Test XI Selection Thread

Top Contributors
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

I have no doubt Steve Smith is ready for test cricket, if he is selected to play.

This kid has just taken 7 wickets in an innings, smashed a century in the same game.

His one of the leading run scores in the shield.

What more do you want?

Fact is most of you are scared that his only 20 years old.

This Smith kid can play, lets get him into the fray.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

Yes but you're not seeing the point. He is the next choice player in almost everyone's mind. But that's the problem next choice. It's far better for him to either be in the team or playing shield. If he sits around like all young people he gets impatient and that will only sour him.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

I'm scared he's a 20 year old for a reason. If he's a batsman I don't mind him being so young, although I like to have a 25 year old cap for that.

I can't work out what he is yet though. He has an aura of nothing much in particular about him.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

WTF Boris?

He averages 50+ with the bat.

Has just taken 7 wickets in an innings in the same match as he blasted another 100.

He is a panther in the field.

I'll break it down for you.

Smith is capable of batting in the top 6 with Haddin at 7.

Smith is also capable of supporting Nathan Hauritz in the spin department.

In time, Smith could well become the number 1 spinner.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

LIONS then DAYLIGHT;392453 said:
WTF Boris?

He averages 50+ with the bat.

Has just taken 7 wickets in an innings in the same match as he blasted another 100.

He is a panther in the field.

I'll break it down for you.

Smith is capable of batting in the top 6 with Haddin at 7.

Smith is also capable of supporting Nathan Hauritz in the spin department.

In time, Smith could well become the number 1 spinner.
Click to expand...

You said it yourself. In time.

He has to prove it at domestic level first. He has been averaging 70 over 9 games. We all know 9 games is the barest of fractions of a career. Gotta have another season before I consider him.

You are asking for a 20 year old to work out what he is while play for AUSTRALIA, perhaps the number 1 team in the world, or soon to be. Does he even know if he's a batsman or a bowler yet?

When he gets to international level every other team is going to jump on him. They are going to analyse him to the bone. Don't want another Phil Hughes happening. Give him another year and we will know for sure what he's like. We have other batsman, North/White, and other spinners, Hauritz.

No need to jeopardise his ability to fulfill lustful dreams.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

What do you mean 'work out' what he is?

Why does he have to prove it at domestic level?

His batting this year warrants him a spot in the squad on that alone.

This guy has got so much potential, lets not sit around for another season because this guy is ready to start winning games for us now.

His leg spinning has come on in leaps and bounds since that net with Warnie, the guy is in great form?

Why wait another season?

Stop being so conservative, have a crack.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

We had a crack with Hughes...
We had a crack with Siddle...
We are having a crack with McKay.
People want to have a crack with White.

Hughes and Siddle so far have only been hampered by international games.

Hughes could have had one more season at full flight domestically and shoved his case right in the face of the selectors. Now all that has happened is he has had his technique picked apart by the best in the world, walked all over and got deposited back on the domestic scene to try and get going again, on some part unsuccessfully. Now Watson has capitalised on his spot and I doubt he is getting it back until Watson/Katich calls it a day or fails catastrophically.

Siddle could have had one more season to really push his case. All that happened is that he got to international level in 9 games, played all three forms at once and without the time and effort being put into fully analysing his technique and effectiveness he has now maybe caused himself irrepairable damage through injury and burn out. Quite obvious in his statistics that things went wrong. Now what is happening, he's already been injured more often the Brett Lee has, and that's a big statement. One more season and the bowling line up is still open to lots of debate, he would still be improving and developing at the level he should be at, and he would have zoomed into the side more effectively around about now.

McKay I think will be alright, but he's had a little more experience.

White has the experience now as well, but how many people do you want to take a punt on at once???

Smith should work out what he is... whether he is a bowler, batsman, bit of both, all of both, or more of one than the other. Now he is just anything and everything to no real effect but to blast everyone away with stupidly high stastics.

Put him in the side and he might get going for a little while, but the other teams will sort him out in no time. Not a good choice for the Ashes.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

I disagree fundamentally with what your saying.

You just don't get it.

Hughes was dropped on a gut feel by Ponting - sometimes selectors go with those things.

Hughes technique wasn't 'picked apart' - he just had to make a minor adjustment.

Watson has now come into the side and is our best player.

IMO Peter Siddle was playing injured most of this summer. Why? Because he wanted to cement a spot in the team.

All I can say is that I'm glad your not picking the test team.

Sometimes you can't wait for another season to see a player.

Hughes and Smith will both play 100+ tests for Australia. We already know that.

Both of them are capable of representing Australia now if the chance comes up.

