First Test- Australia v South Africa

[Sproj]

They also showed fourth innings batting averages. Warner is 43 or something and now he's gone.

Smith and Khawaja are 30-odd, Marsh jack all and Voges at 16. This could be over tonight.

 

[CaptainHook]

Nothing triggers a collapse more than run out. Watch this joke of a team bow out in this session.

 

[Broncoman]

Agreed. Absolutely sick of him.

Sick of the best opener in the country. You're hard to please.

 

[1910]

He made a 50 in the first innings when the next highest score on the team was 20, and I have no idea what you're referring to when you say he averages 25 this year considering this was the first FC game he's played this season, how you can justify using his average from 2 innings as a reason not to consider him, when one of the innings he made a half century.

Labuschange barely averages 30 in FC, and also made a duck first innings, so that's also a terrible alternative if you're shooting down the Heazlett suggestion.

You said his current form is good- his current form is averaging 25- so how was I wrong? So you're happy to use his 50 as good current form but don't want his 0 used- that's the best example of picking data to suit you I have ever seen.

I wasn't suggesting Labuschagne I was just pointing out if you're going to blindly just pick Bulls without watching them then Labuschagne is in better form this season. He at least made a 85 against Starc and Hazlewood last week.

 

[CaptainHook]

Sick of the best opener in the country. You're hard to please.

Heh. Maybe I'm hard to please but I've never really warmed up to his style of play. I think he's a slugger, not a genuine stroke player.

I don't think he has a lot of patience or discipline. Go find me a career saving, back to the wall century. Go find me a guy playing sensible strokes, rotating the strike and trying to get through the session because that's what his team needs.

Find me multiple examples of that and I might give him a second look.

 

[Unbreakable]

You said his current form is good- his current form is averaging 25- so how was I wrong? So you're happy to use his 50 as good current form but don't want his 0 used- that's the best example of picking data to suit you I have ever seen.

I wasn't suggesting Labuschagne I was just pointing out if you're going to blindly just pick Bulls without watching them then Labuschagne is in better form this season. He at least made a 85 against Starc and Hazlewood last week.

His current form is good, scoring a 50 when your team doesn't crack 200 and the top score apart from him is 20 is good form, he also has a 101, 73 & 60 in the last 2 months playing for the National Performance Squad against South Africa A & India A in 50 over games, which is better competition than shield at the moment.

So you don't need to make up things about him playing 2 shield games at an average of 25 when he's only played 1 game lol, speaking of picking data to suit you.

For someone who claims to have good knowledge on the game, you really don't.

 

[1910]

His current form is good, scoring a 50 when your team doesn't crack 200 and the top score apart from him is 20 is good form, he also has a 101, 73 & 60 in the last 2 months playing for the National Performance Squad against South Africa A & India A in 50 over games, which is better competition than shield at the moment.

So you don't need to make up things about him playing 2 shield games at an average of 25 when he's only played 1 game lol, speaking of picking data to suit you.

For someone who claims to have good knowledge on the game, you really don't.

I clearly meant innings not games. Sorry. Would have thought that was obvious given I know his average from his two knocks.

Are you seriously using one day A form as a reason to pick someone for the Test team? Better than the Shield?

 

[Unbreakable]

I clearly meant innings not games. Sorry. Would have thought that was obvious given I know his average from his two knocks.

Are you seriously using one day A form as a reason to pick someone for the Test team? Better than the Shield?

I mean I think you're being completely unfair on him, you're saying he's in poor form because "he didn't get a 100 in his 2 innings so far", how realistic is that? I understand the whole idea of picking players directly off tonnes, but come on.

And no, I'm not using his 50 over form as the reason to pick him, that's just what we call "runs on the board", and the squads that India & SA sent over were pretty handy, more or less the best young players from both countries mixed in with some international players, he wasn't knocking the ball around against grade cricketers.

 

[Broncoman]

We are that desperate we are chasing Labushange?

Good lord

 

[Sproj]

Khawaja dropped, difficult chance though. Some of these South Africans are looking a little chubby, namely Amla but especially Philander. These bowlers are hitting the cracks relentlessly, good bowling but loving the application by these two batsmen.

 

[Sproj]

We are that desperate we are chasing Labushange?

Good lord

What? Have you even read the point [MENTION=8272]1910[/MENTION] has been making? It's pretty clear and easy to understand, even if you don't agree with it.

 

[Unbreakable]

What? Have you even read the point [MENTION=8272]1910[/MENTION] has been making? It's pretty clear and easy to understand, even if you don't agree with it.

To be fair he hasnt really made a point apart from shitting on every else's suggestions, I'm yet to see him put forward some realistic options to improve the team. It's quite apparent that several members of this squad just aren't up to test cricket standards, we need to stop going with "old reliables" at one point or another, or we can look forward to another 5 years of mediocrity in the test arena.

The only exception is Mitch Marsh, he's young, but arguably the worst all rounder that Australia has ever had, at least in recent years.

 

[Broncoman]

I'll raise you John Hastings

 

[broncoboy]

apparently it was announced by cricket Australia this morning that they wiki be taking the same squad to Hobart

 

[1910]

I mean I think you're being completely unfair on him, you're saying he's in poor form because "he didn't get a 100 in his 2 innings so far", how realistic is that? I understand the whole idea of picking players directly off tonnes, but come on.

