What do you do with Shane Watson?

[Sweet Jesus]

Hopefully his critics have a spell for a little while. Well played, Watto. Well deserved

That's a bit rich. He hit a catch straight down the throat of fine leg when he was on four. That catch goes down and suddenly Watson is a protected species again? These things happen in sport and it's all well and good. But you can't turn around and suggest that all criticism of Watson is misplaced because of this knock, when he was desperately lucky to survive that early chance.

Besides, sensible critics of Watson are focused on his lack of runs at Test level. Pretty sure that hasn't changed. In ODIs, Watson has an outstanding record and Mitch Marsh hasn't done enough to force his way in at Watson's expense.

 

[Mitchell54]

Rename thread to Finch

great for him to come out and carve an innings when he looked in all sorts early.

Finch needs to get a good score soon or i am looking for his replacement.

 

[ManWithNoName]

That's a bit rich. He hit a catch straight down the throat of fine leg when he was on four. That catch goes down and suddenly Watson is a protected species again? These things happen in sport and it's all well and good. But you can't turn around and suggest that all criticism of Watson is misplaced because of this knock, when he was desperately lucky to survive that early chance.

Besides, sensible critics of Watson are focused on his lack of runs at Test level. Pretty sure that hasn't changed. In ODIs, Watson has an outstanding record and Mitch Marsh hasn't done enough to force his way in at Watson's expense.

So any innings where a player is dropped is meaningless?

 

[Moonwatcher]

So any innings where a player is dropped is meaningless?

It means he got scores of 4 and 60* and that is how he should be judged. If Watson and Maxwell had been caught a heap of pressure would have been put on the lower order.

 

[ManWithNoName]

It means he got scores of 4 and 60* , that's an average of 32 per knock which is ok in an isolated innings.

Or, in a much more sensible way, he scored 64*

 

[Moonwatcher]

Or, in a much more sensible way, he scored 64*

That is a sensible way to view Pakistan's fielding/bowling performance.

 

[ManWithNoName]

That is a sensible way to view Pakistan's fielding/bowling performance.

So if a batsman is given out incorrectly by an umpire mistake, do you then extrapolate what he would've scored without that?

 

[Moonwatcher]

So if a batsman is given out incorrectly by an umpire mistake, do you then extrapolate what he would've scored without that?

You judge his/her performance up until the dismissal. I give credit to Watson for all 64 of his runs, but the reality is he chose to give his wicket away when on 4 runs. The fact Pakistan didn't accept it doesn't make Watson's decision any better.

 

[ManWithNoName]

You judge his/her performance up until the dismissal. I give credit to Watson for all 64 of his runs, but the reality is he chose to give his wicket away when on 4 runs. The fact Pakistan didn't accept it doesn't make Watson's decision any better.

So Steve Waugh's innings at the 1999 WC where he made a ton against South Africa, overrated?

 

[Bradesmaen]

That's a bit rich. He hit a catch straight down the throat of fine leg when he was on four. That catch goes down and suddenly Watson is a protected species again? These things happen in sport and it's all well and good. But you can't turn around and suggest that all criticism of Watson is misplaced because of this knock, when he was desperately lucky to survive that early chance.

Besides, sensible critics of Watson are focused on his lack of runs at Test level. Pretty sure that hasn't changed. In ODIs, Watson has an outstanding record and Mitch Marsh hasn't done enough to force his way in at Watson's expense.

David Warner gives about 5 chances and innings in Test matches, but is the greatest batsman to have ever lived.. enough said. The Watson hate is now into hilarity level.

 

[Moonwatcher]

So Steve Waugh's innings at the 1999 WC where he made a ton against South Africa, overrated?

The famous quote is "You've just dropped the world cup" the emphasis is correctly on the fielding performance. Steve Waugh used his second chance to good effect as did Watto, but I think you have to accept the fate of the match was put in the hands of the fielding team on both occasions.

