MELBOURNE 3rd Test: Australia v India on Dec 26-30, 2014

[madunit]

this rickywalford1 character is a worse troll than Bunniesman.

Watson is the arguably the most naturally gifted athlete Australia has produced in a long time however his mental strength, application, inability to modify and improve his game makes him the most irritating athlete in any sport.

He's egotistical without reason. Other than one Australian summer, he's been an abject failure.

He is not our best option at #3.

In fact, he doesn't even deserve to be in the test side, and hasn't deserved to be there for a long time.

 

[JJ]

I think he was. From memory, he was test, ODI and t20 player of the year for 2 years straight. Carving up the IPL as well. For that period, probably world class to everyone but Australian cricket fans.

For the record - Australian test player of the year once (2011), Australian ODI player of the year 2010, 11, 12 and Allan Border medallist 2010, 2011

He's had two seasons in which he was world class in all forms, the rest of the time he's been a world class ODI player and poor-average test player...

If two good seasons means he's easily world class etc, then we have different criteria - he's no Keith Miller, nothing surer.

I maintain he's not especially talented compared to most international cricketers - talent has to include mental strength imo, and also he moves like a 60 year old, his body is shit - yes, he obviously went to the gym, but looks about as flexible as my grandmother - his batting is profoundly limited - as evidenced by the unusual proportion of bowled and lbw dismissals - sorry, but he's been talked up for years, and nothing has come of it

 

[rickywalford1]

You struggle with differing opinions Madunit. Apologies. I'll try to conform.

 

[rickywalford1]

For the record - Australian test player of the year once (2011), Australian ODI player of the year 2010, 11, 12 and Allan Border medallist 2010, 2011

He's had two seasons in which he was world class in all forms, the rest of the time he's been a world class ODI player and poor-average test player...

If two good seasons means he's easily world class etc, then we have different criteria - he's no Keith Miller, nothing surer.

I maintain he's not especially talented compared to most international cricketers - talent has to include mental strength imo, and also he moves like a 60 year old, his body is shit - yes, he obviously went to the gym, but looks about as flexible as my grandmother - his batting is profoundly limited - as evidenced by the unusual proportion of bowled and lbw dismissals - sorry, but he's been talked up for years, and nothing has come of it

I only ever said he was world class for that injury free period. Not disputing he hasn't been able to replicate it since and not disputing he is fragile.

 

[JJ]

54 tests, 4 centuries and 70 wickets... hardly elite all-rounder :lol:

 

[The Charlatan]

54 tests, 4 centuries and 70 wickets... hardly elite all-rounder :lol:

Bingo!

 

[WaznTheGreat]

Keith Miller is pretty much the only good all-rounder Australia has ever had in our entire history(bit of an exaggeration,there were others) which makes it even stranger as to why our selectors are so obsessed with finding all-rounders as we have been so successful over a million year period not needing them.

Andrew Flintoff got a few wickets against us once in 2005,who cares,he is the most overrated cricket ever,nothing to see here.

 

[typicalfan]

Watson did have a purple patch but like most test players, the opposition work you out. It is how you come through the other side that defines you. Watson has the same issues as when he began.

Just because I don't rate him doesn't make me a hater.

 

[Mr Angry]

World Class........yeah World Class wanker with an ego who refuses to put team first.

Could have a quality contributor, but chose a selfish path of self delusion.

I look forward to the cancer being removed.

 

[Twizzle]

Watson was KO'd in the nets by a bouncer from James Pattinson.

While its not good for Watson its good to see his comeback is going along nicely.

 

[lockyno1]

Isn't that what he is saying ? He Is better off coming in early.

You are the one stupidly saying he has to open. I have said right from the start he should bat 3 or 4. It is his natural position regardless of where he is batting for QLD.

 

[lockyno1]

Keith Miller is pretty much the only good all-rounder Australia has ever had in our entire history(bit of an exaggeration,there were others) which makes it even stranger as to why our selectors are so obsessed with finding all-rounders as we have been so successful over a million year period not needing them.

