Changes for Boxing Day - In: J.Burns Out: M.Marsh

[DaRick]

Would like:
- Rogers
- Warner
- Cowan/Ferguson/Voges/Burns (your mileage may vary)
- Smith
- S Marsh (to reduce instability in batting lineup if nothing else)
- Watson (will need his bowling more now that Mitch Marsh is injured)
- Wade/Nevill/Hartley (depends on batting vs keeping tradeoffs - also am not sure how much Wade has improved)
- Johnson
- Harris
- Lyon
- Hazlewood (remains at #11 for now)

Will probably get:
- Rogers
- Warner
- Watson
- Smith
- S Marsh
- ?????
- Haddin (for 'leadership', which is a pretty spurious argument given Rogers' presence)
- Johnson
- Harris
- Lyon
- Hazlewood

N.B: Faulkner would be fine as #7, but IMO not #6 (he doesn't have a SS hundred for starters).

 

[The Swans Blog]

If Mitch is injured then Watson should keep his spot bat bat at 6.

Did a hammy or something, but yeah Watson in before Haddin has to be the case. I'd even promote Steve Smith to no.3. Something is wrong with those Marsh boys, one of them sure can't bat for s**t.

I'd love to drop Haddin but it won't happen. Otherwise Hartley or Nevill to come in.

With any luck he'll retire after this series. He's pulling a Ponting here...

Harris in for Starc.

No doubt.

Surely there's a better opening batsman than Rogers? He's s**t as, looks like a scared little kid out there every time he bats. He has no confidence and it's pretty bloody obvious he doesn't and I think that it translates to a complete lack of confidence nationwide. I could be wrong though.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Surely there's a better opening batsman than Rogers? He's s**t as, looks like a scared little kid out there every time he bats. He has no confidence and it's pretty bloody obvious he doesn't and I think that it translates to a complete lack of confidence nationwide. I could be wrong though.

He scored half-centuries in both innings.

 

[davis_756]

Yep, don't think there will be too many changes, barring injury.

Haddins 9 catches is in the book, he won't be dropped.

Harris is an interesting one, he's up for a lot of cricket next year, and given his history not sure having him play in Melbourne then back in Sydney is worth the risk. Starc has his haters, but wouldn't mind him having a couple of Tests just to get a bit of continuity.

What does the amount of catches as a keeper prove? To me it proves the bowlers got more nicks and indicates exactly 0% how good or bad the keeper was

 

[ROOTA#6]

Did a hammy or something, but yeah Watson in before Haddin has to be the case. I'd even promote Steve Smith to no.3. Something is wrong with those Marsh boys, one of them sure can't bat for s**t.


With any luck he'll retire after this series. He's pulling a Ponting here...


No doubt.

Surely there's a better opening batsman than Rogers? He's s**t as, looks like a scared little kid out there every time he bats. He has no confidence and it's pretty bloody obvious he doesn't and I think that it translates to a complete lack of confidence nationwide. I could be wrong though.

Know much about cricket?

 

[The Swans Blog]

I'm just saying that a guy with career stats like that can't get a game yet Shaun Marsh does averaging far less than many other talented players who aren't getting a look in. Or have been pigeonholed early on in their careers that they miss out Ie: Cameron White being picked as a spinner when he should have been playing as a batsmen which luckily hasn't happened to Smith.

Pretty sure Smith was picked as a spin bowler, but was so crap in his first couple of tests that he became a dedicated batsman.

Know much about cricket?

What bone are you picking?

 

[ROOTA#6]

Pretty sure Smith was picked as a spin bowler, but was so crap in his first couple of tests that he became a dedicated batsman.


What bone are you picking?

Your crack at Rogers

 

[gandaal]

James Faulkner cannot bat at 6 in Test cricket

Neither can Watson, Mitch Marsh, Brad Haddin, Shaun Marsh, George Bailey... yet they were still given the opportunity.

Faulkner couldn't do any worse.

 

[Sealz]

Did a hammy or something, but yeah Watson in before Haddin has to be the case. I'd even promote Steve Smith to no.3. Something is wrong with those Marsh boys, one of them sure can't bat for s**t.


With any luck he'll retire after this series. He's pulling a Ponting here...


No doubt.

Surely there's a better opening batsman than Rogers? He's s**t as, looks like a scared little kid out there every time he bats. He has no confidence and it's pretty bloody obvious he doesn't and I think that it translates to a complete lack of confidence nationwide. I could be wrong though.

Such a s**t post.

 

[The Swans Blog]

That's just blatantly wrong - if anything Mitch is a better bowler than he is a batsman

The he really is a dud pick because he was tripe with the bat. He's got a good test average of 40 with a high of 87. Take out that 87 and his average is 30. He's young, developing and could be worth persisting with. But he's got to be consistent with the bat before the ball.

