Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

Top Contributors
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

Sober Symonds;377831 said:
Ponting's not our best slipsman ever ... not even close. Watson's not our worst. He just has a bigger confidence issue than most, and it can be ill-afforded in that position. Good on him though, we need whoever we can get doing it well in there.
Click to expand...

I wasn't saying Ponting was our best slipper ever, but rather one of the better fielders in general ever. Who else can field absolutely anywhere on the field such as he does? And besides he is one of the better slip fielders that any of us would have seen in any of our life times, he doesn't put down many.

Watson is great in the slips... on his day. He has his bad days, such as the SS final last year where he put down 4 or 5 throughout the game, in which I think Queensland would have had a pretty good run at (or perhaps a start of one) the win if he had held on to them. Just one example, but he is much better in the point area.
 
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

Boris;377820 said:
Hey eddie, nice to see Siddle is getting into bowling averages above even that of Lee's!

The only bowler to not have any effect on the Windies in an absolute thrashing.

Surely Clark has to have a go at Adelaide. Wouldn't want any other bowler bowling for you on such a road.
Click to expand...

Your resilience is to be admired, Boris. To wait as long as you have for Siddle to have such minimal impact as he did in the First Test and be able to point to anything resembling under-achievement is a true test of man's ability to perservere.

Siddle is not our greatest ever paceman, although you expect him to be. Like Hilfenhaus, he has time on his side though, and a rare tick to the selectors for recognising this. His Test career so far has predominantly consisted of matches against strong opposition on foreign soil. We have, after all, succumb in 3 or our past 4 Test series. He has not yet had the luxury of blasting away at inferior sub-continental batsmen in favourable home conditions. He has not played against Bangladesh, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, and just once so far against the West Indies. Still, his average is less than your boy's, and will probably remain so despite the less-than-dominant era he plays in.

You will be glad to hear an opportunity opened up with an unfortunate knee injury to Man-of-the-Match Hilfy. A replacement has been named ... Clint McKay. Ouch!:D
 
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

Sober Symonds;377842 said:
Your resilience is to be admired, Boris. To wait as long as you have for Siddle to have such minimal impact as he did in the First Test and be able to point to anything resembling under-achievement is a true test of man's ability to perservere.

Siddle is not our greatest ever paceman, although you expect him to be. Like Hilfenhaus, he has time on his side though, and a rare tick to the selectors for recognising this. His Test career so far has predominantly consisted of matches against strong opposition on foreign soil. We have, after all, succumb in 3 or our past 4 Test series. He has not yet had the luxury of blasting away at inferior sub-continental batsmen in favourable home conditions. He has not played against Bangladesh, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, and just once so far against the West Indies. Still, his average is less than your boy's, and will probably remain so despite the less-than-dominant era he plays in.

You will be glad to hear an opportunity opened up with an unfortunate knee injury to Man-of-the-Match Hilfy. A replacement has been named ... Clint McKay. Ouch!:D
Click to expand...

Believe me, I have warmed a lot Siddle, he did well in the Ashes and very well in the tour of India for the ODIs.

I don't want this to be an average war once again, I only said the average thing because its a common funny comment that eddie makes to get me hooked on Lee's undeserved average. Just thought I'd repay the favour and it did work, I hooked someone. :p

The problem that I have is that young talent is meant to be explosive and really upping the ante on everyone. Like Hilfenhaus, he has really given it his best shot and is taking wickets for small amounts of runs just working as a quiet achiever and doing what he is meant to be.

They say players can only get better. I find that is true, take the example of Lee once again, he turned from a nightmarish pie chucker to a line and length bowler with a devastating short ball and yorker, that is economical but has bad spells and gets a flogging more than you would probably want. But he has played 70 Tests and has a better wicket/match ratio than McGrath.

Then there is Stuart Clark, the only reason people don't like him is because he is boring. People forget that he has been a force around domestic sides of late, even in ODers. He has an average of 23, boosted up by the 44 he is averaging this year after the Fifth Ashes Test and an unfortunate average against Bangladesh of 77. He has 24 Tests, and while playing with McGrath he proved himself to be capable of the same heights if he had not played in the same era as him. People forgot very quickly after his injury the sort of bowling he was capable of and quickly found a new replacement in Siddle.

