Pakistan in Australia

[Boris]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

Watson has always been regarded as a batsmen who bowls, when he was at the bulls he was racking up massive scores which never got mentioned.

Only in the past couple of seasons has he truly gotten this title. He was first selected to play right down the order, number 8 and took a season or two to start going up.

He also averaged pretty badly when he first started.

Along with that he still have trouble converting scores, always getting stuck over lunch breaks and such and he can lose his eye over a short period of time.

Always has gotten lots of 80s and 90s but not that many 100s.

 

[eddiesmith]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

Plus plenty of Ducks when opening the batting

 

[T.A Offspinner]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

Plus plenty of Ducks when opening the batting

from what i've gathered he really isn't your favourite person...

it was well done by him to finally get the monkey off his back...and of the teams back...

 

[Sober Symonds]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

Yes, there was a danger that his issues were becoming more prominent than the the entire team's. Regardless of what I think of him, his inability to convert seemed to be the key focus of the entire match. He is batting really well, but still he has been in the headlines for everything else for the past week or more.

Even the process of getting to his hundred on the day was drawn out to the point of excrutiation. If Watson had taken any longer to get through the 90's, Pakistan could have kept him there till stumps on Day 4 and saved the game.

 

[Boris]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

What I find strange is how he became an opener.

One day he just decided he was going to be an opener pretty much. Opened about 5 times to my memory for Queensland when they were short an opener after a retirement or 5, and didn't succeed in any of them to any extent.

Katich had to pile on literally thousands of runs in that position to make sure he was selected ahead of Jaques after Langer retired. Yet Watson can stroll in and say 'I'm and opener now' and they select him despite not having any experience.

Don't get me wrong, it worked, but what about Jaques and Rogers and the other openers out there that could have done the same, if not better, job and are now feeling as if they are wrong done by after being selected behind a number 5 or 6 batsman for the position they have batted at for years.

It was a bold move, and it paid off for the moment.

 

[Sober Symonds]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

They wanted him in there and that was it. It wouldn't have mattered whatever else happened. Hughes should probably still be in there, but they took what small excuse there was to drop him in order to create an opening (pardon the pun) for Watson. As you would expect, he hasn't looked back.

For now he will have to remain at the top, because he has looked so good there. I can only see Sth Africa as a true test of his ability to cope with whatever that position can throw at him. Otherwise, he's hardly set a foot wrong and they would be loathe to tinker with the current layout.

Merv Hughes (selector, rocket scientist), said on TV yesterday that they did take back-up openers to England for the last Ashes ... that's what Watson and North were, apparently. I suppose he can say anything now, though I struggle to believe that.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

Yes, there was a danger that his issues were becoming more prominent than the the entire team's. Regardless of what I think of him, his inability to convert seemed to be the key focus of the entire match. He is batting really well, but still he has been in the headlines for everything else for the past week or more.

Even the process of getting to his hundred on the day was drawn out to the point of excrutiation. If Watson had taken any longer to get through the 90's, Pakistan could have kept him there till stumps on Day 4 and saved the game.

I don't have a problem with how long Watson took to get his hundred, since it was his first one and considering what had gone before it, not just the near misses, but the injuries, the disappointments and the setbacks. Sure, if it was his 6th hundred then im sure Ponting would have ran a message out saying go for this damn hundred or get out. But this was different.

These type of innings can make cricketers, allow them to free themselves from self-doubt. As we saw with Symonds, he was a different beast once he got that ton in the 2003 WC against Pakistan, before that match he couldn't get the ball off the square. After it, he was an unstoppable force as an ODI batsmen, you could draw a line through that moment and say this was Symonds Pre 2003 and this was Symonds Post 2003.

I'll give you another example.

Graeme Hick was a gun English county batsmen, but who struggled to maximise that talent at test cricket. He averaged 50+ at first class cricket but averages 30+ at test cricket.