Andrew Flintoff got a few wickets against us once in 2005,who cares,he is the most overrated cricket ever,nothing to see here.

Allan Davidson was a handy all rounder, so was Richie Benaud to a degree. Miller was elite though.

 

[rickywalford1]

You are the one stupidly saying he has to open. I have said right from the start he should bat 3 or 4. It is his natural position regardless of where he is batting for QLD.

I think you might have misinterpreted. I was stupidly saying he should bat 6. Others saying 3. Saw the comments from Law and posted it for the 3's.

Sensitive bunch you lot.

 

[lockyno1]

Has your affection shifted from Shane Watson?

I am realistic. At the time, he deserved his spot and the England tour he replaced Hughes it was 100% the correct call. That said now...let me be absolutely frank bowling 120kmph pies does not equal being an 'all rounder' and his batting is horrific for a number 3!

 

[JJ]

Allan Davidson was a handy all rounder, so was Richie Benaud to a degree. Miller was elite though.

Allan Davidson is the most criminally underrated cricketer Australia has ever produced - and you're not big at under-rating your players.

A truly great cricketer

 

[doyen]

Miller scored 2958 runs in 55 tests--Watson 3480 in 54 tests.Their averages are similar-- probably Miller had more not outs!!

MILLER-7 hundreds & 13/50s.
WATSON-4 hundreds & 22/50s.

Watson made a big 100 in an Ashes test at The Oval;he also made a good 100 at Mohali in India;an Ashes 100 at Perth & a century against the Pakis in Melbourne[his first].

26 scores over 50 in 54 tests "aint" too bad!!

 

[hineyrulz]

Miller scored 2958 runs in 55 tests--Watson 3480 in 54 tests.Their averages are similar-- probably Miller had more not outs!!

MILLER-7 hundreds & 13/50s.
WATSON-4 hundreds & 22/50s.

Watson made a big 100 in an Ashes test at The Oval;he also made a good 100 at Mohali in India;an Ashes 100 at Perth & a century against the Pakis in Melbourne[his first].

26 scores over 50 in 54 tests "aint" too bad!!

It's a terrible conversion rate and a reason why he shouldn't be batting in the top 3. How many digs did Miller have compared to Watson??? Miller was from all reports a great team player and batted for the team. Watson on the other hand os about the most selfish aussie cricketer i have ever seen. Their batting records aren't even remotely similar when you consider Miller bowled over 20 overs an innings most of his career while Watson never had anywhere near the worklaod.

 

[African Monkey]

Miller scored 2958 runs in 55 tests--Watson 3480 in 54 tests.Their averages are similar-- probably Miller had more not outs!!

MILLER-7 hundreds & 13/50s.
WATSON-4 hundreds & 22/50s.

Watson made a big 100 in an Ashes test at The Oval;he also made a good 100 at Mohali in India;an Ashes 100 at Perth & a century against the Pakis in Melbourne[his first].

26 scores over 50 in 54 tests "aint" too bad!!

TBF those ashes centuries were hardly top draw. The one at the oval was when the series was done and dusted where he had Simon Kerrigan bowling horrible half trackers that me and you could have put away and Chris Woakes was also playing, the one in Perth was a help yourself innings where you guys were miles ahead in the game, likewise the Pakistan game. The only century of any quality from him was the Indian effort imo.

 

[doyen]

Any century in a test is OK,IMO!!

Wish I could have scored 10 runs in one test!!

 

[JJ]

Miller scored 2958 runs in 55 tests--Watson 3480 in 54 tests.Their averages are similar-- probably Miller had more not outs!!

MILLER-7 hundreds & 13/50s.
WATSON-4 hundreds & 22/50s.

Watson made a big 100 in an Ashes test at The Oval;he also made a good 100 at Mohali in India;an Ashes 100 at Perth & a century against the Pakis in Melbourne[his first].

26 scores over 50 in 54 tests "aint" too bad!!

:lol: you are kidding right?

Miller didn't bat in the top 3, Miller was a wonderful fast bowler not merely useful , Miller lost several years of sport to the war...

Miller was the Botham of his era