Australian ODI Squad - 2014/15

[LukeParkerno1]

He also has more ODI hundreds than Marsh and Maxwell.

Still, I think he is ideal for number 7.

Never said he wasn't a number 7. Isn't a top 6 bat though.

 

[bird_man]

Never said he wasn't a number 7. Isn't a top 6 bat though.

Never said you did. I just don't know why you are bringing up his Shield record when we are talking ODI's. Finch has an even worse shield record and is just about our best one day batsman at the moment.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Never said you did. I just don't know why you are bringing up his Shield record when we are talking ODI's. Finch has an even worse shield record and is just about our best one day batsman at the moment.

He hasn't got a ton period though. If you bat in the top 6 you have to have the ability to play a long innings (meaning a ton). I rate Faulkner, best finisher in world cricket but I wouldn't want him in at 3/40.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

The bloke has a gran total of ZERO FC hundreds. I rate him but he aint a top 6 bat!

Right this important distinction down

FC matches are played over 4 days.

ODI's/ODD's are played over 1 day. Hence OD

One should not be used as an argument for the other. End of.

 

[PaddyO]

He hasn't got a ton period though. If you bat in the top 6 you have to have the ability to play a long innings (meaning a ton). I rate Faulkner, best finisher in world cricket but I wouldn't want him in at 3/40.

You do realise he has an ODI ton, right?

Like, he has a ton in the format we are discussing. And that in 29 innings he has 13 not outs, which suggests to me a move up the order is probably a decent idea if the team needs it. And that he is averaging more than all of our top 6 in ODI cricket. At the moment he is the exact guy I want in at 3/40, tbh.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

You do realise he has an ODI ton, right?

Like, he has a ton in the format we are discussing. And that in 29 innings he has 13 not outs, which suggests to me a move up the order is probably a decent idea if the team needs it. And that he is averaging more than all of our top 6 in ODI cricket. At the moment he is the exact guy I want in at 3/40, tbh.

One century, thats it. I'll take Marsh and his 10+ tons domestically, or Maxwell with his similar stats. I have no issue Faulkner coming in at 7. He should be the 'floater' in our lineup. Meaning he'll be promoted if the situation demands. I'd be backing Marsh to build an innings more than Faulkner, although I expect that as I see Marsh as a batsman first and foremost

 

[Yoda_]

He hasn't got a ton period though. If you bat in the top 6 you have to have the ability to play a long innings (meaning a ton). I rate Faulkner, best finisher in world cricket but I wouldn't want him in at 3/40.

This is such a myth. You play to the situation and as far as I'm concerned, he has played most situations to perfection.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Yoda_]

He hasn't got a ton period though. If you bat in the top 6 you have to have the ability to play a long innings (meaning a ton). I rate Faulkner, best finisher in world cricket but I wouldn't want him in at 3/40.

Um, Faulkner has made a ton (116 to be exact) and another 4 half centuries meaning a meaningful innings (of 50+) has been achieved 1 in every 6 innings. Not bad for a bloke who usually comes in with 10 overs to go.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Allikat]

It's a bit hard to make ODI tonnes when there's usually not enough balls left in the game when he comes in. And considering who our #3 before today was. I reckon if you compare the stats, since Faulkner's come into the Aus side, he'd have better stats than Watto in both batting & bowling. I'm not saying put Faulkner in 3, or as a genuine batsman, but a 5 or 6 isn't out of his ability.

I am a little biased though #frisky4faulkner

 

[footyfan1978]

Clarke opening with Warner and Bailey coming in at 4 after Smith and no Finch would make me happy enough. Not expecting it by any means but I actually think it would improve our team overall. Got nothing against Finch but him and Warner together just does not seem to work often and no way Warner is going out. If Clarke would rather other hitters face the later overs then fair enough, least get yourself in early and set the innings up with Warner being the goer and you his opening partner.
I do not think it will happen. I think they will stick with Finch and has enough past scores to stay but he still does not fill me with confidence. Mitchell Marsh will not feel secure. His bowling as expected not developed enough to be able to count on as one of the allrounding bowlers. He had a purple patch in game one at MCG but even he knew that himself. I am expecting at least another change for next game.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Clarke opening yeah, no. Just a shocking idea. You have Clarke at 4 for a good reason- in case both Finch and Warner go early.

If it is between Watson and Marsh I know who I'm picking right now.

 

[footyfan1978]

Clarke opening yeah, no. Just a shocking idea.

