Opinion Cricket thread

[Le Grille]

Klinger would be ok, not totally against that.

But you make the point that it has to be on form, Handscomb has been consistent for 2 or 3 seasons now in first class and one day cricket. Patterson had a great season last year and has started well this year. Bancroft is a little green and hasn't had the best start this season but was brilliant last season. He has the ability to grind out an innings. Something this team seriously struggles with. It's not about developing talent, there are younger guys around the country in terrific form and aren't even considered.

If it were up to me I'd have both Handscomb and Patterson in the next 11, both are in great form so forget their age they are actually in good knick.

I don't disagree with any of that.

 

[Nate7]

Klinger would be ok, not totally against that.

But you make the point that it has to be on form, Handscomb has been consistent for 2 or 3 seasons now in first class and one day cricket. Patterson had a great season last year and has started well this year. Bancroft is a little green and hasn't had the best start this season but was brilliant last season. He has the ability to grind out an innings. Something this team seriously struggles with. It's not about developing talent, there are younger guys around the country in terrific form and aren't even considered.

If it were up to me I'd have both Handscomb and Patterson in the next 11, both are in great form so forget their age they are actually in good enough knick.

Kurtis Patterson from NSW or James Pattinson?

 

[trooroo4life]

Kurtis Patterson from NSW or James Pattinson?

Kurtis, avg's 42 in first class cricket. 13x 50's and 5x 100's in something like 30 games. So far has a 100, a 60 odd and another score of 30 odd in 2 shield matches this year.

 

[Firestarter]

Mate, this is Australia. Unless you are Punter, you dont get a crack in the test team before you are 28.

As i was saying earlier, an Amir, Rabada, Kohli, Root etc doesnt get a gig in the test team until they are 'ready' in the eyes of the selectors or from NSW. The whole system needs a shake up imho

Punter or a NSW player. Prove me wrong.

 

[trooroo4life]

My ideal next 11:
Warner
Klinger
Khawaja
Smith
Handscomb
Patterson
Neville
Agar
Mennie
Starc
Hazelwood

Nothing to lose in Adelaide, get a couple new faces in there. Could switch Klinger and Khawaja both are capable of opening or batting at first drop.

 

[big_e]

Yeah, I'm all in favour of Patterson. 700+ runs last year, average in the forties, started well this season. It's time. Voges out.

Also, I've been a fan of Lyon for some time but he's simply not performing any more. Probably O'Keefe in his place.

Would love to see Bancroft in place of Burns but scores of 6, 17, 20 and 22 are poor. The form opener is Marcus Harris but I need to see more from him before he's in the conversation. Perhaps having Handscomb as keeper ahead of Nevill strengthens the batting enough for Burns to save his place until Shaun Marsh comes back in.

Whatever the changes, the side picked for the next test should be the side for the rest of the summer. Take the pressure off them, give them a chance to bed themselves in the side ahead of the Indian tour. Any player returning from injury gets to play shield cricket to prove their fitness ahead of what will be an arduous tour.

Warner
Burns
Khawaja
Smith
Patterson
Ferguson
Handscomb
O'Keefe
Starc
Mennie
Hazlewood
Bird (12th)

 

[archereleven]

Totally agree with Ian Chappell(must be a first)

Its not the selectors job to look at stats and form and pick teams, its their job to identify talent, to give them games and keep the faith.

Klinger would be ok, not totally against that.

But you make the point that it has to be on form, Handscomb has been consistent for 2 or 3 seasons now in first class and one day cricket. Patterson had a great season last year and has started well this year. Bancroft is a little green and hasn't had the best start this season but was brilliant last season. He has the ability to grind out an innings. Something this team seriously struggles with. It's not about developing talent, there are younger guys around the country in terrific form and aren't even considered.

If it were up to me I'd have both Handscomb and Patterson in the next 11, both are in great form so forget their age they are actually in good enough knick.

Going off that, the Ashton Agar must be picked for Adelaide too...

In football, there are young stars debuting every single year. They come in and are just stars straight off the bat. Cricket is no different, ableit more technical, so its harder to do but they just arnt given the opportunity anymore.

 

[trooroo4life]

Yeah, I'm all in favour of Patterson. 700+ runs last year, average in the forties, started well this season. It's time. Voges out.

Also, I've been a fan of Lyon for some time but he's simply not performing any more. Probably O'Keefe in his place.

Would love to see Bancroft in place of Burns but scores of 6, 17, 20 and 22 are poor. The form opener is Marcus Harris but I need to see more from him before he's in the conversation. Perhaps having Handscomb as keeper ahead of Nevill strengthens the batting enough for Burns to save his place until Shaun Marsh comes back in.

Whatever the changes, the side picked for the next test should be the side for the rest of the summer. Take the pressure off them, give them a chance to bed themselves in the side ahead of the Indian tour. Any player returning from injury gets to play shield cricket to prove their fitness ahead of what will be an arduous tour.

Warner
Burns
Khawaja
Smith
Patterson
Ferguson
Handscomb
O'Keefe
Starc
Mennie
Hazlewood
Bird (12th)

The upcoming Indian tour, another plus for Handscomb. Great player of spin. And Bancroft had a great AusA tour there either last year or year before.

