The Australian top order

[HevyDevy]

Interested to get people's thoughts. In all 4 Ashes Tests our top order has failed in the first innings. We've been in trouble every time only for our middle order to save us.

And of course, after our bowlers have saved the day, they have come out with no pressure and scored runs. So what to do?

Warner has scored, what, 2 hundreds this series? Watson scored 100 last Test. Rogers no hundreds but a few 50s.

The fact that they've all scored some runs and we're winning makes for a dilemma but we can't be 3 or 4/100 all the time.

 

[Sir Biffo]

I think this series it's been OK actually, pretty much every innings someone in the top 7 has made 100, and then someone else has made a 50.

They had a stat up where we'd had 6 100 partnerships in the series so far, make one 100 partnership per innings and that's pretty much 2 blokes knocking off 33% of a decentish score with another 9 to chip in as well ... not bad going.

However in saying that, England have bowled poorly. Against South Africa we'll be found out, carrying 2 nevilles in Watson and Bailey. Watson is just useless. He'll make 100 once in a blue moon when the tides are right, bowlers have given up, pitch is flat etc. People often talk about who you want in to bat when your life is on the line and nominate Border, S Waugh etc. If my life was on the line and I needed a "top line test batsman" knocked over you'd pick Watson every time. He's got a technique honed off bowling machines and textbooks, and it just doesn't work in the real world unfortunately.

Bailey just never looks quite right at this level, a lot like the guy whose name has been changed on this forum ...

 

[lockyno1]

The reality is, there is no-one bashing the door down, possibly Lynn but that is about it!

 

[BunniesMan]

FFS Rogers isn't even averaging his age. Watson got a cheap 100 that was almost as cheap as his 100 in England. Meanwhile he's done a whole lot of nothing in moments where his runs would actually contribute to a meaningful win.

Rogers shouldn't be in the team and Watson should be at 6. Not exactly on topic but we need to get rid of Bailey too. A barely first class standard bat who doesn't bowl. Whichever selector is responsible for him should be sacked.

 

[BunniesMan]

The reality is, there is no-one bashing the door down, possibly Lynn but that is about it!

There is. But you hate him because you loathe me. If I hated this person you'd be driving the bandwagon to put him back in the team.

 

[HevyDevy]

I think this series it's been OK actually, pretty much every innings someone in the top 7 has made 100, and then someone else has made a 50.

They had a stat up where we'd had 6 100 partnerships in the series so far, make one 100 partnership per innings and that's pretty much 2 blokes knocking off 33% of a decentish score with another 9 to chip in as well ... not bad going.

However in saying that, England have bowled poorly. Against South Africa we'll be found out, carrying 2 nevilles in Watson and Bailey. Watson is just useless. He'll make 100 once in a blue moon when the tides are right, bowlers have given up, pitch is flat etc. People often talk about who you want in to bat when your life is on the line and nominate Border, S Waugh etc. If my life was on the line and I needed a "top line test batsman" knocked over you'd pick Watson every time. He's got a technique honed off bowling machines and textbooks, and it just doesn't work in the real world unfortunately.

Bailey just never looks quite right at this level, a lot like the guy whose name has been changed on this forum ...

The top 7 is not the top order.

Okay, Clarke qualifies as top order but the fact is in 4 Tests, our batting has been in trouble EVERY time in the first innings.

Obv it's been hidden because Clarke and Haddin saved us, In Perth Smith did the job too. And then Warner and Watson score runs under no pressure in the second innings and the problem is masked.

Now, I don't advocate dropping Warner at all, but we have to address the overall problem. We can't be 3/100 ALL THE TIME!!

 

[Sir Biffo]

Yeah sorry pal, didn't really read the topic! Just sort of took it as a general batting order discussion.

Out of the top order, Warner is in amazing form, Rogers is average and Watson is hopeless.

Future prospects - Warner ... good, he could be a good opener (not as good as Langer or Hayden, but maybe a Slater or Taylor). Rogers ... none, he's 36. Watson, none (if he had the ticker to be a test batsman he would have shown in ... IN HIS LAST 40 ODD TESTS!!!)

 

[HevyDevy]

Yeah I agree with that. Warner is good, just needs to do more first innings. Rogers has been okay but doesn't convert starts and at 36 his days are numbered anyway.

Watson ... don't get me started.

 

[jargan83]

The problems with our top order have been masked a bit in this series.

England's batting line up has failed leaving us with a lead and little pressure in the second innings.

Dave Warner's 60 in the first dig in Perth probably shows he should be persisted with and has a future at Test level. Can look a million bucks before playing a dumb shot. I don't think he should have been allowed to play the Big Bash Lin the middle of a Test series.

Rogers was picked because he is an experienced bat but his age and average show he isn't the answer long term. Doesn't cash in when he makes a start.

