Interstate Shitfight thread.

[Art Vandelay_]

Shame. We wouldn't have to put up with Kram's sad Hodge trolls if Starburns_ had nuked him earlier.
Being a Marsh lover is certainly grounds for instant dismissal

 

[JackOutback]

Shame. We wouldn't have to put up with Kram's sad Hodge trolls if Starburns_ had nuked him earlier.
Being a Marsh lover is certainly grounds for instant dismissal

You mean the guys with the second highest average and third most runs (from one less innings)?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

You mean the guys with the second highest average and third most runs (from one less innings)?

Come back to us after the Saffer tour. Scoring on roads against a s**t attack isn't a monumental achievement.
To that end Smith isn't having a GOAT summer. He's cashing in on favourable conditions and an attack that can't get him out.

 

[Scotland]

Smith's been cashing in for the last 4 years.

 

[Demons09]

Well don't misrepresent me thanks. My stance was simple, Nevill wasn't worthy of replacing him.
Which proved correct. They picked a part time keeper instead.

Never the less a much better keeper and batsman.

 

[largebus]

Come back to us after the Saffer tour. Scoring on roads against a s**t attack isn't a monumental achievement.
To that end Smith isn't having a GOAT summer. He's cashing in on favourable conditions and an attack that can't get him out.

That fact makes Handscomb's dropping even funnier. Couldn't even score against a popgun attack

 

[Demons09]

If Maxwell got the call up instead of SMarsh we lose the Ashes.

 

[carnthemlions]

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/austr...ting/most_runs_career.html?id=114;type=trophy
Here's a great resource in the 'which batsman should've played more tests' stakes. Can't say I'm surprised you have to scroll down a long way to find anyone who's still playing.

 

[JackOutback]

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/austr...ting/most_runs_career.html?id=114;type=trophy
Here's a great resource in the 'which batsman should've played more tests' stakes. Can't say I'm surprised you have to scroll down a long way to find anyone who's still playing.

Looking at those stats, hard to say Cox was hard done by. Made a lot of runs but an average under 40 isn't good enough. Bevan seems the hardest done by, averaging 60, but he played Tests and was exposed.

 

[Scotland]

I see no one has refuted this:

93/94: 903 @ 50
94/95: 323 @ 23
95/96: 174 @ 22
96/97: 237 @ 20
97/98: 494 @ 38
98/99: 652 @ 43
2000/01: 973 @ 54
2001/02: 858 @ 57
2002/03: 503 @ 33
2003/04: 984 @ 61
2004/05: 891 @ 64

At no stage between 94/95 and 98/99 did Hodge warrant test selection. Even after his debut season he was behind Ponting, Langer, Hayden, Slater, Blewett etc. who had more runs on the board. Even Lehmann was a young player then. And Cox, Siddons, Law etc.

By the time he had a solid bank of Shield seasons under his belt he was already pushing 30 and it was our strongest era of batting probably ever.

Hodge was unlucky to be dropped after a handful of tests and recalling Damien Martyn was dubious but he really wasn't that unlucky earlier on.

 

[nobbyiscool]

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/austr...ting/most_runs_career.html?id=114;type=trophy
Here's a great resource in the 'which batsman should've played more tests' stakes. Can't say I'm surprised you have to scroll down a long way to find anyone who's still playing.

Looking at those stats, hard to say Cox was hard done by. Made a lot of runs but an average under 40 isn't good enough. Bevan seems the hardest done by, averaging 60, but he played Tests and was exposed.

Averages are an extremely lazy, ineffective way to measure talent. The suggestion that Siddons/Lehmann scoring runs on a 1990s Adelaide oval are equivalent to runs made on a 1990s Bellerive oval is nonsensical.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Never the less a much better keeper and batsman.

he really wasn't. Which was the point, and is why they overlooked him and promoted Paine instead of Nevill.

That fact makes Handscomb's dropping even funnier. Couldn't even score against a popgun attack

He deserved dropping.

Keep going bus boy.
You know damn well this is coming back with interest.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

So he was Phil Hughes 1.0?

Wouldn't Phil Hughes have been Phil Hughes 1.0?

 

[JackOutback]

Averages are an extremely lazy, ineffective way to measure talent. The suggestion that Siddons/Lehmann scoring runs on a 1990s Adelaide oval are equivalent to runs made on a 1990s Bellerive oval is nonsensical.

Averages aren't the be-all-and-end-all but neither are they nothing. Bevan averaged 60 at three different states, two of them hardly roads.

 

[largebus]

Keep going bus boy.
You know damn well this is coming back with interest.

Ten years later...

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Ten years later...
View attachment 449422

I'm thinking March 2018.

You can't actually think he's the answer surely. Poor man's LBWatson.
At least Watto could bowl.

 

[IKnowtheDog]

Looking at those stats, hard to say Cox was hard done by. Made a lot of runs but an average under 40 isn't good enough. Bevan seems the hardest done by, averaging 60, but he played Tests and was exposed.

That average is over an 18 year career. Look at his stats when he was at his best. Marcus North had an average about the same as Cox, yet played 21 tests. Bevan was always a quality cricketer however his brilliance at one day cricket possibly type cast him in the eyes of selectors.