Siddle can improve and will, but firstly I would like him to prove himself at domestic level. He has played one full season, not showing and hint of consistency but rather just an explosive effort in one season. As good as he has shown himself to be of late, which isn't great but applaudable, he still doesn't look international quality to my eyes. When I watch him he looks very rough around the edges and has lots of bad balls and spells, interlaced with good ones. It is a risk for the selectors to want to keep playing him when his form is dropping more and more since South Africa, hasn't had the same effect since there, even on a Gabba pitch against a collapsing minnow like team (poking at one game, I know, but still). He also seems to be a worse person than Watson when it comes to likability.

I'm just saying, what have Lee and Clark, especially Clark, done to get dropped? Get the Allan Border medal, be the top two best bowlers in the world, get injured and be taken over by a big gamble in Hilfenhaus to begin with, and some youngster nobody had heard of before he was picked.

As I warm to him more and more, I still have my doubts as to whether he should be in the side yet. I would prefer to see a veteran of sorts lead the attack rather than the slightly wayward Johnson.

And just because McKay has been picked as a replacement, won't mean he is actually playing, they just let him know he might be (hopefully not, can't afford another youngster).
 
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

Give the West Indies a choice of facing Clark or Bollinger at Adelaide and I guarentee they'd prefer Bollinger play.
 
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

So they should pick McKay instead :D

I would love to know when Lee and Clark were ever considered the 2 best bowlers in the world? Or was it because Lee played a great series in a very bowler friendly conditions against the might of the Windies? Because after that high he went crashing down fast, as did Clark and Australias form dropped

Lets remember this about Lee and Clark, one of them has played in every series loss by Australia in the last 12 months, the only series neither played, Australia won
 
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

eddiesmith;377928 said:
So they should pick McKay instead :D

I would love to know when Lee and Clark were ever considered the 2 best bowlers in the world? Or was it because Lee played a great series in a very bowler friendly conditions against the might of the Windies? Because after that high he went crashing down fast, as did Clark and Australias form dropped

Lets remember this about Lee and Clark, one of them has played in every series loss by Australia in the last 12 months, the only series neither played, Australia won
Click to expand...

Even before that, when McGrath and Warne were still playing. They were both going very well, which enabled them to sit alongside each other at the top of the ICC rankings at McGrath and Warne's retirment, Lee was 1st and Clark was third or fourth and they are still right up there currently despite not having played.

Lee was injured and sick in India, and so was Clark. Lee played on against South Africa when Clark went into surgery. Lee perhaps shouldn't have done that, as he was severely put back by it, but still was averaging 30 when out of form, compared to his 21 of the two years previously. After Clark had his 'form slump' in India his average of 13 over there increase to 22. Not too bad if you ask me.

I say play Lee in Adelaide now, I have changed my mind. Lee has a good record against the Windies and they are scared of him. Might as well let him have one final show off before he probably never gets another game again.
 
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

Let it be said I too am a fan of Clark. You're right, he hasn't done anything much wrong. It's just that timing thing where he was out and they needed to find replacements who, without reaching dizzy heights showed the selectors enough to earn further opportunities. In light of the fact that their batting stocks are again ageing rapidly, Hilditch & co.would be keen to err on the side of youth when it comes to the bowlers to avoid criticism over picking an old team. As a result, Clark and Lee are made to work even harder.

Clark is a wonderful bowler, though it may be that they're waiting for him to return some big figures before reconsideration and it's just not happening.
 
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

Just the main question that bounces around me head is, why does everyone 'prepare for the future'? Fair enough, pick one or two players that are going to be part of the long term plan ten years from now, but you also have to remember that the team is playing cricket... right now. If you keep picking a side for the future, then that future will never come. Clark was picked, although pretty old at the time, to continue as McGrath's protege for a few years to help lessen the blow of losing him. That's how I see it, because they are the same bowler in essence and replacing Gillespie like that shouldn't have been on. They were planning for the future there, while still having the firepower in the present. Now they are planning for the future... but there is no firepower for the present. By then time they finally have a team that everyone is comfortable with, they will have dropped in rankings further and keep losing and drawing Tests, while probably still winning Test series, but nobody will walk out of it going 'that was an excellent series, showclassing exactly what cricket has to got' rather 'that series was okay, but the selections were poor and it was boring cricket'. How could an Ashes series ever be boring, as told by many people?

