Mark Waugh time to go?

[kretchy]

Is it time for Mark Waugh's test career to come to an end?
55 in the first innings of the Pakistan test innings may give him at least one more test against the Pakis. His duck in the second innings wanted have done him any favours but to be fair he did cop an unplayable from Shoaib.
It also looks as though the pressure may have got to his fielding after dropping three catches in the second innings.
Personally I'd like to see him dropped mainly because I am Darren Lehmann fan and would like to see boof into the team.

 

[hourn]

yep, i think time for both of them to go unfortunately


who do you think should replace them.

Watson ?? not yet
Lehmann ?? probably the next best, even though he is fairly old, he should still get one of the two spots.
The other spot should go to either Martin Love or Michael Clarke IMO.

 

[kretchy]

If they both go Lehmann would get one spot. Michael Clarke will eventually play for Australia but he might be classed as too young right now. Jimmy Maher maybe? or even Brad Hodge?

 

[hourn]

Jimmy Maher will take over from Langer or Hayden when they retire for a period of time.

I think Love would be ahead of Hodge for a middle order spot.

 

[bluechampion]

deliberately controversial

Without Steve and Mark Waugh the side should look like this...

HAYDEN
ELLIOTT
LANGER
PONTING
MARTYN
GILCHRIST
WATSON
WARNE
FLEMING
GILLESPIE
McGRATH
12 -
LEHMANN (depending on the pitch)

 

[NICK THE PIE MAN]

LOL.
Should Mark Waugh go?

People have been debating this since around 1996!

 

[kretchy]

Originally posted by NICK THE PIE MAN
LOL.
Should Mark Waugh go?

People have been debating this since around 1996!

They have been but this time I think it is time.

 

[bluechampion]

Originally posted by NICK THE PIE MAN
LOL.
Should Mark Waugh go?

People have been debating this since around 1996!

It's true.

He should stay. At least he has some style at the crease.

 

[hourn]

Re: deliberately controversial

Originally posted by bluechampion
Without Steve and Mark Waugh the side should look like this...

HAYDEN
ELLIOTT
LANGER
PONTING
MARTYN
GILCHRIST
WATSON
WARNE
FLEMING
GILLESPIE
McGRATH
12 -
LEHMANN (depending on the pitch)

nooooooo dont be silly

seriously, Elliot i dont think is any chance now. Why move Langer from his opening spot when he is doing so well.

Lehmann has to get a shot, and Watson isn't good enough.....yet.

my team if both went.

Langer
Hayden
Ponting
Love
Lehmann
Martyn
Gilchrist
Warne
Lee <---- theres another issue there
Gillespie
McGrath

if one went, i dont know who i'd have in first Love or Lehmann. There is arguments for both of them.

 

[bluechampion]

sheeesh

Elliott deserves a chance. He batted well for Yorkshire recently, and Langer's more a no.3.

The Watson / Lehmann / Love issue is interesting.
- Watson will learn from doing.
- Lehmann can bowl abit and has senior player written all over him. He would be replaceing a bloke with 120 odd tests experience.
- Love is a good batsman who deserves a chance.

Also... bring back Flemmo. He's nearly a bloody all-rounder.

 

[hourn]

I reconk there are many people who deserve a chance infront of Elliot.

And yes, Langer is techincally a number 3, but since moving to opener hes done nothing wrong, and why gamble by moving him back to 3 and hoping he's form holds??

If anything, play Elliott at number 3. Dont try and fix it when its working.

 

[redi/whitei]

If it was my decision I would play Mark Waugh until the 2nd test against England. If he hasn't made a big score by then, bye-bye Mark.

Steve Waugh can play for as long as he wants as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Unwritten_Law]

If Mark Waugh goes:

* Maher comes in at three
* Ponting drops to 4

If Steve goes as well:

* Watson comes in at six or seven.

 

[hourn]

Originally posted by Unwritten_Law
If Mark Waugh goes:

* Maher comes in at three
* Ponting drops to 4

Definetaly another option to think about, however Maher's time will come when Hayden and Langer pass the bat on. I dont think he's earned a spot above Love, espiecally seeing as though Love is a middle order batsmen, and Hussey is in front of Maher for an opening batting position i think, despite Maher killing him in 2001-2002. If Maher does the same again, then that will put Maher into the number 1 challenger for an opening batsmen spot.

