Ongoing Test match XI speculation thread.

[LukeParkerno1]

I think you're probably right.

But if Pucovski is the great white hope, if we want to find a way to ease him in after his previous mental health issues upon being called up - it makes all the sense in the world to me to pick him alongside Harris if Warner isn't fit. While he was a bit disappointing when he was in the team, it's not like Harris disgraced himself, and there's something bigger at play with trying to ease Pucovski into the team and making him feel comfortable about it.

Christ, if there were another Victorian worthy of selection (Pattinson?) I'd probably give them an extra check in the "pro" column just to provide as much support as possible to Pucovski, cos his success is one of the ultimate goals going forward.

No it does not make sense one bit! Jeez can we not go back to Harris for a while...and why are we trying to "baby" Pucovski in the side. He plays but he doesn't need blokes in the side just to baby him. Not as if Harris was any good the first time around...imagine what Bumrah would do to him!

 

[eddiesmith]

No it does not make sense one bit! Jeez can we not go back to Harris for a while...and why are we trying to "baby" Pucovski in the side. He plays but he doesn't need blokes in the side just to baby him. Not as if Harris was any good the first time around...imagine what Bumrah would do to him!

He was Australia’s best batsman against India last time

 

[nobbyiscool]

No it does not make sense one bit! Jeez can we not go back to Harris for a while...and why are we trying to "baby" Pucovski in the side. He plays but he doesn't need blokes in the side just to baby him. Not as if Harris was any good the first time around...imagine what Bumrah would do to him!

I dunno man, maybe he does. In fact all the evidence we have so far suggests that he might need a bit of special treatment in his introduction to the team - that's 2020 man, kids are different now. I think people underestimate that.

And if you're picking Shield form, Harris is a friggen mile in front of Burns anyway.

 

[Scratchy05]

Not in a pink ball test he doesn’t. Starc plays

We will see. His white ball form which is usually very good has been bad so we will see if he can bounce back. TBH, I've changed my mind, Starc should start but be on high alert.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I dunno man, maybe he does. In fact all the evidence we have so far suggests that he might need a bit of special treatment in his introduction to the team - that's 2020 man, kids are different now. I think people underestimate that.

And if you're picking Shield form, Harris is a friggen mile in front of Burns anyway.

Then he doesn't play if he's not ready. We aren't bringing in another player to baby him. Ridiculous to think we'd even consider doing this. There is enough experience in our top order anyway. Burns is easily ahead of Harris not even close.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

We will see. His white ball form which is usually very good has been bad so we will see if he can bounce back. TBH, I've changed my mind, Starc should start but be on high alert.

Starc is playing the pink ball test, you are asking for it if you don't play our best pink ball test bowler.

 

[Scratchy05]

Starc is playing the pink ball test, you are asking for it if you don't play our best pink ball test bowler.

He isn't looking like it at the moment though but I back him in.

 

[Docker82]

They will but Pattinson should be and deserves to be selected ahead.

No he doesn’t. Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins are by far our best three bowlers.

Neser and Abbott are closer to overtaking Pattinson than Pattinson is to overtaking Starc.

 

[eddiesmith]

No he doesn’t. Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins are by far our best three bowlers.

Neser and Abbott are closer to overtaking Pattinson than Pattinson is to overtaking Starc.

Pattinson 26.3
Starc 26.97
Hazlewood 26.2

But yeah Patto is clearly behind them...

 

[Blue Arrow]

Patto a better batsmen too.

On another note Starcs ODI bowling average is up to 23 now.

 

[Pippen94]

Patto a better batsmen too.

On another note Starcs ODI bowling average is up to 23 now.

What do either of those things have to with test bowling??

 

[Scratchy05]

No he doesn’t. Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins are by far our best three bowlers.

Neser and Abbott are closer to overtaking Pattinson than Pattinson is to overtaking Starc.

Pattinson had a better average last year and a better economy but Starc had a better strike rate.

 

[Pykie]

All right armers, meaning Lyon will be less effective

Yeah, well, we aren't exactly playing NZ here.

They will have Ashwin or Jadeja as well.

 

[Docker82]

Pattinson had a better average last year and a better economy but Starc had a better strike rate.

Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins to a lesser extent have had their career averages somewhat ruined by several sub continent tours and the disgracefully flat pitches served up in Australia between 2015 and 2018. Pattinson has only ever performed on bowling friendly wickets in Australia or England, usually against poor performing opposition. This was exposed massively in his most recent test match where he was very very average.

Pattinson also hasn’t played in the shield this year. Victorians use shield form as a justification as to why Harris should be ahead of Burns, yet ignore the same thing from non-Victorians in Neser and Abbott.