 

[Angus Young]

Great to see Watson makes some runs last night

but fk me how that Pakistani bloke dropped that catch

 

[Fade to Gray]

David Warner gives about 5 chances and innings in Test matches, but is the greatest batsman to have ever lived.. enough said. The Watson hate is now into hilarity level.

Not quite at the hilarous levels of your Warner hate.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

So any innings where a player is dropped is meaningless?

Is that your view? Or are you suggesting it's the conclusion I've offered? Because I don't recall saying that.

I certainly wouldn't be saying that Watson's knock negates any and all legitimate criticism of his performance in all forms of the game. Would you?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

David Warner gives about 5 chances and innings in Test matches, but is the greatest batsman to have ever lived.. enough said.

I'm not sure what this has to do with Warner?

The Watson hate is now into hilarity level.

Do you have to hate Watson to point out that he's averaged 31 in Tests since the start of 2011? Do you have to hate Watson to question whether that's good enough?

 

[Bradesmaen]

I'm not sure what this has to do with Warner?

Do you have to hate Watson to point out that he's averaged 31 in Tests since the start of 2011? Do you have to hate Watson to question whether that's good enough?

I wasn't aware yesterday was a test match.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I wasn't aware yesterday was a test match.

It wasn't.

What's your point?

 

[Kram]

Do you have to hate Watson to point out that he's averaged 31 in Tests since the start of 2011? Do you have to hate Watson to question whether that's good enough?

We are in the final stages of World Cup at the minute, I think most of us are concerned with his one day form atm...

 

[Sweet Jesus]

We are in the final stages of World Cup at the minute, I think most of us are concerned with his one day form atm...

Fortunately, it's possible to keep more than one idea in your head at a time.

On one hand, Watson's excellent ODI record means he remains relatively secure in the 50-over side, even if Mitch Marsh's numbers since the start of 2014 are superior. On the other hand, that does absolutely nothing to negate criticism of his sustained lack of runs in Test cricket.

Perhaps this dichotomy is too complex to take root here?

 

[Bradesmaen]

It wasn't.

What's your point?

Why bring up his Test match average when everyone is talking about one dayers?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Why bring up his Test match average when everyone is talking about one dayers?

Because criticism of Watson doesn't apply only to his spot in ODIs.

In fact, the more sensible criticism relates to his spot in the Test side.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Because criticism of Watson doesn't apply only to his spot in ODIs.

In fact, the more sensible criticism relates to his spot in the Test side.

But Test matches are irrelevant at this point in time. The next Test isn't until we hit the Windies where we can discuss it at that point, but Australia has at least 1, if not 2 matches in ODI's to come and therefore the only thing that is relevant is whether he deserves his spot in the ODI team and that answer is yes.

 

[Tulip]

Some people will never be happy. Have been as critical of Watson as everyone else last summer, but he's coming in at 5/6 and doing a good job. Feel for Mitch Marsh and George Bailey, but he's making runs and for that he deserves his spot.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

But Test matches are irrelevant at this point in time. The next Test isn't until we hit the Windies where we can discuss it at that point, but Australia has at least 1, if not 2 matches in ODI's to come and therefore the only thing that is relevant is whether he deserves his spot in the ODI team and that answer is yes.

I'm not sure why you think you're in a position to deem what's relevant and what's not in a way that is binding on everyone else.

There's still plenty of discussion about the Test side for the year ahead. And there's still grounds to criticise Watson's lack of runs in that format.

 

[Bradesmaen]

I'm not sure why you think you're in a position to deem what's relevant and what's not in a way that is binding on everyone else.

There's still plenty of discussion about the Test side for the year ahead. And there's still grounds to criticise Watson's lack of runs in that format.

And when the World Cup is over, the discussion can return to his test form. The last 10 pages in this are about his ODI form, that is what EVERYONE HERE was commenting on and you randomly brought up his Test match stats to somehow back up your opinion that he doesn't belong in the ODI side.