June 2018: Aust v Eng in England - 5 ODI/+T20

[AlwaysGreen]

Team when Smith returns:

Finch (c)
Khawaja
Head
Smith
MMarsh
Maxwell
Stoinis
Carey
Starc
Cummins
Hazelwood
Lyon

Will trouble a few sides. Backups in Short, Stanlake and Tye.

 

[ANTiLAG]

Team when Smith returns:

Finch (c)
Khawaja
Head
Smith
MMarsh
Maxwell
Stoinis
Carey
Starc
Cummins
Hazelwood
Lyon

Will trouble a few sides. Backups in Short, Stanlake and Tye.

Still seems too slow up top. Still seems light on batting at 8.

 

[Bazal]

Team when Smith returns:

Finch (c)
Khawaja
Head
Smith
MMarsh
Maxwell
Stoinis
Carey
Starc
Cummins
Hazelwood
Lyon

Will trouble a few sides. Backups in Short, Stanlake and Tye.

I really think we need to give someone like Weatherald a run at some stage. Maybe even a Dan Hughes. You're still carrying three all rounders in that side and I think one thing we can take from England, despite their approach being incredibly fallible, is that you don't want too many all-rounders in terms of squad balance.

Especially in the middle order where you need more flexible players who can alter their pace as the game requires. Guys like Stoinis and the ShitShow are pure hitters without (IMO) much of a batsmans brain

 

[ANTiLAG]

I really think we need to give someone like Weatherald a run at some stage. Maybe even a Dan Hughes. You're still carrying three all rounders in that side and I think one thing we can take from England, despite their approach being incredibly fallible, is that you don't want too many all-rounders in terms of squad balance.

Lol!

Stokes, Woakes, Ali in their top 8 plus Willey, Plunkett and Rashid in the tail.

England oozes allrounders.

Seriously, England just beat NZ in NZ - Aus lost the last 3 series in NZ. England just thrashed Aus in Aus with Smith and Warner. And they did with a ton of runs from Woakes at 8.

You're hilarious.

England is number 1 and regularly going past 300 more than anyone else.

Fallible? Sure - they lose, but they win far more. They're number 1.

What's next - you ignore India's allrounders too (in tests or odi)?


Aus won the WC in 2015 with Watson, Maxwell and Faulkner in the top 7 and Haddin at 8.

Why are you wanting to go backwards and get rid of allrounders?

If a team doesn't bat deep, it is worried about losing wickets, that is not the way to score swiftly and maximize the 50 overs.

 

[Bazal]

Lol!

Stokes, Woakes, Ali in their top 8 plus Willey, Plunkett and Rashid in the tail.

England oozes allrounders.

Seriously, England just beat NZ in NZ - Aus lost the last 3 series in NZ. England just beat Aus in Aus with Smith and Warner.

You're hilarious.

England is number 1 and regularly going past 300 more than anyone else.

Fallible? Sure - they lose, but they win far more.

What's next - you ignore India's allrounders too (in tests or odi)?

You are deadset taking the piss now, surely. No one can be this f**king stupid

Woakes bats 8, so he is in the tail. Stokes is one genuine all rounder. Ali is a batsman who bowls.

England, in their full strength top seven, have one "all rounder" and he would make the side as a batsman if he was unable to bowl. And probably as a bowler if he was in shit form with the bat. Right now we have three (two of them in the top 5!) and none of them would make the side as batsmen. That's the whole, very reasonable and simple point, that you have once again missed entirely. We are obsessed with bits and pieces players whilst England and India have a top 7 made up mostly of batsmen.

Seriously, if you can't actually understand the discussion, just don't f**king contribute. We'd all be better for it.

 

[ANTiLAG]

You are deadset taking the piss now, surely. No one can be this f**king stupid

Woakes bats 8, so he is in the tail. Stokes is one genuine all rounder. Ali is a batsman who bowls.

England, in their full strength top seven, have one "all rounder" and he would make the side as a batsman if he was unable to bowl. And probably as a bowler if he was in shit form with the bat. Right now we have three (two of them in the top 5!) and none of them would make the side as batsmen. That's the whole, very reasonable and simple point, that you have once again missed entirely. We are obsessed with bits and pieces players whilst England and India have a top 7 made up mostly of batsmen.

Seriously, if you can't actually understand the discussion, just don't f**king contribute. We'd all be better for it.

Nah - you think 8 is in the tail, but even Finch will tell you that for England at 9 - it isn't the tail. You just don't get it.

For NZ - 8 is not the tail. For SA - 8 is not the tail. For India - 8 is not the tail.

For Aus - 8 is the tail now, but 2015 WC you had Haddin at 8 - not the tail.

CA is going backwards. Welcome to 6th - next stop is not qualifying

England evolved after the 2015 WC, CA went backwards in a big way.

CA may as well embrace the old Keppler Wessels - "we don't care about the first 40 overs but merely save wickets for the last 10 overs" strategy that I wouldn't be surprised at all if you're a fan of.

