've previously supported Watson being in the team, but have now realised Watson can't play injured, Ian will infer you were actually just wrong all along.

Everyone get how it works? Cool, move on...

You must have a lot of sand.

 

[PaddyO]

You must have a lot of sand.

I must? Lol

 

[Phone]

You must have a lot of sand.

please explain what this means

 

[Cleavy]

he's saying the person has lots of sand in their vagina

 

[Phone]

i sure hope he isn't, cause that's pretty offensive and somebody would have to do something about that and we sure wouldnt want that

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Marsh has hurt his knee in a dead rubber T20 match.

 

[western royboy]

Marsh has hurt his knee in a dead rubber T20 match.

How bad

 

[Carbine Chaos]

How bad

No idea, just happened.

Marsh is going off the field. He landed gingerly while fielding earlier in the over. We are possibly talking of an injured left knee. Beer is in charge of the team now

I'm assuming the worst because he's a Marsh and the lovely timing of it.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Marsh is back on the field. He has a Test debut in 20 days. This is a dead rubber T20 that half the world doesn't know about and the other half couldn't care less about

Hmmm.

 

[southernswannies]

Since there's no T20 thread thought I'd post here, presuming Kolkata Knight Riders (Cummins) and certainly one of Maxwell or Boyce both being in the Champions League final they'll have to draft in Hughesy or Lyon for surprise debuts.

Could potentially make for a very weak batting squad:

Finch, Warner, M. Marsh, Smith, Faulkner, Haddin, Starc, Richardson, Abbott, Boyce, Lyon

in the presumption they go Lyon over Hughes, which I think they'll do as well as Hobart not making it.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Hmmm.

Considering it was his first shot at skippering for WA, you can bet it mattered to Mitch.

 

[Hellgood]

Since there's no T20 thread thought I'd post here, presuming Kolkata Knight Riders (Cummins) and certainly one of Maxwell or Boyce both being in the Champions League final they'll have to draft in Hughesy or Lyon for surprise debuts.

Could potentially make for a very weak batting squad:

Finch, Warner, M. Marsh, Smith, Faulkner, Haddin, Starc, Richardson, Abbott, Boyce, Lyon

in the presumption they go Lyon over Hughes, which I think they'll do as well as Hobart not making it.

Don't like that bowling attack at all other than Starc, but I suppose it's the hand we've been dealt with injuries at the moment.

 

[Soups]

Marsh is in some hot form. Lovely to watch! He better stay fit!

 

[bird_man]

please explain what this means

It's what he says when he loses am argument. It gets used quite a bit.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Don't like that bowling attack at all other than Starc, but I suppose it's the hand we've been dealt with injuries at the moment.

s'alright, the skipper can do his share of the bowling

 

[Hudu Gurusingha]

Came for a visit to the cricket forum looking forward to reading some light hearted discussion about the upcoming test series. Oh great Ian Dargie is still hanging around with his utensil out being an obnoxious twot.

And back out the door I go

 

[Ian Dargie]

Came for a visit to the cricket forum looking forward to reading some light hearted discussion about the upcoming test series. Oh great Ian Dargie is still hanging around with his utensil out being an obnoxious twot.

Why tag me in a post like this unless you're trying to be provocative?