Developing too many Bitsa players?

[dan warna]

looking at peoples 'forecasted future talent' threads and posts we seem to be developing batsmen who want to bowl and bowlers who want to bat and a lot of players with one or two of the following inabilities to 1. play spin, 2. build an innings.

More than a few under 30's are bitsa,

We could probably field close to a 5-6 man all-rounder team mixing batting and bowling all rounders.

1. Rogers Bat
2. Watson bat/bowl
3. McDonald Bat/bowl
4. Maxwell Bat/bowl
5. Clark bat
6. Wade keep
7. Agar Bat/Bowl
8. Faulkner Bowl/bat
9. Pattinson Bowl/bat
10. Harris Bowl
11. Lyon Bowl

Not losing much on the bowling (probably only siddle from the starting X1 for the bowling) and we'll batting down to 10 as harris and lyon are not mugs at all, and on current form, really this lot wouldn't do any worse than what we have currently representing us.

Which leads to my conclusion, is this the effect of 20/20 cricket and ODI, 50 over cricket taking a functional precedence in the non test match arena in the development of cricketers?

none of these all-rounders are 'great', probably only pattinson has the form to bowl under 25 and bat close to 40 if he can keep his fitness.

Watson, could have and should have but didn't.

Mcdonald and maxwell are adequate batsmen and handy bowlers.

faulkner is a good bowler who can bat well.

Agar has a lot of 'potential' with the bat and seems adequate with the ball.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

6. Wade keep

But Wade can't keep.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

But Wade can't keep.

He can be bowl/bat.

Dan Warna is right though. Our chairman of selectors came out and said sometime ago that they want players who can add more than one skill. I wish they'd count fielding as an extra skill as I think that could do with some real work but he meant bowling AND batting.

Bitsa players are all the go.Hence Warner's stinking leggies getting more of a run.

 

[dan warna]

He can be bowl/bat.

Dan Warna is right though. Our chairman of selectors came out and said sometime ago that they want players who can add more than one skill. I wish they'd count fielding as an extra skill as I think that could do with some real work but he meant bowling AND batting.

Bitsa players are all the go.Hence Warner's stinking leggies getting more of a run.

the problem is too many bitsa players and not enough pure batsmen and pure bowlers of quality.

10 years ago it would have been a joke if someone said 'if only we had 5 batsmen who could average 40 in test cricket' as we had hayden, clarke, hussey, punter who averaged over 50, and a mix of lehmann, langer, gilchrist etc who averaged mid 40s.

Now i think only Clarke is about 40 (at over 50) but the gap between him and the rest is astounding.

 

[Mateyman]

the problem is too many bitsa players and not enough pure batsmen and pure bowlers of quality.

10 years ago it would have been a joke if someone said 'if only we had 5 batsmen who could average 40 in test cricket' as we had hayden, clarke, hussey, punter who averaged over 50, and a mix of lehmann, langer, gilchrist etc who averaged mid 40s.

Now i think only Clarke is about 40 (at over 50) but the gap between him and the rest is astounding.

To be fair, Pattinson, Starc and to a lesser extent Siddle are handy batsmen, but are clearly bowlers first. They are pure bowlers, who add valuable runs from good batting skill.
Smith is also trying to be a pure batsman, and his leggies are now meant to be just a useful extra like Clarke's left armers.
Bonus question, why do some people bowl left handed and bat right handed? I just can't imagine how it would feel natural or where you'd try bowling with your other arm in the first place.
Pitches also have more life in them than the mid-2000s run fests, somewhat contributing to the lower averages

 

[Furn2]

To be fair, Pattinson, Starc and to a lesser extent Siddle are handy batsmen, but are clearly bowlers first. They are pure bowlers, who add valuable runs from good batting skill.
Smith is also trying to be a pure batsman, and his leggies are now meant to be just a useful extra like Clarke's left armers.
Bonus question, why do some people bowl left handed and bat right handed? I just can't imagine how it would feel natural or where you'd try bowling with your other arm in the first place.
Pitches also have more life in them than the mid-2000s run fests, somewhat contributing to the lower averages

There's a school of thought that if your right handed you should bat left and vice versa, the reason being that you're stronger hand should be your top hand not your bottom hand. That's kind of a new thing though.

