Changes for the 3rd Test

[bungwahl]

Don't hate him, but I don't think he is the answer. Average of mid 30's is hardly great, it is average, and that is what you will get from him..average. I would rather have Burns, Silk, etc, than have Hughes in the side. Hughes can't play spin, in fact he has no idea how to play spin.

Joe Root has batted every position in the England order- doesn't seem to effect him in terms of performances. That is the issue- Joe Root has a better technique.

The problem is the selectors rushed Hughes back last year when they should have left him to gain some experience and confidence in the Shield.

Joe Root has a more traditional technique, and is yet to have his first dip in confidence. It will come at some point, it always does.

Hughes will be one of the mainstays of the Test side for the next decade. Either from right now, if they choose to give him a proper run in one single batting position. Or, he'll get banished back to Shield cricket and top the runs for 2-3 years before coming back and doing very well.

The worst possible thing we can do now is to continue down the patch of throwing inexperienced and undeserving youngsters in to the side. Joe Burns is averaging 30 in County Cricket this season. He is not the remedy (yet).

 

[frankrizzo]

Bird must be wondering whether he needs a new haircut or to bowl left handed or something, test average of 16 first class average of 19 and bowled well in the tour games and he can't get the gig over a scattergun who averages 34 with a 3.5 economy in tests.

 

[TassieEagle]

Bird must be wondering whether he needs a new haircut or to bowl left handed or something, test average of 16 first class average of 19 and bowled well in the tour games and he can't get the gig over a scattergun who averages 34 with a 3.5 economy in tests.

He doesn't have the raw pace or that X-factor plus we need that left armer.

100% agree, he must have Hamished someones dog.

 

[frankrizzo]

The worst thing they did was admit they hid hughes from south africa, either back the bloke 100% or don't pick him in the first place.

They pick hughes time after time but try to hide him from the SA quicks, the new ball in england and then the spinners, if he's test quality you stick him somewhere and leave him there and just back him to do his job, whether he's facing 4 quicks or 4 spinners.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Like others, if that is the selected side I am bemused but not amused.

Starc over Bird - OK. I get that the batsmen can't be trusted to bat. Still, I firmly believe in always selecting the more likely bowler to fill a bowling spot. That is Bird. I don't care that Starc is a left armer and has the occasional fantastic in-swinger. He is about as reliable as my typing, and about 400% moreso than the other Mitchell.

No Hughes - yeah, he still struggles against spin but he improved in India and since, even if he did get out cheaply last Test. Despite the spin issue I would have him at six, where he bated (surprisingly) well with Agar. Unlike many others he has the capacity to learn. When nobody else is performing any better that capacity gets him the nod for mine. Smith is supposedly coming off a sore back and could have been left out on medical grounds. Hughes might be out for a little while now, which is unfortunate as I still think he is the best bet as the next long term captain - but he has to show he deserves a spot in the team before Clarke retires or it can't happen.

Lyon/Agar - I guess if a lot of overs have to be bowled by a spinner, as may well be the case, the more experienced guy can get the chance. Plus, without Wade keeping Lyon is much more likely to take a wicket.
edit: Without checking I'm not sure, but I get the feeling some of the quicker spinners (Kumble, Underwood) may have done well at Old Trafford, that might also play into Lyon's favour.

I can understand Watson staying in. He's not going on with it, but he is actually performing better than the others.

Haddin - yes. He is the best keeper on this tour, though far from the best keeper available.

Rogers - leave him there for now, I still don't see the point of breaking the Warner/Cowan partnership when it was one of the few things that almost worked in the line-up, but the decision has been made so give Rogers (who has the ability) some time when no others are demanding the spot through performance.

 

[frankrizzo]

Agree on rogers, picking a 35 year old with only 1 test under his belt was a huge gamble but they have to at least follow it through and give him the series.

