3rd Test: Australia vs South Africa, Newlands, March 1-5

[the distributer]

Well firstly you're comparing a career of 123 Tests to one of 33. It's like saying Tendulkar>Bradman because the former has more centuries.

Vettori was one of the focal points of the NZ attack for basically his whole career. It's a given that he's going to take wickets given the amount of overs he bowled on average - he already averages six more overs an innings than Lyon.

(btw Lyon's taken 5fa five times, not four)

Your arguments are more or less subjective.



Vettori's average got mildly worse over his career. His performances at the start of his career were/are much the same as the middle and the end.

This 'peak of his powers' thing is nonsense.

Well if he averaged 6 more overs an innings what does that tell you? Clarke gets Lyon the * out of there at the first sign of trouble and he always has, Dann didn't get that luxury mate.

And my point about pitch conditions-ground size still stands.

 

[Super Hans]

Enough about the Lyon debate, I just wanna hear more about how the distributer used to play on turf wickets! Surly the fact that he has done this means he knows everything about the game of cricket.

 

[The Speaker]

Well if he averaged 6 more overs an innings what does that tell you? Clarke gets Lyon the **** out of there at the first sign of trouble and he always has, Dann didn't get that luxury mate.

 

[the distributer]

If we had to play a test next week this is my side and batting order.

Warner
Rogers
Clarke (your best bat goes at 3 IMO)
Watson
Smith
Haddin
Maxwell
Johnson
Harris
Pattinson
Siddle.

That pace attack is extreme, Maxwell IMO is as capable of taking as many 4th innings wkts as Lyon IMO, obviously not first innings wkts though, not sure that would make a huge difference overall though.

I'd also float Maxwells order, if we we're say 1-2 down after 60 overs I'd send him in


Let's fantasise that that line up works for a second, we could easily drop siddle and blood a young promising spinner, it would still leave us with 4 seamers.

 

[the distributer]

You wanna compare wages bro?

 

[Super Hans]

I thought we passed the whole 'Clarke must bat at three' thing, I really did.

 

[the distributer]

I thought we passed the whole 'Clarke must bat at three' thing, I really did.

He doesn't have to, but I think it's time he stepped up TBH.

 

[Super Hans]

He doesn't have to, but I think it's time he stepped up TBH.

Yeah Clarke really needs to step up big time, been letting his country down scoring century after century at number 4/5.

 

[the distributer]

Yeah Clarke really needs to step up big time, been letting his country down scoring century after century at number 4/5.

Not saying he's let us down at all mate, but how many no3s have we chewed up and spat out trying to protect him from batting at 3? He's a proven world class top order batsman and hoes come in during the first 10-20 overs quiet often.

IMO he's a better bet at 3 than Watto, and if he went to 3 it would give us the flexibility to play a batting all rounder at 7.

 

[Illinois Nazi]

Clarke (your best bat goes at 3 IMO)

Did you learn that playing on turf wickets?

 

[Carbine Chaos]

He's a proven world class top order batsman and hoes come in during the first 10-20 overs quiet often.

Well no, he isn't. He's a proven world class middle order batsman.

 

[the distributer]

Did you learn that playing on turf wickets?

Nah mate, I was sitting by your sisters bed at the time..

 

[the distributer]

Well no, he isn't. He's a proven world class middle order batsman.

Well he's proven himself numerous times coming in when a no3 should, now we seem to have good chemistry between out opening duo why not try him at 3? That 11 I named is hardly short on batting mate.

 

[Power Raid]

If we had to play a test next week this is my side and batting order.

Warner
Rogers
Clarke (your best bat goes at 3 IMO)
Watson
Smith
Haddin
Maxwell
Johnson
Harris
Pattinson
Siddle.

That pace attack is extreme, Maxwell IMO is as capable of taking as many 4th innings wkts as Lyon IMO, obviously not first innings wkts though, not sure that would make a huge difference overall though.

I'd also float Maxwells order, if we we're say 1-2 down after 60 overs I'd send him in


Let's fantasise that that line up works for a second, we could easily drop siddle and blood a young promising spinner, it would still leave us with 4 seamers.

that looks like a T20 side or a limited overs side seeking to bat out the overs.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Well he's proven himself numerous times coming in when a no3 should, now we seem to have good chemistry between out opening duo why not try him at 3? That 11 I named is hardly short on batting mate.

He's our best player, lets play him in his strongest position. Has killed it in there for years, why change it? FWIW I see understand your perspective, I just don't agree with it.

 

[the distributer]

that looks like a T20 side or a limited overs side seeking to bat out the overs.

Seriously, which one of my 2 changes concerns you the most? Not being a smart ass, just interested as we seem to agree on a lot issues.

 

[tigs2010]

I don't think Lyon should be dropped. He's still effective when the other side is playing shots. He does need to work on a delivery other than an offie though for when the other team is just in block mode. THe Saffers knew exactly where the ball was going to spin and just bunted it back to him.

 

[the distributer]

He's our best player, lets play him in his strongest position. Has killed it in there for years, why change it? FWIW I see understand your perspective, I just don't agree with it.

Times have changed though IMO, do you want pup coming in around the 15th over or the 35th when the ball starts going? And remember only the best sides have mastered reverse, those who haven't are no threat to us.