Some players just want to be like their heroes, Hussey bats left handed because Allan Border did, iirc.

 

[Tiff]

We are too masculine, need to pick more thorne89 types to bring in more.... emotion.

amidoingitrighthorney?

 

[Marshland]

This is the Pom mentality from the 90s.

 

[dan warna]

RSA did it effectively in the late 90s early noughties but they had Pollock, Kallis and to a lesser extent klusener, devilliers and cronje who, while probably not full all-rounders were handy as in the their second discipline of bowling or batting.

 

[Tyberious Funk]

RSA did it effectively in the late 90s early noughties but they had Pollock, Kallis and to a lesser extent klusener, devilliers and cronje who, while probably not full all-rounders were handy as in the their second discipline of bowling or batting.

Brian McMillan, Andrew Hall, Nicky Boje, Justin Kemp, Pat Symcox, Robin Peterson...

Not all superstars, but gosh South Africa have had a staggering array of multi-talent players.

 

[MisterMarcus]

In limited overs it's fair enough to give yourself some power hitting down the order and 5-6 bowling options. But Tests should be about how well you do in your primary skill.

Being able to hold up an end or roll the arm over should be a bonus in Tests, not a requirement.

 

[peterdean mk12]

To be fair, Pattinson, Starc and to a lesser extent Siddle are handy batsmen, but are clearly bowlers first. They are pure bowlers, who add valuable runs from good batting skill.
Smith is also trying to be a pure batsman, and his leggies are now meant to be just a useful extra like Clarke's left armers.
Bonus question, why do some people bowl left handed and bat right handed? I just can't imagine how it would feel natural or where you'd try bowling with your other arm in the first place.
Pitches also have more life in them than the mid-2000s run fests, somewhat contributing to the lower averages

I bowl right handed and bat left, normally if it takes one hand im right handed if it requires two hands I become left handed, no idea why but it was just natural to me.

 

[TassieEagle]

Guys like Patto, Starc, Sids, Smith and Agar all in the squad due to their primary skill. The other is just a handy add on, like Clarke's bowling or the Waughs.

Watson is our genuine all rounder and we could debate for a month of Sundays about his worth to the test side. Faulkner is the other that comes to mind, he plays as an all rounder for Tassie but in the test arena I would like to see him as a bowler how can make some handy runs (and not be relied upon to do so) if he does this on a consistent basis and can average 35+ then lets reassess. I guess Agar can be thrown in this catagory as well.

The short formats allow for more Maxwell who are truely bits and pieces players and their bowling is needed to ensure we have 5-6 bowling options.

CA seems to have learnt from India that guys like Moises and Maxwell do not add to a test side as they cant be relied upon in any discipline.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

the problem is too many bitsa players and not enough pure batsmen and pure bowlers of quality.

Absolutely this.

We used to always beat South Africa because they were a team of bitsa's (Klusener, Kemp, Boje, Hall, Ontong, Peterson) who could do everything ok but nothing really well. Whereas we had the specialists.

Fair enough if you've got a Jaques Kallis who could earn a spot with either bat or ball. But these cricketers are exceedingly rare. Having an allrounder is not the be all and end all. Watson is the closest thing we've had but if we break it down, all Watson's bowling has delivered Australia is that he was unavailable for the first half of his career due to injury.

Pick your six best batters and your four best bowlers. If it turns out that one of your batters can roll down some decent part time stuff - great. And if you tail enders can hold a bat - great. But that needs to be treated as a bonus, not a factor that impacts selection.

 

[Kayaz]

Absolutely this.

We used to always beat South Africa because they were a team of bitsa's (Klusener, Kemp, Boje, Hall, Ontong, Peterson) who could do everything ok but nothing really well. Whereas we had the specialists.

