Australian tour of SA

[Lindommer]

This team doesn't need Watson. I've advocated long and loud for Shane to return to the Sheffield Shield for four or five matches and do a shitload of bowling with no physical impairment before the selectors consider his return to the test team. I just don't understand why Watson's "guaranteed" a spot in the test team immediately on his return from the many injuries these past few years.

I sincerely hope Clarke's team the next eight months moves on from Watson. If another opener has to be found, look elsewhere.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Lindommer, you're off you're head if you think this team doesn't need Watson. Now sure, if Doolan and Marsh can perform consistently to a test batsmen standard, despite their FC careers suggesting otherwise, then fair enough, we may not. But if over the next few matches they struggle and even out just like the rest of their careers have then there is no way you can say we are better off without a batsman that averages 40+ at shield level (Only about 10 of them currently playing - 5 other ones of them are already in SA - Rogers, Warner, Clarke, Smith and Hughes) and can also provide specialist bowler quality bowling (however not the workload of one) option. But you cannot say he is superfluous based on one good test from the new batsmen.

Why does Watson need to do a shitload of bowling anyway? He's a better credentialed batsman than any replacement barring Phil Hughes. Because he can bowl he has to bowl a lot more at the expense of his batting? That makes zero sense.

I'd argue if anything, with the 6th highest active FC average of 43.55 (could be a few .00 off), he should go back to shield and do a shitload of batting and rack up some big scores like he has historically done at that level (20 FC 100's and 49 FC 50's in 221 innings), just to prove to everybody like you who instantly rates every inferior batsmen above him simply because he can also bowl too, that he is the one of the top 6 batting options we have right now.

I'm all for replacing Watson if we have the correct option. As I said previously, had it been Hughes (better career record) or North (currently in excellent form) I would have felt that those were reasonable options, though I think Hughes should play out this season here before being tried again.

What I am completely against is this notion of Watson is preventing us finding a long term option and we should be looking to try people in the hope they just become that all of a sudden. Let a bloke come out and take the spot with some fucking runs on the board (figuratively, and literally) and make them earn the spot, because not too many have done that right now and if you're out their throwing these guys up hoping they'll suddenly go from mediocre FC players, to 40+ averaging test batsmen, more likely they'll fail in the long term than succeed. Marsh has been the perfect example. He has not had 2 great inning under pressure straight off the bat. Last time he followed it up with an average of 2.83 over a 4 test series...

 

[Lindommer]

TWaS, in my time watching the Australian test team there's been one only one genuine all-rounder, Alan Davidson. Benaud and Gilmour'd be close but I think even they'd call themselves bowlers who could bat a bit. Watson's a pretender in this category; with the opportunities he's had (51 tests over 10 seasons) he SHOULD be approaching Jacques Kallis's figures. Kallis played 166 tests over 18 seasons, scored 45 centuries and took 292 wickets; Watson has 4 centuries and 68 wickets to date. Kallis is one of the best all-rounders of all time, up there with Botham, Hadlee, Khan, Miller and Sobers, and it's probably a bit harsh to compare Shane with these greats. BUT, he has the ability and hasn't delivered. I don't have the inclination to trawl through his record and highlight his many, many injuries and his numerous scores over 30, nor do I want to find out how many of his 50+ scores were in dead matches; my memory tells me the numbers in these three categories are far too high.

Don't get me wrong, he's a bloody good cricketer. Unfortunately, his injuries have been many and constant. I will defend him here and say he's been rushed back in numerous times before he's completely healed, that's why I've called for him to return to the Sheffield Shield and prove his long-term fitness. For me this latest injury is the final straw, I'd send him home if I was the manager.

Question: how many tests has Watson missed through injury since his first test in January 2005?

On another note I agree with you about Hughes. Phil likes South African pitches and bowlers, surely he's next in line. I have a feeling Lehmann could be the making of young Hughes, give him a go selectors. But only if Rogers, Doolan or Marsh don't deliver.

 

[Braveheart81]

Watson won't be playing in the second test because he isn't right to bowl yet.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Lindommer, his ability and what he's delivered on should be irrelevant when comparing his results to others. That all that should determine the best option. Has his FC batting returns been better than all others? Barring Phil Hughes. yes they in fact have. He in fact outscored Clarke, Smith and Haddin across both Ashes series' (Rogers the only other batsmen to play in all tests), so he must be in reasonable touch too.

Too pick and choose which matches to rate the innings of, due to perceived pressure makes a mockery of test match cricket.

When we start placing different expectations on players based on their potential we stop just selecting the best performers.

If in 9 test matches time we say that Doolan and Marsh are the 2nd and 3rd highest run scorers in that 10 match period, I'll be wrong, but at the same time, they have given no indication based on their past performances that they would. They wouldn't be the top run scorers for their state over their last 10 FC matches even.

In summary. Whilst Watson is still yet to be surpassed as an FC batsmen and one of our top run scorers for Australia, pick him. When he's not, pick the player that is. Comparisons to expectations, other eras, etc. are irrelevant. The only one that is, is the comparison to who his replacement would be. All are currently inferior.