You are far to conservative.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

Siddle would be in the Test team now full time and not playing with an injury if he wasn't picked. You must remember that I'm not against Siddle himself in essence, but against him being in the team while he was as young as he was.

You can't pick people based on 9 games that make up their WHOLE career when they are going to play 100+ games for their country. Sure these players can come in for other injured players just for a sniff at it, but not permanent positions after the failing of another.

Personally I think this is the perfect time to put White in the side if North fails in the first Test. I have grown fonder of White as I think he has matured now.

If Hughes' technique wasn't picked apart then why did they bowl bouncers at him? Did they just think it was fun?

Watson has come into the side because Hughes failed. He failed because he was picked without the evidence to back him.

Smith doesn't have that either. 9 games. Big whoop. wait until he's played 18 and then see what he's like. We are considering him here as a batsman of the Australian team of the future.

What evidence do you have that says Smith is a better, more consistent batsman than White? Smith averages 75 for 9 games, White averages 50 over at least 30.

There's a difference between being conservative and ruining a young player's career. Stepping up from domestic to Tests is a big step and the increase in technology is amazingly huge from one to the next. Soon as he steps up they are going to be swarming all over him, and England are pretty damn good when it comes to their little tactics like that.

New Zealand shouldn't be took much of a problem in the Tests at all so anyone can play and play well.

Feldman is averaging 75 with the bat over 5 games. Let's get him into the side. :p
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

Boris;392457 said:
You said it yourself. In time.

He has to prove it at domestic level first. He has been averaging 70 over 9 games. We all know 9 games is the barest of fractions of a career. Gotta have another season before I consider him.

You are asking for a 20 year old to work out what he is while play for AUSTRALIA, perhaps the number 1 team in the world, or soon to be. Does he even know if he's a batsman or a bowler yet?

When he gets to international level every other team is going to jump on him. They are going to analyse him to the bone. Don't want another Phil Hughes happening. Give him another year and we will know for sure what he's like. We have other batsman, North/White, and other spinners, Hauritz.

No need to jeopardise his ability to fulfill lustful dreams.
Click to expand...

Does he have to be anything? Can't he just be an all rounder. He knows what he is, now stop making petty excuses for your dislike of the decision and back up your argument with some real evidence or at least some bold statements rather than being indecisive.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

breeno;392477 said:
Does he have to be anything? Can't he just be an all rounder. He knows what he is, now stop making petty excuses for your dislike of the decision and back up your argument with some real evidence or at least some bold statements rather than being indecisive.
Click to expand...

Well are you going to put a bowling all rounder at 6???
Are you going to put a batting all rounder at 6???
Are you going to put a bowler at 6???

So far he's had a good time with everything. What happens when his true colours shine through?

I would like to say the same to you. Back up your statement with evidence because I think I have supplied enough. My evidence is the lack of evidence that he should be playing.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

Ponting worked well being selected around Smith's age, Martyn probably not so well..
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

We can put Ponting in the Tendulkar category of no age limitations whatsoever.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

Boris, your use of Phil Hughes as an example is just crazy. If Hughes had spent another season of First Class cricket smashing hundreds, do you think he would have been a better batsman coming in? No, because at First Class level, the flaw in his technique wasn't exploited. Him coming into the Test side when he did was, long term, the best possible thing for him. It revealed his technical difficulty, and forced him to rectify it if he wanted to get back into the Test team, while still letting him show to us all that he has what it takes to score many a hundred at the highest level and win games of his own bat. He has since gone back to First Class cricket, made some adjustments, had a slow start to the year as a result, but in the second half went bang and piled on the runs, hopefully (I haven't seen him bat in FC cricket this year) with the technical flaw fixed. He has been selected for the NZ tour, suggesting this is the case.

Peter Siddle is injured. That could just as easily have happened playing SS and FRC games. Playing Tests had nothing to do with it.

Smith knows exactly what he is right now: a hard-hitting but sensible batting allrounder who has the potential to become a perfectly balanced allrounder.

What did you mean about "when his true colours come through"?

For the record, if he's selected, he should come in at 7, Haddin at 6.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

Firstly it is quite obvious that everyone gets blinded by the glitz and glamour of having young players, and it is essential to have them, but they have to be used correctly.

BabyBlues;392504 said:
Boris, your use of Phil Hughes as an example is just crazy. If Hughes had spent another season of First Class cricket smashing hundreds, do you think he would have been a better batsman coming in? No, because at First Class level, the flaw in his technique wasn't exploited. Him coming into the Test side when he did was, long term, the best possible thing for him. It revealed his technical difficulty, and forced him to rectify it if he wanted to get back into the Test team, while still letting him show to us all that he has what it takes to score many a hundred at the highest level and win games of his own bat. He has since gone back to First Class cricket, made some adjustments, had a slow start to the year as a result, but in the second half went bang and piled on the runs, hopefully (I haven't seen him bat in FC cricket this year) with the technical flaw fixed. He has been selected for the NZ tour, suggesting this is the case.
Click to expand...

