Queensland Bulls 2018/2019

[Sproj]

And they left Abbott out!

Well to be fair, that isn't that big a deal, he just isn't really that great.

 

[Unbreakable]

Well to be fair, that isn't that big a deal, he just isn't really that great.

I know, just saying in the scheme of potential bowling line-ups, he'd be another option.

 

[1910]

Feldman 12th man.

Blues 2/72.

 

[1910]

Burns missed that ball, unlucky and terrible time to get a dud call.

 

[1910]

Bulls 5/98

All five pretty avoidable wickets. Not great batting.

 

[Sproj]

Bulls 5/98

All five pretty avoidable wickets. Not great batting.

Microcosm of Australian batting in general they are.

 

[1910]

Gee hard today to hang on after Larkin went so big.

328 behind already two down.

 

[Allo]

Wildebeest with 84. A little resistance from the tail but some poor shots vs Lyon killed our middle order

NSW win by 163

 

[1910]

JLT Sheffield Shield
Queensland Bulls v Victoria, the Gabba
Tuesday – Friday

Queensland Bulls
Usman Khawaja (c)
Joe Burns
Luke Feldman
Sam Heazlett
Charlie Hemphrey
Marnus Labuschagne
James Peirson
Michael Neser
Matthew Renshaw
Mark Steketee
Mitch Swepson
Jack Wildermuth
(12th man to be named)

Toyota Futures League 2nd XI
Queensland Academy of Sport v WA at Allan Border Field
Mon – Thurs
Sam Truloff (c, Wests)
Sam Doggett (Wests)
Cameron Gannon (Norths)
Peter George (Wynnum-Manly)
Sam Heazlett (Redlands)
Corey Hunter (Wynnum-Manly)
Matthew Kuhnemann (Gold Coast)
Alister McDermott (Wynnum-Manly)
Nathan McSweeney (Norths)
Lachlan Pfeffer (Valley)
Brad Powell (Sandgate-Redcliffe)
Bryce Street (Sandgate-Redcliffe)
Lachlan Thompson (Sandgate-Redcliffe)

 

[Unbreakable]

Are they really going to leave Heazlett out for Hemphrey?..

Like, I understand Charlie might be marginally more consistent, but surely there's a greater benefit in getting Heazlett as many shield games as possible..

 

[1910]

Are they really going to leave Heazlett out for Hemphrey?..

Like, I understand Charlie might be marginally more consistent, but surely there's a greater benefit in getting Heazlett as many shield games as possible..

What is Heazlett's selection benefit over other people?

Three 100 since 2015 and one of them in your debut and one two weeks ago is not good enough. Seems to be this misconception and I think it's because he got picked for Australia that Heazlett is killing it but he isn't.

If you wanted to compare their last 15 bats for Queensland back to February.

15, 1, 21, 18, 118*, 1, 6, 43, 11, 13, 18, 59, 16, 124*, 49.

Two 100's and one 50. Heazlett is 100 or nothing. Not too many 50's in there and he only has eight in his career for Queensland. Hemphrey has six since last summer. (four last summer and two this summer).

Hemphrey

1, 17, 72, 23*, 4, 87, 17, 9, 77, 13, 101, 103*, 68*, 9 and 24.

Has averaged 52 over that time and has consistently got runs when Bulls have needed it.

If anyone had to make way for Khawaja then I think Heazlett had to be it.

As a whole career they're pretty even- 26 games at av 33 and 28 games at av of 32 but last one and a half seasons Hemphrey in front considerably.

I'd say that knock against SA and then backing it up with 21, 1 and 15 is a big contributor. It's the context to what he does that gets him potentially dropped.

 

[Unbreakable]

As a whole career they're pretty even- 26 games at av 33 and 28 games at av of 32 but last one and a half seasons Hemphrey in front considerably.

Is he?

You said it yourself, Heazlett has 513 runs over his last 15 innings, Hemphrey has 625 runs over his last 15 innings. That's not a massive difference. When you factor in that Hemphrey is nearly 30 and Heazlett just turned 23, I'd be absolutely sticking with him through his ups and downs compared to a guy who doesn't really have any upside long-term.

Sam has a lot of work to do, there's no question, but dicking him around and dropping him in favour of a guy who will probably be playing park cricket with Peter Forrest within a couple of years, won't really help.

 

[1910]

Is he?

You said it yourself, Heazlett has 513 runs over his last 15 innings, Hemphrey has 625 runs over his last 15 innings. That's not a massive difference. When you factor in that Hemphrey is nearly 30 and Heazlett just turned 23, I'd be absolutely sticking with him through his ups and downs compared to a guy who doesn't really have any upside long-term.

Sam has a lot of work to do, there's no question, but dicking him around and dropping him in favour of a guy who will probably be playing park cricket with Peter Forrest within a couple of years, won't really help.

Yeah he is in front because he has performed better and a lot more consistently. Just looking at end results doesn't take in the context. Heazlett has a problem getting runs and not just scores but runs. He gets a 100 and then does nothing for 12 months. That's not a state batsman. I would much rather the guy who gets 50 every week then the guy who gets 120 every 12 months and nothing else.

He hasn't scored over 500 runs in a season since his debut in 15/16. Hemphrey is coming off 568 runs at 43 in his first full season.

Dicking him around? He's not a hard luck story. There is no 1000 run year and dropped. Shouldn't you have to perform to play for Queensland? Age has nothing to do with it.