Siddons was another unlucky not to play test cricket. The misfortune he suffered on that tour of Pakistan was as close as he got to wearing the baggy green.

 

[DaRick]

Averages are an extremely lazy, ineffective way to measure talent. The suggestion that Siddons/Lehmann scoring runs on a 1990s Adelaide oval are equivalent to runs made on a 1990s Bellerive oval is nonsensical.

Or on 1990's GABBA wickets for that matter, given how green they often were at Shield level.

Thanks anyway carnthemlions.

 

[Scotland]

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/austr...ting/most_runs_career.html?id=114;type=trophy
Here's a great resource in the 'which batsman should've played more tests' stakes. Can't say I'm surprised you have to scroll down a long way to find anyone who's still playing.

Good list.

Matthew Elliott was in the same era of Langer, Blewett, Martyn, Hayden etc. who all earned test caps in their early 20s. He played 21 tests and averaged 33, which is nothing special. Fleming played 20 tests, Reiffel 35. Chris Rogers played 1 test while with WA then 24 as a Vic, Wade had an extended run, Pattinson was pushed just as much as Cummins/Starc/Haze. I don't think there is a conspiracy against Victorians getting picked.

12 players have played 100 tests for Australia. Every one of them played in the 1990s and only Boon, Border, Healy and Taylor didn't play in the 2000s. We had a very settled side from the mid 90s onwards, hence guys could average 50+ in the Shield for years on end and not get a look in.

 

[largebus]

I'm thinking Marsh 2018.

You can't actually think he's the answer surely. Poor man's LBWatson.
At least Watto could bowl.

Before the series: "S Marsh will fail"
S Marsh averages 77

Before WACA test: "M Marsh will fail"
M Marsh averages 141

Now: "M Marsh's bowling sucks"
Credit where its due, a stopped clock is right sometimes.
As you suggested, we should test him on proper bowling wickets in SA.

 

[footyfan1978]

South Australia been s**t for so long.

 

[damochandler]

As a Queenslander, I don't have too many grievances about Queenslanders not getting a proper go. Ian Healy and Craig McDermott played a lot of Tests. The likes of Andrew Symonds and Matthew Hayden had their chances early doors but didn't take them, or proved to have serious technical issues as in Joe Burns' case. Mitch Johnson and Shane Watson were very heavily backed. Andy Bichel was messed around and could have played more games ahead of an underperforming Lee, but I certainly don't think he was actually a superior bowler. The dropping of Matt Renshaw for Cameron Bancroft was reasonable, if not ultimately fully vindicated.

I do think that Michael Kasprowicz should have played the 2003-04 Indian series ahead of Nathan Bracken (NSW) and Brad Williams (WA). He was in very good Shield form, had prior Test experience and certainly had a better Shield record than Williams (Bracken had a similar average; Kaspr had more experience). In addition, when he was recalled at Test level he excelled for about a year.

Stuart Law was very unlucky not to have played more Test cricket ahead of the likes of Greg Blewett (SA). Blewett was overall not successful at Test level. Additionally, it's not like Law failed at Test cricket when actually tried (at ODI level he generally didn't impress though).

Nathan Hauritz was screwed around, most egregiously when Xavier Doherty (TAS) and Michael Beer were chosen ahead of him.

Martin Love, Carl Rackermann and Greg Ritchie could have played more, but Love was simply born in the wrong era, Rackermann didn't help himself by going on rebel tours and Ritchie's record wasn't extraordinary.

EDIT: Allan Border/Jeff Thomson were originally from NSW so I didn't discuss them, but no doubt both would consider themselves Queenslanders and both had prolific, even legendary careers. Also, Chris Hartley should have been selected instead of Matthew Wade (VIC/TAS). Wade might have had Test experience, but he also had no form to spoke of and it showed.

I didn't realise Greg Blewett was overall more successful than Staurt Law in the Shield. Mitigated though because Law invariably had to play on green GABBA seamers* while Adelaide Oval was comparatively flat.

* International GABBA pitches were much more balanced between bat and ball.

Kaspar should’ve played ahead of lee in the 05 ashes series. He was in form an integral part of a dominant attack that destroyed teams on the sub continent

 

[Mkcaptain]

I definitely think Holland is the unluckiest cricketer in Australia currently.
He finally gets past his many injury issues.
Dominates domestic cricket.
Gets flown in to Sri Lanka as the injury replacement of the injury replacement.
Bowls okay, has dropped catches off his bowling that would have significantly improved his figures.
Gets dropped from the second spinner role without a call from the selectors.
Dominates domestic cricket.
Not even in the discussion for squads for India and Bangledesh where O'Keeffe, Agar, and Swepson are preferred.
Dominates domestic cricket.
Not even in the discussion for the Sydney test where Agar is preferred.

I don't think its a state issue but this is the best thread for it since I'll get accused of being a whinging Victorian in any other thread.

 

[archibald]

If Maxwell got the call up instead of SMarsh we lose the Ashes.

Nice crystal ball you have there.

 

[STFU Donnie]

You are either really simple not understanding the argument or trolling.

I've won it.

I know Freo are hard-up for success, but celebrating this 'win'? Crikey.