3rd Test: Australia vs South Africa in Sydney

[lockyno1]

It is not safe as Mitch will kill the pie chucker by beating him in wickets and runs in a man of the match display

 

[The Colonel]

It is not safe as Mitch will kill the pie chucker by beating him in wickets and runs in a man of the match display

The wickets aren't the issue locky..... runs with the bat are. ;-)

 

[lockyno1]

Mitch will get a 50 in the 1st innings and a 30 not out in the 2nd. McDonald will get 2 in the first and 12 in the 2nd

 

[hineyrulz]

Come on Ronald!!!!!

 

[eddiesmith]

Dave Hussey is'nt really a Victorian, maybe thats why Steady Eddie does'nt really rate him :-k

He is averaging just 37 this year in f/c cricket, his f/c record for the Vics is only ok, its the shorter forms where he kicks arse unlike McDonald who is the exact opposite and is better suited to the longer form but should never be allowed to bowl late in a one day game

 

[KHunt]

He is averaging just 37 this year in f/c cricket, his f/c record for the Vics is only ok, its the shorter forms where he kicks arse unlike McDonald who is the exact opposite and is better suited to the longer form but should never be allowed to bowl late in a one day game

eddie who are you going for in this match, because i thought you were an England supporter :shock:

 

[Bigfella]

Way to miss the point. Do we keep going through all rounders one by one until we've tried them all before we pick a batsman? We've tried two, neither have set the world on fire. Why continue the obsession? McDonald is a good enough player and may make an impact, but the balance of the side hasn't suited an all rounder yet, why is it suddenly going to start now? Not to mention McDonald is obviously not a long term option, whereas Hilfenhaus and Bollinger are almost certainly going to be a part of our attack in the years to come

The point is the selectors obsession with all rounders has to stop IMO. We need 6 batsmen, Haddin, and then 4 bowlers. The continual picking of all rounders has done nothing but weaken our batting thus far, and for mine is a failed experiment. And you can put your pro-Victorian attack dog hat away....Dave Hussey needs to be at 6

:lol:

You posted a team above that with 5 batsman Haddin and 5 bowlers???

D Hussey in the shield final last year was far too loose against a test type attack. That was his best chance to force the selectors' hands and I reckon he went off the radar after it.

Marcus North would be the one I would be looking at in the middle order. But to be fair to Symonds, before his recent meltdown he was performing well enough to be seclected at 6 in his own right. He could still do it. But he wasn't ready metally for is recall IMO. Got out slogging in nearly every dig this summer.

I am also very disapointed with Clarke's dismissals since India. Has really let some pressure off. I know he has scored well but frankly has let the side down a few times at important moments. I'd be keeping him at 6 inan ideal world.

Although our inability to bowl sides out cost us two wins in the first two games we should still have managed draws. The batsment let us down in that respect. And the bowlers had some excuses; injuries in the second test and a very good deck in the first, plus a lack of experience.

McDonald's figures look reasonable; hopefully he can do a job. I haven't seen enough Vic shield games to say too much on him, other than obviously they are very keen to get an allrounder in.

 

[Fiji~Bati]

SAfrica will win.. The Australian era of dominance is over

 

[Bazal]

:lol:

You posted a team above that with 5 batsman Haddin and 5 bowlers???

D Hussey in the shield final last year was far too loose against a test type attack. That was his best chance to force the selectors' hands and I reckon he went off the radar after it.

Marcus North would be the one I would be looking at in the middle order. But to be fair to Symonds, before his recent meltdown he was performing well enough to be seclected at 6 in his own right. He could still do it. But he wasn't ready metally for is recall IMO. Got out slogging in nearly every dig this summer.

I am also very disapointed with Clarke's dismissals since India. Has really let some pressure off. I know he has scored well but frankly has let the side down a few times at important moments. I'd be keeping him at 6 inan ideal world.

Although our inability to bowl sides out cost us two wins in the first two games we should still have managed draws. The batsment let us down in that respect. And the bowlers had some excuses; injuries in the second test and a very good deck in the first, plus a lack of experience.

McDonald's figures look reasonable; hopefully he can do a job. I haven't seen enough Vic shield games to say too much on him, other than obviously they are very keen to get an allrounder in.

Sorry, I was unaware there were 6 batsmen in the 12 man squad? Oh wait....

As I said in that post, for this particular dead rubber Test, I'd be blooding the two guys who will be making up a big chunk of our Test attack and then picking the 6 batsmen, keeper and 4 bowlers formula in SA. Who the sixth batsman happens to be is irrelevant, Hussey would do the job IMO, as would North, Shaun Marsh who used to bat down the order and even a smoky like Travis Birt (for example).

