1st Test: Australia v Sri Lanka at Hobart Dec 14-18, 2012

[Twizzle]

Hughes belted the crap out of the Saffas last time he played them, why protect him from that ?

Seriously, some one needs to put this old fossil back in the ground

 

[Earl]

So Rob Quiney was a sacrificial lamb? What an absoluetley pathetic way to treat a bloke.

Test Cricket is the pinnacle of a cricketers life, and to find out you were used up and spat out to protect someone else is as low as it gets.

This old f**kwit needs to drop dead.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Just found out that Usman is a raiders fan. Even more reasons he should be in the team.

 

[TiggaPlease]

Phil Hughes - 5, 1* Australia A v Sth Africans Sydney 2 Nov 2012

They obviously did need to protect him.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

So is it fair to say Rob Quiney is Phillip J Hughes's fluffer?

 

[hineyrulz]

So is it fair to say Rob Quiney is Phillip J Hughes's fluffer?

No that BunniesMongs job.

 

[Earl]

Phil Hughes - 5, 1* Australia A v Sth Africans Sydney 2 Nov 2012

They obviously did need to protect him.

That 1* was louded by some as "the best 1* ever seen"

oh how the standards of australian cricket have slipped.

 

[TiggaPlease]

And Rob Quiney scored "the best 9 ever seen" too.

The Sri Lanka series and Ponting's retirement should have been used as an opportunity to rethink the structure and balance of the team so it will be right for the Ashes. Instead we shuffle the deck chairs...

 

[BunniesMan]

PJH will be licking his lips in anticipation of getting stuck into the Sri Lankans after their bowlers got smashed by our 4th stringers in the tour game. Also PJH wasn't ready yet at the start of the SA series. Since then he's scored another 500+ 1st class runs. Now he is ready. Bringing him in at the start of the summer would have been too soon.

And can we please stop feeling sorry for Quiney. He's the next Stuart Law. Just someone who was lucky to get the Tests he did and who is not a long term answer.

And Rob Quiney scored "the best 9 ever seen" too.

The Sri Lanka series and Ponting's retirement should have been used as an opportunity to rethink the structure and balance of the team so it will be right for the Ashes. Instead we shuffle the deck chairs...

That's exactly what is happening. Watson moving to #4 is a big deal. We're blooding the top 3 of Warner/Cowan/Hughes so they have experience before the Ashes come around.

As for the bowlers, it's pretty hard when almost all of our 1st string fast bowlers are all injured.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

And can we please stop feeling sorry for Quiney. He's the next Stuart Law. Just someone who was lucky to get the Tests he did and who is not a long term answer.

Stuart Law was a great batsmen who scored a nice 50 on debut and was never picked again. He didn't get another opportunity because Damien Martyn, Mark Waugh, Ricky Ponting, Darren Lehmann and Justin Langer were in front of him. All good players. If he played now-a-days, he'd be first player picked after Clarke...

 

[TiggaPlease]

That's exactly what is happening. Watson moving to #4 is a big deal.

Not sure if serious.

Moving Watson to 6 or out of the team would be a big deal. Moving him down one spot makes no difference at all.

 

[hineyrulz]

Stuart Law was a great batsmen who scored a nice 50 on debut and was never picked again. He didn't get another opportunity because Damien Martyn, Mark Waugh, Ricky Ponting, Darren Lehmann and Justin Langer were in front of him. All good players. If he played now-a-days, he'd be first player picked after Clarke...

Agreed, comparing a very good play like Law with a Niffiy like Quiney just shows how clueless BunniesMong is. StatsGuru doesn't give you all the answers.

 

[BunniesMan]

Stuart Law was a great batsmen who scored a nice 50 on debut and was never picked again. He didn't get another opportunity because Damien Martyn, Mark Waugh, Ricky Ponting, Darren Lehmann and Justin Langer were in front of him. All good players. If he played now-a-days, he'd be first player picked after Clarke...

Agreed, comparing a very good play like Law with a Niffiy like Quiney just shows how clueless BunniesMong is. StatsGuru doesn't give you all the answers.

