What do you do with Shane Watson?

[LukeParkerno1]

Hey. Watto is improving.

He's learnt that if he gets out caught really early he can't be criticised for making starts and getting out lbw

Plus he can't use a DRS for a caught dismissal, thats a positive!

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Hey. Watto is improving.

He's learnt that if he gets out caught really early he can't be criticised for making starts and getting out lbw

Is he now shooting for the old Ian Chappell philosophy that if you get out quickly you're not out of form as you haven't batted long enough to find out

 

[Scotland]

Thread needs a poll.

I vote glue factory.

Gonna stick with my thoughts from January.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Is he now shooting for the old Ian Chappell philosophy that if you get out quickly you're not out of form as you haven't batted long enough to find out

The Shane Warne 'he's smashing them in the nets though' trophy

 

[Art Vandelay_]

The Shane Warne 'he's smashing them in the nets though' trophy

What Warnie neglects to tell everyone is he's facing grade cricket 2nds bowlers in the nets and that's why he's smashing them

 

[LukeParkerno1]

What Warnie neglects to tell everyone is he's facing grade cricket 2nds bowlers in the nets and that's why he's smashing them

Yeah but anyone other than Kerrigan and they have to get a new set of stumps lol

 

[the_interloper]

Plus he can't use a DRS for a caught dismissal, thats a positive!

I reckon he would. And he's not a number 6 anyway imo, if he plays he should be in the top 3, it's his best chance of making runs. When the field goes back he struggles and gets himself out.

 

[Fat Nyfe]

Why is he still in the test team?

I understood the debate around the WC. Good one day player with patchy form.

However there is NO sensible reason for him to be playing tests on his form over the past few years

 

[eth-dog]

It doesn't even make practical sense age-wise. I mean, in the best XI we're playing (assuming Voges is preferred over S Marsh now) we have:

Warner (28)
Rogers (37)
Smith (26)
Clarke (34)
Voges (35)
Watson (33)
Haddin (37)
Johnson (33)
Harris (35)
Lyon (27)
Hazlewood (24)

We have 7 blokes age 33 and over. Rogers is gone after the Ashes, and in all likelihood so are Haddin and Harris. Dumping Watson now gives time to Marsh to settle into the side before the summer. Let's say we dump Watson now and bring in Marsh, lose Rogers and (hopefully) bring in Silk, lose Haddin and bring in Nevill and lose Harris and bring in Starc. Our side for the summer looks like:

Warner (28)
Silk (23)
Smith (26)
Clarke (34)
Voges (35)
M Marsh (23)
Nevill (29)
Johnson (33)
Starc (25)
Lyon (27)
Hazlewood (24)

Eventually I'd hope to slot Pattinson in for Johnson, Handscomb in for Voges and Burns in for Clarke.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I reckon he would. And he's not a number 6 anyway imo, if he plays he should be in the top 3, it's his best chance of making runs. When the field goes back he struggles and gets himself out.

So pension him off, he aint batting top 3!

 

[Jimthegreat]

Probably at the point you play Marsh ahead of him. He got a game before has he could play the dual roles of batting and bowling. No need to now with marsh around.

 

[MisterMarcus]

I would have thought failing to score runs and failing to take wickets kind of disqualified you from being an all-rounder, but maybe that's just me.......

 

[Doodlesweaver]

He's going to want to be a bit more circumspect with that bat anyway. He's got such hard hands at times, well, most of the time.

 

[Ashton Agar]

Hmmm how many more failures before we dump his sorry arse? Is he seriously still the best allrounder we can muster. How sad.

He's not the best allrounder we can muster though. We have Mitch Marsh in the squad...!

 

[Art Vandelay_]

He's not the best allrounder we can muster though. We have Mitch Marsh in the squad...!

I think most of us agree MM is a better alternative. Boggles the mind what they see in him, he's been ordinary for some time now.

 

[Hinkler]

It doesn't even make practical sense age-wise. I mean, in the best XI we're playing (assuming Voges is preferred over S Marsh now) we have:

Warner (28)
Rogers (37)
Smith (26)
Clarke (34)
Voges (35)
Watson (33)
Haddin (37)
Johnson (33)
Harris (35)
Lyon (27)
Hazlewood (24)

We have 7 blokes age 33 and over. Rogers is gone after the Ashes, and in all likelihood so are Haddin and Harris. Dumping Watson now gives time to Marsh to settle into the side before the summer. Let's say we dump Watson now and bring in Marsh, lose Rogers and (hopefully) bring in Silk, lose Haddin and bring in Nevill and lose Harris and bring in Starc. Our side for the summer looks like:

Warner (28)
Silk (23)
Smith (26)
Clarke (34)
Voges (35)
M Marsh (23)
Nevill (29)
Johnson (33)
Starc (25)
Lyon (27)
Hazlewood (24)

Eventually I'd hope to slot Pattinson in for Johnson, Handscomb in for Voges and Burns in for Clarke.

Change Silk with Burns

 

[eth-dog]

Change Silk with Burns

Silk is a better opener.

 

[Dr Awkward]

Not much talk of Faulkner on here, I would love to get him into the side.

Good bowler, great competitive spirit and seems to just be a "winner". Anyone know whether he is a chance?

 

[Ashton Agar]

Not much talk of Faulkner on here, I would love to get him into the side.

Good bowler, great competitive spirit and seems to just be a "winner". Anyone know whether he is a chance?

He's really not a chance. Behind too many in both batting and bowling.

 

[eth-dog]

Not much talk of Faulkner on here, I would love to get him into the side.

Good bowler, great competitive spirit and seems to just be a "winner". Anyone know whether he is a chance?

He'd be exposed in the top 6 at test level.

 

[The_Reaper]

Not much talk of Faulkner on here, I would love to get him into the side.

Good bowler, great competitive spirit and seems to just be a "winner". Anyone know whether he is a chance?

Faulkner's test hopes depend on him being good enough to be one of our top three quicks or batting at seven which would require a keeper good enough to bat at six.

With our top order I'd also suggest that Nevill won't be batting at six.

 

[Jimthegreat]

I would have thought failing to score runs and failing to take wickets kind of disqualified you from being an all-rounder, but maybe that's just me.......

The 10+ overs he bowled were like gold to the other bowlers to give them a break. Kept the breaks on. I was happy to keep him in on that basis, especially while we were winning anyway. The tailender's batting was bailing him out on his lack of runs (was partially an attempt at humour but it's actually true). Things is now we have someone else who can do that job and actually makes runs. Now to actually play him!

 

[RookiePick]

Mitch Marsh has shown he can bowl tight but Watson has (historic) form for breaking through...it's the only possible thing I can think of keeping MMarsh out at present.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Faulkner's test hopes depend on him being good enough to be one of our top three quicks or batting at seven which would require a keeper good enough to bat at six.

With our top order I'd also suggest that Nevill won't be batting at six.

Shame Watson's present status didn't rely on something similar

 

[The Casey Cat]

What Warnie neglects to tell everyone is he's facing grade cricket 2nds bowlers in the nets and that's why he's smashing them

Grade cricket seconds spinners would still have him stuffed.