 

[Sealz]

Can't see the selectors making too many changes.
Harris will come in for Starc and if M Marsh isn't right either Cowan comes in at 3 and Watson drops down to 6 or either Faulkner or Henriques come in.
Cowan has had a great start to the Sheild season but not sure if he will work at 3.
I do think Faulkner could do well if given the chance.

 

[The Swans Blog]

I have heard this too. Personally I think this sort of thing is ridiculous - seems stupid to categorically rule someone out - but I keep hearing commentators in the media say that the selectors just don't think he has what it takes to be a test cricketer.

Brad Hodge an average of 55 after 6 tests. He never got a fair shake of it and could have proven to be an excellent middle order batsman when we had so many poor batsman.
David Hussey

No doubt there's more.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Brad Hodge an average of 55 after 6 tests. He never got a fair shake of it and could have proven to be an excellent middle order batsman when we had so many poor batsman.
David Hussey

No doubt there's more.

What are you suggesting?

Neither of these guys were black-balled. More likely, they were the victims of circumstance.

Pretty sure Smith was picked as a spin bowler, but was so crap in his first couple of tests that he became a dedicated batsman.

In the 2009-10 Sheffield Shield season, Smith scored 772 runs at 77, giving him a FC average of 50-plus after 13 FC matches. He was 20 years old at that stage and made his Test debut against Pakistan later that year.

So, in reality, his batting was always his strength. But Australia had a revolving door of spinners at the time and he was one of many who was tried.

 

[The Swans Blog]

He scored half-centuries in both innings.

I posted in another forum, but he usually plays his best when his back is against the wall. The century against SA, the 50s in the series and the 50s against India haven't been when the team dominated, it's been when the team sort of fell to pieces and his slow style kept him in it.

Before his back-to-back half centuries, he scored 5, 2, 9 & 21. The previous 5 innings were pretty healthy at an average of 50 with his 107 against SA, but then preceded by 4, 1 and 5. Basically, you can summarise his innings as: He either gets out for nothing or not much at all, and he sometimes makes runs. Highest score of 119 in 35 innings, barely averages over 35 and has a SR under 50. He's made 50 or more in 11 innings with 4 centuries (11% of innings, 36% conversion rate). Take away those innings and he averages an appalling 26 in 31 innings.

Is he the 2nd best opening batsman in Australia? I Weep for our cricket future.

 

[The Swans Blog]

What are you suggesting?

Neither of these guys were black-balled. More likely, they were the victims of circumstance.

They were most definitely black balled. There was practically public campaign when Damien Martyn retired to promote Brad Hodge - granted most of it came out of Victoria, but on the back of a decent couple of tests including a double century, he was dropped for pretty crap players who themselves were dropped. He never got a look back in and the selectors said more than 4 years ago they wouldn't pick him again.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...ed-for-australia/story-e6frepmo-1225988465326
http://www.theroar.com.au/2012/01/26/hodge-saves-last-shot-for-selectors/

He's been one of the best FC batsman in Australia in the last 15 years, yet has played 6 tests, when players like Chris Rogers, Mitchell Marsh, Marcus North, Ed Cowan, Phil Hughes, Matthew Wade (as a batsman) were picked ahead of him. Not to mention the other rubbish players who should never have been near the team.

 

[The Swans Blog]

Your crack at Rogers

He's a rubbish opener with clearly limited ability and his role in the team is that of a senior player. He wouldn't be in the team if there were a better player, or one that's in better form... oh wait. This thread says Ed Cowan! Well time will tell.

I'm expecting 2 changes after this series - Rogers & Haddin out with probably Cowan coming back in and Wade or Paine.

 

[Kram]

Seriously will Victorians ever stfu about Hodge, he was bog ordinary at Test level.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I posted in another forum, but he usually plays his best when his back is against the wall. The century against SA, the 50s in the series and the 50s against India haven't been when the team dominated, it's been when the team sort of fell to pieces and his slow style kept him in it.

Surely that's a good thing.

Before his back-to-back half centuries, he scored 5, 2, 9 & 21. The previous 5 innings were pretty healthy at an average of 50 with his 107 against SA, but then preceded by 4, 1 and 5. Basically, you can summarise his innings as: He either gets out for nothing or not much at all, and he sometimes makes runs. Highest score of 119 in 35 innings, barely averages over 35 and has a SR under 50. He's made 50 or more in 11 innings with 4 centuries (11% of innings, 36% conversion rate). Take away those innings and he averages an appalling 26 in 31 innings.

If you don't count his best innings, his average suffers. I think that's true for most batsmen.

Is he the 2nd best opening batsman in Australia?

I agree he's on thin ice, partly because of his age and partly because he hasn't scored heavily enough to cement his position.

