Changes for the next test

[cyclops]

thats exactly rite,we have had the best ride in the last 10-15 yrs or so,play some young kids,hey we will lose more than we will win but holy sh#t there will be some exciting times in front of us thats for sure.look at the young south african for example.

[stan]

Symonds, well whatever, he will be given another test. like Hayden.

[stan]

Also looking at the other side, The south africans will probably bring in prince for well the only dud at the moment, McKenzie.
I believe that would mean Duminey will open the innings.

[locky801]

Also looking at the other side, The south africans will probably bring in prince for well the only dud at the moment, McKenzie.
I believe that would mean Duminey will open the innings.

Why open Duminy when you have a ready made opener in Devilliers in the side

[stan]

Also looking at the other side, The south africans will probably bring in prince for well the only dud at the moment, McKenzie.
I believe that would mean Duminey will open the innings.

Why open Duminy when you have a ready made opener in Devilliers in the side

eh, either way they will probably beat us again.

[locky801]

Also looking at the other side, The south africans will probably bring in prince for well the only dud at the moment, McKenzie.
I believe that would mean Duminey will open the innings.

Why open Duminy when you have a ready made opener in Devilliers in the side

eh, either way they will probably beat us again.

No arguement there

[GWW]

I don't know how injured Symonds is, but if he's "fit" for the next test, he has to be dropped. Its crazy to be playing an all rounder who's bowling is restricted. The Australian team needs to get back to 6 batsman, and as such need to select D Hussey, or even Klinger.

Given that we do lose this Test which looks inevitable, i'm not sure what point there is in selecting Hayden for the 3rd Test. Hughes may not be quite ready, but its obvious he has a future at Test level. I'd like to see him put into the test squad and mingle with the other players, and get him ready for the Ashes Tour.

[Gozu]

I don't know how injured Symonds is, but if he's "fit" for the next test, he has to be dropped. Its crazy to be playing an all rounder who's bowling is restricted. The Australian team needs to get back to 6 batsman, and as such need to select D Hussey, or even Klinger.

Given that we do lose this Test which looks inevitable, i'm not sure what point there is in selecting Hayden for the 3rd Test. Hughes may not be quite ready, but its obvious he has a future at Test level. I'd like to see him put into the test squad and mingle with the other players, and get him ready for the Ashes Tour.

Shouldn't be much chance of Symonds being dropped. The big 150 in the Ashes, the 160 odd last summer against India, from memory a couple of 70's in the West Indies, missed out in the three innings against NZ despite getting starts and has a 50 and two starts from four innings in this series. I said before the test he never should've been picked given the problems with hsi knee and injury is the only reason I could see him missing the Sydney test.

Hayden while finished deserves one final bow. He can't be considered for the South African tour and should be dropped from all forms of the game if he refuses to retire and go back and make runs for Queensland if he has any designs on touring South Africa. Hughes is still way too green as his coach implied today and Jacques should be fit for the South African tour anyway.

[Psyber]

You're kidding aren't you???
Clarke is one of the only batsmen who has consistently made runs over the past few months.
Since the start of the India tour he's averaged over 50.

Not entirely. I think he is inherently brittle and apart from that one dogged 88 he doesn't dig in when the batsmen before him fail - you have thought he'd have remembered to do the same in the second innings. He does alright when the guys before him get a start and wear the bowlers down a bit, and that makes his stats look good.
He has talent but hasn't learned to fight yet.

[Baron Greenback]

So you think dropping him for someone else, probably with less experience, is the answer?

[catchisthecry]

Well Watson wont be in, out for months with stress fracture in his back

[rod_rooster]

Well Watson wont be in, out for months with stress fracture in his back

Is that for real? As much as i think the guy is an ordinary player i do feel for him with the injuries he has had. His body simply can't cope with the workload that's put on it. As much as his bowling has improved recently he simply needs to give it away if he wants to play cricket at any level long term. His batting is what he needs to concentrate on and whilst i don't think he will ever be good enough to play Test cricket simply as a batsman if he makes enough runs who knows. One thing is for sure he won't play much cricket at any level if he keeps breaking down and if he continues to bowl it is inevitable that he will.

[Psyber]

Rotations---this aint the NAB Cup

However, if we hadn't always, and only ever, played the "stars", but had given some a rest when they were carrying little injuries or were out of form, we may now find some of them were holding up better, and we may some reserves with some experience at the highest level. As it is, we must now play on with the crocks and the out of form, or bring in players untried at Test level.
Part of maintaining a team is grooming the replacements...

[Psyber]

So you think dropping him for someone else, probably with less experience, is the answer?

Trying to find someone with better temperament, or encouraging him to develop it, may pay off in the longer term - and the longer term is what counts now - we have lost this series and will probably lose the next couple whatever we do. If we had taken the opportunity to give newer players some higher level experience while we were strong we would be better off now I suspect.

[rod_rooster]

So you think dropping him for someone else, probably with less experience, is the answer?

