Fourth Test team

[LukeParkerno1]

Hand on heart zero complains from me if either (particularly Maxwell) get picked but the hysteria over them missing out is laughable, I suppose this is what you get when half this board are Bushranger fanboys.

We all bag Marsh and rightly so but are either of these options really any better? Im far from convinced

 

[HLM*]

I have and I said I would have had him in the side before the India series. I wouldn’t now. We have the SL series (who are pretty terrible) where we can use it to get some games into some new players. I see no point going Wade when smith, Warner and Bancroft will be back shortly. I’d rather give Laubashgne a go in the SL series (he’s just one option)

Warner and especially Bancroft are no guarantees to come back into the test side.

 

[bird_man]

Hand on heart zero complains from me if either (particularly Maxwell) get picked but the hysteria over them missing out is laughable, I suppose this is what you get when half this board are Bushranger fanboys.

I'm not that fussed about Maxwell getting a game, more so how Burns seems to be on the outer and the fact JL tells them they need to make runs and then brings in two players averaging around 30.

I don't like the mixed messages or the double standards and confused by some of the selections. It has nothing to do with what shield side I follow.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Warner and especially Bancroft are no guarantees to come back into the test side.

They are certainties with the alternatives. Bancroft is better than either of our openers. Was starting to look good in South Africa against the best attack in the world. We don’t have the batsmen to be leaving out players like Warner! He averages close to 50!

 

[Kram]

Warner and especially Bancroft are no guarantees to come back into the test side.

I hate Warner but please.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I hate Warner but please.

The alternative is playing Finch and Harris...

Jeez!

Give me a tossbag but talented bat in Warner thanks!

 

[HLM*]

The alternative is playing Finch and Harris...

Jeez!

Give me a tossbag but talented bat in Warner thanks!

Or Renshaw who had great success against the Duke in 2018. If he can score runs in the second half of the Shield season it’ll make the decision to not select Warner much easier.

People underestimate how much emphasis Langer has put into creating a team culture. If recalling Warner creates disharmony amongst the current group there’s no way Langer recalls him.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Or Renshaw who had great success against the Duke in 2018. If he can score runs in the second half of the Shield season it’ll make the decision to not select Warner much easier.

People underestimate how much emphasis Langer has put into creating a team culture. If recalling Warner creates disharmony amongst the current group there’s no way Langer recalls him.

Renshaw needs runs, I’d probably play all 3 with Bancroft at 6. Smith at 4. Personally that is a more solid top order. We need to pick players that score runs. That’s our weakness.

Langer is a muppet but even he wouldn’t leave Warner out.

 

[Stax on the mill]

Or Renshaw who had great success against the Duke in 2018. If he can score runs in the second half of the Shield season it’ll make the decision to not select Warner much easier.

People underestimate how much emphasis Langer has put into creating a team culture. If recalling Warner creates disharmony amongst the current group there’s no way Langer recalls him.

Warner is definitely coming back. The coach and skipper have both indicated they want him back. I doubt they would have said that without sounding out the current players. It's not as if Australia are travelling well enough to permanently blackball a bloke who has made 21 test centuries and has an average of 48.

Yes, Warner has serious baggage, and he made a monumental error of judgement in the sandpaper scandal. However, we give 2nd chances to the worst of the worst criminals, and Warner does not fit into that category. Warner admitted he instigated the ball tampering, apologised and has nearly served out his sentence ( which I reckon was way over the top ).

He has maintained a dignified silence and has behaved impeccably in the interim. He surely doesn't have to now serve an additional lifetime ban from test cricket because the self righteous armchair paragons ( not referring to you ) demand it. His re-instatement of course would come with the stipulation that his behaviour needs to be beyond reproach.

 

[Bwillow11]

Or Renshaw who had great success against the Duke in 2018. If he can score runs in the second half of the Shield season it’ll make the decision to not select Warner much easier.

People underestimate how much emphasis Langer has put into creating a team culture. If recalling Warner creates disharmony amongst the current group there’s no way Langer recalls him.

That's where Wade's non-selection comes in. Everyone knows he's a bit of a tossbag so while his runs may stand up, the players and Langer must not want him anywhere near the side.

 

[HLM*]

That's where Wade's non-selection comes in. Everyone knows he's a bit of a tossbag so while his runs may stand up, the players and Langer must not want him anywhere near the side.

He captains his state and a BBL side. Can’t be that much of a toss bag.

 

[Kram]

That's where Wade's non-selection comes in. Everyone knows he's a bit of a tossbag so while his runs may stand up, the players and Langer must not want him anywhere near the side.

Or maybe they just think he will bat like he did when he was last in the Test side.

 

[HLM*]

Warner is definitely coming back. The coach and skipper have both indicated they want him back. I doubt they would have said that without sounding out the current players. It's not as if Australia are travelling well enough to permanently blackball a bloke who has made 21 test centuries and has an average of 48.