Still the pass mark for him for the rest of the series is going to be rather high, a few 40's and 50's isn't going to do it, he needs a big ton by the end of this series to have any hope of playing the home series.

The others won't have to prove as much to keep their spots but then they aren't 35 and test cricket newbies.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

The problem is the selectors rushed Hughes back last year when they should have left him to gain some experience and confidence in the Shield.

Joe Root has a more traditional technique, and is yet to have his first dip in confidence. It will come at some point, it always does.

Hughes will be one of the mainstays of the Test side for the next decade. Either from right now, if they choose to give him a proper run in one single batting position. Or, he'll get banished back to Shield cricket and top the runs for 2-3 years before coming back and doing very well.

The worst possible thing we can do now is to continue down the patch of throwing inexperienced and undeserving youngsters in to the side. Joe Burns is averaging 30 in County Cricket this season. He is not the remedy (yet).

Rushed him back? They shielded him from the South African attack (Rob Quiney played). He has to make runs, especially as he got the armchair ride back in by playing the SL meat pies attack. Root has the technique to deal with a dip in form, Hughes doesn't. It is ugly at the best of times let alone when he is out of form.

Get Silk and Burns in the side, but not until after the home summer. However if tempted I would gamble on Jordan Silk in the home summer as like Root he has the technique to succeed.

 

[placebo]

Bird must be wondering whether he needs a new haircut or to bowl left handed or something, test average of 16 first class average of 19 and bowled well in the tour games and he can't get the gig over a scattergun who averages 34 with a 3.5 economy in tests.

Oh but you forgot, he's a left-hander, which y'know, means a whole lot...it spices up our line-up or something, makes us more dynamic. Becuase he's left handed. Because that totally trumps picking the better bowler. Because we're a bunch of simpletons. Oh but he bats as well...yes, we're in such a state that we pick bowlers because they're more trusted with the bat than our entire top order. But hey, gotta have that left handed bowler, just like Englan-oh. Oh wait.

 

[carnthemlions]

Yay, let's drop Phil Hughes. Again.
If you're going to have Hughes or Warner in the team(or both), why the **** would they not be opening?
Rogers and Watson will both be gone by the end of the series unless something miraculous happens. Cowan is effectively just a younger version of Rogers.
Warner has suffered from everyone trying to turn him into a 'test' batsman. Either let him play aggressively or don't play him at all. Player development in Australian cricket right now is starting to look like the Melbourne football club- do we blame the players or the system?

 

[HBF]

Bird must be wondering whether he needs a new haircut or to bowl left handed or something, test average of 16 first class average of 19 and bowled well in the tour games and he can't get the gig over a scattergun who averages 34 with a 3.5 economy in tests.

Very true, and he also brings us consistency that Starc simply doesn't have. A bowling lineup of Siddle, Bird, Harris and Lyon is at least going to give us 4 bowlers who will go from the first ball to the last, and not leak runs like Starc and Patto have been doing.

 

[bungwahl]

Rushed him back? They shielded him from the South African attack (Rob Quiney played). He has to make runs, especially as he got the armchair ride back in by playing the SL meat pies attack. Root has the technique to deal with a dip in form, Hughes doesn't. It is ugly at the best of times let alone when he is out of form.

Get Silk and Burns in the side, but not until after the home summer. However if tempted I would gamble on Jordan Silk in the home summer as like Root he has the technique to succeed.

Ahh.. yeah, rushed him back. Remember c: Guptill b: Martin? He got axed after that and told to go and rebuild his confidence in the Shield for a few seasons. Half a Shield season later he's being rushed back in to the Test side to be a fill-gap batsman. Are they trying to build his confidence or destroy it completely? As for being shielded from the RSA quicks - I think we all know Hughes would be much happier facing quicks than Sri Lankan and Indian spinners..

