The selectors

[BarneyBent]

Jesus.
how have we made sweeping changes and still lost both games at the selection table???

Cos we chose pace for the spinning deck, and then dropped our best spinner for two inferior spinners for the quicker deck.

 

[Cleavy]

Cos we chose pace for the spinning deck, and then dropped our best spinner for two inferior spinners for the quicker deck.

and we won the toss in both games too.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

There are no superstars that the selectors refuse to pick. They are stuck with a relatively big pool of shallow depth if that makes sense.

I'm not blaming the selectors when the players aren't up to it.

 

[Black Diamond]

There are no superstars that the selectors refuse to pick. They are stuck with a relatively big pool of shallow depth if that makes sense.

I'm not blaming the selectors when the players aren't up to it.

Thing is that the selectors can still stick to the basics: six batsmen, one keeper, four bowlers. It works for a reason.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Jesus.
how have we made sweeping changes and still lost both games at the selection table???

Would have lost both anyway, but selection hasn't helped.

 

[brisbane13]

Thing is that the selectors can still stick to the basics: six batsmen, one keeper, four bowlers. It works for a reason.

against a minor side. we where never going to win in India realistically. but the selectors time surely must be running out. if only they could pick a side and sick with it it, even if it does contain Henriques & Maxwell. the teem needs to settle & gain experience

 

[Ill Chicken]

against a minor side. we where never going to win in India realistically. but the selectors time surely must be running out. if only they could pick a side and sick with it it, even if it does contain Henriques & Maxwell. the teem needs to settle & gain experience

No the best team needs to play every test. The selectors create their own problems by having a shit rotation policy with the quicks, a poor batting line up and letting blokes who average mid-30 keep playing. What is the difference between Watson and North?

 

[Black Diamond]

against a minor side.

No. The only time you should ever deviate from things as simple as team balance is if you have a few freaks at your disposal. We have no freaks in our side.

Six batsmen, one keeper and four bowlers didn't just happen. It evolved over many, many years of playing cricket. It's the right thing to do all of the time.

 

[western royboy]

No. The only time you should ever deviate from things as simple as team balance is if you have a few freaks at your disposal. We have no freaks in our side.

Six batsmen, one keeper and four bowlers didn't just happen. It evolved over many, many years of playing cricket. It's the right thing to do all of the time.

In this test we have five batsman, one keeper and two bowlers and several imposters.

 

[brisbane13]

In this test we have five batsman, one keeper and two bowlers and several imposters.

part timers, who ever, experience is priceless, the best teem needs to be picked and stay picked

 

[Caesar]

Henriques and Maxwell in the same side is excessive, but I think a fifth bowler is necessary. We have played a few matches since Warne retired without a fifth bowler and it never works well. The pacemen get tired and the part-timers have to bowl too many overs and get smashed. It doesn't help that we don't really have any good change bowlers these days - Warner's leggies are overrated and Clarke's not much good unless the deck is spinning. Would love a Waugh or a Hussey to send down a few medium pacers when the bowlers need a break.

Unfortunately the way our side is at the moment, our spinner is not going to be a big wicket threat and usually in any given match one of our pacemen doesn't play very well. If you don't have a fifth bowler, that leaves you with two pacemen to take the bulk of your wickets, plus cover for the guy who is spraying them everywhere.

It would be nice if you had three reliable, wickettaking pacemen but we don't really. Pattinson is the only one. Siddle is an honest toiler but he's a fairly uninspiring opening bowler. Starc and Johnson are hot and cold. Bird is reliable as clockwork, but doesn't move the ball much out of the hand which means he needs a bit from the pitch to get him wickets.

If Starc can become a reliable wickettaker, I would be happy to bowl Pattinson-Starc-Bird-Lyon without a fifth bowler. But until that happens I think you need one of the top 6 bats to also be able to deliver 20-30 overs. Watson in the past has been able to do that without weakening our batting too much, and thankfully Henriques looks like he might be able to take over the role.

 

[King Elvis]

I love it when i am right , the selectors need to take a good long hard look at themselves

They need to be sacked.

 

[matty p]

The non-selection of O'Keefe just looks more and more baffling by the day. They absolutely need to fly him over to replace Bird before the 3rd test. Heads should roll over this.

 

[Ill Chicken]

The worst part is now because they dropped Lyon, they're to arrogant to acknowledge they made a mistake and it'll be like when they dropped Hauritz for Doherty, they'll more than likely play a similar team in the 3rd test or they'll pick someone completely different instead of saying to Lyon, we made a mistake, you're back in.

