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

[to1994]

Good for Patterson scoring runs but again, people going over board.

a) this game doesn't even have FC status, it's a warm up for the Sri Lankans and just have a look at the bowling card, everyone's getting a bowl including some of the batsman.

b) Sri Lanka are a work in progress and almost all of their bowlers have never bowled in Australia before, the attack these guys are facing based on current skill level combined with what I said above is likely worse then anything they face at Shield level.

If the selectors actually alter the squad, axe someone and replace them with Patterson based on this 3 day game it's basically proof they have no idea what they're doing.

 

[Taylor]

I think Jhye Richardson offers enough difference to Starc to pair well with him for the new ball. One is tall, left handed and the other is smaller and more skidding.

 

[Len Nicodemo]

He looks like a keeper and the sooner we get games into young players the better imo.

I thought he was a bowler?

 

[Len Nicodemo]

I think Jhye Richardson offers enough difference to Starc to pair well with him for the new ball. One is tall, left handed and the other is smaller and more skidding.

Got a bit of the dale Steyn skid about him, but about 10km slower

 

[1990crow]

2 hundreds in 1 game. Have to reward performance. Not gettin 100s was his only knock.

 

[eDPS]

Good for Patterson scoring runs but again, people going over board.

a) this game doesn't even have FC status, it's a warm up for the Sri Lankans and just have a look at the bowling card, everyone's getting a bowl including some of the batsman.

b) Sri Lanka are a work in progress and almost all of their bowlers have never bowled in Australia before, the attack these guys are facing based on current skill level combined with what I said above is likely worse then anything they face at Shield level.

If the selectors actually alter the squad, axe someone and replace them with Patterson based on this 3 day game it's basically proof they have no idea what they're doing.

Both Burns and Renshaw have failed against a team not going all out if that’s the case which looks even worse for us

 

[Topkent]

Pretty hilarious that we pick a squad prior to the CAXI game, then the players we picked all fail while Patterson scores back to back hundreds.

 

[eDPS]

Pretty hilarious that we pick a squad prior to the CAXI game, then the players we picked all fail while Patterson scores back to back hundreds.

Since when have our selectors looked competent?

 

[Skarrz]

Good for Patterson scoring runs but again, people going over board.

a) this game doesn't even have FC status, it's a warm up for the Sri Lankans and just have a look at the bowling card, everyone's getting a bowl including some of the batsman.

b) Sri Lanka are a work in progress and almost all of their bowlers have never bowled in Australia before, the attack these guys are facing based on current skill level combined with what I said above is likely worse then anything they face at Shield level.

If the selectors actually alter the squad, axe someone and replace them with Patterson based on this 3 day game it's basically proof they have no idea what they're doing.

We have had a severe lack of centuries in any form of the game recently and he has scored 2 against the bowling attack we will be facing in tests. PLUS on hobart’s deck. PLUS the other test incumbents have failed hard against the same bowlers?

 

[to1994]

Both Burns and Renshaw have failed against a team not going all out if that’s the case which looks even worse for us

Both are probably out of form because of a complete lack of red ball cricket (although Renshaw's troubles have gone on longer). The point is you can't base everything off of a 3 day practice game. Good on Patterson for doing well but if he leapfrogs anyone already in the squad based on this it would be more mind boggling then the initial selections. I don't think Renshaw should play though, he really needs to rediscover some form before he's thrown back in, if he gets some runs between now and The Ashes I'd still have him as my preferred option in England. For the Sri Lanka Tests they should just play Pucovski and Burns.

 

[to1994]

We have had a severe lack of centuries in any form of the game recently and he has scored 2 against the bowling attack we will be facing in tests. PLUS on hobart’s deck. PLUS the other test incumbents have failed hard against the same bowlers?

What's your suggestion? Sorry Joe and/or Matt but due to you not getting a good score against the new ball in a 3 day practice game where we must only bat 75 overs we're removing you from the squad. This being for someone who we didn't consider to be among the top 10 Bats in the country before the Indian series and who got to face about 10 different bowlers, some batsman, some part timers, almost all who haven't bowled in Australia before?

I like Kurtis Patterson and I hope he gets a chance but it would be ridiculous to alter the squad on the back of this. If he carries his form into the Shield season I'd love him to be next in line but they need to have confidence at the very least in Pucovski and Burns.

