Australian ODI Squad - 2014/15

[Kram]

Honestly some of the drivel that gets posted about Watson on here is astounding. He has been a gun in the ODI side for years and hardly 'mediocre'. Or can't people tell the difference between white and coloured cricket clothing?

Bailey has done far less as a ODI player, has been in poor form for a while and he is only one year younger!

 

[Underarm]

All that shows is that yes Bailey is in a slump while for Watson that is the best he's capable of, and he's not going to get any better. He hasn't for 10 years.
It is perfectly normal for all batsman go though periods of bad form. Baileys form slump is no different to that of Hayden, Gilchrist, Mark Waugh etc had in their careers. Show patience. That's a bit different to playing 10 years of mediocrity with nothing more than the odd 50.
As for his bowling he's finished surely. Hasn't been taking wickets either. Even Smith is a better option.
So what we are left with is an all rounder who cant bat and cant bowl. Or someone as good as Aaron Finch at his best. I know who id prefer

Averages 40 in ODI, and at one stage was the most damaging opener in the game. To say he's been hopeless for 10 years shows the complete ignorance of your cricket knowlege.

He may be past it now, but he certainly wasn't 5 years ago.

 

[bird_man]

All that shows is that yes Bailey is in a slump while for Watson that is the best he's capable of, and he's not going to get any better. He hasn't for 10 years.
It is perfectly normal for all batsman go though periods of bad form. Baileys form slump is no different to that of Hayden, Gilchrist, Mark Waugh etc had in their careers. Show patience. That's a bit different to playing 10 years of mediocrity with nothing more than the odd 50.
As for his bowling he's finished surely. Hasn't been taking wickets either. Even Smith is a better option.
So what we are left with is an all rounder who cant bat and cant bowl. Or someone as good as Aaron Finch at his best. I know who id prefer

10 years worth? Amazing that his average can still be above 40 if he has been poor for 10 years.

Bailey had an amazing 2013 and a very poor 2014, yet you put it down to a form slump? How do we know he just didn't have a brilliant purple patch that he will never live up to again?

I'm not trying to bag Bailey out, but I find it laughable that you can criticise Watson so badly even though his last 12 months have been better than Baileys. Your argument makes no sense!

 

[LukeParkerno1]

10 years worth? Amazing that his average can still be above 40 if he has been poor for 10 years.

Bailey had an amazing 2013 and a very poor 2014, yet you put it down to a form slump? How do we know he just didn't have a brilliant purple patch that he will never live up to again?

I'm not trying to bag Bailey out, but I find it laughable that you can criticise Watson so badly even though his last 12 months have been better than Baileys. Your argument makes no sense!

Not to mention that in ODI cricket you NEED bowling options, ideally 7 blokes who can bowl- and no Finch/Smith's party pies don't count. Ideally you have Watson and Marsh in there and that gives you two extra blokes. You may not need both but they are handy to have.

 

[SleazySimon]

Not to mention that in ODI cricket you NEED bowling options, ideally 7 blokes who can bowl- and no Finch/Smith's party pies don't count. Ideally you have Watson and Marsh in there and that gives you two extra blokes. You may not need both but they are handy to have.

7?! Lol. I like the sound of it but that's a little over the top. You've already got specialist bowlers Johnson, Starc, Cummins/Hazelwood Then it's all rounders Faulkner, Marsh and Maxwell. More than enough bowling in that. And that's before you can even mention Watson based on CURRENT form. And all those allrounders are outperforming him with the bat too.

 

[SleazySimon]

Averages 40 in ODI, and at one stage was the most damaging opener in the game. To say he's been hopeless for 10 years shows the complete ignorance of your cricket knowlege.

He may be past it now, but he certainly wasn't 5 years ago.

My expectations are probably too high, bit ill always compare everyone to the era before his.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

My expectations are probably too high, bit ill always compare everyone to the era before his.

Watson would be in our top 4-5 ODI's cricketers of all time.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

7?! Lol. I like the sound of it but that's a little over the top. You've already got specialist bowlers Johnson, Starc, Cummins/Hazelwood Then it's all rounders Faulkner, Marsh and Maxwell. More than enough bowling in that. And that's before you can even mention Watson based on CURRENT form. And all those allrounders are outperforming him with the bat too.

You go into a game against South Africa or New Zealand with only 5 bowlers, you will struggle. Especially if one of them is Maxwell. Ideally you have Marsh/Watson as spare bowling options. We don't need Clarke necessarily.

 

[Kram]

My expectations are probably too high, bit ill always compare everyone to the era before his.

Seriously, you need to get a clue..

 

[The_Reaper]

Watson would be in our top 4-5 ODI's cricketers of all time.

Ricky Ponting
Dean Jones
Michael Bevan
Glenn McGrath
Brett Lee
Adam Gilchrist
Shane Warne

All definitely better than Watson

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Ricky Ponting
Dean Jones
Michael Bevan
Glenn McGrath
Brett Lee
Adam Gilchrist
Shane Warne

All definitely better than Watson

You bag Watson..he has a better record than Jones with more hundreds, not to mention his 160 odd wickets. The only three that would definitely be ahead would be Gilchrist, Ponting and McGrath. Watson and we bag him would be on the same level as Warne in ODI's. People forget how good the bloke is!

 

[The_Reaper]

You bag Watson..he has a better record than Jones with more hundreds, not to mention his 160 odd wickets. The only three that would definitely be ahead would be Gilchrist, Ponting and McGrath. Watson and we bag him would be on the same level as Warne in ODI's. People forget how good the bloke is!

I'm not bagging Watson

But there have been some seriously good ODI players for Australia over the years.

Jones played in a different era- compare his batting record with his peers

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I'm not bagging Watson

But there have been some seriously good ODI players for Australia over the years.

