CRICKET Australia v West Indies

[1910]

Australia Test squad: Pat Cummins (c), Scott Boland, Alex Carey, Cameron Green, Josh Hazlewood, Travis Head, Usman Khawaja, Marnus Labuschagne, Nathan Lyon, Mitchell Marsh, Matthew Renshaw, Steve Smith, Mitchell Starc.

Australia ODI squad: Steve Smith (c), Travis Head (vc), Sean Abbott, Nathan Ellis, Cameron Green, Aaron Hardie, Josh Inglis, Marnus Labuschagne, Glenn Maxwell, Lance Morris, Jhye Richardson, Matt Short, Adam Zampa.

 

[1910]

“Cameron Green will come into the playing XI for the Test in Adelaide in a squad also containing Scott Boland and Matthew Renshaw. We have selected a team we believe contains the best six batters in the country,” Bailey said.

 

[BooKhaki]

I've warmed to the idea of Smith opening, and it's a fantastic idea Green going straight to 4 instead of moving Head and Marsh.

 

[Fitzy]

The right call has been made. Gives the country a while to find a quality opener whilst maintaining the best 6 batsman in the side. Well done. Nobody can complain about that. I think Labuschagne, Green, Head are the key to our future and they are all now locked into there preferred positions which is good.

 

[Mister Wright]

Unlikely that we will lose this series, particularly if we go with a full strength bowling unit, but will be interesting to see what the selectors do if Smith & Green both fail in their positions and we then have to go to New Zealand, were batting conditions, especially early can be a bit tricky.

 

[mitch222]

Just confirms everyone's suspicions, the playing group still do not trust Bancroft and I don't think the selectors will risk upsetting the entire playing group for him in the future. I think you can finally put a nail in the coffin for his test career.

 

[Sproj]

Bancroft only has himself to blame. Yes he might have been influenced by Warner and maybe Smith and others but he didn't need to come out and bag out the bowlers. Unless you are averaging 60 and smashing the door down, the selectors don't have to pick you. He burned bridges and this is the result.

As for the ODI side, I guess this is the start of planning for the next World Cup with this side. Will be interesting to see who steps up.

I wonder if they might be looking at something like this:

1. M.Short/ Smith
2. Head
3. Smith/Labushagne
4. Labushagne/Smith/Hardie
5. Maxwell
6. Inglis
7. Green/Hardie
8. Richardson/Abbott
9. Ellis/Morris/Abbott
10. Morris/Ellis/Abbott
11. Zampa

Interesting no Sangha

 

[Sproj]

I also like that the selectors seem to be starting to future proof the side to an extent:

1. Khawaja (37) -> Renshaw (27)
2. Smith (34) -> ?? (This position is a concern moving forward, but if it is Pucs (25))
3. Labushagne (29) -> No need to worry at present but McSweeney (24)
4. Green (24) -> He should be a 10 year player here so no need to worry at present
5. Head (30) -> Davies (23)
6. Marsh (32) -> Hardie (25)
7. Carey (32) -> Inglis (28)
8. Starc (33) -> Richardson (27)
9. Cummins (30) -> No need to worry at present but a LOT of good young pacemen around
10. Lyon (36) -> Murphy (22)
11. Hazlewood (33) -> Morris (25)

 

[BroncsFan]

Just confirms everyone's suspicions, the playing group still do not trust Bancroft and I don't think the selectors will risk upsetting the entire playing group for him in the future. I think you can finally put a nail in the coffin for his test career.

Yep it would seem like Renshaw might be next in line based on the squad announcement today... well at least he better be ahead of Marcus fucking Harris anyway!!

 

[BroncsFan]

The exclusion of Bancroft is interesting in regards to Warner's comments from a week or so ago when he was talking about Harris as being his choice for next inline.

Harris has arguably performed worst out of the 3, but he might've known Bancroft was on the outer and no chance despite having the best recent shield form.

 

[BroncsFan]

Just saw an interview with George Baily on Fox openly talking about Smith moving to the top, so it all looks pretty set to happen at this point.

Amazing how quickly everything has changed for Smith to emerge as the new opener moving forward.

I'm pretty excited to see Smith move to the top as it just seems to provide the best balance across the batting line up. I'm also excited to see Green in his preferred position of 4 as well.

