Ongoing Test match XI speculation thread.

Remove this Banner Ad

The obvious thing to me would be to play Pucovski at 6 and wade misses out.

I don't think Burns or Wade are long term (or even medium term) Australian test players and 6 would be a much easier introduction for Pucovski.
 
tombomb said:
The obvious thing to me would be to play Pucovski at 6 and wade misses out.

I don't think Burns or Wade are long term (or even medium term) Australian test players and 6 would be a much easier introduction for Pucovski.
Click to expand...
The obvious thing, if Pucovski were to play, would be keeping the player who's actually made runs this year in the Shield.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

eth-dog said:
The obvious thing, if Pucovski were to play, would be keeping the player who's actually made runs this year in the Shield.
Click to expand...

If they were playing West Indies or Pakistan, I would agree. But the Australian top order are going to be under enormous pressure in this series.

I think Pucovski would be better off eased into the team like Ponting and Smith were. Asking him to open the batting against Bumrah and Shami would be throwing him to the wolves.
 
Agree with Warnes comments. Give Burns the first 2 tests, if he fails we can put a line through him. If he makes some runs, we can be confident in his quality if he's making runs against this Indian attack. Otherwise ease Pucovski in at the G on a flat deck.

On the mental health issue, there is absolutely nothing wrong with raising it. The people who have an issue with it being raised are most likely still of the belief that having a mental health condition is some kind of defect and the person needs 'protection' from scrutiny. The more the issue is normalised the better.
 
Teen Wolf said:
Stop making baseless accusations, regardless of the target, and then I'll cool my jets. How about that.


I wouldn't bring it up unprompted, either. Is Pat Cummins' back an ongoing cause for consideration? Or Steve Smith's concussion issues? Or Nathan Lyon's spinning finger? Or the mental health of every player? Yes, but for some reason we're singling one person out, despite it not being raised as a selection issue by any CA official in the media.

Rubbish post mate.
Click to expand...

You're still pointing your guns in the wrong direction.

And yes, those players physical condition would be factored in. They didn't cycle the quicks last time because they thought everyone should have a turn.

And I still think CA is full of old school guys who come from an era of toughen up princess and see depression as a weakness of character. They also come from the sledging prime of cricket.
 
archibald said:
Agree with Warnes comments. Give Burns the first 2 tests, if he fails we can put a line through him. If he makes some runs, we can be confident in his quality if he's making runs against this Indian attack. Otherwise ease Pucovski in at the G on a flat deck.

On the mental health issue, there is absolutely nothing wrong with raising it. The people who have an issue with it being raised are most likely still of the belief that having a mental health condition is some kind of defect and the person needs 'protection' from scrutiny. The more the issue is normalised the better.
Click to expand...

Well the MCG is actually the second test and probably the least flat of the first three tests which be all on pretty much roads..
 
Teen Wolf said:
Stop making baseless accusations, regardless of the target, and then I'll cool my jets. How about that.


I wouldn't bring it up unprompted, either. Is Pat Cummins' back an ongoing cause for consideration? Or Steve Smith's concussion issues? Or Nathan Lyon's spinning finger? Or the mental health of every player? Yes, but for some reason we're singling one person out, despite it not being raised as a selection issue by any CA official in the media.

Rubbish post mate.
Click to expand...
Yes, our fast bowlers’ injuries and Steve Smith’s concussions are an ongoing consideration that are discussed frequently. As I said, you can’t have it both ways, claiming on the one hand that we shouldn’t treat people differently because of mental health issue and on the other act as if mentioning it is akin to saying Candyman in the mirror five times.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Teen Wolf said:
Stop making baseless accusations, regardless of the target, and then I'll cool my jets. How about that.


I wouldn't bring it up unprompted, either. Is Pat Cummins' back an ongoing cause for consideration? Or Steve Smith's concussion issues? Or Nathan Lyon's spinning finger? Or the mental health of every player? Yes, but for some reason we're singling one person out, despite it not being raised as a selection issue by any CA official in the media.

Rubbish post mate.
Click to expand...
Lol, what are you on about, previous injuries, like Cam Greens back are mentioned all the time when factoring in selection. Pucovski has had issues with mental health that have kept him from likely debuting already. It’s a point of discussion and 100% selectors are asking his doctors if he’s recovered enough to play and deal with the stress of international cricket. No one is having a crack at Pucovski for this
 
Border has thrown his weight behind Pucovski.

