Australia Test squad - 2014

[LukeParkerno1]

Why, not many other blokes have to

Mainly because the blokes in the team have done nothing to get dropped for Maxwell! Especially as Maxwell has failed before at test level!

 

[Ian Dargie]

Needs to show he can bat in the top 6- and that means more than half a FC season. Needs to do it for another season.

Did Steve Smith do that?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Did Steve Smith do that?

Yes, did it more than Maxwell!

 

[Ian Dargie]

Yes, did it more than Maxwell!

Do we need to go back and look at how Smith performed in those two Sheffield Shield seasons while he was out of the side?

In 2011-12, he made 492 runs at 41. In 2012-13, he made 296 at 37. Based on that, was it OK for him to be recalled last year?

If so, how can you argue Maxwell shouldn't be considered when he made 544 runs at 45 this season? I don't think that's amazing. But it surpasses Smith's performance in either of the seasons prior to his recall.

 

[The_Reaper]

Maxwell if he plays will be in the middle order. So if he is in the team, which one of Clarke, Smith and Watson bats at 3?

 

[Ian Dargie]

Maxwell if he plays will be in the middle order. So if he is in the team, which one of Clarke, Smith and Watson bats at 3?

I don't see Maxwell as being in the best side.

He probably makes the squad as cover for Watson, allowing for the possibility we may want a spinning all-rounder over a fourth seamer.

Alternatively, Watson returns to No.3 and Maxwell at No.6. I definitely don't think Watson should bat at No.3 but I can't rule out him being given another go there.

My point in this thread is more a pushback against the double standards being applied by the other poster.

 

[courtjester]

why would anyone love cozzie to get a gig. Too lazy and fat to put in the hard work to get one.

I laugh at these references to Cozzie. Guy moves well and is one of the better fielders in either the slips or the covers in Shield cricket

 

[blaze036]

I laugh at these references to Cozzie. Guy moves well and is one of the better fielders in either the slips or the covers in Shield cricket

And if he lost some weight he would move better which would help his team win more games of cricket.

Surely wouldn't hinder his batting either

Instead he would rather meat pies than playing for Australia, pathetic.

 

[Super Hans]

Surely wouldn't hinder his batting either

You don't know that though, he could lose power, balance, etc. It might not, but you never now.

 

[blaze036]

You don't know that though, he could lose power, balance, etc. It might not, but you never now.

Yep, being morbidly obese helps your batting performance

 

[bird_man]

Maxwell takes Watsons spot at 6 on a turning deck, horses for courses.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Maxwell takes Watsons spot at 6 on a turning deck, horses for courses.

Watson will be invaluable bowling reverse swing, you'd be insane to drop him.

 

[Cleavy]

Maxwell if he plays will be in the middle order. So if he is in the team, which one of Clarke, Smith and Watson bats at 3?

Most likely Watson, but Smith batted well in the Shield game at 3 for NSW

 

[courtjester]

And if he lost some weight he would move better which would help his team win more games of cricket.

Surely wouldn't hinder his batting either

Instead he would rather meat pies than playing for Australia, pathetic.

Fitness and slimness are so overrated in cricket. Guy can bat, and can move well in the field, good catcher. That's all that matters. Doesn't matter if he's 82 kilos or 122 kilos, if he can do what he needs to do….

Yep, being morbidly obese helps your batting performance

He's not morbidly obese. Just an o/weight guy.

Would be far from the worst option at #3 in the test side.

 

[beatnik]

Do we need to go back and look at how Smith performed in those two Sheffield Shield seasons while he was out of the side?

In 2011-12, he made 492 runs at 41. In 2012-13, he made 296 at 37. Based on that, was it OK for him to be recalled last year?

If so, how can you argue Maxwell shouldn't be considered when he made 544 runs at 45 this season? I don't think that's amazing. But it surpasses Smith's performance in either of the seasons prior to his recall.

...because cricket stats are just numbers - armchair selectors (me included) love to throw them around but they're correlative and you can't infer causality

If selection was just about the numbers, then you'd write an algorithm to replace them but it's not, so you can't

Will they get it right with someone like S Marsh? Who knows? One thing you can say for sure is that there's raw talent that is off the charts, whatever the numbers say

The best selectors look at a whole range of indicators and, when they get it right and stick with it, you see one-time questionable inclusions like Warner and Smith blossom into Test players

Our selectors have demonstrated their worth this summer - I can't fault their reading of those many player indicators...I'd hate to see us abandon our approach in favour of a Flower-like data-only approach to selection

Peace

 

[Ian Dargie]

...because cricket stats are just numbers - armchair selectors (me included) love to throw them around but they're correlative and you can't infer causality

If selection was just about the numbers, then you'd write an algorithm to replace them but it's not, so you can't

Take the initial claim: that Smith scored heavily at domestic level while out of the Australian side and therefore earned his recall.

These numbers show that he did not. I don't need an algorithm to infer that.

So you can't endorse Smith's selection on the back of his domestic performance, while arguing that Maxwell hasn't done enough. Because Maxwell has done more this season than Smith did before his recall.

There may be other reasons not to pick Maxwell. I'm merely pointing out an inconsistency.

The best selectors look at a whole range of indicators and, when they get it right and stick with it, you see one-time questionable inclusions like Warner and Smith blossom into Test players

I'm not sure you understand the point I've been making.

 

[beatnik]

Take the initial claim: that Smith scored heavily at domestic level while out of the Australian side and therefore earned his recall.