Again, I think McDonald is a good player. But two other, better all rounders have failed both in terms of personal performance and team structure. I just see no reason to persist with the formula when we have some good batsmen waiting in the wings.

 

[Ali's Choice]

Exactly. In fact during the last 15 years, when the aussie cricket team has been in its prime, they have played a 6-4 split, with specialist bowlers and batsman given the responsibility to perform their roles. This infatuation with playing an allrounder is a hangover from your loss to Freddie's Pommy team in the '05 Ashes and, TBH, in hindsight has not been all that successful for you.

 

[Bigfella]

Sorry, I was unaware there were 6 batsmen in the 12 man squad? Oh wait....

As I said in that post, for this particular dead rubber Test, I'd be blooding the two guys who will be making up a big chunk of our Test attack and then picking the 6 batsmen, keeper and 4 bowlers formula in SA. Who the sixth batsman happens to be is irrelevant, Hussey would do the job IMO, as would North, Shaun Marsh who used to bat down the order and even a smoky like Travis Birt (for example).

Again, I think McDonald is a good player. But two other, better all rounders have failed both in terms of personal performance and team structure. I just see no reason to persist with the formula when we have some good batsmen waiting in the wings.

Yes in your post a couple above you did say that.

I think the question really neds to be asked is - are any of them actually all-rounders? The definition used to be that you would make the side for either discipline. Then it morphed into the situation where you qualify if you would get picked on one discipline.

Aren't our current "all-rounders" blokes who would nearly get picked in both disciplines but not quite for either? Symonds has been the most valuable and he is really a batsman who bowls a bit a la North or Hussey.

It becomes a real issue when you are also selecting spinners who don't take wickets let alone other senior players out of form.

 

[Bazal]

Yes in your post a couple above you did say that.

I think the question really neds to be asked is - are any of them actually all-rounders? The definition used to be that you would make the side for either discipline. Then it morphed into the situation where you qualify if you would get picked on one discipline.

Aren't our current "all-rounders" blokes who would nearly get picked in both disciplines but not quite for either? Symonds has been the most valuable and he is really a batsman who bowls a bit a la North or Hussey.

It becomes a real issue when you are also selecting spinners who don't take wickets let alone other senior players out of form.

I agree. I think the most genuine all rounder is Watson, and he's only still a top order bat who is a handy bowler as well. Not to mention he never really found his feet at Test level. Symonds is a batsman who can't decide if he wants to be an off spinner or a medium pacer, and McDonald is a batsman who bowls handy enough mediums but certainly wouldn't be picked as a bowler.

If we had a Flintoff, sure, he'd be in the side. But the selectors seem to me to be trying to match what England did to us with Flntoff in the last Ashes tour over there, and we simply don't have that player. For mine, Symonds, Watson, McDonald, Hopes, Henriques (although he never played a game they still had him in the squad), White and the like are niether in the 6 best batsmen or 4 best bowlers in the country and certainly not in both categories. So I can't understand their selections over guys who are in those categories. Nothing against them, they're all good players in their own right...but they shouldn't be in the Test team IMO (although Hopes and Henriques weren't, I guess...)

 

[hineyrulz]

Well said Baz, is Ronald in the top 10 batsman in Australia???? No, Is he in the top 10 bowlers????? No. Well what the hell is he doing with a baggy green????

 

[TheParraboy]

I wish we had a Jacques Henry in Australian cricket somewhere tbrh....

 

[eddiesmith]

Well said Baz, is Ronald in the top 10 batsman in Australia???? No, Is he in the top 10 bowlers????? No. Well what the hell is he doing with a baggy green????

Neither were Symonds or Watson, Hauritz and Casson wouldnt be in the top 10 bowlers either

 

[hineyrulz]

Neither were Symonds or Watson, Hauritz and Casson wouldnt be in the top 10 bowlers either

Were Casson or Hauritz batting at 6 :? And i agree on Symonds and Watson. Thats my point, i am sick off all this all rounder crap.....

 

[Twizzle]

Neither were Symonds or Watson, Hauritz and Casson wouldnt be in the top 10 bowlers either

name me 10 sinners ahead of Hauritz and Casson

 

[Bazal]

Neither were Symonds or Watson, Hauritz and Casson wouldnt be in the top 10 bowlers either

I'd struggle to name a top 5 spinners, let alone ten. Symonds and Watson are spot on though and that's the point tbh....they aren't Test quality but the obsession with all rounders got them a spot, and kept it for them despite form.

 

[eddiesmith]

name me 10 sinners ahead of Hauritz and Casson

So you play a spinner even if there are 10 quicks better than him for team balance? Why cant the same apply to all rounders?

 

[Twizzle]

we dont have any world class all rounders