Hick was on 98* not out against Australia in the 1995 Ashes series in Australia, yet the captain at the time, Michael Atherton decided to would be a good time to declare. No doubt, probably beliefing that Hick had been told to get his century, hadn't done it, and so he has no-one to blame but himself. Going by how much Atherton talks about Ian Chappell these days, Atherton probably was trying to emulate Chappell's hard as nails captainicy style.

Hick never got an ashes hundred, Alec Stewart would later write that his teammates couldn't believe the decision.

One has to wonder that if Hick did make that hundred whether it would have been his awakening and his making as a test batsmen of worth.

It is a perfect example of the need to think about these type of things, Watson could take as long as he likes IMO.

 

[Boris]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

They wanted him in there and that was it. It wouldn't have mattered whatever else happened. Hughes should probably still be in there, but they took what small excuse there was to drop him in order to create an opening (pardon the pun) for Watson. As you would expect, he hasn't looked back.

For now he will have to remain at the top, because he has looked so good there. I can only see Sth Africa as a true test of his ability to cope with whatever that position can throw at him. Otherwise, he's hardly set a foot wrong and they would be loathe to tinker with the current layout.

Merv Hughes (selector, rocket scientist), said on TV yesterday that they did take back-up openers to England for the last Ashes ... that's what Watson and North were, apparently. I suppose he can say anything now, though I struggle to believe that.

Yeah, I agree. Just put him anywhere because he said he could go anywhere, so they took the opportunity.

I do find it strange though, that they didn't take a punt and put North or even Hussey opening, because really Hussey does actually have a good record opening, although that was in good form where anything was possible. I thought shoving him there was a bit rude by them.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

Well they want Watson's bowling, that is what Rogers, Jacques, Hughes and co all have against them - they don't bowl and really none of them are much to write home about in the fielding department.

Watson can at least field at slip.

Watson can also bat just as well as all of those players, and he can also bowl you 10-15 overs and get you 1 or 2 wickets.

Watson has taken 9 wickets @ 26 this summer, that's what we were missing this time last year. When we were getting into a position to bowl SA out but we couldn't finish off the innings.

Watson IMO is a dark-horse for the Allan Border Medal - he is a fine player - and the best part is, I always knew he could do it.

 

[Boris]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

Well they want Watson's bowling, that is what Rogers, Jacques, Hughes and co all have against them - they don't bowl and really none of them are much to write home about in the fielding department.

Watson can at least field at slip.

Watson can also bat just as well as all of those players, and he can also bowl you 10-15 overs and get you 1 or 2 wickets.

Watson has taken 9 wickets @ 26 this summer, that's what we were missing this time last year. When we were getting into a position to bowl SA out but we couldn't finish off the innings.

Watson IMO is a dark-horse for the Allan Border Medal - he is a fine player - and the best part is, I always knew he could do it.

Yeah I know this all.

One thing though, he isn't as good a batsman as at least Jaques for one thing. While playing Tests Jaques has an average of over 50 after only playing a few. Jaques has that ability to be as good as Langer, Hayden, Slater, Taylor, and keep going, it's just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Given the chance he could have flourished, but growing up with Langer and Hayden is an unlucky thing to do. Jaques has the big score consistently skill, just has to get into the side first, which is unlikely now.

The same could be said of Rogers.

Watson is a batsman, yes, but hasn't always been as good as he is now. I don't think he could go for a couple seasons straight scoring plus 1000 runs with 5 centuries per season. He isn't that sort of batsman that is suited to that opening position.

And we absolutely need his bowling as you say.

Watson can't get the Allan Border Medal now due to his fines, or so one would expect, and not showing a general spirit of the game as is required for the medal. But other than that, I think it has what it takes to become that.

 

[breeno]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

Yeah I know this all.

One thing though, he isn't as good a batsman as at least Jaques for one thing. While playing Tests Jaques has an average of over 50 after only playing a few. Jaques has that ability to be as good as Langer, Hayden, Slater, Taylor, and keep going, it's just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Given the chance he could have flourished, but growing up with Langer and Hayden is an unlucky thing to do. Jaques has the big score consistently skill, just has to get into the side first, which is unlikely now.