And no, I'm not using his 50 over form as the reason to pick him, that's just what we call "runs on the board", and the squads that India & SA sent over were pretty handy, more or less the best young players from both countries mixed in with some international players, he wasn't knocking the ball around against grade cricketers.

I never used the word poor. I just pointed out your claim of current good form isn't backed up by his scores this week. It's not harsh if you want to be a Shield player- 50's are great. If you want to be rushed into a Test side for next week and your debut well then 50's aren't going to cut it.

 

[1910]

To be fair he hasnt really made a point apart from shitting on every else's suggestions, I'm yet to see him put forward some realistic options to improve the team. It's quite apparent that several members of this squad just aren't up to test cricket standards, we need to stop going with "old reliables" at one point or another, or we can look forward to another 5 years of mediocrity in the test arena.

The only exception is Mitch Marsh, he's young, but arguably the worst all rounder that Australia has ever had, at least in recent years.

Isn't it up to the young batsmen to prove at Shield level they're up to it and score big 100's and 1000 runs in a season? No one is at the moment.

I have made several points- this is our best batsmen at the moment. Until someone wants to score 1000 runs in a year and average 60. This is what we have at the moment. I don't think we can change anything.

We can look at why we have stopped producing the sort of innings we saw yesterday by two South Africans but that's another conversation.

Marsh is a perfect example; made one Shield 100- yet we scratch our head and say why can't be peel off Test 100's? Steve Waugh took 27 Tests to score his first 100; Marsh is up to Test 18. So he's tracking well with Waugh.

Bowling wise I have said I am a big fan of Mennie and Sayers- both backed up by performance. Last year Mennie took 51 wickets. Sayers 37 wickets. Mennie is now being rewarded by being around the Test squad.

Sayers has backed that up this season with 17 at an unbelievable 10.8 so far and would be a great selection for Adelaide under lights swinging it.

South Australia have developed a nice trio of Sayers, Mennie and Worrall.

 

[Unbreakable]

Isn't it up to the young batsmen to prove at Shield level they're up to it and score big 100's and 1000 runs in a season? No one is at the moment.

I have made several points- this is our best batsmen at the moment. Until someone wants to score 1000 runs in a year and average 60. This is what we have at the moment. I don't think we can change anything.

We can look at why we have stopped producing the sort of innings we saw yesterday by two South Africans but that's another conversation.

Marsh is a perfect example; made one Shield 100- yet we scratch our head and say why can't be peel off Test 100's? Steve Waugh took 27 Tests to score his first 100; Marsh is up to Test 18. So he's tracking well with Waugh.

Bowling wise I have said I am a big fan of Mennie and Sayers- both backed up by performance. Last year Mennie took 51 wickets. Sayers 37 wickets. Mennie is now being rewarded by being around the Test squad.

Sayers has backed that up this season with 17 at an unbelievable 10.8 so far and would be a great selection for Adelaide under lights swinging it.

South Australia have developed a nice trio of Sayers, Mennie and Worrall.

Thanks for your input.

As much as I don't rate our bowling depth, I think it's a MAJOR secondary concern to our batting right now, we were put under pressure this game because of our batting, our bowlers did great first day, had all the pressure on them on day 3 because of our usual batting collapse.

I agree that we've got nobody kicking the door down demanding to be selected, but surely at some point it's gotta be better to give a raw 21-23 year old player a run with an average of 40 over someone who's just wasting a spot in the test side making little to no runs on a consistent basis.

 

[Sproj]

I'm not worried about our pace bowling either. I am most worried about two things: we have developed a penchant for losing and that is a mentality that is hard to break. Has the honeymoon period with Darren Lehmann worn off? The other thing I'm worried about is that there doesn't seem to be any public talk anymore of raising standards. When Lehmann first took the job, he publicly declared the standards that were expected.

Suddenly, we lose 3-0 in SL a place we have never lost before in a series and everyone just seems to go, 'Ahh spin, that old chestnut again but the batsmen are trying.' Then, as world number 1, we go to SA with a ridiculous bowling squad and give them all the momentum by losing 5-0 on the eve of a test series here and no one seems to take ownership of it.

And I just want to add, Rabada is a gun in the making but he is still a rookie. Maharaj is on debut at the WACA and looking like he's throwing grenades. It is appalling and all on the back of a insatiable desire to self implode and throw our hands in the air when the going gets tough. SA lose Steyn and have an unfit Philander plus a very raw and underwhelming top six, but look at them right. Even Cook's bowling looked threatening. What the?

Meanwhile, our bowlers can't even bowl out their tail and they walk off patting each other on the back and shaking hands with job well done? Screw you Australian test team. At least Khawaja seems to have re-found his very impressive mojo.

These two bats, particularly MMarsh have a lot to prove tomorrow. Can they? Doubt it.

I would seriously drop Voges next test. Age seems to have caught up with him in the batting department but very definitely in the fielding, he just never looks safe, ever.

Unfortunately, as good as Head and Patterson are going in the last year or two, the only player who could very well be argued as having done enough is Lehmann, so get him in there.