 

[Train Without a Station]

BH, if he is under an injury cloud then good call not to select him. If he can't bowl, he's not 100% fit to bat either.

 

[Braveheart81]

BH, if he is under an injury cloud then good call not to select him. If he can't bowl, he's not 100% fit to bat either.

I read an article about it the other day which explained his ongoing leg injuries in detail.

Apparently he would probably be right to bat in this test but not bowl. Based on their previous experience, it takes close to a week for him to be right to bowl following being right to bat.

Running between wickets doesn't put as much stress on his leg as bowling does.

 

[Train Without a Station]

What if he has to dive for a single, or in the field, etc. You'd have to imagine these factors would be a consideration.

Sure he could "bat", but that's looking at it in a purely theoretical stress. You certainly cannot carry somebody who has physical limitations due to injury. Clarke as captain and unequalled as a batsman would have to be the only exception to this.

Like I mentioned previously, since they are there, I'm keen for Marsh and Doolan to get another chance to succeed/fail anyway. Really can't make the argument to replace him by either based on a single performance.

 

[Braveheart81]

What if he has to dive for a single, or in the field, etc. You'd have to imagine these factors would be a consideration.

Sure he could "bat", but that's looking at it in a purely theoretical stress. You certainly cannot carry somebody who has physical limitations due to injury. Clarke as captain and unequalled as a batsman would have to be the only exception to this.

I'm not arguing for Watson's inclusion (far from it), but I disagree with this. Different activities involve different levels of stress on the body.

Bowling is the most stressful activity in cricket and it is common place for players to be fit to play but not fit to bowl. When Cummins and Starc were making their comebacks earlier this season, both of them started playing grade cricket again purely as batsmen because their bodies were fine to do that.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Oh, I understand you aren't pushing his case.

I just feel in the theoretical sense, yes they are completely different.

However practically I don't agree. If we are talking about back injuries, yes nothing in cricket places a similar stress.

Leg injuries, it only takes one sharp push off in the field or dive for a single, or sharp stop and turn to place a similar stress on the leg. Plus you have to consider that if he knows he's injured it's in his head. Will he be able to forget about it and play completely freely with no inhibitions as though he was 100%? I doubt that.

 

[RugbyReg]

No All Rounders? NO ALL ROUNDERS?

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Allan Robert Border.

 

[light]

Bottom line is that none of us are selectors or in the test squad - we have no idea what kind of physical state he is in.

Clarke has stated repeatedly that Watson is being considered but is by no means guaranteed to play. Read between the lines and that essentially means he will not be playing the next test.

However, if one of our top six batsman can't play for whatever reason, then I think the selectors are completely justified in selecting him as a specialist batsman who could potentially bowl.

 

[Braveheart81]

It's interesting that Warner has been bowling mediums to try and fill the void of a fifth bowler in Watson's absence.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Yeah. If he can throw some decent overs he will be a pretty important option. Outside Watson previously we didn't have a single medium pace part time option. Anybody who bowled on the side was a spinner (Warner, Clarke, Smith).

 

[Braveheart81]

Warner's mediums are pretty average though. He's so short that they are very flat. He swings it a bit but at that pace it's to be expected.

Michael Hussey's mediums were certainly substantially better.

 

[No4918]

No All Rounders? NO ALL ROUNDERS?

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Allan Robert Border.

Bloody QLDers

Border 39 @ 39 runs
Clarke 30 @ 37 runs

 

[Lindommer]

BORDER FROM QUEENSLAND?!

You're obviously unaware, No4918, young Allan grew up in Sydney and started his cricket career playing for Mosman and New South Wales before those thieving bastards from north of the Tweed pinched him as they couldn't raise a decent cricket team themselves. As they did with Ray Lindwall and Greg Chappell. And Jeff Thomson. And Ray Phillips. And Usman Khawaja. I'll stop there.

 

[Braveheart81]

BORDER FROM QUEENSLAND?!

You're obviously unaware, No4918, young Allan grew up in Sydney and started his cricket career playing for Mosman and New South Wales before those thieving bastards north of the Tweed pinched him as they couldn't raise a decent cricket team themselves. As they did with Ray Lindwall and Greg Chappell. And Ray Phillips. And Usman Khawaja. I'll stop there.

You're forgetting two of Queensland's greatest home grown talents to have played in their Sheffield Shield team; Viv Richards and Ian Botham.

 

[RugbyReg]

You're forgetting two of Queensland's greatest home grown talents to have played in their Sheffield Shield team; Viv Richards and Ian Botham.

Woa woa woa. I know we are getting off-topic here but I couldn't let this slide.

I remember as a wee lad watching the 1984/85 Sheffield Shield final with youthful belief that QLD would win this seemingly elusive shield I had heard so much. We were doing ok after the first innings but were ripped asunder in the second innings by that famous NSWmen Imran Kahn. He's premier now or something isn't he?

 

[Lindommer]

Born and bred in Lakemba, true blue to the core. Not premier, Nod, but doing very well thanks to Eddie Obeid.....