Australia vs India - Test Series

Allo said:
Yeah watched it a bit later on. Quite interesting, but still a bit tame imo
Click to expand...

Probably edited quite a bit out. Nice little look behind the scenes though, lots of emotion in those wins and losses.
 
Fernando said:
Yeah that was the short version shown yesterday, the full length is like 8 or so episodes.
Click to expand...

Oh cool, didn't know that. I'd definitely watch the full length. I'd love something of that quality for QLD or god forbid, the Broncos in a good year. Very well made.
 
holdzy said:
Oh cool, didn't know that. I'd definitely watch the full length. I'd love something of that quality for QLD or god forbid, the Broncos in a good year. Very well made.
Click to expand...
There was talk about doing a docu on the QLD camp this year but it didn't happen. Would've been a great series to do it in hindsight.
 
You can make a case for Wade, Head or maybe even Pucovski for #5. I think we're gonna crush India now so need to get it right for the Ashes this time next year.
 
Fernando said:
You can make a case for Wade, Head or maybe even Pucovski for #5. I think we're gonna crush India now so need to get it right for the Ashes this time next year.
Click to expand...
Just judging by posts around here I think Wade is the more popular choice for 5 but its a flip of the coin between he and Head. There's nothing really in it. I'd get around Pucovski at 5. Maybe I am alone in this but I don't see him as an opener long term.

The only slight concern is the combination of Pucovski and Green is quite inexperienced. If we were suddenly 3 for not many and those two were at the crease I wouldn't be all that confident. Then again Paine's batting has improved immensely in recent seasons so it's not the same concern it could have been.
 
Last edited:
A State doesn’t normally move a player unless they have the blessing of Langer and CA. Rogers was U19 coach and elite pathway coach so he’s in the system. It would be beyond strange for him to move Pucovski to open he gets 495 runs in two games and you move him to five.

a conversation would have taken place between Langer and Rogers about him opening and what that would or wouldn’t do for his future Test spot.
 
Last edited:
Burns has bought himself another test, but I don’t think we should just lock him in for the foreseeable future. He’s had one decent score since the start of the shield season and it was against a demoralised side who had just been bowled out for 36.

I agree that Head’s position in the team shouldn’t be guaranteed, but the selectors have a different opinion and he seems to have acquired Mitch Marsh’s undroppable status. Unless Wade tons up, I assume Warner comes in for Wade in Sydney/ Brisbane. Puco should play too, but he’ll end up being rortered and his first test will end up being in insane conditions under pressure like England in Brisbane or something.
 
Last edited:
1910 said:
A State doesn’t normally move a player unless they have the blessing of Langer and CA. Rogers was U19 coach and elite pathway coach so he’s in the system. It would be beyond strange for him to move Pucovski to open he gets 495 runs in two games and you move him to five.

a conversation would have taken place between Langer and Rogers about him opening and what that would or wouldn’t do for his future Test spot.
Click to expand...
Langer himself debuted in test cricket at #6 before moving up the order.

From memory, Puco didn't open when he first hit the FC scene - I think he batted at 3 or 4. Handscomb now bats at 3 for Vic so it's not as if he's got any test future, Puco could have easily stayed at first drop. Another example is Renshaw who most would consider an out and out opener, yet he now bats at #5 for QLD. What's the logic there, have CA blessed that?

If there have been conversations about future test spots it makes the decision to move Wade to open even stranger. He basically earned his test recall on the back of piling up runs at #6 in shield then earlier in FC this season he batted at 3 (fair enough as the best bat in the TAS line up). Why hang him out to dry opening for one test if they're going to drop him back to FC where he will inevitably bat in the middle order?

I don't think there's any set rule.
 
Last edited:
The True King said:
Langer himself debuted in test cricket at #6 before moving up the order.

From memory, Puco didn't open when he first hit the FC scene - I think he batted at 3 or 4. Handscomb now bats at 3 for Vic so it's not as if he's got any test future, Puco could have easily stayed at first drop. Another example is Renshaw who most would consider an out and out opener, yet he now bats at #5 for QLD. What's the logic there, have CA blessed that?

If there have been conversations about future test spots it makes the decision to move Wade to open even stranger. He basically earned his test recall on the back of piling up runs at #6 in shield then earlier in FC this season he batted at 3 (fair enough as the best bat in the TAS line up). Why hang him out to dry opening for one test if they're going to drop him back to FC where he will inevitably bat in the middle order?

I don't think there's any set rule.
Click to expand...

I don’t think you read what I said, I am doubtful Victoria would have moved him in the off-season without consulting Langer.

Yeah Chuck did talk to Langer about moving Renshaw.

I don’t think it will matter; Pucovski is long odds to play again this summer I’d say.
 
Last edited:
1910 said:
I don’t think you read what I said, I am doubtful Victoria would have moved him in the off-season without consulting Langer.

Yeah Chuck did talk to Langer about moving Renshaw.
Click to expand...
No doubt there is some consultation I just question the logic of the decision.

If Langer has agreed to that and it's a rule moving forward, it virtually means Renshaw has no future as a test opener.

Pucovski is a freak and has the talent and potential to be world class. I can see him succeeding as an opener but in reality the world's best batsmen usually bat 3,4,5 and that's why I believe he should be somewhere in there.
 
The True King said:
No doubt there is some consultation I just question the logic of the decision.

If Langer has agreed to that and it's a rule moving forward, it virtually means Renshaw has no future as a test opener.

Pucovski is a freak and has the talent and potential to be world class. I can see him succeeding as an opener but in reality the world's best batsmen usually bat 3,4,5 and that's why I believe he should be somewhere in there.
Click to expand...
It’s not a rule but it’s a conversation the states and national coach have- we need him to open for us- we see him in the middle order for the Test side. They then figure out what is best for him and 99% of the time the Test side wins.

Test side set the bowlers too- doesn’t matter if a state needs one wicket to win if it’s been set that Cummins only bowls 12 overs that’s it.
 
I reckon the side will be unchanged for Melbourne, I don't think Warner will be fit.

For India, I'd go:

1. Sharma/Rahul
2. Gill
3. Pujara
4. Rahane
5. Pandya
6. Pant
7. Jadeja
8. Ashwin
9. Bumrah
10. Siraj
11. Yadav

Shami looks to be out and Shaw looked hopelessly loose for Aussie pitches. Gill is a future superstar, so get him in there. Harsh on Agarwal but Sharma is an out and out gun in all formats. Rahul is also a seasoned vet. I think they need Pandya, though there are question marks on him being able to bowl, so bring in Jadeja. This strengthens their all round bowling options and considerably lengthens their middle order, as 9-11 are not going to offer much.
 
Hussey and Haddin both come out in support of Wade over Head at 5.

Selectors have their work cut out for them if Warner is fit.
 
1. Prithvi Shaw
2. Mayank Agarwal
3. Cheteshwar Pujuara
4. Shubman Gill
5. Ajinkya Rahane (c)
6. Ravindra Jadeja
7. Rishabh Pant (wk)
8. Ravichindaran Ashwin
9. Umesh Yadav
10. Jasprit Bumrah
11. Mohammed Siraj

This is what I'm expecting from India for Boxing Day - I think they'll give Shaw & Agarwal another chance.
 
New Posts

Unread

Watch

YouTube
0 0 658
1:22:15
NSWRL Round 19, 1993 - Canberra Raiders vs Brisbane Broncos
View full media list »

Active Now

Total: 181 (members: 19, guests: 162)
Robots: 660
Top
  AdBlock Message
Please consider adding BHQ to your Adblock Whitelist. We do our best to make sure it doesn't affect your experience on the website, and the funds help us pay server and software costs.