Fair enough if you've got a Jaques Kallis who could earn a spot with either bat or ball. But these cricketers are exceedingly rare. Having an allrounder is not the be all and end all. Watson is the closest thing we've had but if we break it down, all Watson's bowling has delivered Australia is that he was unavailable for the first half of his career due to injury.

Pick your six best batters and your four best bowlers. If it turns out that one of your batters can roll down some decent part time stuff - great. And if you tail enders can hold a bat - great. But that needs to be treated as a bonus, not a factor that impacts selection.

Fair call, but surely if a bowler who is at a simillar level too another, their batting surely has to come into the mix, Example Bird and Starc, I'd honestly prefer starc right now because he adds to the team with his batting, but i get what you are saying.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Fair call, but surely if a bowler who is at a simillar level too another, their batting surely has to come into the mix, Example Bird and Starc, I'd honestly prefer starc right now because he adds to the team with his batting, but i get what you are saying.

Yeah, there's be some line ball calls at times where quality of fielding and their secondary skill with bat/ball would be the tie breaker.

I think dan warna is right though in that this is too much of a consideration at the moment.

 

[Kayaz]

Yeah, there's be some line ball calls at times where quality of fielding and their secondary skill with bat/ball would be the tie breaker.

I think dan warna is right though in that this is too much of a consideration at the moment.

To be fair they did drop Starc for Bird, even though bird is a true number 11, and starc had just come off a 60 odd not out, so i don't think it's that much of a consideration.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

To be fair they did drop Starc for Bird, even though bird is a true number 11, and starc had just come off a 60 odd not out, so i don't think it's that much of a consideration.

That's one dead rubber test.

We've just come off a period where we have seen Smith, Maxwell and Henriques chosen to play test cricket even though all are not test quality with either skill but do a bit of both. Faulkner looks like he will be next. Mitch Marsh can't be too far away. Dan Christian?

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

That's one dead rubber test.

We've just come off a period where we have seen Smith, Maxwell and Henriques chosen to play test cricket even though all are not test quality with either skill but do a bit of both. Faulkner looks like he will be next. Mitch Marsh can't be too far away. Dan Christian?

To be fair, as critical as I have been of Smith, he is arguably in our best six batsmen right now. He is possibly not Test quality, but apart from Clarke who is? Perhaps Rogers.

I thought it was stupid taking him to India, but in the end it sort of worked out. I don't think I had him in my preferred squad for England, but his returns have been at least on par with most batsmen and probably slightly above. That is perhaps testament to how Zimbabwesque* our batting often is than Smith being a world beater, but he probbaly does deserve selection in the current predicament.

All that said, pick the six batsmen, four bowlers, and keeper best on form, opposition and conditions. Secondary skills are important only as tie breakers. And age only if its still too tough to call after the secondary skills.

*Zimbabwesque may not be a perfectly cromulent word, but I think most people will get my meaning.

 

[TassieEagle]

Last test wasn't a dead rubber either, we still had a chance to draw the series. It's just that the trophy was gone.

 

[Slax]

But Wade can't keep.

I see this a massive issue right around the country, state sides want a keeper who can bat a bit and are putting an increasing amount of emphasis on this in the selections, as such players who are actually excellent keepers are missing out and what we see at a national level is just a continuation of this process. Unless we get the states to change nothing will change at a national level.

To be fair they did drop Starc for Bird, even though bird is a true number 11, and starc had just come off a 60 odd not out, so i don't think it's that much of a consideration.

And a good thing it was too. Remember Jason Gillespie is the only player ever dropped immediately after scoring a double century

 

[swingdog]

Brad Hodge?

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Brad Hodge?

Played the next two Tests. Still very quick to be axed coming off a 200, but not immediate.

 

[TassieEagle]

And a good thing it was too. Remember Jason Gillespie is the only player ever dropped immediately after scoring a double century

Even though it was against Bangladesh Dizzy was a bit stiff to get dropped after that series. Averaged 231 with the bat and 11.25 with the ball.

 

[Torz]

Even though it was against Bangladesh Dizzy was a bit stiff to get dropped after that series. Averaged 231 with the bat and 11.25 with the ball.

Who came in for him?