 

[Phone]

Different situations. Lyon has been dropped after a prolonged period of poor form (unless anyone counts an average of 45 in Lyon's last 7 tests + av. of 71 in 5 shield games this season as decent form). They basically decided Hauritz wasn't up to it. Once Lyon works on the issues that have helped create his poor form (whatever they may be), he'll back in. Hauritz didn't really have a way back.

 

[Ill Chicken]

Different situations. Lyon has been dropped after a prolonged period of poor form (unless anyone counts an average of 45 in Lyon's last 7 tests + av. of 71 in 5 shield games this season as decent form). They basically decided Hauritz wasn't up to it. Once Lyon works on the issues that have helped create his poor form (whatever they may be), he'll back in. Hauritz didn't really have a way back.

Hauritz was given the arse for no reason, he was in career best form at NSW during that Ashes series and their boys club mentality doesn't change for anyone.

The issue with Lyon is they stopped playing him in the formats where he made a name for himself. His shield form was never there to begin with.

 

[frankrizzo]

"We wanted primarily a left-arm spinner," he said.

"We looked at Chennai, we thought the Indian middle-order played (Lyon's) off-spin particularly well, so we wanted somebody who could turn it away as our primary resource, which gave Xavier an opportunity.

"I thought he went very well today, he toiled manfully. Xavier gave us what we know Xavier we can.

"Glenn was always going to be the other option, we felt that we would have another spinner and if we had another spinner, we wanted a guy who would bring more to the party.

"He was another allrounder, a guy that could bat eight and bat deep for us and give us something in the field. That's why we went with Maxi."-mickey arthur

I have no issue with the doherty reasoning but he's basically admitting they picked maxwell as a spinner not because he's a better spinner than lyon or even comparable but because he can bat at 8 and is a better fielder.

It just seems that for the selectors the idea that we pick say doherty/lyon on a spinning pitch is simply impossible because nether man can bat higher than 10, i just don't get it if they were the two they thought would be the best spinning combo who cares if they can score runs?

 

[Ill Chicken]

I'm starting to think that Graeme Smith was actually a captain/coach the whole time Mickey Arthur was with the national team.

 

[Zach Package]

so for conversation's sake, who would everyone have gone with in their capacity as armchair selector?
I'd go with this (given the current squad)

Warner
Cowan
Hughes
Watson
God
Mozz
Wade
Siddle
Pattinson
Lyon
Doherty

IMO the Maxwell selection is an absolute travesty. Bowled 10 overs of poo (i'd expect to get 10 overs out of a clarke/dilshan/trott style part timer on a day where you take 1 wicket), and although he lengthens our batting in theory, I'd probably have more faith sending a pattinson or a siddle out at 8.
In short, he just shouldn't be there, clarke won't be able to use him as a true second spinner, because he'll probably end up with Tahir like figures.

Mozz to bat 6 because in essence he's a middle order batsmen who will bowl, not a bowler who can offer a bit with the bat.

 

[Cleavy]

"Glenn was always going to be the other option, we felt that we would have another spinner and if we had another spinner, we wanted a guy who would bring more to the party.

"He was another allrounder, a guy that could bat eight and bat deep for us and give us something in the field. That's why we went with Maxi."-mickey arthur

Steve Smith all over again.

 

[Wicked Lester]

so for conversation's sake, who would everyone have gone with in their capacity as armchair selector?
I'd go with this (given the current squad)

Warner
Cowan
Hughes
Watson
God
Mozz
Wade
Siddle
Pattinson
Lyon
Doherty

Given the sqad, that's about as good as it gets.

If Doherty proves to be as venomous as I suspect he will, it may be worth giving Smith an opportunity in his place next test. The other thing I'd do is tell Pup - sorry God - that great batsmen do not bat at five, certainly not when the team's top order is crumbling over and over again. Sure, mug punters love a rescue mission, but real cricket lovers admire the bloke who goes in at at first or second drop and makes sure the collapse never happens in the first place.

The thing I find odd in this thread is the reference to 'the selectors' as if they are a group of suits from The Melbourne Club inflicting untold grief on our poor unsuspecting team. Its John Inverarity, Rod Marsh, Andy Bichel, Mickey Arthur and Michael Clarke. If I read correctly, the tour selectors (who determine the team from the selected squad) are Invers, Arthur and Clarke.

 

[Black Diamond]

Steve Smith all over again.

Steve Smith has some credibility as a test batsman.

Maxwell is Cameron White V2.0.

 

[King Elvis]

We should play 10 all rounders and a keeper, that way, everyone can have a bowl.

 

[Slax]

In this test we have five batsman, one keeper and two bowlers and several imposters.

In this side we have two batsmen, one keeper, two bowlers and 6 imposters

 

[Team DJ]

In this side we have two batsmen, one keeper, two bowlers and 6 imposters

Is the keeper really a test level keeper either?