 

[RudyBlue]

No perfect answer here. I'd probably go:

Burns
Harris
Khawaja (like him at 3)
Labuschagne
Head
Pucovski (SLs won't cause him any issues imo)
Paine
Cummins
Starc
Richardson
Lyon

Patterson's in the best form of all and would love to put him in that middle order. Hopefully he keeps making runs and becomes our long term No. 5.

 

[Taylor]

Got a bit of the dale Steyn skid about him, but about 10km slower

I thought Richardson bowls at 140?

 

[Seagrave_Holmes]

Good for Patterson scoring runs but again, people going over board.

a) this game doesn't even have FC status, it's a warm up for the Sri Lankans and just have a look at the bowling card, everyone's getting a bowl including some of the batsman.

b) Sri Lanka are a work in progress and almost all of their bowlers have never bowled in Australia before, the attack these guys are facing based on current skill level combined with what I said above is likely worse then anything they face at Shield level.

If the selectors actually alter the squad, axe someone and replace them with Patterson based on this 3 day game it's basically proof they have no idea what they're doing.

If the runs are cheap and don't count then what does that say for the other test contenders who have failed in both innings?

 

[Jimthegreat]

Got a bit of the dale Steyn skid about him, but about 10km slower

Like I said yesterday, Richardson hits 145+k often. All he's done is bowl to the conditions in the ODIs even when he was over 140 quite a few times yesterday. Stanlake was only in the high 130's yesterday but we know he usually hits 150s and generally in the 140s.

 

[Jimthegreat]

What's your suggestion? Sorry Joe and/or Matt but due to you not getting a good score against the new ball in a 3 day practice game where we must only bat 75 overs we're removing you from the squad. This being for someone who we didn't consider to be among the top 10 Bats in the country before the Indian series and who got to face about 10 different bowlers, some batsman, some part timers, almost all who haven't bowled in Australia before?

I like Kurtis Patterson and I hope he gets a chance but it would be ridiculous to alter the squad on the back of this. If he carries his form into the Shield season I'd love him to be next in line but they need to have confidence at the very least in Pucovski and Burns.

Doubling up centuries is outstanding under any circumstances, no ifs or buts. He has made runs ALL year, so it wouldn't just be on the back of this. Overall average is 41. Others selected haven't made runs bar Labuschagne with 50 in the 2nd innings and Pucovski. All faced the same bowlers the same as you'll be getting in the Test Match, much than alot of the FC bowlers around.

No problems going in with:

Harris
Khawaja
Labuschagne
Patterson
Head
Pucovski
Paine
Cummins
Starc
Lyon
Richardson

Starc would need to do well otherwise Pattinson might replace him come the Ashes.

 

[to1994]

If the runs are cheap and don't count then what does that say for the other test contenders who have failed in both innings?

It's one game? Not to mention the guys who genuinely failed were the openers, the only people Patterson could replace are Pucovski and Marnus. I personally wouldn't have a problem if Patterson was named instead of either of those initially, but because he wasn't they cannot retcon that now based on this.

 

[eDPS]

It's one game? Not to mention the guys who genuinely failed were the openers, the only people Patterson could replace are Pucovski and Marnus. I personally wouldn't have a problem if Patterson was named instead of either of those initially, but because he wasn't they cannot retcon that now based on this.

Not exactly, they could just have Harris and Khawaja open again with Marnus at 3 and Patterson at 4. Won’t happen but if either Renshaw or Burns fail in the first I can see them going with that opening attack.

 

[Jimthegreat]

It's one game? Not to mention the guys who genuinely failed were the openers, the only people Patterson could replace are Pucovski and Marnus. I personally wouldn't have a problem if Patterson was named instead of either of those initially, but because he wasn't they cannot retcon that now based on this.

Khawaja opens with Harris and Patterson slots into number 4. Not hard. He's been the best performed batsman all year with Wade. Not based on one game.

 

[Park cricketer]

Can't wait to see Jhye bowling with the Dukes ball.

Probably the best new ball bowler in Australia right now. I do think he can be a bit more consistent in his lengths, but he's young and only going to improve. But he has a wonderful seam position that the senior guys in the test team seem to lack. He's fairly quick as well, be interesting to see if he plays in the XI vs Sri Lanka.

