David Warner Batting 6??

[Bradesmaen]

Not sure what is so wrong with an average of 45 and 3 hundreds in your first 11 tests.

I think (and hope, obviously) that you'll be proven wrong.

I'd say it might have something to do with his Marcus North like record. 3 Hundreds, 1 fifty and plenty of failures.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

I'd say it might have something to do with his Marcus North like record. 3 Hundreds, 1 fifty and plenty of failures.

An attacking opening batsman who makes low scores and high scores? Shock horror.

Comes with his style of play. There will be days when it doesn't come off but it's worth keeping him in the team for those it does. His average so far shows he is doing something right, by cashing in when he gets in.

There are no consistent alternatives. Cowan is a defensive bat but has just as many failures. You could make an argument for Watson but I still think he'd be suited to the middle order.

 

[Bradesmaen]

An attacking opening batsman who makes low scores and high scores? Shock horror.

Comes with his style of play. There will be days when it doesn't come off but it's worth keeping him in the team for those it does. His average so far shows he is doing something right, by cashing in when he gets in.

There are no consistent alternatives. Cowan is a defensive bat but has just as many failures. You could make an argument for Watson but I still think he'd be suited to the middle order.

But does it? Look at Gayle and Sehwag. They are attacking bastmen but they know how to reign it in when needed. Warner has no idea, he just hits. Watching it from the ground yesterday, you could see it was only a matter of a time before he threw his wicket away. He slashed and hacked at balls that weren't there to do it to and was lucky not to be out about 4 times before he got out.

Sure its exciting blah blah blah, but if he wants to be a successful test cricket opener then he has to be able to reign it in and learn from Hayden.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

But does it? Look at Gayle and Sehwag. They are attacking bastmen but they know how to reign it in when needed. Warner has no idea, he just hits. Watching it from the ground yesterday, you could see it was only a matter of a time before he threw his wicket away. He slashed and hacked at balls that weren't there to do it to and was lucky not to be out about 4 times before he got out.

Sure its exciting blah blah blah, but if he wants to be a successful test cricket opener then he has to be able to reign it in and learn from Hayden.

He is capable of reigning it in, I don't see how some of you don't see it.

In either case he'll get much better at it with experience.

 

[Bucking Beads]

If the alternative is Quiney I think we will stick with Warner thanks.

 

[Bradesmaen]

He is capable of reigning it in, I don't see how some of you don't see it.

In either case he'll get much better at it with experience.

He hasn't though. People point to the Hobart innings, but in reality he was still slashing at the ball.

So basically, we should keep him in the team so we're 1/not many basically so he can learn? There is this competition that the majority of players learn in, its called the Sheffield Shield. That is where he should be learning, if he can at all (which given his recent statements proves he can't).

 

[Carbine Chaos]

He hasn't though. People point to the Hobart innings, but in reality he was still slashing at the ball.

So basically, we should keep him in the team so we're 1/not many basically so he can learn? There is this competition that the majority of players learn in, its called the Sheffield Shield. That is where he should be learning, if he can at all (which given his recent statements proves he can't).

We should keep him in the team because he has earned his spot FFS. It's not rocket surgery.

 

[Bradesmaen]

We should keep him in the team because he has earned his spot FFS. It's not rocket surgery.

He earned his test spot on the T20 field. Blind Freddy could see that.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

He earned his test spot on the T20 field. Blind Freddy could see that.

No, if you had any clue you'd remember that he won his Test spot off great FC form. But don't let facts get in the way.

He averages 45 in Test cricket.

Name your alternatives.

 

[BarneyBent]

Slogged a century on a road in the first innings, slogged a 40 and got out stupidly on a slightly more difficult deck in the second innings, when the smart play was to compile an innings at a steady clip, keeping the middle order away from the twilight overs and giving us a good platform to build an unassailable lead by Lunch or Tea tomorrow. Everyone in the ground could see it, except apparently Warner, who tried to hit every single ball over the fence.

It's time to face facts - something the Australian selectors have never been good at - Warner is not a Test batsman. Twenty20 and a ODI opener at most.

If he'd gotten out in either innings playing big shots, you might have a point. But his dismissals came from an edge off a block and a leading edge from an attempted drop to the legside.

 

[Bradesmaen]

No, if you had any clue you'd remember that he won his Test spot off great FC form. But don't let facts get in the way.

