Bancroft overlooked

[Black Diamond]

100% the tour match against Pakistan leading into the first test sealed his fate. Yes he got 50 but he was lucky to not be out a dozen times all the same way and then he gets out the same way.

Yep. He has always played away from his body, always fallen across to the off-side, and rarely hits through the line.

You can get away with this at shield level. Not in test cricket.

 

[Westend]

100% the tour match against Pakistan leading into the first test sealed his fate. Yes he got 50 but he was lucky to not be out a dozen times all the same way and then he gets out the same way.

Wrong there Luke he was not lucky to be out a dozen times he got to 50 and was given out lbw. I watched it and he batted well

 

[frankrizzo]

Interesting smith and ussie average 58 batting together thats over 42 innings, wonder if that number swayed selectors

 

[Westend]

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?

Why is head ussie marnus Smith and marsh?? they all have flaws why is it different now ??

All batters have technical flaws simple fact is Bancroft went back to the shield and scored runs thats fact..this technical flaws doesn't fly for me it just a convienant excuse for me ....Bancroft deserves to know the full story of why he wasn't picked from the selectors

 

[Hamingja]

Smith opening is wild to me but if he genuinely wants to do it, then great. All the opener options suck which is why Warner has been able to limp on for years. Green is a test class player.

 

[frankrizzo]

Bancroft deserves to know the full story of why he wasn't picked from the selectors

His poor test record his obvious flaws and his scoring rate would be what they tell him its hardly a secret what concerns are with him, you can agree or disagree with the concerns but they are ones that are well known.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Wrong there Luke he was not lucky to be out a dozen times he got to 50 and was given out lbw. I watched it and he batted well

I watched every ball, and he was lucky to not be lbw a lot and it was just a matter of when. You recon better test bowlers won't just get him out easily? They would.

 

[Westend]

Dont agree he already had a lot more chances at test level than a lot of much better players got over the years, he has flaws that are more likely to be exposed at test level he has a poor test record and as i was reading other day he is slowest scoring batsman in shield this year, is he bit unlucky? yes i think so is he a 100 percent must pick and thats proof of a conspiracy against him no i dont think so.

well if he scores slow we might as well drop ussie because he does the same

this technical flaws scoring slow age ...I have heard it all

what needs to happen is the selectors have to clear the air with Bancroft get him on the phone and explain why ...as they should to the contenders otherwise this sandpaper gate and him being the fall guy and relationship with players in the team will always be there

 

[dogs105]

Cameron Green age 24

FC 47
Test 34



Cameron Bancroft age 31

FC 39
Test 26


IF Smith has success as an opener, which batsman would you rather have in the side? Without including bowling.

 

[Westend]

I watched every ball, and he was lucky to not be lbw a lot and it was just a matter of when. You recon better test bowlers won't just get him out easily? They would.

he made a 50 you would think he didn't get over 5 the way you are talking ...its just silly

I agree greenie in the team as he is in the best six bats but just to be dismissive of bancrofts innings that day of 50 as a reason for not being picked far out thats just stupid

 

[frankrizzo]

well if he scores slow we might as well drop ussie because he does the same

yes ussies slow scoring does hurt bancrofts chances of a recall think thats obvious and i think if it was ussie going this summer not warner bancroft have much better chance getting spot back.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

well if he scores slow we might as well drop ussie because he does the same

this technical flaws scoring slow age ...I have heard it all

what needs to happen is the selectors have to clear the air with Bancroft get him on the phone and explain why ...as they should to the contenders otherwise this sandpaper gate and him being the fall guy and relationship with players in the team will always be there

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?

 

[Westend]

Cameron Green age 24

FC 47
Test 34



Cameron Bancroft age 31

FC 39
Test 26


IF Smith has success as an opener, which batsman would you rather have in the side? Without including bowling.

yeah I agree the value of greenie for me over Bancroft Harris or Renshaw is the reason I want him over them

but Bancroft deserves to know why he hasn't been picked

 

[LukeParkerno1]

he made a 50 you would think he didn't get over 5 the way you are talking ...its just silly

I agree greenie in the team as he is in the best six bats but just to be dismissive of bancrofts innings that day of 50 as a reason for not being picked far out thats just stupid

Look deeper I know he made 50, but if you are going to look that shaky you better be making 150 not just 50. It was a scratchy innings at best. Compare that innings to what Renshaw looked.

 

[Black Diamond]

Why is head ussie marnus Smith and marsh?? they all have flaws why is it different now ??

The first difference is they actually score runs.

Second difference is they have techniques which demonstrate they are more likely to succeed. Batting properly is the first indicator that a player can do well.