 

[kretchy]

Jimmy Maher was a middle order batsman though before he was shifted to the top of order.

 

[hourn]

yer i know but either way i still don't think he is inline before Love or Lehmann, my order of batting-challenges would be:

1 - Lehmann
2 - Love
3 - Hussey (opener)
4 - Watson (because hes young and can bowl - he would bat #7)
5 - Maher (opener - can but middle order)
6 - Clarke
7 - Hodge
8 - Katich
9 - Blewett (middle order - can open)
10 - Elliot (opener)
11 - Bevan

 

[Slax]

Surprised no-one has mentioned Ryan Campbell.

Both of them should go after the Ashes series and allow some younger blood a chance in the side.

 

[DaveW]

No. Now is not the time for Mark Waugh to go.

That time was some years ago.

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by Slax
Surprised no-one has mentioned Ryan Campbell.

Both of them should go after the Ashes series and allow some younger blood a chance in the side.

Why is that surprising? He's a complete hack at both batting and keeping.

 

[Richmondfan#1]

Well with the youngest fella in the side being 25 (B.Lee) perhaps it's time to blood the youngsters. Otherwise we'll be left behind. That includes getting rid of Steve as well. They've both served Australia well but the time has come.

 

[dr nick]

interesting fact:
the last test played (aus v pak) involved the most experienced side ever fielded in the history of test cricket. for the first time ever, the combined number of test caps was over 700 (703). that figure will drop a bit with gillespie out (34 tests) and bichel in (6) to only 686 (still the 3rd highest ever!!)

 

[hourn]

Originally posted by Richmondfan#1
Well with the youngest fella in the side being 25 (B.Lee) perhaps it's time to blood the youngsters. Otherwise we'll be left behind. That includes getting rid of Steve as well. They've both served Australia well but the time has come.

thats absolute crap, if the Waugh's are batting good enough they're young enough.

As it stands though, they aren't batting well enough, so they should face the axe.

They shouldn't be replaced because they are too old.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Originally posted by redi/whitei
If it was my decision I would play Mark Waugh until the 2nd test against England. If he hasn't made a big score by then, bye-bye Mark.

Steve Waugh can play for as long as he wants as far as I'm concerned.

I totally agree. There is still 2 tests to play against Pakistan and both Waughs may play themselves into form. I would certainly begin the test series against England with Mark Waugh at No.4, and I think unless he screws up completely Steve Waugh should captain the entire series.
As a South Aussie I'd love to see Boof Lehmann in the XI but there are only 6 batting spots. My team for the First Test v England would read:

LANGER
HAYDEN
PONTING
M.WAUGH
S.WAUGH (Captain)
MARTYN or LEHMANN
GILCHRIST
WARNE
LEE
GILLESPIE
McGRATH

It's a great side, why change it?

 

[Richmondfan#1]

Originally posted by hourn


thats absolute crap, if the Waugh's are batting good enough they're young enough.

As it stands though, they aren't batting well enough, so they should face the axe.

They shouldn't be replaced because they are too old.

Oops, that didn't come out to well. Sorry about that. What I am saying is we should blood the youngsters. Fair point though, if they're batting well, keep them. But they aren't, possible because of age, possibly not but perhaps time to give a younger guy an opportunity? Just my opinion. But hey, give us a break, I'm a 14 year old chick with no sporty friends whatsoever ... oh the loneliness. OK, now I'm just rambling.

 

[Nige_Bix]

David Hookes reckons they [the Waughs] could be looking at [or hoping for] the 5th test v England as their swan song.

I do remember that Steve signed that bat contract for a few years - when does that end??

My worry about our side is that it tends now to be lacking a bit of depth in the bowling apart from the four frontline bowlers. Steve had hardly bowled in the past few years and Mark isn't generally as effective as he used to be. None of the other bats suggested come in the category of batting/allrounders which is what we need. - with the exception of Watson - and is he an allrounder?? - ie can he legitimately claim a place in the side as either as batsman or a bowler [a la Ian Botham] or is he a batting/all-rounder or a bowling/allrounder.

South Africa always seem to be able to come up with a few - but then again to contradict my point - we seem to be able to beat wthm with what we have. I guess its because our 4 bowlers have the wood on them and out batsmen have performed realy well and we have a guiy called Gilchrist!!