If there's no reverse there's no problem mostly, reverse is our arch enemy, and if we skittled by seam there's 2 sides to that coin.

 

[the distributer]

I don't think Lyon should be dropped. He's still effective when the other side is playing shots. He does need to work on a delivery other than an offie though for when the other team is just in block mode. THe Saffers knew exactly where the ball was going to spin and just bunted it back to him.

If your spinner is consistently ineffective on a 4th innings pitch (some day 5 pitches, one being a spinners wet dream at the SCG) it's time to move on, if you're bowling during the second innings on a 3rd day pitch the game has already been won or lost pretty much, rarely are first innings wkts from an offie going to influence that result, especially from one who asks as few a questions as Lyon.

 

[Power Raid]

Seriously, which one of my 2 changes concerns you the most? Not being a smart ass, just interested as we seem to agree on a lot issues.

I am not trying to be a smart ass either, but here goes:

Glenn Maxwell I see as part of our future but as a replacement to watson rather than Lyon. He may improve his bowling and become a more balanced all rounder or improve his batting and be selected on his batting alone. What is certain is he wouldn't replace Lyon for his spin bowling just as yet. My gut feel is Faulkner will eventually replace watson as the all rounder (in the medium term) whilst maxwell will be selected on his batting alone.

watson in the short term, must be selected on his all round capabilities. If he can't bowl, he shouldn't be selected. He is a tidy number 6 or someone we use to throw the bat around as an opener. What is certain, is he isn't a number 4.

I can't see anyone replacing Lyon in the short term. Muirhead isn't ready, OKeefe has the numbers but can't get selected and no one else is on the radar other than our century man Algar (and I am talking about his bowling).

Clarke is just about finished. He is a more than handy number 4 or 5 but number 3 has never been his spot and never be his spot.

Haddin has been handy in the ashes series but a batting average over his career in the 30s, averaged 30s in 2013 and 20s in 2014. These stats are hardly compelling enough to be promoted to 6.

You mentioned next week...............I am not sure Harris would be fit (otherwise, yes he would be in)

 

[the distributer]

I am not trying to be a smart ass either, but here goes:

Glenn Maxwell I see as part of our future but as a replacement to watson rather than Lyon. He may improve his bowling and become a more balanced all rounder or improve his batting and be selected on his batting alone. What is certain is he wouldn't replace Lyon for his spin bowling just as yet. My gut feel is Faulkner will eventually replace watson as the all rounder (in the medium term) whilst maxwell will be selected on his batting alone.

watson in the short term, must be selected on his all round capabilities. If he can't bowl, he shouldn't be selected. He is a tidy number 6 or someone we use to throw the bat around as an opener. What is certain, is he isn't a number 4.

I can't see anyone replacing Lyon in the short term. Muirhead isn't ready, OKeefe has the numbers but can't get selected and no one else is on the radar other than our century man Algar (and I am talking about his bowling).

Clarke is just about finished. He is a more than handy number 4 or 5 but number 3 has never been his spot and never be his spot.

Haddin has been handy in the ashes series but a batting average over his career in the 30s, averaged 30s in 2013 and 20s in 2014. These stats are hardly compelling enough to be promoted to 6.

You mentioned next week...............I am not sure Harris would be fit (otherwise, yes he would be in)

good read.

I'd play Watto at 3 before Doolan though, and I'd play Clarke at 3 before Watto, as I said earlier reverse swing has made it bloody hard for middle order bats, you can adjust to it if you're set (ala Rogers). But you're ****ed coming in cold against it, against good exponents of the art I'd rather Clarke got set before the 25th-35th over.

I honestly think we need to rethink how we play the game when it comes to batting orders, if there's no reverse then not many bowling lineups are going to trouble us no matter what our order, and if it's decking it'll deck for us as well.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Clarke hasn't exactly been struggling in the middle order against this devilish reverse swing for the last few seasons. The likes of Smith etc. too. I think you're building it up to be a bigger (or at least, more consistent) threat than it is. And if he comes out at 3 he's having to survive against traditional swing too.

 

[the distributer]

Clarke hasn't exactly been struggling in the middle order against this devilish reverse swing for the last few seasons. The likes of Smith etc. too. I think you're building it up to be a bigger (or at least, more consistent) threat than it is. And if he comes out at 3 he's having to survive against traditional swing too.

Mate, our most disappointing loses over the last 6 years or so have been down to reverse.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Mate, our most disappointing loses over the last 6 years or so have been down to reverse.

You could say that for most nations. I don't see how getting your eye in against traditional swing gives you a huge advantage in countering the ball when it begins to go back the other way; in fact, I think arguments could be countered both ways (i.e. players getting used to swing one way will be in big trouble when it starts to go the other).

The Clarke to 3 debate is an interesting one.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

And, the last thing before I go to bed, the most damning thing against promoting Clarke is the simple fact that the man who knows his game best, himself, keeps himself in the middle order because he clearly believes that is what he is. There is nothing wrong with the captain/best player batting in the middle, Border and Waugh are proof of that. I'd back Clarke's judgement in and he's done a bloody fine job. Moving Clarke to a spot where he feels he would contribute less just because we see it as an area of weakness isn't a good reason to do it. You just simply have to play your best player in the spot where they will do their best personally, and I think that is true from juniors all the way to Test level.