Michael J Clarke (Australia) - One Day Internationals
Performance Analysis by Batting Position
Position Inns NO 50s 100s HS Runs Avg
Opening 20 2 6 2 105* 782 43.44
No. 3 24 3 5 1 111* 850 40.48
No. 4 108 20 30 5 130 4073 46.28
No. 5 17 5 8 0 82 751 62.58
No. 6 32 12 7 0 82* 967 48.35
No. 7 17 2 0 0 44* 351 23.40
No. 8
No. 9
No. 10
No. 11
Overall 218 44 56 8 130 7774 44.68

Whether he opens or bats lower he has decent results.
Problem with him deciding not to bat himself today when tempo being increased was essentially him saying he is not ideal to up the rate as quite a few others are. Fair enough however I'd rather he open bat and get us off to a solid foundation if that is he thinking. Like I said I do not expect it to happen.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Averages more at 4,5,6. Exactly. He's a middle order bat mate. If we so wanted to replace an opener we should have picked Shaun Marsh in the squad. Clarke's SR isn't good enough to open you need boundary hitters.

 

[footyfan1978]

He's a middle order bat mate.

He certainly is in Tests but I seen no reason he could also not be a one day opener. Just think Warner and him partnered together is a better balance than Finch and Warner batting together. Just always get the sense with Warner and Finch batting together one of them feels the need to play a role foreign to them. I do not like that and prefer a balanced opening pair.

 

[Jak!x]

He certainly is in Tests but I seen no reason he could also not be a one day opener. Just think Warner and him partnered together is a better balance than Finch and Warner batting together. Just always get the sense with Warner and Finch batting together one of them feels the need to play a role foreign to them. I do not like that and prefer a balanced opening pair.

IIRC he actually broke into the ODI team as an opening bat. No need for him to return there with Watson, Warner, Haddin and Finch all capable but wouldn't be a disaster either

 

[CountryRace]

Looks good on paper with no watto

Is the glue factory open

 

[LukeParkerno1]

He certainly is in Tests but I seen no reason he could also not be a one day opener. Just think Warner and him partnered together is a better balance than Finch and Warner batting together. Just always get the sense with Warner and Finch batting together one of them feels the need to play a role foreign to them. I do not like that and prefer a balanced opening pair.

Then pick Shaun Marsh, who to be honest should have been in the squad.

 

[Yoda_]

Is Clarke even in our best ODI side?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Is Clarke even in our best ODI side?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Depends, right now...probably. In a year, probably not.

 

[footyfan1978]

Then pick Shaun Marsh, who to be honest should have been in the squad.

Would love to have the option of Shaun Marsh but we do not, so given our present situation of those available a better balance to team with what happened in last week would be Clarke opening. I know it will not happen but would prefer it than what we got going on. Hopefully the order they have works.

 

[Seagrave_Holmes]

Now that Faulkner is back in, what if we brought in Bailey for Marsh? There would then be 5 proper bats at the top with Maxwell in a 6 and Faulkner at 7. Surely we would then be able to get 20 overs out of Maxwell, Faulkner and Clarke or even Smith. Faulkner averages 7.4 overs per game over his career and has bowled at least 9 overs in 18/38 innings so he would most likely bowl around half of those 20 overs.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Now that Faulkner is back in, what if we brought in Bailey for Marsh? There would then be 5 proper bats at the top with Maxwell in a 6 and Faulkner at 7. Surely we would then be able to get 20 overs out of Maxwell, Faulkner and Clarke or even Smith. Faulkner averages 7.4 overs per game over his career and has bowled at least 9 overs in 18/38 innings so he would most likely bowl around half of those 20 overs.

No thanks. You need more bowling options, and it isn't as if Bailey is smashing the ball.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Would love to have the option of Shaun Marsh but we do not, so given our present situation of those available a better balance to team with what happened in last week would be Clarke opening. I know it will not happen but would prefer it than what we got going on. Hopefully the order they have works.

You realise we have dropped the lemon aka Watson from that debacle last week. We don't need Clarke opening. You need boundary hitters in power plays you don't need blokes plodding along at 70%.

 

[The Speaker]

Now that Faulkner is back in, what if we brought in Bailey for Marsh? There would then be 5 proper bats at the top with Maxwell in a 6 and Faulkner at 7. Surely we would then be able to get 20 overs out of Maxwell, Faulkner and Clarke or even Smith. Faulkner averages 7.4 overs per game over his career and has bowled at least 9 overs in 18/38 innings so he would most likely bowl around half of those 20 overs.

Faulkner having bowled nine overs in that many games isn't necessarily a good thing.

 

[western royboy]

In all seriousness, people talking about the number of genuine bats in the side include Finch as one of that number. I think that's a stretch - he's a one trick pony that in the current day and age has it all in his favour, but it's generous to describe him as a genuine bat. It would appear that our chances hinge on not having to venture to NZ for a semi final. If we do I hope we have a few more genuine bats in the side.