Australia v India, 1st Test at Adelaide Oval Dec 6-10.

[Spook]

I think Kohli is further ahead of the competition in limited overs than Smith is ahead of the pack in Tests, so overall I would probably have him ahead, but in Tests Smith is comfortably the best bat of the generation. I think they're both equally limited captains though (although Kohli hasn't managed to drop a nuke on his own side yet, so I'd have to give him the edge there as well).

Perfectly summed up. Smiths test avaerage of 61 and Kohlis record in ODI and T20s backs up your case.
Their win loss draw records as captains are similar as well. Also their batting averages as captains says they’ve stepped up; Smith 70 and Kohli 65

 

[RookiePick]

It's the kind of situation where you need the captain to stick a rocket up the bowlers. Have to bowl like we're defending a 120 total to have a chance.

Yes. It's the bowlers that need a rocket.

 

[NSWCROW]

Finchy ducking out early to beat the dinner rush at HJ's

 

[Marshland]

Quick kids, make sure to get Shaun Marsh's autograph. Could be your last chance.

Ya think?

He'll be in the team for centuries to come yet. Along with his brothers. And then his kids.

 

[Snarls Barkley]

Why would you bring Wade back in? It’s been proven that he isn’t good enough at international level. Just because Marsh and Wade dominate at state level doesn’t mean that they’ll suddenly be good enough to perform in Test cricket.

 

[Zach Package]

Finchy ducking out early to beat the dinner rush at HJ's

The McRib is back.

 

[DaRick]

Why would you bring Wade back in? It’s been proven that he isn’t good enough at international level. Just because Marsh and Wade dominate at state level doesn’t mean that they’ll suddenly be good enough to perform in Test cricket.

We're not really spoilt for choice here.

 

[Richard Pryor]

Would me posting that Kapil Dev was a much better all rounder than Mitch Marsh make it relevant? Even at his age he'd probably still be better.

Given Mitch Marsh isn't even playing in this Test that might be the one thing that makes it even LESS relevant!!??@?#?@

 

[HLM*]

Why would you bring Wade back in? It’s been proven that he isn’t good enough at international level. Just because Marsh and Wade dominate at state level doesn’t mean that they’ll suddenly be good enough to perform in Test cricket.

Great logic. If you fail put a line through them.

Imagine if that was in place when Ponting was dropped after his first stint in test cricket. Or Hayden. Or Michael Clarke. Or steve smith.

 

[Westend]

Pretty good day for us. Test evenly poised...no guarantee of getting these last three cheaply.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ummm no ...India way on top IMO....we need at least a hundred run lead to put pressure on them

I have no faith in our current batting line up chasing anything over 150 in the last innings

I would love to see us chase down a total...but I cannot see it happening

there is no intent from out batters...ashwin is just dictating terms

Hopefully tomorrow Head can kick on with Starc and co to support him

 

[Zach Package]

Why would you bring Wade back in? It’s been proven that he isn’t good enough at international level. Just because Marsh and Wade dominate at state level doesn’t mean that they’ll suddenly be good enough to perform in Test cricket.

Why aren't we discussing viable alternatives to a player who has 1 first class century in a 13 year career?

 

[Woody15]

Tom Cooper making runs again. 3rd 100 in 4 matches beckoning. Hard to ignore that.

To be honest I dont care who is in the side. The names being thrown around aren't going to change anything. Cooper averages 34 in FC and is 32. Late bloomer perhaps but slim chance.

The worst thing I can think of happening is the selectors rushing in someone like Pucovski or another promising young player. The pressure would be immense.

 

[Richard Pryor]

Tom Cooper making runs again. 3rd 100 in 4 matches beckoning. Hard to ignore that.

To be honest I dont care who is in the side. The names being thrown around aren't going to change anything. Cooper averages 34 in FC and is 32. Late bloomer perhaps but slim chance.

The worst thing I can think of happening is the selectors rushing in someone like Pucovski or another promising young player. The pressure would be immense.

Isn't Tom Cooper ineligible due to playing for the Dutch though? I think there's a few years you need to wait to switch national sides.

 

[Visions]

Did you get on them?

Had a bit of a flutter, yes.

 

[Woody15]

Isn't Tom Cooper ineligible due to playing for the Dutch though? I think there's a few years you need to wait to switch national sides.