He averages 45 in Test cricket.

Name your alternatives.

His great FC form? 2 centuries and a bunch of low scores? Meanwhile Phil Hughes, Jaques, Klinger and Quiney were knocking up the centuries only to be overlooked because of their lack of Commercial appeal.

He averages 45 now, but he's played so little test cricket. Quiney averages 3! DROP HIM FOREVER! WORST TEST PLAYER EVER! But if he scores 200 next innings he's averaging 50.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Warner actually earned his spot for dominating in an Australia A tour. He also was in good form in shield cricket before he was picked.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Warner actually earned his spot for dominating in an Australia A tour. He also was in good form in shield cricket before he was picked.

Don't bother with logic.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Warner actually earned his spot for dominating in an Australia A tour. He also was in good form in shield cricket before he was picked.

One century and a few failures = good form? Ferguson must be a shoe-in for a test spot.

 

[BarneyBent]

****ing Hussey. Slogged a century in the first innings, throws his wicket away in the second when we really needed him to buckle down. Clearly not suited to the format.

 

[DaRick]

A few things:

1) I believe that Warner is actually better technically than Sehwag and Gayle because at least he actually moves his feet, whereas the latter two rely exclusively on their eye and power-hitting.

2) Warner, like Sehwag and Gayle, can contribute with the ball and he is a better fielder than Sehwag at least.

3) If you are going to put him at #6, you are going to have to displace Mike Hussey. Not a great idea.

4) Marcus North struggled to make 10 a lot of the time. Because of his inexperience and the nature in which he plays, Warner is quite inconsistent, but he's not that bad. Neither Sehwag nor Gayle are particularly consistent either.

5) Who are you going to replace him with? Phil Hughes, whose technique is...ahem...'unorthodox'? Hughes may also be needed down the order soon enough.

6) Warner still has scope for improvement.

 

[Team DJ]

Hughes and Khawaja are my alternatives. Hughes is greatly improved this summer.

Warner at 6 Hussey could comfortably bat 4

 

[Hodgepodge]

Yeah I would bat Warner at 6, Shane Watson to return as an opener.

I don't know about Ed Cowan . . . I think his failure gets overlooked because he's a very disciplined batsman, but he hasn't made a lot of runs at this level, averaging about 30.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

Warner's talent is exceptional and the scope for improvement is huge. He will develop more and more into a lethal test batsman and WILL become our Sehwag..

I like having him open and think he makes a great pairing with Cowan. They are so different in so many ways but it works. As a pairing, they will also inspire a generation of kids to watch test cricket.

If he gets in he can win a test match in a session and the value of that is crucial.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

Urgh. Warner has far more talent and potential talent than any other Australian batsman folks want to move him down to 6?????

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Warner starting with the ball coming onto the bat is also a lot better than having him start against quality spin at 6.

We'd be mad to move him.

 

[dajesmac]

Warner in the middle order is a horrible idea. Averaging 45 in his first 19 innings, with 3 outstanding centuries, and people are considering him a failed experiment? Yeesh.

Hughes and Burns/Khawaja/Maddinson are my picks to replace Ponting and Hussey when they retire. We've got a good thing going with Warner.

 

[Caesar]

Has anyone advocating this actually thought about it? I have never really rated Warner as a Test player but if he is in the team he belongs at the top of the order. He likes a hard ball, pace bowling, and the freedom to play his innings how he wants to.

Putting him in the lower middle order where he will be expected to work the ball for singles, farm the strike with tail-enders, deal with spinners on a deteriorating pitch etc. is pretty much playing him against type.

 

[beatnik]

Slogged a century on a road in the first innings, slogged a 40 and got out stupidly on a slightly more difficult deck in the second innings, when the smart play was to compile an innings at a steady clip, keeping the middle order away from the twilight overs and giving us a good platform to build an unassailable lead by Lunch or Tea tomorrow. Everyone in the ground could see it, except apparently Warner, who tried to hit every single ball over the fence.

It's time to face facts - something the Australian selectors have never been good at - Warner is not a Test batsman. Twenty20 and a ODI opener at most.

Oh my sides...funniest post I have read in a long while...possibly ever!

#kidssaythedarndestthings

 

[NTRabbit]

Out poorly throwing his bat around and chasing the ball yet again. Can't build an innings around an opener who does that all the time.