Let’s face it - if Pattinson was from NSW and Starc from Victoria we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The stats lie to us on their test careers on this occasion. It needs to be looked at more closely.

Starc will play the first test unless he’s injured and not only because it’s with a pink ball.

 

[eth-dog]

Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins to a lesser extent have had their career averages somewhat ruined by several sub continent tours and the disgracefully flat pitches served up in Australia between 2015 and 2018. Pattinson has only ever performed on bowling friendly wickets in Australia or England, usually against poor performing opposition. This was exposed massively in his most recent test match where he was very very average.

Pattinson also hasn’t played in the shield this year. Victorians use shield form as a justification as to why Harris should be ahead of Burns, yet ignore the same thing from non-Victorians in Neser and Abbott.

Let’s face it - if Pattinson was from NSW and Starc from Victoria we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The stats lie to us on their test careers on this occasion. It needs to be looked at more closely.

Starc will play the first test unless he’s injured and not only because it’s with a pink ball.

Except for the fact he's got a better record in Asia than he does in England but don't let facts get in the way of a good rant

 

[Taylor]

Wouldn't Pattison be needing to dislodge Cummins for that mostly up and down, occasional bouncer, first change bowling role?

 

[eth-dog]

Wouldn't Pattison be needing to dislodge Cummins for that mostly up and down, occasional bouncer, first change bowling role?

You reckon? Pattinson bowls his best opening the bowling, 66 wickets at 25 opening as opposed to 15 wickets at around 30 bowling 3rd or 4th

 

[Pykie]

Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins to a lesser extent have had their career averages somewhat ruined by several sub continent tours and the disgracefully flat pitches served up in Australia between 2015 and 2018. Pattinson has only ever performed on bowling friendly wickets in Australia or England, usually against poor performing opposition. This was exposed massively in his most recent test match where he was very very average.

Pattinson also hasn’t played in the shield this year. Victorians use shield form as a justification as to why Harris should be ahead of Burns, yet ignore the same thing from non-Victorians in Neser and Abbott.

Let’s face it - if Pattinson was from NSW and Starc from Victoria we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The stats lie to us on their test careers on this occasion. It needs to be looked at more closely.

Starc will play the first test unless he’s injured and not only because it’s with a pink ball.

It would be the perfect time for an u/22 left arm quick to emerge in the Shield tbh. Starc hasn't had a lot of competition for a long long time.

Brett Lee was a frustrating bowler during his test career, who I rank on the rung below Gillespie, Harris, Johnson etc.

Starc makes Brett Lee seem like McGrath at times though. He's probably my least favourite Australian bowler with 35+ tests to his name since that 80's period with the likes of Lawson getting about. He's above Hilfenhaus and Kaspa, but even below someone like Stu Clark for me.

He's got an incredible strike rate (Better than McGrath's) and averages 27 with the ball in test cricket. But has one of the worst economy rates of any bowler in history with 200+ test wickets. I think his strike rate is as good as it is in part because of how erratic he is, he gets a ball under the batsman's guard because they are literally going everywhere during an over.

Mitchell Johnson has a similar record, but his was even worse during his "hiatus" when he turned to complete shit. Then he churned out probably the best back to back series in the last 30 years by an Australian bowler, which elevates him.

 

[Taylor]

You reckon? Pattinson bowls his best opening the bowling, 66 wickets at 25 opening as opposed to 15 wickets at around 30 bowling 3rd or 4th

I do think so. I expect all bowlers do better with a new ball too but I see him as the same slugging it out, putting his back into it, borderline intimidating bowling that Cummins does during that period between new ball Starc overs.

 

[eth-dog]

I do think so. I expect all bowlers do better with a new ball too but I see him as the same slugging it out, putting his back into it, borderline intimidating bowling that Cummins does during that period between new ball Starc overs.

Not really, Mitchell Johnson bowled better as the second change bowler than any other position, Peter Siddle was consistently around the 30's regardless of where he bowled, similar to Ishant Sharma

Pattinson swings the ball at pace unlike Cummins, is definitely more suited to the Starc role than the Cummins one

 

[Scratchy05]

Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins to a lesser extent have had their career averages somewhat ruined by several sub continent tours and the disgracefully flat pitches served up in Australia between 2015 and 2018. Pattinson has only ever performed on bowling friendly wickets in Australia or England, usually against poor performing opposition. This was exposed massively in his most recent test match where he was very very average.

Pattinson also hasn’t played in the shield this year. Victorians use shield form as a justification as to why Harris should be ahead of Burns, yet ignore the same thing from non-Victorians in Neser and Abbott.