The same could be said of Rogers.

Watson is a batsman, yes, but hasn't always been as good as he is now. I don't think he could go for a couple seasons straight scoring plus 1000 runs with 5 centuries per season. He isn't that sort of batsman that is suited to that opening position.

And we absolutely need his bowling as you say.

Watson can't get the Allan Border Medal now due to his fines, or so one would expect, and not showing a general spirit of the game as is required for the medal. But other than that, I think it has what it takes to become that.

He hasn't always been as good a bat as them, but what has that got to do with the now?

Since his inclusion in the Ashes, I'm pretty sure he has the best batting record in our team. That would suggest he's performing better than anyone in our team with the bat. How can you say Jaques would be doing better?

I feel he is an underrated player with both forms of his cricket, and at the moment should be mentioned in the same breath as Ponting or Clarke. Averaging 70+ since his inclusion in the Ashes is not easy, especially when he is opening the batting. He is our most in form batsman, so to say Jaques is definitely a better bat than him is a bit rash.

 

[Sober Symonds]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

...Rogers, Jacques, Hughes and co ... they don't bowl and really none of them are much to write home about in the fielding department.
Watson can at least field at slip.

Really haven't seen much of Rogers fielding. I do remember though, when he played that Test a couple of years ago he didn't do much with the bat but took an absolute corker of a catch at backward point or thereabouts. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I do find it strange though, that they didn't take a punt and put North or even Hussey opening, because really Hussey does actually have a good record opening, although that was in good form where anything was possible. I thought shoving him there was a bit rude by them.

Agreed. I said at the time Hussey would have been a good choice to put back into an opener's spot. That's how he got into the team to begin with, and form has seemed to desert him where he was.

It's history now, but one can't help thinking Watson won't remain as opener for too long - as an all-rounder. Once we face stiff opposition where he spends 2 days in the field (inc.bowling 20+ overs) before being sent in with an hour to go, I fancy he will be under a new sort of pressure.

I don't have a problem with how long Watson took to get his hundred, since it was his first one and considering what had gone before it, not just the near misses, but the injuries, the disappointments and the setbacks. Sure, if it was his 6th hundred then im sure Ponting would have ran a message out saying go for this damn hundred or get out. But this was different.
...Watson could take as long as he likes IMO.

That viewpoint would appear to come from someone interested more in Watson than the team. Yes, there was enough time to indulge him on this occasion, but there has to be a limit LtD. No individual is bigger than the team, and to say he can take as long as he likes is a bit rich. The best lessons are learnt abiding by team standards. It could also be a dangerous thing to put his personal achievements ahead of everyone else.

During the labourious process of getting from 89 to 100, there is little doubt Watson forgot about everything except those three figures.

 

[T.A Offspinner]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

and to spend 60 odd minutes plus lunch in the 90's is taking it too far, and the main argument of the issue is that it's a team sport, the individual milestones should be an added bonus.

So when he's spending this much time just to make it to a personal goal then he should really wake up to himself and remember he's in a TEAM and it's not just the shane watson show...

Yes he is a good player but If he could just stop being self indulged it'd be not only better for the team but also for himself... and maybe people would stop hating on him...

 

[Boris]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

He hasn't always been as good a bat as them, but what has that got to do with the now?

Since his inclusion in the Ashes, I'm pretty sure he has the best batting record in our team. That would suggest he's performing better than anyone in our team with the bat. How can you say Jaques would be doing better?

I feel he is an underrated player with both forms of his cricket, and at the moment should be mentioned in the same breath as Ponting or Clarke. Averaging 70+ since his inclusion in the Ashes is not easy, especially when he is opening the batting. He is our most in form batsman, so to say Jaques is definitely a better bat than him is a bit rash.

I agree completely there.