Technique... ugh. The eternal catch cry of the downtrodden supporter. Technique is merely beneficial to a batsman with limited natural ability. Many of the most naturally talented and successful batsmen in history had non-textbook techniques. Most were also left to bat the way they bat, rather than having people in their ear telling them to play like the picture in the textbook. It's like telling Shaun Tait to bowl line and length..

 

[Tyberious Funk]

Not convinced about Hughes at all, but how got dumped ahead of Watto is beyond me.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Ahh.. yeah, rushed him back. Remember c: Guptill b: Martin? He got axed after that and told to go and rebuild his confidence in the Shield for a few seasons. Half a Shield season later he's being rushed back in to the Test side to be a fill-gap batsman. Are they trying to build his confidence or destroy it completely? As for being shielded from the RSA quicks - I think we all know Hughes would be much happier facing quicks than Sri Lankan and Indian spinners..

Technique... ugh. The eternal catch cry of the downtrodden supporter. Technique is merely beneficial to a batsman with limited natural ability. Many of the most naturally talented and successful batsmen in history had non-textbook techniques. Most were also left to bat the way they bat, rather than having people in their ear telling them to play like the picture in the textbook. It's like telling Shaun Tait to bowl line and length..

Hughes isn't good enough, end of story. A good batsman makes runs whether it is at 1 or 6- ask Joe Root, ask Mike Hussey, etc. Hughes doesn't have the technique to help him through poor periods. His ability against spinners is diabolical, he has nothing. Stay in the crease, you are a walking wicket against a quality spinner. I would take a bloke with limited ability over Hughes right now as they might actually FIGHT for their position and not try and invent ways to get out to spinners!

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Not convinced about Hughes at all, but how got dumped ahead of Watto is beyond me.

Watson is set fair for this series and probably the next.

I can't believe Chris Rogers said that Watson is one of our only batsmen who can take games away from the opposition. FFS, when has he done that in test cricket? It doesn't make anyone sound any smarter pushing this line of crap.

 

[strauchanie59]

Starc, while he has potential, rarely gets top order players out. He continues to struggle bowling to 1-6 players but his wickets are bumped up by the 7-11 category. Bird on the other hand can do both. Yet they will go with Starc...they should've had Bird in for the first test and left him in the team.

 

[bungwahl]

Hughes isn't good enough, end of story. A good batsman makes runs whether it is at 1 or 6- ask Joe Root, ask Mike Hussey, etc. Hughes doesn't have the technique to help him through poor periods. His ability against spinners is diabolical, he has nothing. Stay in the crease, you are a walking wicket against a quality spinner. I would take a bloke with limited ability over Hughes right now as they might actually FIGHT for their position and not try and invent ways to get out to spinners!

Ok, so you hate Hughes. It's much easier if you just come out and say it. And referencing "ask Joe Root" is laughable.

Hughes is the most naturally talented young batsman in the country. There are others with much better techniques, such as Silk, but it's hard to argue that Hughes doesn't have a natural gift. He dominated junior cricket, grade cricket, state cricket, and Test cricket, until being unceremoniously dropped with a test average of 55, and 2 centuries in 5 games. Imagine if we currently had a batsman coming off two 100's with an average of 55 - he would be given 20 games to prove himself.

After being dropped, "experts" decided that Hughes didn't look like a traditional Test batsman and needed to fix his technique. They employed a batting coach and set about remodelling his style. Unfortunately, as is usually the case, the naturally gifted player wasn't suited to a being remodelled to a rigid technique. He fell apart, and it was blatantly apparent that he was stuck in two minds every ball. Natural game or textbook? End result... c: Guptill b: Martin.

Hughes was sent back to Shield cricket and moved to SA for a fresh approach, and set about becoming one of the top run scorers in the domestic competition. Part of the success came from regressing back towards his original style and playing with more freedom.

Selectors took note of his run spree and rushed him back to the Test side where he did well in Australia, then struggled early in India. However, unlike many of his colleagues, he was one batsman who made clear improvements towards the end of the Indian tour. Against spin he progressed from "appalling" to "struggling".

