What do you do with Shane Watson?

[Gough]

Although he's a keeper Mark Boucher should be considered when looking at great all rounders, 5515 runs @ 30.3 and 555 dismissals, a record that will stand for years.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Watson's record at 6 is even more ordinary than his overall record. I'm sure the selectors will find some justification to keep him, though. After all he made a bunch of 50s 6 years ago as an opener and he could bowl at 140 km/h when he was 20.

I think he's still got some to offer, but I'd like it to be at 6. If he gets a consistent run there he would be fine. Need to shore up that top order with Rogers on the way out too.

 

[Scotland]

Although he's a keeper Mark Boucher should be considered when looking at great all rounders, 5515 runs @ 30.3 and 555 dismissals, a record that will stand for years.

Was a fan of Boucher, but Gilchrist had more dismissals per game and scored more runs playing 50 less tests. Boucher's batting record is good, but it's a bit like Shane Warne in that it looks better simply because he played so many matches.

 

[Globular]

As a 6 Watson still has a future in test cricket, as long as he bowls. Solid 50s and keeping it tight with the ball are quite handy from an all rounder. However at 3 his batting just isn't good enough to demand that spot.

It also doesn't help that that people around the Australian team (Watto included) shift the goal posts in relation to what his role is in the team. When he's not bowling he is a world class batsman, when he can't buy a run his bowling is important, struggling down the order he is a top order player etc.

I think the bigger problem is that the selectors, coaches, CA organisation are trying to manufacture a great test all-rounder. They all seem to forget what utter freaks Sobers and Kallis were, in ability and longevity. Then combine it with the fact they want the player to have an X-FACTOR quality and you might as well try looking for a unicorn.

 

[Scotland]

I think he's still got some to offer, but I'd like it to be at 6. If he gets a consistent run there he would be fine. Need to shore up that top order with Rogers on the way out too.

He'll be 34 soon. It's time to let go.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

He'll be 34 soon. It's time to let go.

Marsh isn't quite ready yet, so Watson will have a few more years to contribute.

 

[Scotland]

As a 6 Watson still has a future in test cricket, as long as he bowls. Solid 50s and keeping it tight with the ball are quite handy from an all rounder. However at 3 his batting just isn't good enough to demand that spot.

I could quite easily see Watson playing an innings like Joe Burns yesterday. Coming in at 4/50 after a top order collapse he wouldn't fill me with confidence.

 

[Scotland]

Marsh isn't quite ready yet, so Watson will have a few more years to contribute.

Marsh already averages nearly 40 batting at 6 in tests. Why would we keep him in cotton wool to play a guy who probably wouldn't even do that?

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Marsh already averages nearly 40 batting at 6 in tests. Why would we keep him in cotton wool to play a guy who probably wouldn't even do that?

Not so much putting him in cotton wool as opposed to Marsh struggling with fitness and form. They make a fine pair in that respect.

 

[Globular]

I could quite easily see Watson playing an innings like Joe Burns yesterday. Coming in at 4/50 after a top order collapse he wouldn't fill me with confidence.

To be fair Mitch Marsh, Faulkner or Maxwell, Ager or anyother all-rounder candidates wouldn't fill me with confidence in that situation

 

[Scotland]

To be fair Mitch Marsh, Faulkner or Maxwell, Ager or anyother all-rounder candidates wouldn't fill me with confidence in that situation

Marsh batted with a lot of maturity in UAE I thought. He looks comfortable batting at test level.

Maxwell and Agar should be nowhere near the test side.

Faulkner I rate highly, but he's a bowling all rounder. I'm not convinced he could bat in the top 6, but I'd be happy to give him a chance based on his ODI performances. He really needs to make some FC scores for Tassie.

 

[Craze]

Imran Khan took 362 wickets in 88 matches. That's enough to be picked as a bowler alone. His batting was a bonus and he made 6 100s and 18 50s.
Ian Botham took 383 in 102 matches. That's enough to be picked as a bowler alone. His batting was a bonus, and he made 14 100s and 22 50s.
Jacques Kallis took 292 wickets in 166 matches. That's not enough to be picked as a bowler alone, but the 13,000 runs @ 55 thing cancels that out.

Shane Watson has 71 wickets in 55 matches. That's not even close to enough to be picked as a bowler alone. He averages 35 with the bat having batted predominantly in the top order. That's not good enough to be picked as a batsman alone batting at 6, let alone opening or at 3.

So you're saying that Watson should not be in the XI. That's fine and you're entitled to your opinion. I stand by my view that Watson was worth persevering with and his record is not as bad as some make out.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Therefore I'd say it is only fair to critique Watson on his contributions as an all-rounder. When compared to the best all-rounders of the past 40 years, his stats are actually OK ...