Watson is not a number 3. He is a number 6 or 7 but seems to have a free pass to bat where he wants.

Steve Smith probably has a question or two over him. Scored a great 100 when it was needed in Perth but he needs more runs. Very early in his Test career and has potential.

George Bailey is not a Test player. Was picked on ODI form which was always going to be risky. Sure he scored a 50 at Adelaide but I reckon a few of the Cricketers on this forum could have scored a 50 on that deck.

Not many players knocking down the door this year and the one who has been averaged 28ish during his last run in the side.

Do we take a punt on a couple of promising kids to take to South Africa in the squad?

 

[HevyDevy]

f**k jargan, get out of my brain!!!

Pretty much echoing my thoughts. And yes just about time to blood one or two, but of course hard to change a winning team even if some cracks have been masked over.

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

I notice the OP stopped short of giving suggestions on who could fix the top order which sums up the problem. We need to give it a few years and persevere until the likes of Silk and Maddinson hopefully develop in to test standard batsman.

 

[vvvrulz]

There is. But you hate him because you loathe me. If I hated this person you'd be driving the bandwagon to put him back in the team.

No.

Rogers isn't a great player but he is at least showing competency in defence, seeing off the new ball and batting for time. He's played some useful innings including the 61 in this test.

He's not a long term option but he is the best that is available and Lehmann is obviously all about choosing the best available team and not rotating a bunch of plonkers with 'potential'.

WilliamGilbertGrace has big problems against the new ball and quality spin.
Had his chances, isn't good enough, and its got nothing to do with you at least in my opinion.

 

[TheParraboy]

If you think we got problems, have a look at the poms side. With Kallis retiring, and a lot of their top order in their twighlight years. South Africa are heading for a massive overhaul in batting as well

Possibly India are the only ones who have a gun settled top 6, lets see how they go down under next summer

Whilst we are winning, its good to give guys an extended run, rather than chopping and changing after ever test or two

 

[Twizzle]

we do have issues but luckily we have the Hads

 

[BunniesMan]

No.

Rogers isn't a great player but he is at least showing competency in defence, seeing off the new ball and batting for time. He's played some useful innings including the 61 in this test.

He's not a long term option but he is the best that is available and Lehmann is obviously all about choosing the best available team and not rotating a bunch of plonkers with 'potential'.

WilliamGilbertGrace has big problems against the new ball and quality spin.
Had his chances, isn't good enough, and its got nothing to do with you at least in my opinion.

Anyone who thinks Rogers is more deserving than WGG is clearly biased. Rogers has a lower average while only being played in his usual position and getting one long go (beside his first test). WGG has been in and out and up and down the order and is averaging more. Rogers is 36, WGG is 25. WGG's best years are infront of him. Rogers' best years are behind him.

 

[vvvrulz]

Anyone who thinks Rogers is more deserving than WGG is clearly biased. Rogers has a lower average while only being played in his usual position and getting one long go (beside his first test). WGG has been in and out and up and down the order and is averaging more. Rogers is 36, WGG is 25. WGG's best years are infront of him. Rogers' best years are behind him.

Mate stop pointing at the numbers, do you even watch the matches?

Look at the manner in which WilliamGilbertGrace struggles against quality bowling and in pressure situations and the fact that Rogers has the ability to combat it and hang in there.

I'm not biased, I don't even support Australia.

In fact lets play the numbers game... Rogers currently averages 35.16 and WilliamGilbertGrace 32.65.
Your argument is completely dead.

 

[RHCP]

Usual position :lol: is WGG usually a five-eighth or a goal keeper rather than a batsman which he has been picked as? You have nfi Bunny.

 

[Timbo]

If we win here, I wouldn't make any changes for Sydney despite Baileys poor form.

For South Africa though I'd replace him with Maddinson and slide Watson down to 6.

 

[BunniesMan]

RHCP. Where you bat is irrelevant? If you actually believe that how about questioning why the most accomplished batsman in Australia refuses to go up even 1 spot.

If we win here, I wouldn't make any changes for Sydney despite Baileys poor form.

For South Africa though I'd replace him with Maddinson and slide Watson down to 6.

Even if we rule out the best top order batsman outside of this team because you hate me. Sure let's go with that. But there are still so many other options more deserving than Maddinson. How do you pick Maddinson ahead of Lynn? What's the point of shield cricket? Maddinson is out of form. The number one option is clear. The number two option is Lynn. Then you have the likes of Doolan and Head and even North who have done more than Maddinson.

Let's try and wait for Maddinson to have one good summer instead of promoting him while out of form.

 

[TheParraboy]

Clarke has moved to no 4, no problems

scored 2 tons in live ashes tests there as well

Where has he refused to move up?