Think this is embarrassing at the moment, with a tour of India coming up it could get a whole lot worse without change. Scary.

 

[muttley45]

It is a pity that Glen Maxwell hasn't got the temperament (so far ) for Test cricket, cos he sure as shit ticks a few other boxes.

 

[KiwiRoo]

If you think Dave Warner is the problem, then you might want to take up another game. How he got into the team means zero in 2016.

He is the best and most damaging player in the team, averages 49 as an opener and has an 18/22 100/50 conversion rate. Regularly saves 20-30 runs in the field as our best fieldsman and has a good pair of hands. Doesnt he also back up the wicket keeper too?

The only knock on Warner is his inability to turn 100's in 200's.

Totally agree . One of the best players in world cricket

My only knocks on Warner aren't cricket related, but totally related to hearing him talk drivel. Nothing worse than hearing someone trying to be more articulate than what god intended !

But he'd be one of first picked after Starc and Smith

 

[archereleven]

My ideal next 11:
Warner
Klinger - Might as well ask Bucky to unretire.
Khawaja
Smith
Handscomb
Patterson
Neville
Agar
Mennie - He will get punished at Adelaide.
Starc
Hazelwood

Nothing to lose in Adelaide, get a couple new faces in there. Could switch Klinger and Khawaja both are capable of opening or batting at first drop.

Mine:

Warner
Weatherald- Averaging a tick under 50 from 10 innings and coming off a ton at Adelaide Oval. Obvious talent.
Khawaja
Smith
Patterson- Form this year and last should get him a gig at 5
Bailey- Leadership is void in the current team and has been in great form to boot
Handscomb- Gets the nod over Nevill
Agar- Replaces Lyon and strengthens the batting lineup
Strac
Hazlewood
Behrendorff- Replaces Mennie, need someone who hits the deck and gets steep bounce

 

[KiwiRoo]

Im not suggesting that it should necessarily be older players what I am saying is you shouldn't be developing your game at test level. If you have enough skills at 19 to contribute to the side, then great you're in but if you have any deficiencies they will get found out pretty quickly.

Test Cricket is the best of the best, not what might one day be the best

Aussie need to be careful they don't resort to the scatter gun approach of the late 80's. Pick people who you think have the talent or more importantly the temperament and stick with them
wholesale changes do not help one iota

 

[LuvtheKangas]

Test Stats - Both innings

Nathan Lyon: 6 runs

Voges, Ferguson, Burns combined: 7 runs

Conclusion: Move Lyon up the order as an all-rounder?

Why not, he meets the usual Australian all-rounder criterion of not being good enough at either.

 

[Mav]

You serious? A bit a moisture around means the ball will either swing or move off the seam. We'll be lucky to bat for 5 full sessions over 2 innings.

And not one like for this post!

 

[rickety]

Is there a Father/Son rule for cricket? Surely one of the Chappells has a son, Dougie Walters, Rick McCosker, even bloody Kim Hughes. I remember watching the cricket while living in London, and Boycott was commentating and prattling on about Gary Kerstin not having enough mothers milk when he was a young un, and that was why he made plenty of 50's, but never made a lot of 100's - didn't have the strength. I wonder what Geoffery would have to say about the current aussie bats.

 

[Mav]

Is there a Father/Son rule for cricket? Surely one of the Chappells has a son, Dougie Walters, Rick McCosker, even bloody Kim Hughes. I remember watching the cricket while living in London, and Boycott was commentating and prattling on about Gary Kerstin not having enough mothers milk when he was a young un, and that was why he made plenty of 50's, but never made a lot of 100's - didn't have the strength. I wonder what Geoffery would have to say about the current aussie bats.

Jake Lehmann is one of the best up and comers. Averaging 49.

 

[Heaps of fun]

Can't wait to watch the fourth day of the test today. Set up to be a classic.

 

[GarnerSmash]

If you think Dave Warner is the problem, then you might want to take up another game. How he got into the team means zero in 2016.

He is the best and most damaging player in the team, averages 49 as an opener and has an 18/22 100/50 conversion rate. Regularly saves 20-30 runs in the field as our best fieldsman and has a good pair of hands. Doesnt he also back up the wicket keeper too?

The only knock on Warner is his inability to turn 100's in 200's.

He's a great striker of the ball and when he gets going is close to unstoppable. But he doea have a significant weakness that will stop him in his tracks on unfriendly pitches and against good bowlers, and that is the same thing that makes him dangerous. That the vast majority of pitches he has played on have been roads is not his fault, and has suited him. But it has stifled the development of his defensive game, his temperament and his technique. He could be a much better player than he already is.

Basically he is like an attacking half back flanker with no defensive game. When his attacks come off, great. When they don't he looks like a dick and exposes his team mates.

 

[Firestarter]

He's a great striker of the ball and when he gets going is close to unstoppable. But he doea have a significant weakness that will stop him in his tracks on unfriendly pitches and against good bowlers, and that is the same thing that makes him dangerous. That the vast majority of pitches he has played on have been roads is not his fault, and has suited him. But it has stifled the development of his defensive game, his temperament and his technique. He could be a much better player than he already is.