Next comes the Ashes, and in the first Test Hughes again showed he was the batsman who was willing to fight and score ugly runs, combining first with Smith and then Agar for valuable partnerships. It was clear that Swann presented some problems, though Hughes seemed comfortable enough on his way to 81*.

In fact, if you want to analyse it - Hughes has been dismissed 3 times this series, and all 3 have been controversial. Twice LBW to Swann - one given not out after appearing to pitch outside leg, overturned on review after pitching a bees wang on leg. The other given out, reviewed and shown to be clipping the leg bail - umpires call stands. The third dismissal was a edge of Bresnan that Hughes reviewed immediately and seemed likely to escape after Hotspot showed no edge.

So, Hughes is the leading run scorer on the tour and has had three dubious dismissals in the Tests. He could well be our only in form batsman right now.

Apologies for the long post, I get irritated when ignorant people make stupid comments about good players.

 

[carnthemlions]

Ok, so you hate Hughes. It's much easier if you just come out and say it. And referencing "ask Joe Root" is laughable.

This post makes too much sense.
STOP BEING REASONABLE!!!1!1!1!!

 

[The_Reaper]

I'm hoping that they stamp Watto's books after this series.

 

[carnthemlions]

I'm hoping that they stamp Watto's books after this series.

This is my reaction after every test Watto plays. Still waiting...
It's quite simple. You're never going to do well if you have a cancer at the top of the batting order.

 

[Kayaz]

Get rid of both I say. Watson is massively overrated and will again fail to make a big score despite getting a start, Rogers is passed his best and is not a long term prospect which is what we need to look for. I'd also like to see the back of Khawaja too, he has a history in both first class cricket and Tests of making starts and not going on with it.

Hughes has a massive technical flaw which will be shown up time and again, although to be fair he did handle Swann well in the 1st Test, so it could just be a mental thing about settling in to spin as it seems he gets out quickly. We need though to look for 10 year players not stop gaps and trust some younger players with talent, throw them in at the deep end and you'll quickly work out if they can sink or swim, some may revel in the challenge.

how can you say it could be mental when you just previously stated he has a "massive" flaw in his game lol?

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Surely we haven't picked Starc? Surely?

The only reason I can think to pick him is so that he roughs up the pitch for Lyon to bowl into.

I'd rather they just get Siddle to bowl around the wicket.

 

[BluesMan]

clearly watson gets picked because his bowling is valuable.

 

[Showbags]

Surely we haven't picked Starc? Surely?

The only reason I can think to pick him is so that he roughs up the pitch for Lyon to bowl into.

I'd rather they just get Siddle to bowl around the wicket.

And for Swann.

The problem with Bird is he bowls a good line and length and builds pressure. The selectors seem to always want at least one bowler who bowls one filthy pie per over.

 

[Torz]

Ahh.. yeah, rushed him back. Remember c: Guptill b: Martin? He got axed after that and told to go and rebuild his confidence in the Shield for a few seasons. Half a Shield season later he's being rushed back in to the Test side to be a fill-gap batsman. Are they trying to build his confidence or destroy it completely? As for being shielded from the RSA quicks - I think we all know Hughes would be much happier facing quicks than Sri Lankan and Indian spinners..

Technique... ugh. The eternal catch cry of the downtrodden supporter. Technique is merely beneficial to a batsman with limited natural ability. Many of the most naturally talented and successful batsmen in history had non-textbook techniques. Most were also left to bat the way they bat, rather than having people in their ear telling them to play like the picture in the textbook. It's like telling Shaun Tait to bowl line and length..

He did play a good chunk of county cricket and made plenty of runs, instead of opting for the BBL.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

And for Swann.

The problem with Bird is he bowls a good line and length and builds pressure. The selectors seem to always want at least one bowler who bowls one filthy pie per over.

Not as much for Swann as we have more left handers in our top order.