Watson ... 3,549 runs @ 35.49, 71 wickets @ 33.36 (5,100 balls)

Since the start of 2011, he's scored 1776 runs at 31 and taken 32 wickets at 35.

That's the problem. And he's batting at No.3?

Imran (regarded more as a bowling all-rounder) ... 3,807 runs @ 37.69, 362 wickets @ 22.61 (19,000+ balls)
Botham (more a batting all-rounder) ... 5,200 runs @ 33.54, 383 wickets @ 28.40 (21,800 balls)
Kallis ... 13,000 runs @ 55 (wow!), 292 wickets @ 32.65 (20,100 balls)

Firstly I wouldn't put Watson in the class of the other three. So don't jump down my throat. But I think there's plenty worse.

I'm sure there are plenty worse. We shouldn't be picking them either.

What I will say in Watson's defence is that his batting is comparable to Botham and Imran.

And these guys were bowling all-rounders. If Watson's batting analogous to these guys, it makes you wonder why the hell he is batting at No.3.

Watson's bowling is comparable to Botham and Kallis.

Watson is nowhere near Botham's bowling.

And even Kallis took a shitload more wickets than Watson has.

So it might technically be 'comparable', but the comparison doesn't flatter Watson.

I'd say Watson's bowling is under-rated, and is not far behind Botham in terms of average and strike rate (1 wicket every 72 balls for Watson, compared to 1 wicket for every 59 balls for Botham).

That's crazy.

Botham took 383 wickets at 28. That includes 27 five-wicket hauls. And that average drifted after he turned 30. His first 350 wickets came at an average of 26.

Watson is not in the same neighbourhood. It's like saying Watson's bowling is not far behind Mitchell Johnson's.

 

[Scotland]

So you're saying that Watson should not be in the XI. That's fine and you're entitled to your opinion. I stand by my view that Watson was worth persevering with and his record is not as bad as some make out.

Worth persevering with? He's nearly 34. His performances may improve, but it seems unlikely to at this point and his record is not going to markedly change from here on in.

 

[Craze]

Yes, was worth persevering with. Which means to say that in the past 5 years Australia has lacked batting talent and Watson filled a whole. Whether that continues to be the case is debatable. I certainly think that Watson belonged at 6 and should have stayed there.

 

[The_Reaper]

Kallis' bowling is getting pretty underated on this thread.

When he was younger he was pretty good

 

[Gough]

Kallis' bowling is getting pretty underated on this thread.

When he was younger he was pretty good

One of my cousins was in Kallis' year at Wynberg Boys, and reckoned facing him in the nets, even as lighty, was just terrifying. He also said his IQ and batting average weren't that far apart.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Marsh batted with a lot of maturity in UAE I thought. He looks comfortable batting at test level.

Maxwell and Agar should be nowhere near the test side.

Faulkner I rate highly, but he's a bowling all rounder. I'm not convinced he could bat in the top 6, but I'd be happy to give him a chance based on his ODI performances. He really needs to make some FC scores for Tassie.

Marshs bowling is sub standard, barely FC standard. His batting is also not number 6 standard at the moment, he was only in the team because the selection panel has been fanatical about finding an allrounder since Flintoff tore us a new one in England.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Marshs bowling is sub standard, barely FC standard.

His bowling is easily FC standard. Averages below 30.

 

[Gough]

His bowling is easily FC standard. Averages below 30.

Watched him closely during the Adelaide Test, his bowling looked really handy. If only the Marsh boys weren't held together by sticky tape.

 

[Bradesmaen]

His bowling is easily FC standard. Averages below 30.

SA wickets dont count

 

[The Speaker]

Marshs bowling is sub standard, barely FC standard.

Nonsense.

 

[Scotland]

Marshs bowling is sub standard, barely FC standard. His batting is also not number 6 standard at the moment

He's taken 57 wickets @ 29.3. Not bad for a guy who debuted at 18. The bloke we want him to replace has a FC average of... 29.3.

In his second test he made 87 and 47. If Watson did that he'd be cemented in the XI for another year. His batting is fine.

he was only in the team because the selection panel has been fanatical about finding an allrounder since Flintoff tore us a new one in England.

And he's 23 years old. And has performed well in ODI cricket. And his Dad is Geoff Marsh.

 

[The_Reaper]

And he averaged just under 50 with the bat at first class level over a 12 month period before his test debut, including a double century for Australia A.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I stand by my view that Watson was worth persevering with and his record is not as bad as some make out.

Look at his record in the second half of his career i.e. since the start of 2011.

Marsh's batting is also not number 6 standard at the moment...

What standard is Watson's batting?

I think he's still got some to offer, but I'd like it to be at 6. If he gets a consistent run there he would be fine. Need to shore up that top order with Rogers on the way out too.

How do we do that?