Will you support Harris staying in the Test side on one 100 every 12 months? Did you want Bancroft dropped?

 

[Unbreakable]

Will you support Harris staying in the Test side on one 100 every 12 months? Did you want Bancroft dropped?

Test area vs Domestic arena is 2 completely different things and you know it. Domestic games should be used to give experience and opportunity to our most promising young batsmen. It's any wonder that we don't have anyone scoring big runs in Shield, if you're not averaging 45 by the time you're 23, you're gonna get dropped for some journeyman plodder. Story of Australian cricket really.

 

[1910]

Test area vs Domestic arena is 2 completely different things and you know it. Domestic games should be used to give experience and opportunity to our most promising young batsmen. It's any wonder that we don't have anyone scoring big runs in Shield, if you're not averaging 45 by the time you're 23, you're gonna get dropped for some journeyman plodder. Story of Australian cricket really.

You've just described the opposite of what a strong domestic comp looks like. Making it just an under age team and
completely just disregarding state cricket like that is what is wrong- should be earned not just given away because you're young and could be alright.

This PONI system and guys pulling out of games and not playing Shield is what's wrong.

No I don't know it and it's not right. The idea that you just have kids playing against kids is wrong when was our last great period of domestic cricket? Would it have been when we had older experienced players playing?

Hussey played 176 FC games before playing a Test- would have dropped him for a 19 year old? Too old? Hodge 167? Roy 166? Lehmann 122.

Nothing to gain from those guys.

Remember the 90's? Hayden had more 100's than Heazlett by the start of his second season- half the games.

Roy made his debut 24 years ago this week against the Blues, Waugh, Waugh, Taylor, Slater, McGrath, Holdsworth, Matthews, Bevan, Border, McDermott, Rackemann, Barsby- all tough older players trying to get in the Test team or stay in there.

Roy could only manage to bat at 7!

Roy played three games and dropped- I wonder which produced better players when we valued domestic cricket and had players earning it because of performance or now?

97/98 had nine guys average more than 50. Last batsmen to get 1000 runs in a year? Voges (1358) and Klinger (1046) in 2014/2015- two older plodders.

 

[Unbreakable]

You've just described the opposite of what a strong domestic comp looks like. Making it just an under age team and
completely just disregarding state cricket like that is what is wrong- should be earned not just given away because you're young and could be alright.

This PONI system and guys pulling out of games and not playing Shield is what's wrong.

No I don't know it and it's not right. The idea that you just have kids playing against kids is wrong when was our last great period of domestic cricket? Would it have been when we had older experienced players playing?

Hussey played 176 FC games before playing a Test- would have dropped him for a 19 year old? Too old? Hodge 167? Roy 166? Lehmann 122.

Nothing to gain from those guys.

Remember the 90's? Hayden had more 100's than Heazlett by the start of his second season- half the games.

Roy made his debut 24 years ago this week against the Blues, Waugh, Waugh, Taylor, Slater, McGrath, Holdsworth, Matthews, Bevan, Border, McDermott, Rackemann, Barsby- all tough older players trying to get in the Test team or stay in there.

Roy could only manage to bat at 7!

Roy played three games and dropped- I wonder which produced better players when we valued domestic cricket and had players earning it because of performance or now?

97/98 had nine guys average more than 50. Last batsmen to get 1000 runs in a year? Voges (1358) and Klinger (1046) in 2014/2015- two older plodders.

None of anything you said has any relevance in the discussion we're having unfortunately. I agree with literally everything you said, we should be rewarding runs over all else. I'm talking exclusively about this specific scenario, Hemphrey isn't Hussey, or Voges, or Klinger.. He's a guy who's nearly 30 years old and has only managed to play 25 shield games and averages 32. What are we gaining by rewarding & nurturing that type of player ahead of a 23 year old putting up comparatively similar numbers, who may have a chance at the type of late bloomer run you're referencing.

 

[Unbreakable]

One thing I don't understand is why our guys are playing such little first class..

For example I was just looking at Langer's profile, he played 360 first class matches of cricket, even if you take away his 105 tests that's 255 first class matches.

Some comparison points for our experienced brigade.. S.Marsh 118 FC matches, Paine 91 FC matches, Khawaja 85 FC matches..

Is it any wonder we suck? Even our most experienced bats have barely played 1/3rd of the amount of longer format cricket as Langer, that's a disgrace. Anyone who is aspiring to be a test cricketer should have incentive to completely avoid both shorter formats over the winter, they should all be going to England to play county cricket, and when they're not playing county cricket, play grade cricket somewhere, just play more fucking cricket.

 

[Accept]

One thing I don't understand is why our guys are playing such little first class..

For example I was just looking at Langer's profile, he played 360 first class matches of cricket, even if you take away his 105 tests that's 255 first class matches.

Some comparison points for our experienced brigade.. S.Marsh 118 FC matches, Paine 91 FC matches, Khawaja 85 FC matches..

Is it any wonder we suck? Even our most experienced bats have barely played 1/3rd of the amount of longer format cricket as Langer, that's a disgrace. Anyone who is aspiring to be a test cricketer should have incentive to completely avoid both shorter formats over the winter, they should all be going to England to play county cricket, and when they're not playing county cricket, play grade cricket somewhere, just play more fucking cricket.

Compacted schedule because of T20 cricket would be one reason. Plus the fact that the Shield is now a split season. International cricket often overlaps the domestic stuff these days. Langer played a fair bit of county cricket as well.