He was picked in the wrong place at the wrong time. He came in against the then number 1 side in the world.

They didn't do their homework and bowled to him in all the wrong places, but if they did like England did then Steyn, Morkel and Ntini would have made a mess of him. Hughes in that case was picked as a long term replacement. There were no other openers around the fray at the time and it looked like he was going to keep playing for a long time. That was not the case because he bomb dived, which put frankly I predicted when he played his first Test. Want me to bring up the quote if I can find it?

How could you know he wouldn't have it corrected at State level? He'd played a whole one season for the opposition to work him out. Then as soon as everyone knew it he struggled at domestic level as well. Now he has most likely corrected the issue, haven't seen him bounced out from the little I have seen.

Would have been much better to have given him the correct exposure at the correct time. Not a burst then and we will probably not see him again properly and successfully for another few years. He will only come in for injuries and quite likely score lowly because he has only the one game to do anything.

See the problem there? If they waited like they should have he would have 20 FC games under his belt in the same time he had 10 and would have undoubted evidence under his name should he big good enough.

BabyBlues;392504 said:
Peter Siddle is injured. That could just as easily have happened playing SS and FRC games. Playing Tests had nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

That is true, but less likely. In his whole 9 games he played he wouldn't have had the time to experience the difficulties of bowling, he rode on a wave of success.

If he injured himself he would have been out for a few months, recovered properly and got playing again.

As LtD said he has been probably playing the whole summer with an injury, just so he didn't lose his spot. That sort of pressure isn't quite as bad at state level. He wouldn't have had to play ODD, T20D and FC, he could have taken the T20 off for example to recover. If you are given the chance to play for Australia would you turn it down?

He was an unproven entity. If he had come off good then it was a worthwhile risk. He didn't come off and now he has been mistreated. Fine line.

I fear for his injury concerns. I think his future isn't as bright as it should be.

BabyBlues;392504 said:
Smith knows exactly what he is right now: a hard-hitting but sensible batting allrounder who has the potential to become a perfectly balanced allrounder.

What did you mean about "when his true colours come through"?

For the record, if he's selected, he should come in at 7, Haddin at 6.
Click to expand...

Can anyone do some research on Smith and pull up anything on his Second XI contributions, and different stats for different levels? Maybe then I will be able to demonstrate that this is more likely than not just a burst of unpredicted greatness, he will settle down soon, then what will he be.

He is being picked for a hotly contested spot in a permanent position there, not an injury replacement or go between. 2 years down the track I want to know whether we will be doubting selecting him because he turns into an all rounder that averages 30 with bat and ball and doesn't really fit anywhere?

EDIT: I'm not able to look for this myself due to me using up all my free time writing this :p
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

"Smith is only pretending to be a top-quality bat at the moment. He shouldn't be picked because his stats are really good and that somehow indicates that he is not a world-class batsman"

Do you see how ridiculous the above statement is, Boris? Sadly, it is basically paraphrasing your own argument. Who really gives a toss about his 2nd XI stats (For the record, he has been scoring centuries for fun in grade cricket all season, with his dominance bordering on a pisstake when he decides to face up cackhanded and still smash sixes). Please give some sort of justification for why you think his amazing recent form is just a 'burst of unpredicted greatness', because what you are doing now is rehashed the same already debunked points that you were at the start of the thread.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

Then why the hell has he been thought of and treated like a bowler?
This makes absolutely no sense to me, any of this thread.

Once again people are responding to my arguments with nothing.
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

Boris;392515 said:
Then why the hell has he been thought of and treated like a bowler?
This makes absolutely no sense to me, any of this thread.

Once again people are responding to my arguments with nothing.
Click to expand...
Its nothing new when the latest hot prodigy with the massive media bandwagon behind them is in form, next will be Khawaja

Some would have a test team full of 20 year olds, wouldnt matter that they wouldnt win a test series for 10 years...
 
Re: Test XI Selection Thread - NZ Tour

Boris;392515 said:
Then why the hell has he been thought of and treated like a bowler?
Click to expand...
He hasn't

Boris;392515 said:
This makes absolutely no sense to me, any of this thread.

Once again people are responding to my arguments with nothing.
Click to expand...

You haven't made any arguments. You are making spurious assertions based on 'gut feelings' and 'intuition'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top