Trying to find someone with better temperament, or encouraging him to develop it, may pay off in the longer term - and the longer term is what counts now - we have lost this series and will probably lose the next couple whatever we do.

Are you still going on about this? Dropping Michael Clarke would be one of the worst selection decisions ever made by the Australian selectors and that includes picking the likes of Scott Muller. You suggested he only makes runs when given a good platform by the top order yet he has made more runs than anyone else in recent times despite coming in behind the same top order you yourself have suggested is under performing and should be replaced.

[Bob Loblaw]

You're kidding aren't you???
Clarke is one of the only batsmen who has consistently made runs over the past few months.
Since the start of the India tour he's averaged over 50.

Not entirely. I think he is inherently brittle and apart from that one dogged 88 he doesn't dig in when the batsmen before him fail - you have thought he'd have remembered to do the same in the second innings. He does alright when the guys before him get a start and wear the bowlers down a bit, and that makes his stats look good.
He has talent but hasn't learned to fight yet.

I think your memory is failing you Psyber, he has shown quite the opposite

This test: 1st innings 88*
Last test: 1st innings came to the crease in Perth at 3/15 and made 62
2nd test vs NZ: 1st innings 110
1st test vs NZ: 1st innings came to the crease at 3/23 and made 98
4th test vs Ind: 1st innings came to the crease at 3/229 and only made 8
3rd test vs Ind: 1st innings 112
2nd test vs Ind: 2nd innings came to the crease at 3/52 and made 69
1st test vs Ind: 1st innings came to the crease at 3/226 and only made 11

no way he should be dropped. only criticism you could have looking at his recent performances is he hasn't made many runs in the 2nd innings

[Bob Loblaw]

if anyone other than Psyber suggested Clarke should be dropped you would assume they are on drugs. However, knowing his stance on substance abuse it is difficult to know why he dislikes Clarke, perhaps he had a Bingle in his Audi?

[rod_rooster]

if anyone other than Psyber suggested Clarke should be dropped you would assume they are on drugs. However, knowing his stance on substance abuse it is difficult to know why he dislikes Clarke, perhaps he had a Bingle in his Audi?

[Psyber]

Are you still going on about this? Dropping Michael Clarke would be one of the worst selection decisions ever made by the Australian selectors and that includes picking the likes of Scott Muller. You suggested he only makes runs when given a good platform by the top order yet he has made more runs than anyone else in recent times despite coming in behind the same top order you yourself have suggested is under performing and should be replaced.

I was simply explaining why I said it in the first place in response to Chuck's question. I know the "star" mentality dominates here from the football threads, too, so I didn't expect many to agree.

I think your memory is failing you Psyber, he has shown quite the opposite

You make a valid point, Bob, and I agree it looks like the second innings performances have affected my impressions. Facts are more effective than belligerence and I bow to them...
However, I do think he needs some coaching in learning to maintain focus if he is to reach his potential of his talent.

if anyone other than Psyber suggested Clarke should be dropped you would assume they are on drugs. However, knowing his stance on substance abuse it is difficult to know why he dislikes Clarke, perhaps he had a Bingle in his Audi?

No, I am really just unimpressed with the brittleness of the Aussie team and their incapacity to stay focussed at critical times in the game. And also with the lack of forethought of our coaches and selectors in playing unfit players because they haven't developed potential replacements. As you pointed out, my impressions of Clarke were biased by his second innings records - possibly because I rarely see televised cricket other than on Sundays...

[FlyingHigh]

Are you still going on about this? Dropping Michael Clarke would be one of the worst selection decisions ever made by the Australian selectors and that includes picking the likes of Scott Muller. You suggested he only makes runs when given a good platform by the top order yet he has made more runs than anyone else in recent times despite coming in behind the same top order you yourself have suggested is under performing and should be replaced.

I was simply explaining why I said it in the first place in response to Chuck's question. I know the "star" mentality dominates here from the football threads, too, so I didn't expect many to agree.

I think your memory is failing you Psyber, he has shown quite the opposite

You make a valid point, Bob, and I agree it looks like the second innings performances have affected my impressions. Facts are more effective than belligerence and I bow to them...
However, I do think he needs some coaching in learning to maintain focus if he is to reach his potential of his talent.

if anyone other than Psyber suggested Clarke should be dropped you would assume they are on drugs. However, knowing his stance on substance abuse it is difficult to know why he dislikes Clarke, perhaps he had a Bingle in his Audi?

No, I am really just unimpressed with the brittleness of the Aussie team and their incapacity to stay focussed at critical times in the game. And also with the lack of forethought of our coaches and selectors in playing unfit players because they haven't developed potential replacements. As you pointed out, my impressions of Clarke were biased by his second innings records - possibly because I rarely see televised cricket other than on Sundays...

While I don't think Clarke should be dropped, your point is valid Pysber. Three of the last four innings he has given his wicket away whilst on top of the bowling. It is the same sort of thing he got dropped for a couple of years ago, and to see it hasn't been eradicated is a cause for concern when he really should be maturing.
FWIW I think the batting order would be better with him at 4 and Hussey at 5.