Rolling Ashes Squad Thread, now featuring Haddin XII v Hick XII beginning p. 147

[TigerCraig]

Pretty much.

We have a shocking top order, further limiting our batting is not the answer. Pick 6 bats, a keeper, and 4 bowlers. It's worked for 100 years.

Yep, and if the keeper averages more than 35 its a bonus - so long as they are the best keeper (which I think Paine is anyway)

I'd be going:

Warner
Harris
Khawaja
Smith
Patterson
Burns
Paine
Cummins
Pattinson
Lyon
Hazelwood

Starc/Richardson/Labuchagne/Renshaw/Handscombe/Wade/Sanga (the traditional young bolter).

Would be nice to have a true leggie, but wouldnt just pick one for the sake of it. Either Wade or Handscombe can be reserve keeper, but these days you can just fly one in if you need to

 

[TigerCraig]

Cummins may be an all rounder, but him batting at 8 does not give the selectors what they want, which is a 5th bowling option unfortunately.

Yeah, but no point in a 5th bowler if they dont get used. Plus, England is not as hot and ground not as hard. 3 seamers, a spinner and 5-10 overs tops from the part-timers should be plenty

 

[bird_man]

Yeah, but no point in a 5th bowler if they dont get used. Plus, England is not as hot and ground not as hard. 3 seamers, a spinner and 5-10 overs tops from the part-timers should be plenty

Oh, I agree, but it is clearly the way the selectors think.

Hopefully some bowler friendly wickets will see us just go with our 6 best batsmen.

 

[Marcel Proust]

Not making the most of starts has been the common theme all series for our batsmen. MMarsh aside, they've got at least one this series but failed to develop on them, that suggests to me that the bare bones of a Test match batsman might be there, it's learning how to capitalise from them that will put the skin on the bones, or not. That's why I'm happy seeing the younger guys given a few more chances, if they can start to turn those thirties into fifties and then hundreds they have a future, and it's where I see SMarsh's age as really acting against him.

Head looks good and makes a start then gets out doing stupid s**t. consistent and frustrating

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Head looks good and makes a start then gets out doing stupid s**t. consistent and frustrating

Plays like a ODI cricketer

 

[corbies]

Bring back the Australia A squads who play regularly at home or away!

What do you mean bring them back? We have an agreement for our A team to play South Africa and India every year either here or over there. Have done for the past 4 years.

 

[Sproj]

I'd far prefer Laubasghne over Stones and personally it's not even close. Laubasghne has the technique and our top 6 in general have terrible techniques, Laubausghne was good in Sydney, deserves and extended run, and he's a gun short leg fielder and considering we have Head dropping dolly's at short leg it's a factor.

Handscomb can fill that role in fine in the field. I don't give as much credence to technique as the media does. I hope Labamba becomes a quality bat but he can do it in Shield, not in the test XI.

Techniques isn't everything, otherwise G.Smith, S.Smith, Cook, Chanderpaul would never have even got a look in and Watson, S.Marsh and Labumblebee would be all time greats.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Handscomb can fill that role in fine in the field. I don't give as much credence to technique as the media does. I hope Labamba becomes a quality bat but he can do it in Shield, not in the test XI.

Techniques isn't everything, otherwise G.Smith, S.Smith, Cook, Chanderpaul would never have even got a look in and Watson, S.Marsh and Labumblebee would be all time greats.

Having a good base is critical when the ball is moving as you need to be able to leave the ball. I’d rather someone with a good technique than someone who doesn’t.

 

[Marcel Proust]

Plays like a ODI cricketer

20/20

Michael Beven wouldnt do that rubbish after getting in

 

[Park cricketer]

Australia's problems are on two fronts - Batting and bowling. During this series, the thing that striked me the most was that a number of Australia's batsmen had limited overs techniques. Where have all the Australian batsmen with classical techniques gone, you know, like Damien Martyn and the ilk? Those who play with a high elbow and a straight bat and don't leave a gap between their bat and the pad.. In fact, the two batsmen I thought had the most compact technique for test cricket was their no.7 and 8, Tim Paine and Pat Cummins. Paine seems to bat well and very compact until he reaches 30 or so score and then throws his wicket away playing a loose shot. Cummins I think has got great potential with the bat and he is going to be of immense importance in England against the swinging duke ball with his tight technique.