How about we try playing a game called "Lets not put words in BM's mouth".

I never said Law was no good. I wasn't even comparing Law and Quiney in terms of talent. If you read what I actually said was they were both lucky to get the games they did and are not long term answers.

In his context, Law was lucky to get a Test and was not a long term option. Would that have been the case in 2012? No, but it was in 1995. Just like Quiney in 2012.

My initial point was just let's not feel sorry for Quiney, he overachieved in getting the games he did. He only got a game because of an injury and because it was a matter of being just weeks too early for Hughes. I'm reasonably confident he'll never play again. But he gets to treasure a Baggy Green for the rest of his life which is what 99.9% of us can only dream of doing.

 

[Red&BlackBear]

How about we try playing a game called "Lets not put words in BM's mouth".

I never said Law was no good. I wasn't even comparing Law and Quiney in terms of talent. If you read what I actually said was they were both lucky to get the games they did and are not long term answers.

In his context, Law was lucky to get a Test and was not a long term option. Would that have been the case in 2012? No, but it was in 1995. Just like Quiney in 2012.

My initial point was just let's not feel sorry for Quiney, he overachieved in getting the games he did. He only got a game because of an injury and because it was a matter of being just weeks too early for Hughes. I'm reasonably confident he'll never play again. But he gets to treasure a Baggy Green for the rest of his life which is what 99.9% of us can only dream of doing.

Law wasn't lucky to get a test, he was unlucky to only get one test. He should have been one of the players to come in when either Bevan or Ponting were dropped during the later 90's. But by then the selectors wanted Lehmann who could also bowl a few and thus Law never got the chance again. I think the final blow was when Love was selected in front of him, even though Law kept piling on the runs domestically. By that stage Law was too old. You don't make a 50 on debut if you're not a decent player. Sometimes it's all about timing. Players like Law, Elliot, D. Hussey, Hodge, Maher.. bad timing cost them more games or in same cases a debut.

If you want to compare Quiney to anyone, I suggest the bowler Scott Muller....

 

[BunniesMan]

Law wasn't lucky to get a test, he was unlucky to only get one test. He should have been one of the players to come in when either Bevan or Ponting were dropped during the later 90's. But by then the selectors wanted Lehmann who could also bowl a few and thus Law never got the chance again. I think the final blow was when Love was selected in front of him, even though Law kept piling on the runs domestically. By that stage Law was too old. You don't make a 50 on debut if you're not a decent player. Sometimes it's all about timing. Players like Law, Elliot, D. Hussey, Hodge, Maher.. bad timing cost them more games or in same cases a debut.

If you want to compare Quiney to anyone, I suggest the bowler Scott Muller....

Muller actually got 4 wickets in that famous Hobart test against Pakistan. 4 out of 20 while bowling in the same attack as Mcgrath and Warne ain't bad at all.

He had talent he just was quite mentally weak.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

A bit rich saying Law was a great batsman.

 

[hineyrulz]

A bit rich saying Law was a great batsman.

He was a modern master compared to a Nuffy like Quiney.

 

[Earl]

A bit rich saying Law was a great batsman.

27,000 First Class Runs @ a tick over 50

He was more than handy and would walk into the Aussie team atm

He was just unfortunate that he played in an era when a FC average of 57 wasn't good enough to play Test Cricket for Australia.

Apparantly 35 is good enough now

 

[AlwaysGreen]

27,000 First Class Runs @ a tick over 50

He was more than handy and would walk into the Aussie team atm

He was just unfortunate that he played in an era when a FC average of 57 wasn't good enough to play Test Cricket for Australia.

Apparantly 35 is good enough now

Great batsman = Viv Richards, Lara, Barrington. In an Australian sense it = Border, S Waugh, Ponting.

Not Stuart Law.

 

[Mr Angry]

I have a hunch the ego driven Watson will be begging Clarke to stay 3.

Will be filthy if Clarke allows it, it would be putrid.

FTR I would play Warner 3 and open with Hughes.

If I see Watson top 3, I will know Clarke has the man love controlling him, not his astute brain.