These numbers show that he did not. I don't need an algorithm to infer that.

So you can't endorse Smith's selection on the back of his domestic performance, while arguing that Maxwell hasn't done enough. Because Maxwell has done more this season than Smith did before his recall.

There may be other reasons not to pick Maxwell. I'm merely pointing out an inconsistency.

I'm not sure you understand the point I've been making.

keep your knickers on, I neither "endorsed Smith's selection" or argued "that Maxwell hasn't done enough"

please don't drag me into whatever mundane broader semantic argument you were wrapped up in

I simply made a point about selection being about more than statistical comparison

feel free to address that point but otherwise save yourself the energy of typing and me the effort of ignoring your 'retort'

peace

 

[Ian Dargie]

keep your knickers on, I neither "endorsed Smith's selection" or argued "that Maxwell hasn't done enough"

I never suggested otherwise. I merely gave you some context.

Maybe it's you who should keep your knickers on.

please don't drag me into whatever mundane broader semantic argument you were wrapped up in

Semantics have nothing to do with it. That's just a weird thing to say.

I simply made a point about selection being about more than statistical comparison

feel free to address that point but otherwise save yourself the energy of typing and me the effort of ignoring your 'retort'

Thank you for your gracious offer.

But surely you understand that 'statistics' – in this case, runs scored – are at some level a measure of performance. When I point out that Smith didn't score a lot of runs domestically during his time out of the Test side, that's not just abstract nonsense. It's reality. You don't get to wave away the fact that Smith did very little to earn his recall as 'statistics', as though that invalidates the facts.

I suggest you spare us the cute little tap dance and at least try to engage with the substance.

 

[Ian Dargie]

With the Sheffield Shield season nearly over, it's interesting to look at the top performers and see who - if any - are genuine prospects to be called into the Test side.

First, the batsmen. If we assume that North probably won't be recalled at age 35, are Carters, Cooper and Forrest legitimate options? How about Voges?

It's hard to see any of them being preferred to Hughes, isn't it? Whether that's as a reserve batsmen or in the actual XI.

We've got a fair bit of bowling depth, so it's hard to imagine any of these guys leapfrogging their way past Starc, Pattinson and Bird. That said, Sayers has been knocking on the door for a little while and Behrendorff could be another good prospect if he delivers again next season.

 

[The_Reaper]

We know one thing for certain, O'Keefe will still be ignored

 

[Doodlesweaver]

We know one thing for certain, O'Keefe will still be ignored

Reeks hasn't done himself any harm with his knock. He's got 3 tons in first class cricket now. He's good enough to rack them up regularly from now on I hope.

 

[courtjester]

Do we need to go back and look at how Smith performed in those two Sheffield Shield seasons while he was out of the side?

In 2011-12, he made 492 runs at 41. In 2012-13, he made 296 at 37. Based on that, was it OK for him to be recalled last year?

If so, how can you argue Maxwell shouldn't be considered when he made 544 runs at 45 this season? I don't think that's amazing. But it surpasses Smith's performance in either of the seasons prior to his recall.

Because selection is about more than numbers and stats.

 

[Ian Dargie]

Because selection is about more than numbers and stats.

But surely at some level it is about performance?

Setting that aside, I was merely correcting another poster who suggested Smith earned his recall by scoring runs domestically - and that Maxwell needs to do the same.

It is a fact that Maxwell scored more heavily this season than Smith did in either of his two seasons out of the Test side. Yes, a fact. Dangerous things around here, I understand.

I'm not saying Maxwell should necessarily be in the Test side because of that. I'm merely saying that it is empirically and undeniably true that Maxwell did more this season than Smith did between being dropped and being recalled. Therefore, it is inconsistent to say Smith's recall was justified by domestic performance while at the same time saying Maxwell hasn't done enough.

 

[eth-dog]

But surely at some level it is about performance?

Setting that aside, I was merely correcting another poster who suggested Smith earned his recall by scoring runs domestically - and that Maxwell needs to do the same.

It is a fact that Maxwell scored more heavily this season than Smith did in either of his two seasons out of the Test side. Yes, a fact. Dangerous things around here, I understand.

I'm not saying Maxwell should necessarily be in the Test side because of that. I'm merely saying that it is empirically and undeniably true that Maxwell did more this season than Smith did between being dropped and being recalled. Therefore, it is inconsistent to say Smith's recall was justified by domestic performance while at the same time saying Maxwell hasn't done enough.

It's all relative. Steve Smith broke into a very weak Australian top 7, ergo his performance domestically doesn't have to be as good as what Maxwell's is, because Maxwell trying to break into a much stronger top 7.

 

[Ian Dargie]

It's all relative.

Bending over backwards to abandon the principle of consistency.

Steve Smith broke into a very weak Australian top 7, ergo his performance domestically doesn't have to be as good as what Maxwell's is, because Maxwell trying to break into a much stronger top 7.

There's still an obvious gap in the top six and obviously another spot for a reserve batsman. So don't pretend Australia's batting line-up is now a closed shop.

Smith may have come back into a weaker side but he was also competing against all the other guys outside the team who scored more heavily domestically.

Again, this is not an argument for Maxwell to be selected or for against Smith being in the side. It is merely a statement of fact: Smith was recalled to the Test side without scoring as heavily as Maxwell did this season. You can explain that away with platitudes like "it's all relative" if you like, but the argument that Smith did enough domestically, while Maxwell needs to do more, is a non-starter.