Fourth Test team

[Woody15]

Crazy. For an important series like this, I'm backing form, performance and test experience every day of the week. Whats the point in making shield runs if the criteria for selection is a prediction on how his technique might stand up?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Why are they hesitant to pick Wade? You could argue that his poor batting last time in the test side may have been the pressue he was under with the gloves. Him not having to keep will release all that and he could do well. Things couldn't get any worse really.

Everything coming out stems from him probably being a bit of a tool, no idea how accurate that is though. He'd only be a stop gap anyway and 3 players are coming right back in (well at least 2, and probably Bancroft), so they would question what the point of it is.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Crazy. For an important series like this, I'm backing form, performance and test experience every day of the week. Whats the point in making shield runs if the criteria for selection is a prediction on how his technique might stand up?

Whether his technique has improved since the last time is my issue. He was really found out last time. I wouldn't be against him in the middle order though, Just feel Anderson, etc will eat him for breakfast with his fishy technique outside off stump early.

 

[Woody15]

Why are they hesitant to pick Wade? You could argue that his poor batting last time in the test side may have been the pressue he was under with the gloves. Him not having to keep will release all that and he could do well. Things couldn't get any worse really.

Completely agree. Has done enough to warrant selection and to see if without the gloves there is a test batsman there. His performances over the past 2 years certainly warrant another chance.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Completely agree. Has done enough to warrant selection and to see if without the gloves there is a test batsman there. His performances over the past 2 years certainly warrant another chance.

Only if the guy they are replacing is SMarsh.

 

[Woody15]

Whether his technique has improved since the last time is my issue. He was really found out last time. I wouldn't be against him in the middle order though, Just feel Anderson, etc will eat him for breakfast with his fishy technique outside off stump early.

He has scored runs. He is in form. That should be enough. Especially considering how bare the cupboard is.

 

[qman]

Completely agree. Has done enough to warrant selection and to see if without the gloves there is a test batsman there. His performances over the past 2 years certainly warrant another chance.

When he first came in to the test side, he made hundreds but his keeping was shit and he was dropped. Second chance he got, he probably felt the pressure in regards to his keeping standards, focused more on the keeping and dropped the ball with his batting! Give him a final chance, I always liked him as a bat.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

He has scored runs. He is in form. That should be enough. Especially considering how bare the cupboard is.

That is one factor. I also look at who would be most successful against a moving ball. Now whilst the cupboard isn't filled with 6 Steve Smith's we can at least give ourselves our best chance. If Burns is in the side, he has to bat 5 or 6. He'd be cannon fodder opening against a swinging Duke.

 

[Sproj]

The apparently pretty technique top six:

1. Harris
2. Watson
3. S.Marsh
4. Finch
5. Labushagne
6. M.Marsh

The apparently ugly technique top six:

1. Burns
2. Renshaw
3. Smith
4. Handscomb
5. Maxwell
6. Wade

I know which of those batting line ups I’d prefer and I can assure you it isn’t the ones the selectors would go with.

 

[Woody15]

When he first came in to the test side, he made hundreds but his keeping was shit and he was dropped. Second chance he got, he probably felt the pressure in regards to his keeping standards, focused more on the keeping and dropped the ball with his batting! Give him a final chance, I always liked him as a bat.

I didn't think much of him. Obviously struggled a lot previously but perhaps with no gloves now, he might be an option. I was against him getting another run at the start of the season, but you just can't ignore the runs and form.

 

[bird_man]

Or Burns...with that fish outside off technique...

We are going to struggle to find 6 batsmen in the country that have a great technique that can make runs.

Burns should have been playing this whole series. He has his issues no doubt, but he has a better test average than every batsman we've played so far besides Khawaja and Handscomb and has 3 test centuries to his name. Not to mention he's been averaging over 50 since the start of the 2017/18 season

 

[Sproj]

That is one factor. I also look at who would be most successful against a moving ball. Now whilst the cupboard isn't filled with 6 Steve Smith's we can at least give ourselves our best chance. If Burns is in the side, he has to bat 5 or 6. He'd be cannon fodder opening against a swinging Duke.

So just go with:

1. Warner
2.
3. Khawaja
4. Smith
5. Burns/Finch/Head (all batting together)
6.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

We are going to struggle to find 6 batsmen in the country that have a great technique that can make runs.

Burns should have been playing this whole series. He has his issues no doubt, but he has a better test average than every batsman we've played so far besides Khawaja and Handscomb and has 3 test centuries to his name. Not to mention he's been averaging over 50 since the start of the 2017/18 series.

That is why I'm not against giving an Ashes debut to Will Pukovski or Jason Sangha. These two have the technique, for me everything stems from having a good base (technique).

 

[Woody15]

That is one factor. I also look at who would be most successful against a moving ball. Now whilst the cupboard isn't filled with 6 Steve Smith's we can at least give ourselves our best chance. If Burns is in the side, he has to bat 5 or 6. He'd be cannon fodder opening against a swinging Duke.

You would exclude 3/4 of the domestic players if you factor in a moving ball into test selection.

That is why I'm not against giving an Ashes debut to Will Pukovski or Jason Sangha. These two have the technique, for me everything stems from having a good base (technique).