Interesting battle playing out in the media.

Pretty much echo's some thoughts in here. What if he's the real deal and we miss out on a year of a guy that should be in the side for the next 10-15 years?

Border:

“You have to think how long can we keep this guy out of the side?” Border told foxsports.com.au. “Are we better off just getting him in and you might feel bad for Burnsy (Joe Burns) or whoever misses out but how do you ignore that, that form and just his style? He could be something special for the next 10-15 years.”

“He’s got that Mark Waugh style about him with the really good technique that is easy on the eye when he plays his shots.

“There is also a really steely resolve to his run-scoring. He just keeps making double-hundreds, it’s quite remarkable. It’s that fighter’s instinct to make as many runs as you possibly can."


High praise indeed, especially with Border advocating the axing of a QLD opening bat.
 
JackOutback said:
Yes, our fast bowlers’ injuries and Steve Smith’s concussions are an ongoing consideration that are discussed frequently. As I said, you can’t have it both ways, claiming on the one hand that we shouldn’t treat people differently because of mental health issue and on the other act as if mentioning it is akin to saying Candyman in the mirror five times.
Click to expand...
Snuffaluphagus said:
Lol, what are you on about, previous injuries, like Cam Greens back are mentioned all the time when factoring in selection. Pucovski has had issues with mental health that have kept him from likely debuting already. It’s a point of discussion and 100% selectors are asking his doctors if he’s recovered enough to play and deal with the stress of international cricket. No one is having a crack at Pucovski for this
Click to expand...
The ludicrous argument being put forth is that "old school" guys at Cricket Australia will put a line through anybody who has ever had mental health issues.

"Hey mate, we think you're soft and not gonna be able to cope with the pressures of international cricket... but we'll still waste everybody's time by picking you in the Test squad along with several other guys who have experienced similar struggles as you."

If you believe that's what's going on, you're the one having it both ways. If you don't think that's what's going on, please direct your WTFs to the poster claiming it is.
 
danielnajdek said:
Well it looks like Will wont be picked if the coach, captain and Warner want Burns in. Can't wait to see Burns nick it to slips for a duck in the first over.
Click to expand...

Yeah does seems like the jungle drums are beating pretty heavily that Burns will be retained.
 
burge13 said:
What's the point of selectors if the boys club won't pick the most in-form batsmen in shield cricket...
Click to expand...

If we just picked the most in form players in shield cricket what why would we need selectors at all? A bunch of nobodies on an interest forum could pick the team based off who has the best stats.

The reality is the selectors’ jobs exist because it isn’t that easy. They’ll get it wrong occasionally but they’d do better than most of us.

FWIW I think both Pucovski and Burns would struggle against this Indian attack unless we’re playing on highways.
 
Docker82 said:
If we just picked the most in form players in shield cricket what why would we need selectors at all? A bunch of nobodies on an interest forum could pick the team based off who has the best stats.

The reality is the selectors’ jobs exist because it isn’t that easy. They’ll get it wrong occasionally but they’d do better than most of us.

FWIW I think both Pucovski and Burns would struggle against this Indian attack unless we’re playing on highways.
Click to expand...
Im not saying pick just off stats but gee Burns summer so far v Puc is an absolute no brainer. When did Burns become untouchable?! Must have missed the memo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

akkaps
Test India v England (5 Tests) + Ind A v Eng Lions (1 Tour Match and 3 FC games)
112 113 114 115 116
Replies
3K
Views
54K
PhatBoy
PhatBoy
1990crow
  • Poll
Test World Test XI vs Australia
Replies
7
Views
890
samFFC
samFFC
Wormkilla
Test Mediocre cricketers to play 100 tests
2
Replies
40
Views
1K
PhatBoy
PhatBoy
ioppolo
Fixture PM's XI vs Pakistan. 6-9 December @ Manuka Oval
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
266
Views
6K
Westend
W
BarneyBent
Thought experiment: Combined AUS/RSA Test XI
Replies
8
Views
449
Blue1980
Blue1980
C
Australia test squad for NZ tour
Replies
18
Views
580
Gough
Gough
T
Hockley and 3 Test Series
2 3
Replies
54
Views
2K
The 747
The 747

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top