Gutted, my favourite Batsman in Australia when he's on. One of the best batting techniques you'll see.
Usman Khawaja
- Thread starter POKsPies252
- Start date
- Tagged users None
He looks good no doubt, but you have to make the runs and he hasn't done this for Australia yet.
Best wishes to him. Been a real disappointment for mine. The earlier post about ongoing knee issues might have been a big part of his under performing..
Golumless
A bigger deal out west.
Seems to have worked for Watson
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Yes but Khawaja not getting a start is 20 off 80 balls at best, there is the issue. Too much a 'four or nothing' player. Way too many dot balls. Should study Michael Hussey, turn a good ball into a single.
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,892
- 6,917
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
Watson can bowl and ever since Flintoff ripped through us in that Ashes series CA have had this belief that they must have an allrounder in the side. I am one of those who wants to see Watson gone from the side, far too inconsistent.
We desperately need to find another batsman our test line up isn't much stronger than NZ at the moment. We have 3 world class batsmen - Clarke, Warner & Smith; one showing promise in M. Marsh; a solid battler in Rogers and a massively over-rated #3 and wicketkeeper who can no longer bat either. Our batting line up hasn't looked this bad since the mid-80s.
ManWithNoName
TheBrownDog
We can't have both Marsh and Watson in the top 6. Need another proper full time bat in there.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Agreed. Just the question of and this is the million dollar question...'are any of them ready'. Sean Marsh isn't the answer, so who else is there:
- Joe Burns (first really sensational year)
-Peter Handscomb (inj. but has had a good year, but has been batting down the order)
- Callum Ferguson (good year but is he a test number 3)
- Nic Maddinson (inconsistent but has had a good start to the year)
- Jake Doran (yet to debut)
Anyone I am missing? There isn't a lot of options at number 3. I'm hesitant as good as his form is to move Smith to number 3. Firmly believe he will be a gun number 4.
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,892
- 6,917
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
I wouldn't be putting a line through M Marsh as being there for his batting alone, he is in his 4th test has made scores of at least 40 in his last 4 innings, which includes a highest score in the innings and two where we were chasing quick runs. If Marsh continues down this path then he can rightly claim to be in the side for his batting, remember Smith was first brought in as a spinner, then an allrounder and now is an outright batsman.
The easier & better solution is just drop Watson for Ferguson or Burns (my picks)
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Yikes, Mitch Marsh as good as he is won't be a test number 3, and I'm not sure how Ferguson is either. Can he buy a run away from the road in Adelaide? I rate Mitch, he is an absolute gun. But surely it is better having Smith at 4 and Mitch Marsh at 5 or 6. Fill in the other two with batsmen (doesn't matter who). I have always said there is zero point moving blokes from positions they are excelling at, especially one that has to bowl as well. The further up the order the less bowling Marsh will do. Was it wrong to not move Mike Hussey? Perfect number 5 or 6 as well.
ManWithNoName
TheBrownDog
I'm not questioning his batting, just with him also having to bowl I'd rather have another full time batsman in there. Rather than two guys who are splitting their attention.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Punt Watson and pick a number 3 that isn't someone that doesn't have a brain for starters. 12months ago I was all for Watson playing at 3, but his performances haven't stacked up recently. We can't carry Watson and the Marsh brothers in the 1 side, we will be down to 8 blokes half the time!
Doran is not an option FFS
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Right now no he isn't, never said he was. In 3 years or so he is, which is why it depends what they do with Watson. Do they really want to wait for Jake OR and I prefer this...replace Watson NOW and get someone in even for 3-4 seasons. If nothing else would add depth.
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,892
- 6,917
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
Why does he have to be a #3 batsman?
Steve Waugh played a total of 14 innings at either 3 or 4 for an average of 31. So does that mean he was any less a great player?
This whole idea that some players need to be able to bat at #3 to justify themselves is absolute BS. Clarke (if he returns) should stay at 4 and Smith should play at 4 or 5 (depending on Clarke's presence).
Which is why I'd like to see Watson out of the side.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Someone needs to bat 3. I agree with you, your best bat doesn't always bat 3. In fact I have said, Smith and Marsh should be at 4 and 5. Someone needs to bat 6 and someone needs to bat 3. My preference would be Joe Burns at 3, who is a genuine top order bat. Then it is an absolute chook raffle who bats 6. I'd lean towards a Handscomb type who is a top order bat. At 6 you need to be able to score quick, play spinners AND be able to face the new ball. It actually is one of the harder positions. Now you may leave Marsh there as he has shown he can do that too. Either way I want Sean Marsh and Watson where near the side.
ffs it's Shaun Marsh not 'Sean'.
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,892
- 6,917
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
Batting at 6 you also need to know how to bat with the tail.
Include Doran but not Travis Head? ...Brown paper bag etc etc
- Feb 25, 2013
- 51,214
- 58,265
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
Will bat top 4 for Australia for quite a while
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
There is another one just slipped my mind that's all
- Feb 25, 2013
- 51,214
- 58,265
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
would have been a chance for Boxing Day with Marsh and Warner possibly both missing...
Last edited:
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Hardly. A chance but that's about it.