Let’s face it - if Pattinson was from NSW and Starc from Victoria we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The stats lie to us on their test careers on this occasion. It needs to be looked at more closely.

Starc will play the first test unless he’s injured and not only because it’s with a pink ball.

This isn't a matter of Vic vs non-vic, this is a matter of who is the better player. Marcus Harris should never see the test side again (I mean unless he averages very consistent high scores) but Pattinson is a better bowler than Starc. One thing that impresses me about Pattinson is that he seems to have a knack of getting wickets at crucial moments. Starc only does damage when the conditions favour him and turns to shit when they don't. The one advantage Starc does have over Pattinson is that he is a point of difference being a left armer and is very good at cleaning up the tail.

Talk about inflating figures. Starc did that against a home tour of Sri Lanka and Pakistan and bowled significantly worse against a better side in New Zealand. In the 12 month period between Sri Lanka & New Zealand, Starc took 43% of his wickets against tail batsmen (8-11) where they only account for 36% of the wickets so over that period if anything, Starc has an inflated average.

Also, amazing using one test match to judge someone who has bowled well in pretty much every other game he has played in. Oh yeah, andI'm not sure how a 2nd innings return of 6 overs for 8 runs is bad in the slightest.

I do think we have to start Starc because as you said, Pattinson hasn't played any Shield Cricket (which mind you, Starc was also abysmal with by ball) but if he fails in this Pink ball test which is his strong suit, Pattinson comes in for the Boxing Day test.

 

[Scratchy05]

It would be the perfect time for an u/22 left arm quick to emerge in the Shield tbh. Starc hasn't had a lot of competition for a long long time.

Brett Lee was a frustrating bowler during his test career, who I rank on the rung below Gillespie, Harris, Johnson etc.

Starc makes Brett Lee seem like McGrath at times though. He's probably my least favourite Australian bowler with 35+ tests to his name since that 80's period with the likes of Lawson getting about. He's above Hilfenhaus and Kaspa, but even below someone like Stu Clark for me.

He's got an incredible strike rate (Better than McGrath's) and averages 27 with the ball in test cricket. But has one of the worst economy rates of any bowler in history with 200+ test wickets. I think his strike rate is as good as it is in part because of how erratic he is, he gets a ball under the batsman's guard because they are literally going everywhere during an over.

Mitchell Johnson has a similar record, but his was even worse during his "hiatus" when he turned to complete sh*t. Then he churned out probably the best back to back series in the last 30 years by an Australian bowler, which elevates him.

I have been trashing on him but one thing that you are forgettign is that test cricket is about taking wickets. Starcs high economy is fine as his strike rate is very impressive but atm, it seems if he has lost the ability to be a strike bowler when the conditions don't suit him. Happy for him to prove me wrong.

 

[Big Bryza]

No he doesn’t. Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins are by far our best three bowlers.

Neser and Abbott are closer to overtaking Pattinson than Pattinson is to overtaking Starc.

You have seen Starc bowl this season, right?

The campaigner is bowling absolute puss. If he didn't bowl left arm he wouldn't even be close to selection.

 

[frankrizzo]

Starc has flipped around in recent times been average and inconsistent in odi and a consistent wicket taker in tests so of course he starts the test summer as one of the three quicks.

If he struggles in the first two tests then it's an issue but for now his recent test stats are what matters as he was putting up those test numbers numbers when he was bowling poorly in odi cricket.

 

[Pykie]

I have been trashing on him but one thing that you are forgettign is that test cricket is about taking wickets. Starcs high economy is fine as his strike rate is very impressive but atm, it seems if he has lost the ability to be a strike bowler when the conditions don't suit him. Happy for him to prove me wrong.

I'm not forgetting anything.

The fact he has one of the best strike rates in history and yet averages in the high 20's says it all about his economy rate and his general skill as a bowler.

Cummins and Rabada have equally impressive SR's, but can actually control the ball, hence average 21 and 22 respectively in test cricket with the ball.

I already qualified why I think Starc's strike rate is so good. It's because he's so god damn erratic ball to ball, not because he's a fantastically skilled test bowler like the previous two players. He catches batsmen out with the unpredictability of his pitch groupings.

He's a decent third POD option in a test cricket side, but that's it.

He probably had the physical potential to be one of the best quicks of all time. Left arm, 6"6, 150kph, bounce, swing when he gets it right, extremely durable and a low order bat averaging 22 to boot. Put Cummins skill into Starc's physical gifts and durability and you have a 600+ modern wicket taker.

He just doesn't have the skill to make the most of those physical gifts. Which is strange for an Australian quick really, most that reach this level are quality line and length bowlers.