All batters have technical flaws simple fact is Bancroft went back to the shield and scored runs thats fact..this technical flaws doesn't fly for me it just a convienant excuse for me ....Bancroft deserves to know the full story of why he wasn't picked from the selectors

It is not just a convenient excuse. This “all batsmen have flaws” stuff is a cop out. Again, some flaws are worse than others. Some batsmen have the mental application to overcome their deficiencies. To the extent Smith and Labuschagne have flaws, they are far less prominent. Mitch Marsh also has a better technique than Bancroft.

As a thought experiment, why was Phillip Hughes, who was far more prolific than Bancroft at shield level, not also a success at test level?

 

[dogs105]

yeah I agree the value of greenie for me over Bancroft Harris or Renshaw is the reason I want him over them

but Bancroft deserves to know why he hasn't been picked

Tell him to look at those numbers.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Tell him to look at those numbers.

Also I'm not sure the selectors want players whinging in the media, team unity is huge in professional sports

 

[BRAB]

well if he scores slow we might as well drop ussie because he does the same

this technical flaws scoring slow age ...I have heard it all

what needs to happen is the selectors have to clear the air with Bancroft get him on the phone and explain why ...as they should to the contenders otherwise this sandpaper gate and him being the fall guy and relationship with players in the team will always be there

I’m sure the selectors would be letting Bancroft know why he wasn’t selected. Given how close Khawaja is to the end of his career I wouldn’t be that shocked if Bancroft is in the test team after the India series next year.

I know you’ve dismissed the reasons around technical issues, his rate run and his age but I definitely think they’d all play a part.

With how desperate we are for openers now and in the near future I really don’t think they’d be keeping Bancroft out if they genuinely thought he was a good bat just because of some comments he made about sandpaper years ago. There will be some cricketing reason for it that I’m sure they will communicate to Bancroft.

 

[Westend]

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?

well he did score a 100 for Aus A in Sri Lanka you going to count that Luke ? simple fact is out of the specialist openers he has been the highest run scorer

You could make an argument that Aus A games are just roads produced for batting practice for the opposition as well

Tell him to look at those numbers.

what his numbers over Harris and Renshaw in the shield?


the simple fact is and my point is that the selectors need to clear the air on why he wasn't picked otherwise this sandpaper gate Will always linger

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I’m sure the selectors would be letting Bancroft know why he wasn’t selected. Given how close Khawaja is to the end of his career I wouldn’t be that shocked if Bancroft is in the test team after the India series next year.

I know you’ve dismissed the reasons around technical issues, his rate run and his age but I definitely think they’d all play a part.

With how desperate we are for openers now and in the near future I really don’t think they’d be keeping Bancroft out if they genuinely thought he was a good bat just because of some comments he made about sandpaper years ago. There will be some cricketing reason for it that I’m sure they will communicate to Bancroft.

Disagree on him after Ussie, and this is why I feel Smith opening is smart. Smith coud usher in a young opener for say a year to 2 after Khawja retires. Who that is I don't know Ward, Hunt, Wylie(?), etc. By going Smith it gives us another 2 years at least. Actually think Khawaja goes at the Ashes not next summer.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

well he did score a 100 for Aus A in Sri Lanka you going to count that Luke ? simple fact is out of the specialist openers he has been the highest run scorer

You could make an argument that Aus A games are just roads produced for batting practice for the opposition as well

what his numbers over Harris and Renshaw in the shield?


the simple fact is and my point is that the selectors need to clear the air on why he wasn't picked otherwise this sandpaper gate Will always linger

That one hundred in the A game which was good seems a bit of an outlier. If Mankuka was that big a road he'd have made 150 plus not 50. That was his opportunity to smash the door down, instead the selectors come away thinking well Renshaw made a 100 that's it.

 

[Westend]

The first difference is they actually score runs.

Second difference is they have techniques which demonstrate they are more likely to succeed. Batting properly is the first indicator that a player can do well.



It is not just a convenient excuse. This “all batsmen have flaws” stuff is a cop out. Again, some flaws are worse than others. Some batsmen have the mental application to overcome their deficiencies. To the extent Smith and Labuschagne have flaws, they are far less prominent. Mitch Marsh also has a better technique than Bancroft.

As a thought experiment, why was Phillip Hughes, who was far more prolific than Bancroft at shield level, not also a success at test level?

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

 

[dogs105]

what his numbers over Harris and Renshaw in the shield?


the simple fact is and my point is that the selectors need to clear the air on why he wasn't picked otherwise this sandpaper gate Will always linger

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"

 

[LukeParkerno1]

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

There's flaws and then there are flaws you know won't succeed at test level. Every batsman has a flaw here and there, but if a batsman falls in the latter it's hard to be successful. Is Bancroft in that group, the selectors seem to think so and they generally get this right.

 

[Westend]

That one hundred in the A game which was good seems a bit of an outlier. If Mankuka was that big a road he'd have made 150 plus not 50. That was his opportunity to smash the door down, instead the selectors come away thinking well Renshaw made a 100 that's it.

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