England has a wicket keeper in Buttler, a fast bowler in Stokes and their top spinner in Ali in the top 7 - and bowl Root as well when Stokes is injured.

I don't know if this is denial on your part, or something else, but England play allrounders. A lot of them. Rashid, Plunkett, Willey even Jordan- their batting matters just to make the tail.

 

[Bazal]

Nah - you think 8 is in the tail, but even Finch will tell you that for England at 9 - it isn't the tail. You just don't get it.

For NZ - 8 is not the tail. For SA - 8 is not the tail. For India - 8 is not the tail.

For Aus - 8 is the tail, but 2015 WC you had Haddin at 8 - not the tail.

Of course it's the tail you absolute f**knut. You can have Mitch Marsh at 8, but it wastes him because he's unlikely to face many balls.

It's not suddenly "not the tail" because a lot of number 8s can bat a bit. It's not suddenly "not the tail" because of who you put there. Haddin could bat 11 if the team decided to do that, you wouldn't be in here saying "that's not the tail now".

It's the tail because it's still the 8th best bat in the side and you don't want to be relying on him to bat a long time. If he can play a role with the bat most games and get a good 50+ every so often, great...but if you reckon a bloke like Woakes is going to perform consistently as well as a bloke like Buttler or Ali coming in after 20 overs you're even dumber than I thought.

Ultimately, you're just a bellend who likes to argue and feel superior, and shifts the goalposts to make sure the argument continues in your favour in your own mind. You and PouPou Escobar on the Eels forum would get on great...although he's actually intelligent.

 

[Bazal]

And I do apologise to everyone else, morons like AntiCricket rile me up, it won't happen now that I've taken steps to avoid this one.

 

[ANTiLAG]

And I do apologise to everyone else, morons like AntiCricket rile me up, it won't happen now that I've taken steps to avoid this one.

Hey I'm stupid, I'm a moron, and I'm geniused according to you, but you just called the England tail at 8, when Finch just said even at 9 they bat.

And as if Ali is a batsman who bowls a bit. That's Root. Who just bolws 10 overs for 44 runs as Australia tried to conserve wickets on a road. Brilliant strategy, not.

As for Woakes at 8 - read it and weep:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...=2;template=results;type=batting;view=innings

He's probably going better in Australia ODI's than Smith is going for Aus with the bat vs England.

Confirmed - he is:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/267192.html?class=2;template=results;type=batting

 

[ANTiLAG]

Of course it's the tail you absolute f**knut. You can have Mitch Marsh at 8, but it wastes him because he's unlikely to face many balls.

It's not suddenly "not the tail" because a lot of number 8s can bat a bit. It's not suddenly "not the tail" because of who you put there. Haddin could bat 11 if the team decided to do that, you wouldn't be in here saying "that's not the tail now".

It's the tail because it's still the 8th best bat in the side and you don't want to be relying on him to bat a long time. If he can play a role with the bat most games and get a good 50+ every so often, great...but if you reckon a bloke like Woakes is going to perform consistently as well as a bloke like Buttler or Ali coming in after 20 overs you're even dumber than I thought.

Ultimately, you're just a bellend who likes to argue and feel superior, and shifts the goalposts to make sure the argument continues in your favour in your own mind. You and PouPou Escobar on the Eels forum would get on great...although he's actually intelligent.

Actually it is - a team can have no tail at the 9,10 and 11. Like when Bradman reversed the batting order on a sticky dog.

You're still living a world where you ignore the batting talents of people at 8 and 9 matter. Well guess what - often they do. And if you bat deep, you can bat accordingly up top in a limited overs game and be more aggressive early as conserving wickets matters less - ask Finch. Look at Woakes in Australia this year. Put simply - having Mitch Marsh at 8 means Finch as an opener can look to smash Root's bowling instead fo worrying about getting out. That is what batting deep brings.

If you sacrifice batting strength for bowling strength - there is an opportunity cost - and right now - it doesn't appear Australia is making the right one. Lost 10 - won 1 vs England in the last year. Stop dreaming about how fallible they are - if Aus ever beat them this year or next - it is a fluke already, not form.

300 doesn't intimidate England when they know that 481 is obtainable when they do not look to conserve wickets. Start picking a team and not players, and that may mean all-rounders at 8 - it does for everyone else. Or enjoy languishing at 6th or lower, I don't mind either way.

Heck, Klusener spent most of his ODI career batting at 8 - batting deep isn't exactly novel. Just look at the games he batted 9!

 

[WaznTheGreat]

Australia gonna win this series 1-4

 

[Bazal]

Australia gonna win this series 1-4

Win on away goals....?

 

[ANTiLAG]

Win on away goals....?

Not when you just lost 4-1 @ home.

Lol

 

[TheParraboy]

Team when Smith returns:

Finch (c)
Khawaja
Head
Smith
MMarsh
Maxwell
Stoinis
Carey
Starc
Cummins
Hazelwood
Lyon

Will trouble a few sides. Backups in Short, Stanlake and Tye.