Basically he is like an attacking half back flanker with no defensive game. When his attacks come off, great. When they don't he looks like a dick and exposes his team mates.

Hits closer to home than I wished it did.

 

[KiwiRoo]

Ive met Boycott

Hes a complete

He's a great striker of the ball and when he gets going is close to unstoppable. But he doea have a significant weakness that will stop him in his tracks on unfriendly pitches and against good bowlers, and that is the same thing that makes him dangerous. That the vast majority of pitches he has played on have been roads is not his fault, and has suited him. But it has stifled the development of his defensive game, his temperament and his technique. He could be a much better player than he already is.

Basically he is like an attacking half back flanker with no defensive game. When his attacks come off, great. When they don't he looks like a dick and exposes his team mates.

Got a very good hundred in Tassie against us on a track that did a fair bit more than this one, so he can do it. But very fair points BT

 

[archereleven]

He's a great striker of the ball and when he gets going is close to unstoppable. But he doea have a significant weakness that will stop him in his tracks on unfriendly pitches and against good bowlers, and that is the same thing that makes him dangerous. That the vast majority of pitches he has played on have been roads is not his fault, and has suited him. But it has stifled the development of his defensive game, his temperament and his technique. He could be a much better player than he already is.

Basically he is like an attacking half back flanker with no defensive game. When his attacks come off, great. When they don't he looks like a dick and exposes his team mates.

I dont necessarily disagree with what you wrote, but i think he is marked a fair bit harder for the fact everyone knows if he gets us off to a good start then we generally get on with it as a team. If Warner or Smith dont get centuries, you can pretty much pencil us in for sub 200 these days.

I see a fair bit of Matthew Hayden in Warner, but Hayden had the comfort of half a dozen champion batsmen below him, to not 'expose' if he went cheaply and then McGrath/Warne to gash the opposition if the batsmen (on the rare occasion)failed.

Anyway, point of my post was outline the Warner is the least of our worries at this point in time.

 

[rippersnipper]

I'm a grouse opener. Get me in

 

[Le Grille]

He's a great striker of the ball and when he gets going is close to unstoppable. But he doea have a significant weakness that will stop him in his tracks on unfriendly pitches and against good bowlers, and that is the same thing that makes him dangerous. That the vast majority of pitches he has played on have been roads is not his fault, and has suited him. But it has stifled the development of his defensive game, his temperament and his technique. He could be a much better player than he already is.

Basically he is like an attacking half back flanker with no defensive game. When his attacks come off, great. When they don't he looks like a dick and exposes his team mates.

I dont necessarily disagree with what you wrote, but i think he is marked a fair bit harder for the fact everyone knows if he gets us off to a good start then we generally get on with it as a team. If Warner or Smith dont get centuries, you can pretty much pencil us in for sub 200 these days.

I see a fair bit of Matthew Hayden in Warner, but Hayden had the comfort of half a dozen champion batsmen below him, to not 'expose' if he went cheaply and then McGrath/Warne to gash the opposition if the batsmen (on the rare occasion)failed.

Anyway, point of my post was outline the Warner is the least of our worries at this point in time.

I disagree its fine to play the way Warner does in Perth where the conditions suit, but any test batsman not to mention openers must be able to adapt with conditions.

That shot in the first innings was disgraceful. You would get blasted for that in Park cricket.

 

[GarnerSmash]

I dont necessarily disagree with what you wrote, but i think he is marked a fair bit harder for the fact everyone knows if he gets us off to a good start then we generally get on with it as a team. If Warner or Smith dont get centuries, you can pretty much pencil us in for sub 200 these days.

I see a fair bit of Matthew Hayden in Warner, but Hayden had the comfort of half a dozen champion batsmen below him, to not 'expose' if he went cheaply and then McGrath/Warne to gash the opposition if the batsmen (on the rare occasion)failed.

Anyway, point of my post was outline the Warner is the least of our worries at this point in time.

I get what you are saying but don't necessarily agree with the Hayden thing. You would think that given Warner has less batting depth to protecr that he may be somewhat less cavalier than Hayden IE placing greater value on his wicket, but given his test strike rate is 77 and Haydos was 60 it does not appear to be the case.

My position on Warner is that he could become a great if he pulled his head in a bit, especially early in his innings. Warner has been out for less than 10 runs in 25 or his 104 innings. Hayden was out for less than 10 runs in 24 of his 184.

 

[archereleven]

I disagree its fine to play the way Warner does in Perth where the conditions suit, but any test batsman not to mention openers must be able to adapt with conditions.

That shot in the first innings was disgraceful. You would get blasted for that in Park cricket.

Mate, i dont think anyone is saying the shot he played in the first innings was a good one, but sometimes you just go out to shit shots. Thats cricket.

A few in here are forgetting his 123* in Bellerive. Absolute cracker of an innings against the grain on a moving deck. His 2 tons(1 in each innings) in Newlands and his 124 in Brisbane to put England away.

We have few positives in test cricket atm, they are:

Warner
Smith
Hazelwood
Starc