Anyway with Smith and Warner returning, the former problem will get solved to a big extent (although I'm not sure how Warner will fare opening against Anderson and Broad). Harris looked decent but Renshaw should open with Warner at the top with Harris as the backup. Renshaw had a great season at Somerset and I was happy to know that he was dropped for the Indian series. It's very stupid to drop someone for their domestic form when they have been performing in international cricket. That was a very bizarre move from the Australian selectors, or atleast it appeared so from the outside. Khawaja slots in at 3. Smith at 4.

Number 5 is the issue. Contenders are Head and Handscomb. I know he did decently in the series and I think he has a fighting quality in him, but I just don't think Head's technique would hold in England. He has temperament issues too and you need players with great temperament in England. Handscomb shouldn't even be in the squad, it will destroy his career if he's selected in the team against Anderson et al. He needs to go to Shield cricket and work out his technique because it's a flawed one. Or else they could look to someone else from Shield for no.5 role who has been performing in the middle order. I will pick Wade at 6, purely because I've heard he's doing great in Shield and you don't need to pick an all rounder and waste a spot on Mitch Marsh. Paine at 7.

Coming to bowlers, Lyon picks himself as the spinner. As for pacers, you need pacers with the best seam position and swing abilities in England. Pace is not crucial, accuracy in lengths is more important and tearaway quicks aren't suited to english conditions anyway, because the amount of swing generated gets limited at extreme pace. Starc doesn't get a good seam presentation and he is not someone who is accurate and plug away at a spot an over or two in a row. He should be dropped. Cummins is not great in either aspects as well, besides he bowls a bit short but you need him in case you encounter a flat track where he can be extremely useful and his batting at the lower order adds immense value to the team. Hazlewood can get very good seam presentation if he strives to and is the most accurate of them all in Australia, the only thing he needs to do is to attack the stumps more. For the final spot, Aus should pick the best swing bowler in Australia, no matter how slow he is. Be it Siddle or Sayers or anyone that has got great ball skills and can swing the red cherry. He gets the new ball along with Hazlewood.

So you have a swing bowler in whoever is the best one in Australia, seam bowler in Hazlewood and someone who can hit the deck and crank it up on flat wickets in Cummins. All bases covered. And it must be drilled to them that they should attack the stumps much more than they do in Australia.

So my Ashes XI will be:

Warner
Renshaw
Khawaja
Smith
?
Wade
Paine (c) (wk)
Cummins
Lyon
Hazlewood
Siddle/Sayers/?

I leave a question mark at 5 because I'm not convinced that anyone of Smarsh, Head or Handscomb is going to succeed. Finally, Australia has got a pretty inexperienced team and they're going to go up against an English side that has got great depth in their home conditions, so it's better to have low expectations and the aim must be to give a very good account of themselves because it can easily end a bloodbath with bad personnel selected and stupid tactics. Also I think a young prodigy who you think is going to be a leading bat for Australia in the future must be selected in the team - might be Pucovski or Edwards or Sangha. Because the goal should be to give the young guns valuable experience in english conditions so that they're equipped with experience enough to win the next time they tour rather than select old guards like Shaun Marsh, etc., who won't tour the next time.

 

[Sproj]

Having a good base is critical when the ball is moving as you need to be able to leave the ball. I’d rather someone with a good technique than someone who doesn’t.

Labooboo showed the same problem every other bat in the current side showed. He looked a million dollars until he got bored and started chasing balls he had been leaving. Like I said, technique isn't everything, concentration is. This is why he, Head, Finch or S.Marsh will never be any good because they aren't willing to bat time and let bowlers come to them, rather they get out to stupid lack of concentration shots due to CA's mantra of 'batting with intent'.

