changes for boxing day test.

[LukeParkerno1]

To a completely unrelated impact injury, to be fair.

The point stands, injury prone. Needs to get through a full season before I would go near him in a test match. The last thing we need is another fast bowler breaking down mid test. You can take a calculated gamble in a ODI/T20...you usually carry 2-4 All rounders, but in a test match...

 

[bird_man]

Then don't play him. You do not and never will play an AR as a front line quick.

That's a ridiculous statement. There have been many all rounders that have been front line bowlers over the years.

Mitch' problem at the moment is that he is neither a front line bowler, nor is he a top 6 batsman.

 

[Underdog]

I really hate the idea of Khawaja opening. We've been struggling to find a number 3 since Ponting retired - it boggles my mind that on current evidence we seem to have found one, and people would then suggest moving him up to open. The first test against NZ against a genuine opposition also suggests that Burns is worth sticking with. To drop him now for Marsh would be the height of irony - our selectors ruined Marsh's test career by constantly dropping him, they can't possibly be considering doing that to Burns so Marsh can replace him!

I'm not even that disappointed for Marsh. He took apart sub-international standard bowlers in Hobart; I think people are overrating his innings in Adelaide tremendously. He got to bat at the best time of the day, with the ball also at the ideal time of the innings.

Did you not watch the Kiwi's play in Brisbane? Forget the name of the country, their bowling was disgusting.

Pretending that Burns made runs against an quality attack is very misleading.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Did you not watch the Kiwi's play in Brisbane? Forget the name of the country, their bowling was disgusting.

Pretending that Burns made runs against an quality attack is very misleading.

Does that also make Khawajas runs against the Kiwis irrelevant as well? Khawaja even got to come into bat after 100 + run partnerships

 

[Underdog]

Does that also make Khawajas runs against the Kiwis irrelevant as well? Khawaja even got to come into bat after 100 + run partnerships

Not irrelevant, but in context, less valuable if we're judging them by the quality of the attacks.

Marsh's innings in Adelaide, whilst being a fraction of a big Burns or Khawaja innings, was more valuable because he stood up in adversity unlike his teammates and steered us to victory.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Not irrelevant, but in context, less valuable if we're judging them by the quality of the attacks.

I'd hate to know what any runs scored against the Windies are worth.

 

[Underdog]

I'd hate to know what any runs scored against the Windies are worth.

I'm not really big on getting that specific when it comes to records, and I didn't raise this point.

I merely highlighted, when someone criticised Marsh for scoring runs against a weak attack whilst praising Burns for scoring them against a quality attack, that the Kiwis in the 1st test were not a quality attack - they were awful. It's the danger of judging everything by the stats instead of, you know, watching cricket...

 

[MisterMarcus]

Well that's NCN gone, Boland now a genuine chance of making his debut either here or (more likely) Sydney.

 

[nobbyiscool]

Well that's NCN gone, Boland now a genuine chance of making his debut either here or (more likely) Sydney.

This is becoming a scandal. Did Jackson Bird kill Rod Marsh's cat with an axe? Did he run over his kid?

The treatment of Bird is becoming a scandal. Boland is barely Sheffield Shield level, and bowling 1 ball at 140km/h on Sunday night doesn't meet their supposed criteria.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

This is becoming a scandal. Did Jackson Bird kill Rod Marsh's cat with an axe? Did he run over his kid?

The treatment of Bird is becoming a scandal. Boland is barely Sheffield Shield level, and bowling 1 ball at 140km/h on Sunday night doesn't meet their supposed criteria.

I don't completely buy into CA's pace policy but an attack of Hazlewood, Siddle, Bird would be so, so pedestrian. In an ideal world we wouldn't have so many injuries and Bird would be in the Test team instead of Siddle, but I'd prefer Boland to Bird given the other members of the current attack.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Not convinced on Bird personally. Actually surprised they didn't go Paris

 

[nobbyiscool]

Maybe they'll fix it later this afternoon.

"Scott Boland is in the squad"

"Sorry, we meant Jackson Bird."

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Not convinced on Bird personally. Actually surprised they didn't go Paris

Why would they have chosen Paris? One would hope they learned from their past mistakes.

 

[nobbyiscool]

I don't completely buy into CA's pace policy but an attack of Hazlewood, Siddle, Bird would be so, so pedestrian. In an ideal world we wouldn't have so many injuries and Bird would be in the Test team instead of Siddle, but I'd prefer Boland to Bird given the other members of the current attack.

Not convinced on Bird personally. Actually surprised they didn't go Paris

The problem with both of these responses is that Bird has clearly had better form and results in the Shield - he has 22 wickets, Paris has 14 (of which 6 came in 1 innings), and Boland has 13 wickets (of which 7 came in 1 innings).

So what message are you sending to players in the Sheffield Shield competition if you're going to ignore form and results and pick guys on a hunch? This is exactly what we've spent years criticising selectors for.

That said, I wouldn't have been so outraged with Paris - at least he's a left armer.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

So what message are you sending to players in the Sheffield Shield competition if you're going to ignore form and results and pick guys on a hunch? This is exactly what we've spent years criticising selectors for.

That is the opposite of what I said. I don't think Boland should play, and he won't - but I prefer his selection based on team composition. Not a hunch.