If Smudge succeeds at opener, which he very well could, then the Aust batting lineup would have to be in consideration as best in the world, especially in regards to how well balanced it is across the top 6 and how suited everyone would be to their role:
- Uzzie arguably best opener in the world
- Marnus arguably best no. 3 in the world (Kane Williamson in the conversation I'd assume??)
- Head extremely well suited to the no. 5 role
- Marsh perfectly suited to the no. 6 role
- Green very well suited to no. 4 (possible weakness against spin, which a no. 4 is more exposed to)

I'm thinking Smith could also move to the top for ODI's as well??

He's been pretty bloody effective in the BBL matches when he's opened and gets to play against the new ball... I can't see Smith opening in T20's, but the longer ODI format I could see him moving up.

 

[BroncosFever]

You could flip our batting lineup upside down and we'd still beat them.

The real test will come when we take on a top side, Cameron Green at 4 doesn't fill me with any sort of confidence. I got no doubt Smith will get runs, I just feel like we'd have been better off trying to find a genuine opener for the future.

 

[BooKhaki]

Why are people blaming sandpaper, when he has played Test cricket since then.

He is 30+ yrs old, and doesn't have a great record at Test level. He's in the same boat as Harris.

 

[Bongo]

Why are people blaming sandpaper, when he has played Test cricket since then.

He is 30+ yrs old, and doesn't have a great record at Test level. He's in the same boat as Harris.

I agree. I also don't think shield averages are the gold standard for selection either. I would expect guys like Bancroft or Harris who are 30 and have played at test level to have a good shield average. Their average should be better than a younger player on the way up learning their craft. I still don't think anyone of the openers have been performing at the level to demand selection. Pucovski is the one to bring in when the time is right if he can overcome his health issues. Not sure that will definitely happen unfortunately.

I am still not convinced about Renshaw except that he is good against spin so is worth keeping in the picture for the sub-continent, especially given his flexibility to bat down the order.

Harris is like Shaun Marsh with a history of underperforming despite multiple opportunities. The difference is Shaun Marsh had the class to be a world beater and put in some great innings but just couldnt string it together. Harris hasn't even hit a 100 anywhere in test cricket. It would be like bringing back TPJ picking Harris again.

 

[mitch222]

Why are people blaming sandpaper, when he has played Test cricket since then.

He is 30+ yrs old, and doesn't have a great record at Test level. He's in the same boat as Harris.

I think the biggest detractor against Bancroft is that he buried the bowlers in sandgate saying they all knew what was going on which they angrily denied and the current bowlers we have were all there for sandgate. Plus one of them is now captain which would have a big sway over team selections. 7 of the current side played that match and they might not all trust him. And there is no point having a player in the side if you cant trust them. Rather team unity

 

[Sproj]

And although Bancroft has been the best performed opener at Shield level over the last couple of years, it isn't like he is doing a Hayden (and he didn't have all the outside baggage Bancroft does obviously) and averaging 60 year after year to bang the door down. Bancroft probably feels hard done by but it isn't a travesty by any means, not even close and as someone who doesn't care either way, I am not sad for him, he hasn't demanded selection and he isn't as good as he seems to think he is anyway.

 

[Big Del]

I think the biggest detractor against Bancroft is that he buried the bowlers in sandgate saying they all knew what was going on which they angrily denied and the current bowlers we have were all there for sandgate. Plus one of them is now captain which would have a big sway over team selections. 7 of the current side played that match and they might not all trust him. And there is no point having a player in the side if you cant trust them. Rather team unity

George says that is not a factor .
Just picked the best 6 batters . Also said many guys who have been successful openers didn`t start there . Uzzie for example .

There is a lot more to sandpaper gate than meets the eye .
Where was the Aus cricket "family " when the SAf media were handing out Sonny Bill masks at the gates to the ground ?

 

[McHunt]

And although Bancroft has been the best performed opener at Shield level over the last couple of years, it isn't like he is doing a Hayden (and he didn't have all the outside baggage Bancroft does obviously) and averaging 60 year after year to bang the door down. Bancroft probably feels hard done by but it isn't a travesty by any means, not even close and as someone who doesn't care either way, I am not sad for him, he hasn't demanded selection and he isn't as good as he seems to think he is anyway.

Neither has Renshaw. It's a tragedy how Pucovski lost his way.