Remove this Banner Ad

Bancroft overlooked

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

LukeParkerno1 said:
The quick answer is they have made a call he's not test quality like they have to many in the past. In general and people bag selectors they very rarely get this wrong. There's plenty of very good state cricketers that are not test standard. Doubt what happened in the past has come into it, he wouldn't have been picked in the A matches, but in those games he hasn't bashed the door down surely you admit that?
Click to expand...

we dont know that, reality is they like green lot more than any of the openers so they are willing to do left field stuff to get him in, when ussie goes they need a legit opener and for all we know bancroft is the top of the list for them.
 
LukeParkerno1 said:
The matches leading into the Ashes were last year, he was poor in them that was after his best ever shield season, still had exactly the same flaws, did the same against Pakistan A before this test. No wonder the selectors are not convinced. He's a gun in the field sure but as a test bat I'm taking Green and it's comfortably.
Click to expand...
what did Green show at test level? I like him and reckon he seems like a great kid but as a batsman at test level he really struggled most of the time. Nervous and struggled to get going.
 
Westend said:
Outlier so we are picking and choosing are we Luke ??

you could also make the argument in regard to Renshaw that his hundred was scored at a very slow rate ?? and I am hearing that as another excuse for Bancroft not playing due to his strike rate
Click to expand...

Not sure I've said I want any of those 3 that played in our test side. Said it for months, all 3 of them are 30 odd average openers that's it, Bancroft and Renshaw are better in the field that's it. In terms of batting you are getting the same output.

It is why I'm comfortable with the small punt on Smith opening.
 
Westend said:
Outlier so we are picking and choosing are we Luke ??

you could also make the argument in regard to Renshaw that his hundred was scored at a very slow rate ?? and I am hearing that as another excuse for Bancroft not playing due to his strike rate
Click to expand...

renshaws scoring rate will have counted against him as well, i like bancroft and renshaw over harris but selectors seemed to like harris more and im sure him being a more busy player was part of that.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

apollo_creed said:
what did Green show at test level? I like him and reckon he seems like a great kid but as a batsman at test level he really struggled most of the time. Nervous and struggled to get going.
Click to expand...

He already has a test ton and a 5for and he's 24 years old. So in other words way more than Bancroft!
 
dogs105 said:
No, the numbers of Green over Bancroft in Shield and Test.

I don't think they need to explain "yeah, we picked the bloke that has a better record, it's not because of your public statements about sandpaper"
Click to expand...
Roger

And I agree that I would have Green over Bancroft I have said that multiple times

But I disagree with your 2nd statement....and they do need to explain it to Bancroft and the Aussie public and the air needs to be cleared IMO
 
frankrizzo said:
we dont know that, reality is they like green lot more than any of the openers so they are willing to do left field stuff to get him in, when ussie goes they need a legit opener and for all we know bancroft is the top of the list for them.
Click to expand...

Hopefully when Ussie goes one of Ward, Hunt, or someone like Wylie, or even Pucovki is there to be picked.
 
apollo_creed said:
what did Green show at test level? I like him and reckon he seems like a great kid but as a batsman at test level he really struggled most of the time. Nervous and struggled to get going.
Click to expand...
scored a hundred in India and was a major reason why we didn't lose a test in India recently and we where able to draw one and win one

plus he is the best gully fielder arguably the game has seen and can bowl

pretty good package for me
 
I'm pretty comfortable with it, I think he's Joe Burns 2.0. His game doesn't quite stand up to Test cricket, too vulnerable outside off stump to really nail that opening spot against international bowlers.

He should, however, be the next man in line if someone needs calling up/Usman retires at this stage.
 
Carbine Chaos said:
I'm pretty comfortable with it, I think he's Joe Burns 2.0. His game doesn't quite stand up to Test cricket, too vulnerable outside off stump to really nail that opening spot against international bowlers.

He should, however, be the next man in line if someone needs calling up/Usman retires at this stage.
Click to expand...

Perfect spare bat to take on overseas tours not the least of which so he can sub field the best
 
Westend said:
well Bancroft did in the shield thats the point he did so more than Harris and Renshaw .

no its not a cop out all batters have flaws if they didn't they wouldn't get out and using bancrofts is an excuse is convenient cop out for the selectors IMO

I don't get your Hughes reference ..he passed away bit hard for him to be a success at test level atm
Click to expand...
Ok, I’ll put it like this.

Shield runs are great. They indicate form at Shield level and may indicate success at test level.

Technique is as big, if not more of an indicator of success at test level.

Prolific shield players who flopped at test level include David Hookes, Phillip Hughes and Greg Blewett all had significant technical flaws.

Modest/decent Shield players who had great test careers include Smith, S Waugh and MJ Clarke. You may wish to include Labuschagne and Warner in this group. These players had/have good techniques and applied themselves properly.

Bancroft is in that first group. So is Harris. Renshaw is closer to the second group.

Shield runs count for shit if the evidence is the player will not convert at test level.
 
apollo_creed said:
what did Green show at test level? I like him and reckon he seems like a great kid but as a batsman at test level he really struggled most of the time. Nervous and struggled to get going.
Click to expand...

No he didn’t.

Green has as many centuries in India as the rest of the squad combined except Smith.
 
Westend said:
As I have said previously you go for the 6 best bats in the country and go from there and green is in that

If it was a specialist opener though they wanted it should of been Bancroft and the selectors need to clear the air and give Bancroft the truth why he wasn’t picked
Click to expand...

He isn't good enough and he won't STFU about Capetown (which shows a lack of brains).
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Black Diamond said:
No he didn’t.

Green has as many centuries in India as the rest of the squad combined except Smith.
Click to expand...

Also Green was never a number 6, he's a number 4, and 5 at the absolute lowest. Travis Head was in just that good form you can't move him from 5.
 
Gak Attack said:
We at least now everyone knows domestic form is worth * all to selectors.
Click to expand...

It means exactly what has been said. It's a factor, it's never the only thing. To use a football analogy, some players are elite VFL footballers but will never make it at the next level. That's fine we have to accept that.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Bancroft very hard done by. He's done all he can in the circumstances, ie go back to first-class level and score runs.

The truth is that once the selectors have a project player in their sights, in this case Green, nothing is going to stop them from shoehorning him into the side.
 
Black Diamond said:
Not all technical flaws are alike. Some are clearly more inhibitive than others, and some players have the mental application to avoid shots which show the flaws.

Bancroft has played 10 tests for an average of 26 and no centuries.

Why is Bancroft different now to when he debuted?
Click to expand...
Personally, I don't read too much into that. Not everyone fires from the outset when playing Test cricket.

For instance, the bloke currently at #6 in the Test side didn't score his first Test century until Test #22, at which time he had an average of just over 20.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom