Matthew Wade

[Bradesmaen]

You really have no idea. He has already shown he has the temperament and the ability to get Australia out of trouble. Both of his centuries he was under the pump and probably won the game for us. Would make a good number 6, he has shown he can knuckle down and get us out of trouble and can make quick runs when needed. I don't think we should take the gloves off him though, he deserves more of a chance.

He wasn't under the pump in Sydney.. what a crock. When Australia are in trouble, he thinks of only himself. That was evident in Sydney and WA, where he went slogging. Worked in Sydney, didn't work in WA. Sure he made 68 and we got to a "reasonable score" but he got out with 2 wickets left by attempting a stupid shot. He can't knuckle down, he doesn't know how. He either stutters or slogs. There is no in between, its clear as day in both forms of Cricket.

 

[mediumsizered]

He wasn't under the pump in Sydney.. what a crock. When Australia are in trouble, he thinks of only himself. That was evident in Sydney and WA, where he went slogging. Worked in Sydney, didn't work in WA. Sure he made 68 and we got to a "reasonable score" but he got out with 2 wickets left by attempting a stupid shot. He can't knuckle down, he doesn't know how. He either stutters or slogs. There is no in between, its clear as day in both forms of Cricket.

Haters will still hate. I reckon you would have balled your eyes out when Haddin broke his fingernail, oops, I mean strained his hamstring the other day. I bet you were straight on to twitter sending him your best wishes.

 

[Phone]

Bradsmaen has been pretty consistent on Haddin & Wade. I mean, they are the same player. And he's kept the same view. Instead of trying to convince himself Wade is a vastly better keeper or something, like some people did.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Bradsmaen has been pretty consistent on Haddin & Wade. I mean, they are the same player. And he's kept the same view. Instead of trying to convince himself Wade is a vastly better keeper or something, like some people did.

Haters will still hate. I reckon you would have balled your eyes out when Haddin broke his fingernail, oops, I mean strained his hamstring the other day. I bet you were straight on to twitter sending him your best wishes.

What Phone says... honestly some people don't deserve to be a moderator on this site if they are going to be like that.

 

[Phone]

On the whole, I do think Wade (& Haddin) are number 6 contenders. That says more about the the actual batsmen than it does those two. Bailey's about the only one I'd give a shot too. Usman, Doolan, Maxwell etc. nope. (that said I'm on the record somewhere as saying I would have given Doolan a shot at the SCG. so i might change my mind in two weeks time)

 

[Caesar]

Anyone you put into number 6 you will have to develop. I think Wade is as good as anyone in that respect. I would rather take the gloves away from him at Test level, take the pressure off him and let him concentrate on his batting. I see a lot of potential in his first class performances.

Not every keeper who's handy with the willow is capable of being the next Gilchrist. I think if you leave Wade as Test keeper he will never be more than a pretty average gloveman who is capable of going the slog.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

neither do most of the people on the sidelines though

Nor some in the team. If the batting was strong, Cowan and, on current form, Watson would not be there - at a minimum.
Wade playing as a pure batsman is better than Wade playing as a keeper. Are there other batsman to take the spot though.

 

[Heisenberg_]

I'd have more faith in Wade to score runs then most of the batsmen in the Test side except Clarke and maybe Warner.

 

[mediumsizered]

He wasn't under the pump in Sydney.. what a crock. When Australia are in trouble, he thinks of only himself. That was evident in Sydney and WA, where he went slogging. Worked in Sydney, didn't work in WA. Sure he made 68 and we got to a "reasonable score" but he got out with 2 wickets left by attempting a stupid shot. He can't knuckle down, he doesn't know how. He either stutters or slogs. There is no in between, its clear as day in both forms of Cricket.

This is where you show your complete bias.

In a similar scenario in South Africa, Haddin didn't even wait until he had made 68 runs before throwing his wicket away, he played a disgraceful shot when on zero & was the 6th batsmen out with the score on 18. Australia got rolled for 47 that day, whereas thanks to Wade's 68, Australia reached 163. Take out his innings & that of Hastings (32) & the Australian total is closer to 63 than 163.

Sure Wade wasn't "under the pump" in Sydney, but his 102 not out came in 224 minutes, with only 9 boundaries hardly a slogfest. He did score 102 of the 181 runs scored in his time at the crease & one would suggest that given we lost 5 wickets in pursuing a small target in the second innings, Wade's century perhaps saved us from embarrassment in chasing a total which would have been beyond us.

On the other hand, his century against the West Indies was scored after he came to the wicket at 5-157 (Mike Hussey got out 7 runs later) & he scored 106 of the 171 runs scored whilst he was at the wicket & much like his century in Sydney, came whilst batting with the tail (he shared a 102 run partnership with Hilfenhaus for the 9th wicket, of which Hilf only scored 19). Given Australia only won this match by 75 runs, if Wade plays a Haddin innings, Australia loses.

With both of his centuries & his 68 out of 163, Wade has assessed the situation & batted accordingly, each time making runs with the tail. He has also done this for Victoria.

 

[Bradesmaen]

This is where you show your complete bias.

In a similar scenario in South Africa, Haddin didn't even wait until he had made 68 runs before throwing his wicket away, he played a disgraceful shot when on zero & was the 6th batsmen out with the score on 18. Australia got rolled for 47 that day, whereas thanks to Wade's 68, Australia reached 163. Take out his innings & that of Hastings (32) & the Australian total is closer to 63 than 163.

What bias? What proof have you got of any bias other than the fact that I don't like Wade? So disrespectful.

I don't want Haddin or Wade in the test team, I would prefer Paine in the test team and have stated this.

Sure Wade wasn't "under the pump" in Sydney, but his 102 not out came in 224 minutes, with only 9 boundaries hardly a slogfest. He did score 102 of the 181 runs scored in his time at the crease & one would suggest that given we lost 5 wickets in pursuing a small target in the second innings, Wade's century perhaps saved us from embarrassment in chasing a total which would have been beyond us.

Read my entire post. I said he either slogs or struggles to get runs. He can't push singles well, he gets stuck in a hole like Cowan does. When Cowan does it, he's battered from pillar to post, yet no one ever mentions it about Wade.

On the other hand, his century against the West Indies was scored after he came to the wicket at 5-157 (Mike Hussey got out 7 runs later) & he scored 106 of the 171 runs scored whilst he was at the wicket & much like his century in Sydney, came whilst batting with the tail (he shared a 102 run partnership with Hilfenhaus for the 9th wicket, of which Hilf only scored 19). Given Australia only won this match by 75 runs, if Wade plays a Haddin innings, Australia loses.

With both of his centuries & his 68 out of 163, Wade has assessed the situation & batted accordingly, each time making runs with the tail. He has also done this for Victoria.

He never batted accordingly. He scored the runs, but he still slogged. Lets go through some commentary shall we..

94.1
Roach to Wade, no run, dropped, Roach this time, Wade tried to flat-bat that over the bowler and he mistimed it, Roach cupped his hands over his head but couldn't hang on
99.2
Shillingford to Wade, 1 run, ugly hoick which he mistimes to the on side, Wade getting a bit aggressive there
101.1
Shillingford to Wade, no run, another ugly hoick but he fails to make contact, watch out for the inside edge
101.6
Shillingford to Wade, no run, slog and misses, Wade is not happy with himself for missing out
102.4
Rampaul to Wade, no run, edged! Wade gets a thick outside edge on the drive and the ball dropped short of Sammy at gully, it was a slower ball as well
114.3
Shillingford to Wade, OUT, caught at the boundary edge and excellent presence of mind by Bravo! And it's a five-for for Shillingford as well, Wade goes another of his slogs but doesn't get the distance, went flatter to deep midwicket and Bravo caught it, threw it up in the air before going outside the boundary, gets back in the field of play and takes the catch

Yeah, played accordingly there. Ugly hoick seems to be a recurring theme. This was while Hilfenhaus was batting. If Hussey was batting, it'd be singles or twos, none of this trying to hit the cover off the ball.

I swear Victorians are the most biased of all people on this forum, they just put the blinkers on and won't believe cold hard facts.

 

[Caesar]

Wade is a better batsman than Haddin. Haddin is a better keeper than Wade. Neither is exceptional at either.

The difference is that Wade is young, and he has IMO the potential to be a very good lower middle order bat. He also has the potential to be Haddin 2.0. I guess it is down to which you prefer to see in the team.

 

[eth-dog]

Wade is a better batsman than Haddin. Haddin is a better keeper than Wade. Neither is exceptional at either.

The difference is that Wade is young, and he has IMO the potential to be a very good lower middle order bat. He also has the potential to be Haddin 2.0. I guess it is down to which you prefer to see in the team.

Not really. Sure, Wade drops chances to spinners, but Haddin drops chances (and pretty easy chances) to fast bowlers AND spinners

 

[Caesar]

Haddin's keeping improved significantly during his time in the Test team. BigFooty has difficulty recognising this.

He is still nothing flash but I do not think you will find many people who will argue that he isn't comfortably ahead of Wade with the gloves.

 

[Cousin Jed]

Cricinfo commentary wouldn't stand up in court. Half of it doesn't match up with the actual shots being played.

Haddin is not comfortably ahead of Wade with the gloves.

 

[Heisenberg_]

Haddin's keeping improved significantly during his time in the Test team. BigFooty has difficulty recognising this.

He is still nothing flash but I do not think you will find many people who will argue that he isn't comfortably ahead of Wade with the gloves.

I would argue it and would argue you would be in the minority as well.

 

[Kram]

They are about the same with the gloves, very ordinary.

 

[Caesar]

I would argue it and would argue you would be in the minority as well.

On BigFooty, sure. Look at other cricket forums on the web and the near-unanimous view is that Wade is the poorer of the two with the gloves. Guys like Healy agree.

 

[Heisenberg_]

On BigFooty, sure. Look at other cricket forums on the web and the near-unanimous view is that Wade is the poorer of the two with the gloves. Guys like Healy agree.

Comfortably better though?
That's the part I disagree with, Haddin might be slightly better with gloves but not by much and Wade will get better with more Test experience like all young keepers do where as Haddin will get worse.
Batting Wade is comfortably better, that's no contest. Can bat according to the situation a d has already a few times in his short test career and many times for Victoria.
Haddin is incapable of doing so a d should have been sent on the next plane home from South Africa never to be seen again IMHO.

 

[Bradesmaen]

On BigFooty, sure. Look at other cricket forums on the web and the near-unanimous view is that Wade is the poorer of the two with the gloves. Guys like Healy agree.

This is what happens when the forum is dominated by Victorians though, Vic players can do no wrong. I think even White is still in the running for a test spot

 

[Caesar]

Comfortably better though?
That's the part I disagree with, Haddin might be slightly better with gloves but not by much and Wade will get better with more Test experience like all young keepers do where as Haddin will get worse.
Batting Wade is comfortably better, that's no contest. Can bat according to the situation a d has already a few times in his short test career and many times for Victoria.
Haddin is incapable of doing so a d should have been sent on the next plane home from South Africa never to be seen again IMHO.

I didn't say comfortably better. And I don't think Wade is that much better with the bat than Haddin. I actually think most of the difference is down to age - Haddin is a bit more polished with the gloves due to more experience, but is past his best with the bat.

In truth I think they are remarkably similar players. I would never select Haddin over Wade because his greater degree of youth is a pretty clear advantage. But I think people need to wake up to the fact that Wade keeping in the Test team for the next decade is going to be like having another decade of Haddin. He is not going to flower into the next Gilchrist because the reality is that requires freakish talent that would already be evident. Batting and keeping at Test level is hard, doing both is doubly so. He will have to work hard to maintain a workmanlike degree of proficiency in both areas.

Now, while I think Wade has the potential to be a very solid Test batsman and keeping is holding him back from that, I am not overly fussed by having him play the Haddin role in the Test team. But I would have thought that the people who have been whinging about Haddin for so long would not be satisfied with that result.

 

[carnthemlions]

This is what happens when the forum is dominated by Victorians though, Vic players can do no wrong. I think even White is still in the running for a test spot

You think Tim Paine should be in the test team?
lol.

 

[Heisenberg_]

I didn't say comfortably better. And I don't think Wade is that much better with the bat than Haddin. I actually think most of the difference is down to age - Haddin is a bit more polished with the gloves due to more experience, but is past his best with the bat.

In truth I think they are remarkably similar players. I would never select Haddin over Wade because his greater degree of youth is a pretty clear advantage. But I think people need to wake up to the fact that Wade keeping in the Test team for the next decade is going to be like having another decade of Haddin. He is not going to flower into the next Gilchrist because the reality is that requires freakish talent that would already be evident. Batting and keeping at Test level is hard, doing both is doubly so. He will have to work hard to maintain a workmanlike degree of proficiency in both areas.

Now, while I think Wade has the potential to be a very solid Test batsman and keeping is holding him back from that, I am not overly fussed by having him play the Haddin role in the Test team. But I would have thought that the people who have been whinging about Haddin for so long would not be satisfied with that result.

Perhaps I misread your post. While I do agree with a lot of your post, he will never reach Gilchrist levels and nobody will again for that matter, I do think you're underselling Wades batting.
His 2 centuries have both done from difficult situations and batted with a good tempo. Compare that with Haddin who scored 3 tons and IIRC Audtralia was well in control when he came in to bat, I could be wrong though.
Haddins probably better up to the stumps as a keeper maybe but not by much, against pace though Wade wouldn't have made some of those grade level mistakes Haddin made against Imdia last summer and I'd wager Wade will improve as he reaches his peak in a few years in his keeping up to the stumps.
In saying all that I'd be happy to see Hartley come in and have Wade bat at 6. Not Tim Paine though, overrated with bat and gloves.

 

[The_Reaper]

Neither Wade or Haddin are test standard keepers.

 

[bird_man]

What bias? What proof have you got of any bias other than the fact that I don't like Wade? So disrespectful.

I don't want Haddin or Wade in the test team, I would prefer Paine in the test team and have stated this.



Read my entire post. I said he either slogs or struggles to get runs. He can't push singles well, he gets stuck in a hole like Cowan does. When Cowan does it, he's battered from pillar to post, yet no one ever mentions it about Wade.


He never batted accordingly. He scored the runs, but he still slogged. Lets go through some commentary shall we..



Yeah, played accordingly there. Ugly hoick seems to be a recurring theme. This was while Hilfenhaus was batting. If Hussey was batting, it'd be singles or twos, none of this trying to hit the cover off the ball.

I swear Victorians are the most biased of all people on this forum, they just put the blinkers on and won't believe cold hard facts.

Wow! You've gone onto cricinfo and found out that his innings wasn't perfect! I'm not really sure what you think this proves besides the fact you have too much time on your hands. I watched that innings and whilst it was not perfect it was a fantastic innings from a young bloke under a lot off pressure. And he delivered.

It has nothing to do with what state anyone was from. He has 2 centuries in 10 matches with a really good average. Most of his big scores have come at times when we really needed them. He doesn't have a pretty technique like Usman Khawaja but he scores runs when we need him too.

 

[Kram]

What Phone says... honestly some people don't deserve to be a moderator on this site if they are going to be like that.

Go back and read some of his comments pumping up Bryce McGain if you need a good laugh.