Yes, Warner has serious baggage, and he made a monumental error of judgement in the sandpaper scandal. However, we give 2nd chances to the worst of the worst criminals, and Warner does not fit into that category. Warner admitted he instigated the ball tampering, apologised and has nearly served out his sentence ( which I reckon was way over the top ).

He has maintained a dignified silence and has behaved impeccably in the interim. He surely doesn't have to now serve an additional lifetime ban from test cricket because the self righteous armchair paragons ( not referring to you ) demand it. His re-instatement of course would come with the stipulation that his behaviour needs to be beyond reproach.

I would argue his little grade cricket stunt of walking off mid innings suggests that silence you speak of hasn’t been entirely dignified.

With a 4 month overseas tour looming, and obvious fractured relationships between players in the side with Warner, as well as public opinion (which was the overwhelming factor in enforcing the ban to begin with). I just can’t see Warner walking back into the test squad.

We’ve managed to deal with players not liking each other and maintaining a professional relationship for the good of the team in the past, but this is a whole different kettle of fish. Too much water under the bridge to move forward with Warner and continue with this cultural revamp under Langer IMO.

 

[eddiesmith]

So Warner and Bancroft both come straight back in? That should be fun, for the English bowlers!!!

How does a harmonious dressing room go when you have a player who has thrown his partner under the bus in the media?

 

[imadodgyumpire]

I reckon a few of the 90s England team could get into this side

 

[Scotland]

Our coach though...

What of him?

 

[Scotland]

Warner scores runs, he'll be brought back in.

Scored 3 50s and a 100 in the Ashes then 3 50s in South Africa. We'd kill for that now.

 

[Whiskers]

I’m going Stoinis. Get him in.
Our team doesn’t have the luxury of looking over years of form so go with potential talent and recent form.
Stoinis has bowled 80 overs in the shield at 25.1 and has had 7 bats averaging 42.71 with 3 scores in the 80s.
That form wouldn’t get a look in back in the day I admit but he is up and about.
His form is also translating to the shorter form. Batted well in the 50 over game averaging 80, now T20 is doing well.
Good cricketers can perform in all forms and Stoinis is one of those.

 

[boncer34]

Surely Finch out and Laubaschange (my spelling is shit) in isn't a real thing?

 

[bird_man]

Can't see how Bancroft is an improvement on Harris. He'll have to earn his spot back as it's probably the one position with a few decent players vying for the same position.

I'd love to see Renshaw pile on the runs in the second half of the shield season, but if he doesn't I'd have Harris ahead of Bancroft and possibly bat Burns at 5.

Harris obviously needs to start going on with his scores, but he has looked good early and got through the new ball in nearly every occasion. Unless he starts to fail miserably, I think he deserves the full summer to prove himself.

 

[bird_man]

I’m going Stoinis. Get him in.
Our team doesn’t have the luxury of looking over years of form so go with potential talent and recent form.
Stoinis has bowled 80 overs in the shield at 25.1 and has had 7 bats averaging 42.71 with 3 scores in the 80s.
That form wouldn’t get a look in back in the day I admit but he is up and about.
His form is also translating to the shorter form. Batted well in the 50 over game averaging 80, now T20 is doing well.
Good cricketers can perform in all forms and Stoinis is one of those.

"The recent feedback is 'keep going with my white ball stuff'. With Test cricket, Mitchell Marsh is the all-rounder obviously," Stoinis said.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/cri...ogaRdXb-VWFn3JnC1VntDsR5AG4oHvLYyIze1JBvO60Sk

 

[HLM*]

Surely Finch out and Laubaschange (my spelling is shit) in isn't a real thing?

Imagine someone telling you back in the 90’s/early 00’s that by 2019 there’d be more than two genders, ball tampering would result in a 12 month ban and an average of 30 in shield cricket would be good enough to get you into the test side.

 

[bird_man]

Surely Finch out and Laubaschange (my spelling is shit) in isn't a real thing?

Seem like the last spot is down to Loosebuschange and Handscomb.

Finch will play, we're just not sure what the order will be yet.

 

[Scotland]

Can't see how Bancroft is an improvement on Harris. He'll have to earn his spot back as it's probably the one position with a few decent players vying for the same position.

I'd love to see Renshaw pile on the runs in the second half of the shield season, but if he doesn't I'd have Harris ahead of Bancroft and possibly bat Burns at 5.

Harris obviously needs to start going on with his scores, but he has looked good early and got through the new ball in nearly every occasion. Unless he starts to fail miserably, I think he deserves the full summer to prove himself.

They're both similar career wise, but really Bancroft is an improvement on Finch rather than Harris.

 

[bird_man]

They're both similar career wise, but really Bancroft is an improvement on Finch rather than Harris.

I agree, most are an improvement on Finch. But Bancroft has done nothing to earn his spot back. Warner has the runs on the board throughout his career to come straight back in, Bancroft has not. At this stage I'd have him well behind Burns and Renshaw.