I just feel that had Langer or Hayden not been an opener Jaques would have been in the team for his whole career and would end up averaging around 50 at his retirement. He would be the off the shelf opening great. Watson for me, even if you take out his injuries, isn't going to make that status. I mean even with him averaging 70 in that position there are still people questioning his ability to bat there! Some of it may be opinion, yes, but it has to speak for something.

Jacques has been injured though and wouldn't and/or couldn't be put in the team and hasn't shown a great deal of form either. But if Jaques and Watson were having a batting duel, I think Jaques would win.

 

[eddiesmith]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

Really haven't seen much of Rogers fielding. I do remember though, when he played that Test a couple of years ago he didn't do much with the bat but took an absolute corker of a catch at backward point or thereabouts. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Also took a couple of screamers at backward point in a recent one day game, is a fine fielder and fielding is definately not an area that Watson would have over him

 

[Boris]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

For that matter Jaques isn't too bad a bat pad/in close leg side fielder, despite having butter fingers.

Watson holds my personal record as the most catches dropped in one match that I have seen with my own eyes. 7 catches dropped over 2 innings, 5 in the first one. That was the Sheffield Shield final against the Vics last year and if he had held on to all of them, all but one fairly regulation too, I think the Bulls would have been very close to a win. Watson has nothing to write home about with his fielding IMO.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

and to spend 60 odd minutes plus lunch in the 90's is taking it too far, and the main argument of the issue is that it's a team sport, the individual milestones should be an added bonus.

So when he's spending this much time just to make it to a personal goal then he should really wake up to himself and remember he's in a TEAM and it's not just the shane watson show...

Yes he is a good player but If he could just stop being self indulged it'd be not only better for the team but also for himself... and maybe people would stop hating on him...

As I said earlier, I agree with the notion that under normal circumstances he took to long to get the ton, but this was different. As I said earlier, this could well be the making of Watson as a player. I have no problem with the time he took, especially when you consider the Pakistan team resorted to the old 8-1 field and bowling the ball a foot outside off.

 

[T.A Offspinner]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

That is a fair point there, I had actually forgot that they had a field like that set for their bowling, and honestly I don't think anyone here can say they'd be able to score freely with a situation like that.

I still have to agree with alot of others with the fact being that watson could be very easily out-classed by a number of shield players who's position is actually at 1 or 2 BUT as time oes on he can only get better...

It's really a matter of whether or not he can keep going at his rate he is now or if he drops of and starts getting consistant low scores.

 

[Boris]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

But it's also a problem if he isn't scoring big. 80s and 90s every innings is great, but the best openers can bat through an innings, and if given the chance should be able to. Watson could do that if there was a huge collapse, but not at any other time.

True openers who have been there their whole career, ie Jaques, Rogers, Hughes (short but it fits) have the skill and experience at doing that. Watson has opened for about 5 domestic matches, and not once has he batted with anyone below number 4. In international cricket the same applies too, I don't think I remember him batting with Clarke at any point (when he is at five). This could just be luck, but he gets to his 80 off 100 balls and falls as the first or second wicket. Take any opener from the past 15 years and you will see they all can bat all the way down and most of them have not outs to their name.

And then there is the 'feel' of him. He doesn't look like an opener. He looks like he's opening an ODI, not just because of the strike rate, but the general way he goes about it. I just don't think 'opener' when I see him.

 

[T.A Offspinner]

Re: Pakistan in Australia

plus i feel he really struggles playing cut shots and flicking off his pads which alot of openers should have, that's why i have to bat at number 4 or lower. I'm not doubting his ability or skill but he would be more suited lower in the order and i would also like to see a complete shuffle of the batting...

Call me up on this if you think it's too radical but:
1. katich
2. hughes/jaques
3. ponting
4. clarke
5. north
6. watson
7. haddin
8. johnson
9. whoever bowler
10. who ever bowler
11. david boon?


I just think that the way watson plays he need to be further down the order because you are right, he can score fine but he can't bat through like someone of chris gayles standard or sehwag...