Matador BBQs One-Day Cup 2016

[eth-dog]

Hard to keep up with what your argument is.
If it is 'clearly outperformed' then yeah nah.
Not much between them. Wonder what could be added to the discussion to help find a definitive answer?
Maybe we could include form in other forms of cricket?
Radical idea I know.

My arguments have been clear from the start: Handscomb has clearly outperformed Maddinson in FC Cricket from the start of the 2014/15 season.

Over 450 more runs at a much better average isn't "clearly outperformed"?

 

[Number37]

If Maddinson chose a mockery mouse T20 competition over Australia A, he doesn't even deserve to be in consideration. If he wasn't picked for Australia A and went to play T20, he's not in consideration.

It looks like selectors think he may have a role in T20s and ODIs but that does not equal Test selection.

You have devolved into nonsensical arguments.
On the one hand he isn't in the frame for test selection, on the other you want him to play in games that supposedly have a critical bearing on test selection (for fringe players).

Maddinson played in the 2nd but not the first test in the A-series. (after returning from the CPL, negating your ridiculous argument)
Handscomb played in the 1st but not the second test in the A-series. (negating your other ridiculous argument about not getting picked in the A-team means XYZ)

 

[eth-dog]

I like how I'm delusional for suggesting that Handscomb, with 1431 runs at 47 over the past 2 seasons should be ahead of Maddinson, who has 971 runs at 39 over that period of time in the shield.

 

[JackOutback]

I'm neither here or there on Maddinson, but it's patently obvious he is behind Bancroft, Burns, Handscomb and Head when it comes to Test selection.

 

[eth-dog]

I'm neither here or there on Maddinson, but it's patently obvious he is behind Bancroft, Burns, Handscomb and Head when it comes to Test selection.

Patterson would be ahead too.

 

[Phone]

I'm neither here or there on Maddinson, but it's patently obvious he is behind Bancroft, Burns, Handscomb and Head when it comes to Test selection.

I don't think it is, which I guess is the the original point of this. Sure, you can sure that he should be this place in line because these guys have scored more than him, but they don't pick teams like that. you can argue about whether they should, but you can't argue that they don't do that currently. remember: Steve Smith hadn't scored a FC ton for about 15 months when he got re-called.

 

[JackOutback]

I don't think it is, which I guess is the the original point of this. Sure, you can sure that he should be this place in line because these guys have scored more than him, but they don't pick teams like that. you can argue about whether they should, but you can't argue that they don't do that currently. remember: Steve Smith hadn't scored a FC ton for about 15 months when he got re-called.

I'm not basing it solely on form; he's behind Burns because he was part of the Test team recently, Bancroft and Head have both got limited overs call-ups to get a look and Handscomb was Australia A captain. I think the national selectors clearly have their eyes on those four ahead of Maddinson.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Patterson would be ahead too.

Could be the best of the options right now. I wouldn't be completely against them picking Patterson, would be a gamble but I've heard worse options. Good in the field too.

 

[The_Reaper]

I don't think it is, which I guess is the the original point of this. Sure, you can sure that he should be this place in line because these guys have scored more than him, but they don't pick teams like that. you can argue about whether they should, but you can't argue that they don't do that currently. remember: Steve Smith hadn't scored a FC ton for about 15 months when he got re-called.

It feels like Travis Head is the number one ranked potential player at the moment.

Wouldn't be surprised if he were ahead of Handscomb.

 

[Number37]

Could be the best of the options right now. I wouldn't be completely against them picking Patterson, would be a gamble but I've heard worse options. Good in the field too.

KP is not ready yet. If they pick him and he fails they will destroy some of the good work that has been done developing him so far.

Dropped 3 sitters in a club game off Trent Copeland a month ago. Copeland give it to him after the 3rd one went down. KP is as nice a person as you will ever meet so he is not into the whole macho BS but he had a good chuckle when Copeland was given out LBW, was a shocking decision (foot outside off stump, sweeping a leg spinner.)

 

[LukeParkerno1]

KP is not ready yet. If they pick him and he fails they will destroy some of the good work that has been done developing him so far.

Dropped 3 sitters in a club game off Trent Copeland a month ago. Copeland give it to him after the 3rd one went down. KP is as nice a person as you will ever meet so he is not into the whole macho BS but he had a good chuckle when Copeland was given out LBW, was a shocking decision (foot outside off stump, sweeping a leg spinner.)

He's more ready than Mr "potential" Maddinson that's for sure. Ideally I'd be waiting a year or two but his technique is a lot more sure than other options if we aren't playing Handscomb (he's still my preference).

Patterson is good in the field everyone can have a bad day in the field, I've seen Smith have shocking days.

 

[Phone]

It feels like Travis Head is the number one ranked potential player at the moment.

Wouldn't be surprised if he were ahead of Handscomb.

That was certainly my impression at the end of last season. I thought he was a bang on cert to be the 'surprise' call up for SL if there was one, and honestly, given he was there, he should have played that last test in SL.

 

[JackOutback]

They obviously see something in Head, but his average isn't great and didn't he only recently break through for his first centruy (though he appears to have backed it up, at least). Another season or two would be good for him.

 

[Number37]

He's more ready than Mr "potential" Maddinson that's for sure. Ideally I'd be waiting a year or two but his technique is a lot more sure than other options if we aren't playing Handscomb (he's still my preference).

Patterson is good in the field everyone can have a bad day in the field, I've seen Smith have shocking days.

He is still working on getting his front foot in the right place, default is to go straight down the pitch.
If the SA's swing the ball he will get found out because of that front foot movement.