Can you explain to me the finer details of Will Pucovski's and Jason Sangha's techniques and why you think they are worthy of selection for the Ashes?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

So just go with:

1. Warner
2.
3. Khawaja
4. Smith
5. Burns/Finch/Head (all batting together)
6.

1. Warner
2. Renshaw
3. Khawaja
4. Smith
5. Head

Then 1 out of Laubasghne, Pukovski, Sangha, Edwards, Hazelett (better 4 day cricketer), Ferguson. There are probably a few others

 

[LukeParkerno1]

You would exclude 3/4 of the domestic players if you factor in a moving ball into test selection.


Can you explain to me the finer details of Will Pucovski's and Jason Sangha's techniques and why you think they are worthy of selection for the Ashes?

They generally play fairly straight, and play the balls on their merits. Both score big runs. One of our biggest issues is batsmen are happy with scoring 60...well actually that is the worst innings, if you are making 60, you should make 140, those are the easiest runs. Instead we gift wickets away.

 

[Woody15]

They generally play fairly straight, and play the balls on their merits. Both score big runs. One of our biggest issues is batsmen are happy with scoring 60...well actually that is the worst innings, if you are making 60, you should make 140, those are the easiest runs. Instead we gift wickets away.

I dont think you've watched enough of Sangha (14 FC innings) and Pucovski (13 FC innings) to be commenting on their techniques. Personally people like to sound all wanky and knowledgeable when it comes to techniques particularly when it comes to discussing players who they probably have only seen highlights of on the 1 minute news report.

The bold part of your post is quite simply bizarre.

Then 1 out of Laubasghne, Pukovski, Sangha, Edwards, Hazelett (better 4 day cricketer), Ferguson. There are probably a few others

Most of these guys are averaging next to **** all and you want to select them based on what you predict to be good techniques for England? Labuschagne has no business being in the squad let alone in the top 6. He statistically is the 27th best batsman in the Sheffield Shield.

Read this article on Sangha and Edwards posted earlier:

"Cricket Australia’s high-performance empire has hardly had a better day than in early November when teenagers Sangha and Edwards put on 180 for the sixth NSW wicket against Tasmania. But that memorable occasion aside, the pair have 286 first-class runs at 17.9 to show for this season.

For his club Manly-Warringah, meanwhile, tall right-hander Edwards has actually never made a century, from fifths to firsts; at first-grade level he has just two fifties.

Strip these from his first-grade record, in fact, and it contracts to 121 runs at 8.64. Yet in some eyes, Edwards will be closer to Australian selection than Wade, Maxwell and Burns."

 

[MC Bad Genius]

After that over before tea, I'm glad that they picked Labuschagne for his batting. Hahaha. Poor kid is on a hiding to nothing.

 

[eddiesmith]

The thing is, Root would probably know how to get Sangha cheaply by now, handy if he plays

Like Hughes being exposed pre Ashes, Root is hopefully taking notes on any potential opponents at the Thunder

 

[theyellowsash]

why is starc an auto include? he has been impotent or putrid for most of his career outside of a purple patch, and at the moment is just a specialist in extras and dismissing tailenders. pattinson should be straight in once he proves his fitness and form. Hazelwood also needs to be under some pressure, i am generally a fan but he seems to have gone away from the mcgrath style that he needs to be and is trying to imitate the 'bang it in short and fast' style that the selectors have a hard on for.

 

[Sproj]

why is starc an auto include? he has been impotent or putrid for most of his career outside of a purple patch, and at the moment is just a specialist in extras and dismissing tailenders. pattinson should be straight in once he proves his fitness and form. Hazelwood also needs to be under some pressure, i am generally a fan but he seems to have gone away from the mcgrath style that he needs to be and is trying to imitate the 'bang it in short and fast' style that the selectors have a hard on for.

I think Patto would be first choice if he could consistently stay on the park, he needs to prove durability but if he can, he is such a gun with both bat and ball.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Don't mind that first side.

Not sure about Mitch Marsh in England though. Surely it's time to move past him for a while.

Obviously would only be in the side if Maxwell failed. Vice Captain of the cricket side also.

 

[bird_man]

Obviously would only be in the side if Maxwell failed. Vice Captain of the cricket side also.

Surely vice captain means zero when he can't produce performances?

CA are crazy if they keep him in that role when he's not in the best 11 anyway.

I'd have a few ahead of him if Maxwell were to fail

 

[JackOutback]

A lot of people werent sold on the coach to start with and he's done nothing to change that perception. Seems out of his depth and has a tendency to play favourites.

Why not, outside of partisan nonsense? He has a solid record (BBL titles, ODI titles, Shield finals) and a history of turning around shambolic teams. Yet five games in after taking over a colossal ****ing mess and all we get is ‘brown nose gnome’ childishness. The selections were equally inconsistent under Lehman and he didn’t get half the crap after five times the games.

 

[Blue1980]

Carl Hooper?
Viv Richards and Mark/Steve waugh bowled a bit as well.

Both of those sides had high quality bowling lineups that you didn't really need to turn to part time bowlers. When the quicks bowl as badly/pitch is as bad as it was on day 1 in Melbourne , picking the extra bowler has some merit.

Sadly Marsh and the other all rounder from the past decade haven't been needed/used enough in that way.

In my post I mentioned no all rounders should be picked unless they can justify being selected as either a batsmen or bowler on their own. All of the Waugh brothers, Richards and Hooper (as frustrating as he was) were batsmen who bowled a bit.

And with Marnus bowling 4 overs today, and batting at 3 seems they are backing him to become a specialist bat.

As an aside how many batting leg spinner all rounders have there been? Leg spin doesn’t seem the kind of thing you do on your day off.