- Feb 28, 2016
- 11,489
- 8,361
Daniel Sams isn't just some all rounder..he's one of Australia's leading wicket takers in domestic short format games . He's a gun. I actually feel terrible for the lad,
Australia vs India - Test Series
- Thread starter Unbreakable
- Start date
Why do you have 2 matches in different formats at the same to be being played and watering down the both teams. I hate watching second Aussie sides play that are second rate especially against a team like India. I get the focus on the tests but don't have a crap t20 team pretending to be Australia.
He's a bit of a bowler and a bit of a batter. Big step up to bowling at national level. His kohli wicket was a pie. I think he is not in standard currently. Certainly not the last over on debut. Australia lost that game through dumb cricket. It was Broncos like.
Last edited:
No Green, No Cummins or Beset in T20. No spinner in the Australia A match. They got both slides wrong. I get the reasons but could have been done better. Maybe covid bubble was a factor
Last edited:
The True King
NRL Player
- Apr 6, 2018
- 1,716
- 1,662
Because India wanted warm up games before the test series and CA wanted T20 money. This was the compromise.
In my opinion it's one of the better Aus A sides we've rolled out and the Indians certainly have a good XI in both formats. I agree that a spinner should have been picked but with Swepson and Zampa playing T20, the other option was Lyon (also now called up to t20 side). I think the Aus selectors weren't keen on giving India an early look at Lyon before the tests and throwing someone like Pope in against Rahane, Pujara etc would have been a baptism of fire. Maybe they could have gone Holland, who knows.
The mitigating factor so far has been injuries. We can't just suddenly write to the ICC and say we don't want the t20i's to be recognised as international games because we're missing Starc, Warner, Finch, M Marsh, Agar etc.
Last edited:
- Sep 28, 2012
- 13,196
- 11,375
I love Neser, and while he’s super-economical usually, his tendency to over pitch a ball undoes a lot of his good work (despite this he does still keeps a sub-4rpo economy) and could be a concern for selectors as he doesn’t have the goodwill like a Patto or Starc etc. one bad spell could see him miss out
Him being able to score a good 20-50 at 7 or 8 might give him an edge though hopefully
Him being able to score a good 20-50 at 7 or 8 might give him an edge though hopefully
All fair points. I still think we could have made selections to improve both sides injuries aside. That bowling line up on t20 was dreadful.
Last edited:
The True King
NRL Player
- Apr 6, 2018
- 1,716
- 1,662
Yep it was but context is key. Neser and Green are obviously in the test picture so the selectors wanted them to be part of the A game rather than playing the t20. Cummins was rested.
I do agree with you to an extent though, could have been something like:
T20: Stoinis, Short, Smith, Lynn, Maxwell, Phillipe/Carey, Cummins, Sams/Abbott, Swepson, Zampa, Tye
A game: Pucovski, Harris, Head, Henriques, Wade, Green, Paine, Patto, Neser, Bird, Holland(?)
I don't think the selectors have missed the mark by that much all things considered - Sams was easily the best bowler in the Big Bash last season and Tye is quite highly rated in t20.
Not to sound condescending but I'm curious to know what you would have done?
Last edited:
Your suggestions are good. I get Cummins being rested was compounded with the bowlers going down and Finch as well. I would have prioritised the result of the t20 and bulked up that side while the series was alive particularly in the bowling.
I would have had Cummins playing and Patto in the t20 on his ipl form. We already know what he can do at test level. I would have played Green in T20 too. I think he has done enough to be on the fringe of test selection. Obviously knocking up a hundred today confirmed this further and is justified from the selectors point of view.
I would have had Swepson in the 4 day game. If Swepson is our second spinner this was the time for the 4 day game. I might have rested paine and given another keeper a go in the 4 day game too. Abbott in the 4 day game too.
Last edited:
Fernando
NRL Captain
- Jun 6, 2015
- 4,272
- 4,674
Green has a better technique and temperament than most of the fully fledged batsmen we've tried over the last decade. It looks uncomplicated when he's batting. Makes you wonder how guys like Handscomb end up with with weird techniques full of holes when there's a kid batting so simply and successfully like that lol
- Sep 6, 2013
- 56,745
- 69,325
Green IS a batsman, he just also happens to be a bowler as well. He is the most genuine all-rounder I've ever seen for Australia. He is in the top 6 batsmen in the country, as he builds his bowling load up, he'll be in the top five bowlers as well.
Technique doesn't matter too much at all. If you're smoking it through the covers why would they alter your back lift because it's too high?
Lara had a ridiculous back lift, Smith has about 34 things wrong with is technique.
The NCC don't alter things unless it is hurting you or costing you runs/wickets. Technique normally comes about because of environment.
- Sep 6, 2013
- 56,745
- 69,325
Smith's technique is excellent at the points it needs to be, it is such a fallacy that he has no technique. He is quirky before and after the ball comes but at the moment the ball is on its way in, he is as sound as anyone. He is helped by having a great eye but his technique from delivery to execution is excellent, his quirkiness outside that makes it look like he is an ugly batsman.
Fernando
NRL Captain
- Jun 6, 2015
- 4,272
- 4,674
Yeah it doesn't matter if it works. If you have a horrendous technique like Handscomb that gets exploited time after time i'd say it matters quite a bit.
His technique isn't excellent, if you are going by the book he hits balls on the wrong side of his body, hitting from the leg side through the offside isn't in any batting book, he moves across the crease and sometimes doesn't move his feet at all. You can pick his batting apart if you want to go by the book.
If you want perfect batting it's not Smith.
Which was my point it doesn't matter.
- Sep 6, 2013
- 56,745
- 69,325
Again, I disagree. His head is over the ball, has a beautiful hand / arm position and gets to the pitch of the ball. He can create angles with his footwork and at the moment he hits the ball, he is technically perfect. People get his quirkiness mixed up with lack of technique. Yes, he can and does improvise a lot but he is still a beautiful batsman to watch when he wants to be. Again, because of his quirkiness, he is never going to look like a Kohli or a Laxman. If I was teaching a kid how to bat, I would have zero hesitation showing him Smith, why wouldn't you model after the second best test batsman of all time?