It's time to plan for the current as well. Get an older guy in to show they young 'uns what they are meant to be doing while not letting a young guy burn themselves out trying their hardest.

Remember, when Clark and Lee first came into the side, I absolutely hated them, perhaps more than Siddle right now. Clark replaced my favourite pace bowler in Gillespie and Lee replaced the ever lovable Flemming. And now I'm fighting for their existence because some young aspirant in Siddle and a strange pick in Hilfenhaus (for me it was anyway) are taking the two bowlers that have worked their backsides off with brilliant results to get there.
 
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

Anyone who has seen Clark bowl since the Indian series last year realises that Clark needs conditions to be in his favour. In a state game a few weeks back he was bowling at 120 km/hour, he was fodder in the last ashes test match and his age is not helping.

I like Bollinger, in a way his similar to Siddle in that he'll run in all day, he also has the ability to take the ball away from the leftie which will complement Johnson's ability to drift the ball into the left hander.

On the Adelaide Oval Clark will be ineffective, it is the right decision.

Bollinger, IMO, is just as good as Hilfenhaus and Siddle and if he takes his chance he could make it difficult for Hilfenhaus to force his way back into the team.
 
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

I like Clark for Adelaide oval because the only seeming 'weakness' of the Aussie side in Brisbane against the Windies was the bowling. Although it enforced the follow on, the Windies kept getting on top of it for a while until a stupid shot let them down. If that was a much better team playing out there at that Gabba there would have been a very big total made against them.

That makes me think that the Windies have a half decent batting line-up if they get the luck to not get out straight away. Clark is a bowler that can bowl on a batting pitch very well, he has a pretty decent record at Adelaide after only 2 games there, and is just one of those bowlers that could stop the flow of runs on that road.

Bollinger in my mind seems to be a ODI bowler. I like him, sure, but he impressed me less than Siddle in his first game or two. Also means we will have to left hand pace bowlers in the team, which I don't like because I like having the lefty as a tactic to bring him in for something different, instead of having even numbers.

Give him a chance though, let him have his turn.
 
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

Look Clark's days in the test team are over, he has doesn't worry batsmen unless there is something in the wicket, anyone who has seen him bowl lately and who knows a thing about the game would realise this.

It is time to move on - there are better bowlers around, Clark won't be playing in the 10/11 Ashes, why play him now when we can play a better bowler at this point in time.

Clark was finished since the 2008 India tour.
 
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

In my mind it's like putting down your best working dog on the farm because he ate your favourite chicken.
 
Re: West Indies in Australia

a for effort;378349 said:
The Australian selectors policy in recent times has always been to back the guys already in the team and allow them to ride out form slumps if they've shown in the past that they can do the job, especially if the team is still winning. In the last 5 years, the only major 'droppings' I can think of are Gillespie and Hughes, and they were both reactionary responses to Australia losing an Ashes test. The vast majority of player turnover has been through retirements (Langer, Hayden, Martyn, Gilchrist, Warne, MacGill, McGrath). Siddle is doing enough to keep his spot in the team, and unless Bollinger (or anyone else) starts banging on the door with bags of wickets, it's unlikely that the Australian bowling lineup will change much.
Click to expand...

They have been sticking with players who have cemented their spot in the team.

I'm not sure if 13 games of some inconsistency isn't cementing. However 74 and 310 wickets...
 
Re: West Indies in Australia

Boris;378351 said:
They have been sticking with players who have cemented their spot in the team.

I'm not sure if 13 games of some inconsistency isn't cementing. However 74 and 310 wickets...
Click to expand...

Forgot about Lee, but I guess you could attribute that to getting injured at the wrong times.
 
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

Boris;378329 said:
In my mind it's like putting down your best working dog on the farm because he ate your favourite chicken.
Click to expand...

No this situation is like your best working dog died of salmonella from eating your favourite chicken.

All the Clark doubters may well be wrong but that doesn't matter. The reality is that he is finishedas a test cricketer.
 
Re: Australian Test XI - Selection Thread

Thumbs up;378363 said:
No this situation is like your best working dog died of salmonella from eating your favourite chicken.

All the Clark doubters may well be wrong but that doesn't matter. The reality is that he is finishedas a test cricketer.
Click to expand...

Sad how our best cricketers are thrown out like this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top