 

[to1994]

Doubling up centuries is outstanding under any circumstances, no ifs or buts. He has made runs ALL year, so it wouldn't just be on the back of this. Overall average is 41. Others selected haven't made runs bar Labuschagne with 50 in the 2nd innings and Pucovski. All faced the same bowlers the same as you'll be getting in the Test Match, much than alot of the FC bowlers around.

No problems going in with:

Harris
Khawaja
Labuschagne
Patterson
Head
Pucovski
Paine
Cummins
Starc
Lyon
Richardson

Starc would need to do well otherwise Pattinson might replace him come the Ashes.

Like I said, good on Patterson for scoring some runs but it shouldn't change anything. Based on the standard of attack and their inexperience here we shouldn't be basing so much on it. The selectors are trying to pick a team that will eventually get consistent not just against a Test attack worse then most of the Shield Teams (on our shores) but who will also be able to survive against good attacks.

If you look at the India squad and then this current squad Pattinson has been behind about 10 batsman in total given he didn't get a call up for Sri Lanka, he's obviously rated but he shouldn't be leap frogging anyone to the point where the squad is changed. I'm not a fan of everything the selectors have been doing but I can see they're trying to get the guys in they think can succeed and learn the game at Test level, obviously they aren't sure Pattinson can do that or he would've gotten a go earlier. Do I agree with them? I don't really know but they shouldn't be changing their decision on that because of this.

Jake Doran hit a ton ffs and he hasn't scored a Shield run all year, the runs don't mean that much.

 

[Woody15]

Not exactly, they could just have Harris and Khawaja open again with Marnus at 3 and Patterson at 4. Won’t happen but if either Renshaw or Burns fail in the first I can see them going with that opening attack.

The selectors wont change the team if either Renshaw or Burns fail in the first test. Do you really think selectors are going to give those 2 players 1 test to prove themselves?

to1994 is right. It's unfortunate the Patterson wasn't in the squad with these runs and good on him for making them - he is obviously one to watch, but there is zero chance of him being selected at the expense of someone already named.

 

[JackOutback]

Khawaja opens with Harris and Patterson slots into number 4. Not hard. He's been the best performed batsman all year with Wade. Not based on one game.

No he hasn't, he's 11th on the Shield run scorers list, behind SMarsh (who did it in half the games and just got dropped) and Burns (one of the guys you would seemingly have him ahead of). He's not in the top 5 for averages either. He's having a decent year, selections have been inconsistent, but let's not act like his being left out is one of the great tragedies in cricket history.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

who gets the new ball with starc

Cummins and Richardson to open. Starc first change

 

[Jimthegreat]

Like I said, good on Patterson for scoring some runs but it shouldn't change anything. Based on the standard of attack and their inexperience here we shouldn't be basing so much on it. The selectors are trying to pick a team that will eventually get consistent not just against a Test attack worse then most of the Shield Teams (on our shores) but who will also be able to survive against good attacks.

If you look at the India squad and then this current squad Pattinson has been behind about 10 batsman in total given he didn't get a call up for Sri Lanka, he's obviously rated but he shouldn't be leap frogging anyone to the point where the squad is changed. I'm not a fan of everything the selectors have been doing but I can see they're trying to get the guys in they think can succeed and learn the game at Test level, obviously they aren't sure Pattinson can do that or he would've gotten a go earlier. Do I agree with them? I don't really know but they shouldn't be changing their decision on that because of this.

Jake Doran hit a ton ffs and he hasn't scored a Shield run all year, the runs don't mean that much.

You're talking like the selectors get everything right....please! They fk up time and again and again and again. Patterson has been the in-form FC batsman ALL YEAR with Wade. How many times must that part be mentioned? This game isn't a one-off for him. You're not getting that. They should be adding him to the squad based on form. That's not that tough to work out. Doran played one out of the box, but unlike Patterson hasn't been making runs all year, Amazing, the two most in-form batsmen in a year we have struggled for runs don't get selected. So don't be backing the selectors.

The standard of attack is a Test attack better than most things he'd face in FC cricket. Even if they aren't fully switched on they are still better. He tonned up twice with others selected failed badly.

He's not behind any batsman in Australia right now on form.

Rather than talking in theories, I'll make one suggestion.....................look at the scoreboard!!!!!