Id seriously Have Warner back IF he can get some form under his belt prior the WC

Finch has been too slow but no one else at this stage is putting theior hand up

Pending form and fitness id go for

Warner
Carey (wk)
Lynn
Smith
Head (can bowl a few overs of spin)
Maxwell (can bowl a few overs of spin)
MMarsh
Stoinis
Cummins
Starc
Haze or Lyon (pending conditions)

 

[ANTiLAG]

Id seriously Have Warner back IF he can get some form under his belt prior the WC

Finch has been too slow but no one else at this stage is putting theior hand up

Pending form and fitness id go for

Warner
Carey (wk)
Lynn
Smith
Head (can bowl a few overs of spin)
Maxwell (can bowl a few overs of spin)
MMarsh
Stoinis
Cummins
Starc
Haze or Lyon (pending conditions)

That looks like a fair team that can do some serious damage to opposition bowlers, and still has plenty options for the captain in the field. Well done. Seriously, that middle order would intimidate a lot of opposition bowlers, let alone what Warner or Lynn provide up the top. I'd bat Stoinis ahead of MMarsh, though - Marsh in my opinion paces his innings better the later he bats.

Finch seems a tad unlucky if he's been going slow to conserve wickets under instruction because of the previous short batting line ups.

Who would be captain? Is Carey a state captain?

 

[baggygreen man]

Anyway, explaining simple things to the forum dunce aside, what I don't understand is why we haven't gone into the series with a view to blooding some actual batsmen for a potential world cup spot? Obviously there are injuries to contend with but surely we could be giving some genuine bats a go?

Short is a start, he's clearly the kind of bat that ODI sides need these days even if he's yet to really find his feet (and a poor IPL probably hasn't helped his confidence) but as others have said I don't get why we've gone for a 1990s NZ approach with bits and pieces cricketers.

Surely something like;

Weatherald
Short
Khawaja
Head
Paine [c]
Carey
Stoinis

Is a better option than what we have run with if we aren't going to put some short term batting experience in there with a Ferguson or a Bailey.

We've gone with Marsh and Finch who surely won't be at the World Cup (but could be forgiven in the circumstances), and three "all rounders".

Jake Weatherald has a List A average of 44 at a SR of 101. Dan Hughes scored 380 runs in the last Ryobi Cup at an average of 63 and a SR of 90. Khawaja averages 46 at 90 in List A cricket even if he's yet to kick on in ODIs. Honestly I don't understand the obsession with a thousand "all rounders"

I like the idea of a specialist batsman like Weatherald opening in ODI. Problem as I see it with CA thinking is they pick too many hitters in ODI.. If there happens to be something in the deck then they are vulnerable whereas a specialist can weather the storm due to his superior technique. Khawaja is another I would like to see returned for the WC.

 

[baggygreen man]

Id seriously Have Warner back IF he can get some form under his belt prior the WC

Finch has been too slow but no one else at this stage is putting theior hand up

Pending form and fitness id go for

Warner
Carey (wk)
Lynn
Smith
Head (can bowl a few overs of spin)
Maxwell (can bowl a few overs of spin)
MMarsh
Stoinis
Cummins
Starc
Haze or Lyon (pending conditions)

 

[baggygreen man]

The jury is still out for me on Stoinis as the designated all rounder. He is a bit like Maxwell one good score surrounded by several moderate ones. His bowling is no better than Hilton Cartwright..his all round predecessor. The best all round prospect I see at the moment is the young Qlander Jake Wildermuth. CA agrees picking him in our T20 squad.

 

[TheParraboy]

That looks like a fair team that can do some serious damage to opposition bowlers, and still has plenty options for the captain in the field. Well done. Seriously, that middle order would intimidate a lot of opposition bowlers, let alone what Warner or Lynn provide up the top. I'd bat Stoinis ahead of MMarsh, though - Marsh in my opinion paces his innings better the later he bats.

Finch seems a tad unlucky if he's been going slow to conserve wickets under instruction because of the previous short batting line ups.

Who would be captain? Is Carey a state captain?

Not sure enough time to groom Carey for the c

Travis Head most likely, then again loud whispers MMarsh is primed for the gig

 

[Eelectrica]

Id seriously Have Warner back IF he can get some form under his belt prior the WC

Finch has been too slow but no one else at this stage is putting theior hand up

Pending form and fitness id go for

Warner
Carey (wk)
Lynn
Smith
Head (can bowl a few overs of spin)
Maxwell (can bowl a few overs of spin)
MMarsh
Stoinis
Cummins
Starc
Haze or Lyon (pending conditions)

Agreed. That would get us into the semi's and from there who knows.
I'm curious to see how Faulkner goes now he's apparently injury free.
If he can get back to where he was I'd take him over Stoinis. His recent form has been terrible though where it looked the only thing that was finished was his career.

Lynn in full flight is our answer to Hales and Bairstow, I'd love to see that potential turned into reality.