Haddin or Nevill for the Third test?

[Menzel As Anything]

I'll go with the bloke from NSW.

 

[Pugsley]

Who would've thought we'd have a wicketkeeping dilemma ?

 

[Pugsley]

I'll go with the bloke from NSW.

Haddin ? Because you know Nevill is a Victorian

 

[HBF]

Haddin ? Because you know Nevill is a Victorian

And Hadds is mates with Pup.

 

[Demosthenes]

I cannot believe that Australia is even considering Haddin returning and booting Nevill out of the team for the third test- but there it was on the news tonight, Haddin will be making himself available and what a "difficult" decision the selectors will face.

Well, it's not like he was dropped from the team. It would be a bit rough for the selectors to say to any player "you were forced to miss a match, now we won't even consider you". IMO Haddin at least deserves a chance to play in the tour match and put his case.

That said, I hope they stick with Nevill. And I'm sure they won't.

 

[corbies]

Is Nevill really that good a keeper? Everytime I've seen him play at Shield level, he hasn't exactly excelled with the gloves. I certainly wouldn't say he's a better keeper than Haddin (probably about the same tbh).

Its Nevill's batting that I think would give him the edge over Haddin. Just for the fact that he can still play a test innings, rather then Haddin who seems to just be a slogger now.

 

[HBF]

Nevill didn't do anything wrong in the first test. And i think now is as good a time as any to make a change.

 

[danielnajdek]

Haddin will get back in. His mates with Clarke. Enough said.

 

[the_interloper]

*channeling Robbo here* "Do I think Nevill should play in the next Test? Absolutely. Do I think Haddin will come straight back in? Put money on it"

 

[Fat Nyfe]

Australia has become blinded by the train of thought that because a player has been around for a long time, they deserve special treatment. Hayden, Warne, Gilchrist and so on deserved it because they had magnificent careers. Haddin and Watson have been around for a long time but they have never been great players, just serviceable role players. The idea that they have job security because they've played a lot of tests is stupid, conservative thinking and probably cost us the first test.

Its the same situation as Watson/Marsh. There's no way it should not even be a difficult decision. Nevill is younger, in better form, has a far better first class record with strong recent shield form. No brainer for those with brains, unfortunately these selectors have form for brainless decisions, so it will probably come down to the tour game which is stupid.

 

[corbies]

Haddin will get back in. His mates with Clarke. Enough said.

Except Clarke isn't a selector? As is well documented, Clarke and Hughes were great mates and he got dropped from the side several times. If anything this sentiment should be directed towards Lehmann rather than Clarke.

 

[Power Raid]

whatever happens there is a big changing of the guard.

Watson - gone
Clarke - to retire
Haddin - to retire
Rogers - who knows

 

[gbatman]

Agree with the rest of the post, though.

Well Ponting did go too long but in all honesty at the time there was no one making a strong stance for selection in shield cricket at the time. It wasn't like punter was keeping a guy out of the side averaging 50... or 77 for that matter.

 

[gbatman]

The only reason Haddin will play is because he's a favorite and mates and must be a good bloke. It wreaks of boys club. I hope they realise it's not section 3 bush cricket, it's test cricket. If there is someone better or your form is poor you're gone. I don't know what rock Lehmann's been living under but Haddin is not a good keeper and has been very underwhelming for a long time unlike Nevell who despite not playing test cricket has just had an amazing game and season at shield cricket and is just coming into his prime.

 

[ioppolo]

I can see it happening unfortunately. Nevill knows it's coming. He'll be next in line when Haddin goes soon enough at least.

 

[The Swans Blog]

Nevill surely, but if Wade is anything to go by, Haddin will be back in.

 

[outabounds]

The whole reason I started this thread was because I knew what was obvious to everyone (that Nevill should take over now) but I got the sense of the fact that Cricket Australia doesnt have the balls to tell Haddin that its all over. I'm betting Haddin will play and it will be a complete joke if that happens.

 

[saint_]

Go in with the same X1. Shane Watson and Brad Haddin probably have too many mental scars to be playing, which is probably what cost us the first test.

 

[The_Reaper]

I'm not taking Boof seriously on this.

Given the circumstances he's not going to say that Haddin is no chance of returning

 

[The_Reaper]

Haddin will get back in. His mates with Clarke. Enough said.

If Clarke had that much hold over the selectors - explain Watto?

 

[manureid]

Can Haddin bowl leggies?

 

[The_Reaper]

Nevill surely, but if Wade is anything to go by, Haddin will be back in.

Nevill is actually good though

 

[JackOutback]

Not concerned either way. Both won't be needed to bat and they're both adept behind the stumps.

Disagree...despite a good second Test, our batting is still our weak spot and sometimes all too fragile.

I would prefer Neville, he did nothing wrong, but that's not usually how it works. The incumbent comes back in.

 

[kickazz]

The time is soon for Haddin to be replaced, no doubt.

However, if the real reason Neville was selected for the last game was because Haddin had family reasons (I'm not across the details) and not because of form, then to not give Haddin his place back in the side is a poor decision long-term from a team culture point of view.

I don't want a situation where players feel pressured to not attend to important family issues for fear of losing their place in the team.

 

[MinerBoy]

Feel sorry for Haddin and his personal issues but I would have dropped him after the first test anyway if there weren't other issues at play. I'd stick with Nevill.