And, as I said, if I was picking the side I would replace Siddle with Bird. Siddle is finished, Bird is a very good bowler.

 

[eddiesmith]

Now for Hazelwood to break down and Australia to finally have their strongest pace attack in a very long time

 

[nobbyiscool]

That is the opposite of what I said. I don't think Boland should play, and he won't - but I prefer his selection based on team composition. Not a hunch.

And, as I said, if I was picking the side I would replace Siddle with Bird. Siddle is finished, Bird is a very good bowler.

Where is your evidence of that? Your reasoning of "compilation" is based entirely on a hunch because most of these guys haven't played together.

There is currently no real evidence to suggest that Boland is even a Shield-quality, much less test-quality bowler - we do have some limited evidence that Bird is at that grade, or only slightly below (based on limited opportunities).

Players have a right to expect that results + form = selection. Picking Boland, even when he won't play, is completely contrary to that.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Where is your evidence of that? Your reasoning of "compilation" is based entirely on a hunch because most of these guys haven't played together.

There is currently no real evidence to suggest that Boland is even a Shield-quality, much less test-quality bowler - we do have some limited evidence that Bird is at that grade, or only slightly below (based on limited opportunities).

Players have a right to expect that results + form = selection. Picking Boland, even when he won't play, is completely contrary to that.

Compilation of the attack = don't want three accurate/medium pacers. Admittedly Hazlewood is pushing nearer to the 140s but I like an attack with a faster option. It isn't a hunch so much as it is personal preference. Not that hard to understand.

And, again (for the 2nd or 3rd time?) I don't want Boland to play.

 

[nobbyiscool]

Compilation of the attack = don't want three accurate/medium pacers. Admittedly Hazlewood is pushing nearer to the 140s but I like an attack with a faster option. It isn't a hunch so much as it is personal preference. Not that hard to understand.

And, again (for the 2nd or 3rd time?) I don't want Boland to play.

Thanks for making your argument so well - but it's still defeated by the notion that Boland, on average, wouldn't be 5km/h quicker than Bird... from what I've read in the last hour, he's believed to have only hit 140km/h twice in 2 BBL games so far. Even being at the game on Sunday night in the Ponsford Stand (so side on), I thought Hilfenhaus was noticeably the Stars quickest bowler. I'm certainly not advocating for Hilfenhaus - just suggesting that Boland doesn't meet the very criteria that they've picked him on.

I think we're assuming that Boland is cover for different bowlers to begin with - I'm basing support for Bird based on Siddle's back injury (and my belief that Bird is the perfect replacement for Hazelwood). I thought we were told that Pattinson pulled up quite well from Hobart, so I'm not sure what we're covering in that respect.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Thanks for making your argument so well - but it's still defeated by the notion that Boland, on average, wouldn't be 5km/h quicker than Bird... from what I've read in the last hour, he's believed to have only hit 140km/h twice in 2 BBL games so far. Even being at the game on Sunday night in the Ponsford Stand (so side on), I thought Hilfenhaus was noticeably the Stars quickest bowler. I'm certainly not advocating for Hilfenhaus - just suggesting that Boland doesn't meet the very criteria that they've picked him on.

I think we're assuming that Boland is cover for different bowlers to begin with - I'm basing support for Bird based on Siddle's back injury (and my belief that Bird is the perfect replacement for Hazelwood). I thought we were told that Pattinson pulled up quite well from Hobart, so I'm not sure what we're covering in that respect.

From what I have seen I was thinking that Boland was capable of hitting the low 140s consistently in the Shield - you've seen more of him than myself, so fair enough if I'm wrong on that assumption.

I do want Bird in the Test side and I am confused by his being overlooked consistently this summer.

 

[Tyberious Funk]

I have a better idea if you want to replace Burns, bring in an opener.

Khawaja was an opener as a junior player. He's opened for Queensland in FC cricket, and regularly opens in one dayers and T20s.

 

[eddiesmith]

I'd love to see Boland come in for Hazelwood to see the absolute meltdown that would occur on Bigfooty with an attack of Siddle, Pattinson and Boland

 

[Nuke Fremantle]

I'd love to see Boland come in for Hazelwood to see the absolute meltdown that would occur on Bigfooty with an attack of Siddle, Pattinson and Boland

Meltdown? Going by the majority demographic on this site it'd be a celebration of right arm Victorian dross.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Why would they have chosen Paris? One would hope they learned from their past mistakes.

They haven't learnt anyway so nothing would shock me on that front.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Thanks for making your argument so well - but it's still defeated by the notion that Boland, on average, wouldn't be 5km/h quicker than Bird... from what I've read in the last hour, he's believed to have only hit 140km/h twice in 2 BBL games so far. Even being at the game on Sunday night in the Ponsford Stand (so side on), I thought Hilfenhaus was noticeably the Stars quickest bowler. I'm certainly not advocating for Hilfenhaus - just suggesting that Boland doesn't meet the very criteria that they've picked him on.

I think we're assuming that Boland is cover for different bowlers to begin with - I'm basing support for Bird based on Siddle's back injury (and my belief that Bird is the perfect replacement for Hazelwood). I thought we were told that Pattinson pulled up quite well from Hobart, so I'm not sure what we're covering in that respect.

Hey, bring back the Haus, bring back the Haus, I hate seeing him sitting on 99 wickets for test cricket