Interesting.. hadn't heard of it.

 

[HLM*]

Why aren't we discussing viable alternatives to a player who has 1 first class century in a 13 year career?

The big C next to his name makes him exempt from any criticism and from ever being dropped.

 

[Ok Boomer]

Quick kids, make sure to get Shaun Marsh's autograph. Could be your last chance.

Unlikely. Unless Mitch replaces him

 

[Marshland]

You poor Australian cricket fans so starved of success, how many World Cups have you won? Try being an NZ cricket fan, we know all about disappointment.

Aye. And we make for the more likable team.

 

[Visions]

It's the kind of situation where you need the captain to stick a rocket up the bowlers. Have to bowl like we're defending a 120 total to have a chance.

Problem is the bowlers can’t keep on saving our skin every time. They got us into a great position yet the so called elite batsman of this country failed us yet again.

Common theme and will be until the selectors stop with their stupid selections.

 

[sobrave]

You poor Australian cricket fans so starved of success, how many World Cups have you won? Try being an NZ cricket fan, we know all about disappointment.

much easier to support nz, you haven't had to put up with all your players being flogs for a decade plus

 

[Snarls Barkley]

Great logic. If you fail put a line through them.

Imagine if that was in place when Ponting was dropped after his first stint in test cricket. Or Hayden. Or Michael Clarke. Or steve smith.

Matthew Wade is 30. Ponting, Hayden, Clarke and Smith* were all averaging 50 in Test cricket by that time of their career. There is no issue with someone failing, working on their weaknesses and coming back. I was all for Wade coming in to replace Nevill a few years ago, I was fine with Handscomb coming back in this test. I’ll be happy when Renshaw returns to the team. But there is a problem when you just keep recycling the same players over and over again when they’ve proved they are not up to it.

 

[Richard Pryor]

Matthew Wade is 30. Ponting, Hayden, Clarke and Smith* were all averaging 50 in Test cricket by that time of their career. There is no issue with someone failing, working on their weaknesses and coming back. I was all for Wade coming in to replace Nevill a few years ago, I was fine with Handscomb coming back in this test. I’ll be happy when Renshaw returns to the team. But there is a problem when you just keep recycling the same players over and over again when they’ve proved they are not up to it.

The issue is that Australia cannot hold our players to the Golden Age standards. It is not realistic to expect batsmen to be averaging 50+ at 30 with our current reality, and there is no point rushing younger players development (ie; selecting Pucovski) in an unrealistic attempt to reach that standard. Wade would be a player you'd put a line through if it was 2008, but at the moment I think he is on the table, despite the legitimate arguments against him.

 

[HTT]

Fair enough if he hits a great ton or something but do we really have to have a Kohli jizzfest every 15 minutes of every day's play.

Nah man didn’t you see how good he looked in the nets, how audacious some of his stroke play was in his 3 runs yesterday, and his bubbling optimism that just makes you love him

 

[HLM*]

Matthew Wade is 30. Ponting, Hayden, Clarke and Smith* were all averaging 50 in Test cricket by that time of their career. There is no issue with someone failing, working on their weaknesses and coming back. I was all for Wade coming in to replace Nevill a few years ago, I was fine with Handscomb coming back in this test. I’ll be happy when Renshaw returns to the team. But there is a problem when you just keep recycling the same players over and over again when they’ve proved they are not up to it.

Wade has never been in better form and there is no other batsman in the country that is not in the test side that has scored more runs than him in shield cricket. In the last 12 months he’s scored over 1000 runs. Seven 50’s and four 100’s including a century in last years shield final. This season he has come out to bat in the midst of a 4 wicket collapse 6 times and has scored four 50’s guiding his side to a respectable score before running out of batting partners. His form now is far more relevant than his failures as long as 6 years ago.

The Australian side is screaming for somebody that values his wicket, can dig in and stem the flow of wickets, and can bat with the tail. There’s only 2 players in our current test side with more centuries at test level than Wade. Bring in a bloke who’s got experience at test level, is a fighter and is in the form of his life. Sounds pretty simple to me.

 

[Blackhawk42]

Low scoring slog so far.
Handscomb threw away his good work with an awful shot. But 34 off 90 odd in the context of this game is as good as a half century in a lot of others.
Want to see how close we get to their first innings total before sinking the boots in.