Jones played in a different era- compare his batting record with his peers

Do the same for Watson, he has probably been the best ODI all rounder in this era easily. People forget how important he has been. Not sure many would take a pure bat over a gun All Rounder in a ODI side. That isn't putting jones down believe me.

 

[Kram]

Try for something more realistic like top 10 LPno1

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Try for something more realistic like top 10 LPno1

He'd be in my top 5 easily. Probably in 4th or 5th but he'd be there. Definitely in our top 10 that is without a question. I dislike Watto as much as the next bloke in test cricket but in ODI's he is almost first picked.

 

[Underarm]

My expectations are probably too high, bit ill always compare everyone to the era before his.

Him, along with Hussey, Clarke and Ponting really made our side in the late 2000's, early 10's. And once Ponting went downhill and Hussey retired he became probably the most dominant batsmen in 2011. And thats not even mentioning his ability to bowl.

He's no good now, but back in his day he was very, very good.

 

[bird_man]

7?! Lol. I like the sound of it but that's a little over the top. You've already got specialist bowlers Johnson, Starc, Cummins/Hazelwood Then it's all rounders Faulkner, Marsh and Maxwell. More than enough bowling in that. And that's before you can even mention Watson based on CURRENT form. And all those allrounders are outperforming him with the bat too.

Just curious, you have Clarke coming in for Watson, how are you going to fit Faulkner in with Johnson, Hazlewood, Starc, Maxwell and Marsh?

If anything Faulkner takes Watsons spot but it would throw the team balance out if you were to replace Clarke with Watson.

 

[SleazySimon]

Just curious, you have Clarke coming in for Watson, how are you going to fit Faulkner in with Johnson, Hazlewood, Starc, Maxwell and Marsh?

If anything Faulkner takes Watsons spot but it would throw the team balance out if you were to replace Clarke with Watson.

I think you've mistaken me for another poster. All I said was id prefer a specialist batsman to another all rounder. Hardly a ground breaking, controversial opinion. It also throws team balance when the player is question is completely out of form too. For me its Clarke in for Watson, Faulkner for Bailey and Cummins for Hazelwood. To keep playing Watson and Hazelwood when there are clearly others in better form is recipe for disaster.
Form first, needs second. FWIW this should be the side at full strength:
Finch
Warner
Smith
Clarke
Maxwell
Marsh
Haddin
Faulkner
Johnson
Starc
Cummins

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Honestly some of the drivel that gets posted about Watson on here is astounding. He has been a gun in the ODI side for years and hardly 'mediocre'. Or can't people tell the difference between white and coloured cricket clothing?

Bailey has done far less as a ODI player, has been in poor form for a while and he is only one year younger!

Timeout. Outstanding?!?!?

Very good at one point - yes.

Shit now - yes.

Outstanding. Not at a single point in time.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

You go into a game against South Africa or New Zealand with only 5 bowlers, you will struggle. Especially if one of them is Maxwell. Ideally you have Marsh/Watson as spare bowling options. We don't need Clarke necessarily.

Marsh then. Bowling is similar and is currently more likely to score runs.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I think you've mistaken me for another poster. All I said was id prefer a specialist batsman to another all rounder. Hardly a ground breaking, controversial opinion. It also throws team balance when the player is question is completely out of form too. For me its Clarke in for Watson, Faulkner for Bailey and Cummins for Hazelwood. To keep playing Watson and Hazelwood when there are clearly others in better form is recipe for disaster.
Form first, needs second. FWIW this should be the side at full strength:
Finch
Warner
Smith
Clarke
Maxwell
Marsh
Haddin
Faulkner
Johnson
Starc
Cummins

For me swap Haddin and Faulkner and I'd be happy with that line up.

 

[bird_man]

I think you've mistaken me for another poster. All I said was id prefer a specialist batsman to another all rounder. Hardly a ground breaking, controversial opinion. It also throws team balance when the player is question is completely out of form too. For me its Clarke in for Watson, Faulkner for Bailey and Cummins for Hazelwood. To keep playing Watson and Hazelwood when there are clearly others in better form is recipe for disaster.
Form first, needs second. FWIW this should be the side at full strength:
Finch
Warner
Smith
Clarke
Maxwell
Marsh
Haddin
Faulkner
Johnson
Starc
Cummins

The thing is, Faulkner won't be ready for Saturdays game, so we have 5 bowlers including Maxwell and Marsh.

I'm happy for Watson to be dropped for Faulkner, but to drop him for Clarke leaves us a bowler short. Not to mention his form is better than Baileys anyway. (I think I already mentioned his average is double that of Baileys in the last 7 games)

If anything, at the moment we have one too many batsmen with Marsh at 7, if you were going to replace Watson it has to be with a bowler or an all rounder. Maxwells and Marsh' bowling is not reliable enough to expect 10 overs from every match.

Your hate for Watson is strong, but you'll Have to wait until Faulkner is fit before he's a chance of being dropped.

 

[Kram]

Timeout. Outstanding?!?!?

Very good at one point - yes.

Shit now - yes.

Outstanding. Not at a single point in time.

I said he was a gun. Nowhere in my post have I written 'outstanding' Even though he wasn't far off that point for a fair while

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I said he was a gun. Nowhere in my post have I written 'outstanding' Even though he wasn't far off that point for a fair while

Sorry apologies. Exams have had me a bit tired and frazzled, in car terms I'm running on empty atm....

Astounding suddenly looked like outstanding

In any case he's looking 'gun' in the rear view mirror and all that's up ahead is the international scrap heap!

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Marsh then. Bowling is similar and is currently more likely to score runs.

Play both and stop the idea of playing a 10% fit Clarke. I'd rather have Shaun Marsh in the squad!