LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Dean has played 2-3 FC games...just no. Maxwell is laughable at this stage. Do I need to get the video of him REVERSE SWEEPING when on 0...when we are trying to save a test match and getting out? Stoinis is a top 3 bat, batting him at 6 would be ridiculous to say the absolute least...and he isn't ready.
Handscomb, maybe, but there is no rush, the same as Paris/Stanklake/Fedetke. Behrendorff is injured (back)...Tremain is laughable.
As for the side
1. Warner
2. Bancroft OR Silk (whichever one they want). Bancroft had the better year last year. Not fussed which one.
3. Smith
4. Handscomb/Maddinson/Fergguson
5. Voges
6. Mitch Marsh (Burns if they decide to go away with the AR)
7. Nevill (Whiteman next in line)
8. Pattinson
9. Hazelwood
10. Sayers/Boland/Bird (not fussed, reward the best one)
11. Lyon
12th: Peter Siddle
Notes:
1. Burns isn't a long term test opener, too stuck at the crease, thus is a huge nick candidate
2. M.Marsh holding on through lack of realistic options- Faulkner isn't test quality and he is the next 'best'.
Handscomb, maybe, but there is no rush, the same as Paris/Stanklake/Fedetke. Behrendorff is injured (back)...Tremain is laughable.
As for the side
1. Warner
2. Bancroft OR Silk (whichever one they want). Bancroft had the better year last year. Not fussed which one.
3. Smith
4. Handscomb/Maddinson/Fergguson
5. Voges
6. Mitch Marsh (Burns if they decide to go away with the AR)
7. Nevill (Whiteman next in line)
8. Pattinson
9. Hazelwood
10. Sayers/Boland/Bird (not fussed, reward the best one)
11. Lyon
12th: Peter Siddle
Notes:
1. Burns isn't a long term test opener, too stuck at the crease, thus is a huge nick candidate
2. M.Marsh holding on through lack of realistic options- Faulkner isn't test quality and he is the next 'best'.