Phil Hughes - When do we drop him?

[Twizzle]

Depends how many players they take.

Lets assume the 12 that are in the Perth test are.

Plus: Pattinson, Doolan, Coulter-Nile, Cummins, Wade or Paine. Possibly one more batsman.

Starc if he is fit will probably get a look in, the selectors have a hard on for him

 

[Timbo]

Doolan and Maddinson or Lynn are who I think they'll take as batsmen. Paine as the backup gloveman.

 

[BunniesMan]

Depends how many players they take.

Lets assume the 12 that are in the Perth test are.

Plus: Pattinson, Doolan, Coulter-Nile, Cummins, Wade or Paine. Possibly one more batsman.

A few on here like JM are able to see WGC has a future in test cricket. A few hate me so much they hate him solely because of me and hope he never makes it just because I rate him. Then there are a few who are genuinely stupid enough to seriously think he's no good.

Which category do you fall into?

You think Doolan is worthy of being a sure thing for the tour and yet Gilbert isn't? Doolans shield numbers this season: 56, 132, 41, 12, 0, 19, 30 and 17. 307 runs at 38. That makes him worthy of being the first batsman outside of the incumbents to be picked for the tour? But Willie Gilberts 547 at 68 isn't enough?

If we're going to be unbiased and insist on not picking That Guy because we irrationally choose not to then how about limiting ourselves to the people outperforming him.

How about a list of the batsmen who have scored more runs than him:

1. Marcus North

/list

How about a list of the batsmen who average more than That Guy (5+matches):

1. Marcus North

/list

If people look at it objectively Marcus bloody North is the only batsman who deserves a tour spot ahead of That Guy.

 

[Twizzle]

who is that guy ?

 

[BunniesMan]

Doolan and Maddinson or Lynn are who I think they'll take as batsmen. Paine as the backup gloveman.

Oh ffs. Does shield form count for nothing? Are we endorsing the philosophy of that moron Inverarity that gave us Bailey which suggests few good digs in pyjama cricket earns you a test.

Doolan - 307 at 38.
Maddinson - 379 at 42.
Lynn - 215 at 43.

In 14 combined Shield matches they have 1 century between them.

They deserve a tour spot?

 

[BunniesMan]

who is that guy ?

Someone a certain wise man forbids us from mentioning for no good reason.

 

[JJ]

who is that guy ?

Leigh Hart - google him ("that guy" will do it), funny...

Marcus North on fire is he? Him and Phil WilliamGilbertGrace banging down the selection door...

 

[RHCP]

Grace is long dead BM and isn't even an Aussie, what are you on about?

 

[Twizzle]

Someone a certain wise man forbids us from mentioning for no good reason.

no one said you cant mention his name

 

[BunniesMan]

Grace is long dead BM and isn't even an Aussie, what are you on about?

I'm supposedly a troll when I say absolutely nothing but honest on topic opinion in 99.9% of my posts. And yet people playing dumb about the word filter are not trolls.

 

[JJ]

Oh ffs. Does shield form count for nothing? Are we endorsing the philosophy of that moron Inverarity that gave us Bailey which suggests few good digs in pyjama cricket earns you a test.

Doolan - 307 at 38.
Maddinson - 379 at 42.
Lynn - 215 at 43.

In 14 combined Shield matches they have 1 century between them.

They deserve a tour spot?

That is a good point, but apparently your solution is someone who does well at State cricket (which clearly isn't what it once was) and in a relatively large sample of test cricket has shown that he can be worked out relatively easily by opening bowlers, and spinners equally...

I know he scored runs against RSA previously, but regardless of what he does in Shield cricket do you seriously believe that Steyn, Philander, Morkel et al won't destroy him?

 

[BunniesMan]

no one said you cant mention his name

Without it turning into nonsense. The filter annoys me. Everyone knows what variations of William/Gilbert/WilliamGilbert/WillieGilbert/PhillipJoelWilliamGilbert etc mean in the context of this cricket forum.

 

[age.s]

Look I think BM is an enormous genius but to suggest WGG shouldn't and won't play for Australia again is as stupid as saying the same about MJ was before the Ashes. He's still young, has enormous talent and clearly is willing to put in the hard yards required to improve his game. I wouldn't be going near him this summer, but reckon he'll have an extended, successful stint in the team again at some point in his career.

 

[BunniesMan]

That is a good point, but apparently your solution is someone who does well at State cricket (which clearly isn't what it once was) and in a relatively large sample of test cricket has shown that he can be worked out relatively easily by opening bowlers, and spinners equally...

I know he scored runs against RSA previously, but regardless of what he does in Shield cricket do you seriously believe that Steyn, Philander, Morkel et al won't destroy him?

He averaged about 55 against quicks in his latest stint in the test team. And only Swann troubled him in England. He did just fine against their quicks in the test and the tour games as well.

He needs to be given an opportunity at opener. One series. If he fails I'll never want him picked again. Picking a natural opener at 6, someone whose strengths and weaknesses are clearly suited to opener, is absolutely pointless.

In fact I'd rather he not be picked at all than be picked to play down the order. They shouldn't play him until they're finally over Rogers.

 

[Pete Cash]

Plenty of really good First Class cricketers failed to make the step up to Test cricket BM. Mark Ramprakash comes to mind. Matthew Sinclair is another one.

 

[JJ]

Plenty of really good First Class cricketers failed to make the step up to Test cricket BM. Mark Ramprakash comes to mind. Matthew Sinclair is another one.

Graeme Hick... and a few Aussies too (Greg Ritchie, is one that springs to mind), - there is a gap, and quality bowlers target weaknesses, and WilliamGilbertGrace has plenty of them...

 

[madunit]

You can still call Phillip 'Daisy' BM.

Thats not blocked by the word filter.

 

[age.s]

Graeme Hick... and a few Aussies too (Greg Ritchie, is one that springs to mind), - there is a gap, and quality bowlers target weaknesses, and WilliamGilbertGrace has plenty of them...

Weaknesses can be ironed out in the same way they can be exposed. All batsmen have flaws in their game, the difference between a good player and a great player is how well they cover them up. WGG still has loads of time to work around his flaws, and is in some ways lucky to have had international exposure at such a young age pointing them out so clearly.

 

[madunit]

He hasn't shown an ability to learn from his mistakes & iron out his flaws. If anything, he was worse in his return to the test side.

Scores aside, his technique is orthodox & sometimes he gets caught between the shot he wants to play & the shot he should play. He still has issues with his consistency. He'll play two near identical deliveries with two different shots/mindsets

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

He averaged about 55 against quicks in his latest stint in the test team.

You never proved this

And only Swann troubled him in England.

There's that weakness for spin, again.

He did just fine against their quicks in the test and the tour games as well.

In 3 of his 4 innings in the test series he didn't last long enough to trouble anybody

He needs to be given an opportunity at opener. One series. If he fails I'll never want him picked again.

17 of his 26 tests he has opened, he's had his chances.

Picking a natural opener at 6, someone whose strengths and weaknesses are clearly suited to opener, is absolutely pointless.

Good openers can bat from 1 to 11

In fact I'd rather he not be picked at all

Just like the rest of us