 

[Marcel Proust]

Australia's problems are on two fronts - Batting and bowling..

fielding too

 

[Park cricketer]

fielding too

President Cummins disagrees.

 

[Marcel Proust]

Handscomb looks miles better batting outside the crease as opposed to standing on his stumps

even if hes not

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Labooboo showed the same problem every other bat in the current side showed. He looked a million dollars until he got bored and started chasing balls he had been leaving. Like I said, technique isn't everything, concentration is. This is why he, Head, Finch or S.Marsh will never be any good because they aren't willing to bat time and let bowlers come to them, rather they get out to stupid lack of concentration shots due to CA's mantra of 'batting with intent'.

To be fair the Ball was there to be hit. Plus it was a great catch. Out of all our batsmen he looked the best easily.

 

[TommyD13]

What do you mean bring them back? We have an agreement for our A team to play South Africa and India every year either here or over there. Have done for the past 4 years.

When did they play last year?

 

[HLM*]

When did they play last year?

Aus A toured India last year in September. Was the Tour Maxwell got told he didn’t need to be on because he was a lock for the Pakistan away series, and then was not named in the test squad.

 

[Ok Boomer]

There was certainly an intention to come forward more. There were some positive signs to take from his innings. Not saying he's all fixed now but changes like that are not going to happen overnight.



This graphic doesn't scream of someone who refuses to believe he doesn't have a problem with his technique.

India had a 4 man pace attack in Perth and a 2 man pace attack in Sydney. The difference would lie there too.

 

[eddiesmith]

All 3 bans were excessive. CA are a bunch of blow in muppets though that bowed down to the pressure from outside instead of making a rational decision. A ban of between 3-6 matches (meaning they would have been available the start of this summer) would have been more than enough, considering the offence carried a 1 match ban in the ICC.

6 tests and they’re only just available for Sydney. 1 year was fair given the lack of cricket. A 1 year ban now would be a lot more harsh given the next 12 months

 

[Ok Boomer]

1 Harris
2 ?
3 Khawaja
4 ?
5 Handscomb
6 ?
7 Paine
8 Cummins
9 ? though there is no chance Starc misses imo.
10 Lyon
11 Hazlewood

Wouldn't mind Renshaw at 2, someone like Burns at 4 and Stoinis or Maxwell at 6.

 

[Len Nicodemo]

All 3 bans were excessive. CA are a bunch of blow in muppets though that bowed down to the pressure from outside instead of making a rational decision. A ban of between 3-6 matches (meaning they would have been available the start of this summer) would have been more than enough, considering the offence carried a 1 match ban in the ICC.

Who cares what the ICC stipulates, the guy is a blatant cheat and I know everyone does it, but to sit in the sheds and come up with a concocted plan to do it as blatant and deliberate as possible. No way it was an excessive ban.

 

[Len Nicodemo]

Warner's straight in. He has the runs on the board, so to speak. Blokes that average nearly 50 in Test cricket are gold to us right now. Burns can fit into the line up, doesn't have to open. Certainly won't be a lack of spots!

Is he in form though? I mean, Ricky Ponting has the runs on the board and looks semi fit.

 

[Len Nicodemo]

Given that his ban was probably excessive in the first place, making Warner wait even further for Joe Burns or someone to fail before he gets picked is rubbing salt into the wound.

I think he'll go straight back in but I'm intrigued how the team spirit and dynamic will change once he and Smith are there.

Burns deserves it over Warner. Warner is ******* cheat.

 

[TigerCraig]

Who cares what the ICC stipulates, the guy is a blatant cheat and I know everyone does it, but to sit in the sheds and come up with a concocted plan to do it as blatant and deliberate as possible. No way it was an excessive ban.

No real problem in him doing it, but to quote Sir Humphrey Appleby in Yes Minister:

"If you're going to do this damn silly thing, don't do it in this damn silly way"

 

[Marcel Proust]

not only is warner a cheat but he is prone to doing travis head like stupid s**t