But he's a good foil for Warner's more attacking style and there aren't too many guys outside the team demanding selection. It seems strange to demand he be axed when he's just scored two half-centuries in the one match.

 

[gandaal]

Is Handscomb a chance for the keeper spot?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

They were most definitely black balled. There was practically public campaign when Damien Martyn retired to promote Brad Hodge - granted most of it came out of Victoria, but on the back of a decent couple of tests including a double century, he was dropped for pretty crap players who themselves were dropped. He never got a look back in and the selectors said more than 4 years ago they wouldn't pick him again.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...ed-for-australia/story-e6frepmo-1225988465326
http://www.theroar.com.au/2012/01/26/hodge-saves-last-shot-for-selectors/

He's been one of the best FC batsman in Australia in the last 15 years, yet has played 6 tests, when players like Chris Rogers, Mitchell Marsh, Marcus North, Ed Cowan, Phil Hughes, Matthew Wade (as a batsman) were picked ahead of him. Not to mention the other rubbish players who should never have been near the team.

I'm not sure what those articles are meant to prove.

Hodge was definitely unlucky. When he was in his prime, there were some pretty accomplished players ahead of him. By the time they had moved on, there was a preference for younger players. Same goes for David Hussey. Like I said, they were victims of circumstance.

I reckon the one time Hodge was really stiff was in 2009. He was 34, still young enough to be considered for the tour to South Africa and then the Ashes tour to England. But Marcus North was preferred in the middle order alongside Hussey and Clarke. North turned out to be a disappointment overall but he was 4-5 years younger than Hodge and managed to score three centuries and a 96 in his first six Test matches. If you asked the question at the end of the 2009 Ashes, when North was cruising along with an average of 47, you might well have concluded that they got it right by picking North.

 

[The Swans Blog]

Is Handscomb a chance for the keeper spot?

Salad Fingers is in pretty good form I hear.

 

[The Swans Blog]

I'm not sure what those articles are meant to prove.

Hodge was definitely unlucky. When he was in his prime, there were some pretty accomplished players ahead of him. By the time they had moved on, there was a preference for younger players. Same goes for David Hussey.

Like I said, they were victims of circumstance.

Yeah he was, but I thought it was a fair slap in the face to do the whole "Youth Policy" then pick Katich and Hussey and give the finger (metaphorically) to Hodge who was in better fc form.

Seriously will Victorians ever stfu about Hodge, he was bog ordinary at Test level.

Made 200+ and sure had a few bum innings, but no more than any other batsman that's ever played the game. Tell me though, would you prefer an old man 39 year old Hodge coming in at no. 3 or can't run can't score Watson?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Yeah he was, but I thought it was a fair slap in the face to do the whole "Youth Policy" then pick Katich and Hussey and give the finger (metaphorically) to Hodge who was in better fc form.

I'm not sure what period you're referring to here.

Mike Hussey and Brad Hodge made their Test debuts in the same series, against the West Indies in 2005. They were both 30 years old at the time so I don't think you could argue there was a youth policy in place. If anything, Australia were keen to top up with ready-made experienced batsmen to extend their reign at the top for a few more years.

And surely the selectors got it absolutely right with Hussey. He had a spectacular start to his Test career and ended up with 6000 runs at 50-plus.

As for Katich, he was another guy who was jerked around by selectors. But if you want to make it about FC records, Katich actually has Hodge covered. Quite comfortably. More runs, higher average.

Tell me though, would you prefer an old man 39 year old Hodge coming in at no. 3 or can't run can't score Watson?

Why are those the only two options?

 

[Underarm]

He's a rubbish opener with clearly limited ability and his role in the team is that of a senior player. He wouldn't be in the team if there were a better player, or one that's in better form... oh wait. This thread says Ed Cowan! Well time will tell.

I'm expecting 2 changes after this series - Rogers & Haddin out with probably Cowan coming back in and Wade or Paine.

Rogers has scored 3rd most amount of runs, and faced the 2nd most amount of balls in the last 12 months. His form slumps rarely last more than a couple of innings without making some sort of minor contribution with the bat. He was Instrumental in this game getting us over the line.

His 2 50's this game means he gets to survive the rest of the summer. if he fails the next 4 times, the selectors might be dumb enough to leave him out of the side in England.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Rogers has scored 3rd most amount of runs, and faced the 2nd most amount of balls in the last 12 months. His form slumps rarely last more than a couple of innings without making some sort of minor contribution with the bat. He was Instrumental in this game getting us over the line.

His 2 50's this game means he gets to survive the rest of the summer. if he fails the next 4 times, the selectors might be dumb enough to leave him out of the side in England.

With Clarke and Mitch Marsh injured, Watson still short of runs and Shaun Marsh on probation, why are people even talking about Rogers?