Third Test- Australia v South Africa

[1910]

Gillespie would be an excellent choice as selector, he's gone away and got experience and coached and now could apply that. He knows England and that will be vital when they sit down to pick the Ashes' squad.

Hohns and Waugh are already there and their contracts are up mid next year.

 

[1910]

A good start...... now for Sutherland to go as well, the whole system needs an overhaul.

I disagree with that; Sutherland is the CEO- his job isn't on field performance anymore than Paul White is responsible for dropped passes. Australian Cricket is over flowing with money and this team is provided with everything a team could need and more- that's his job.

 

[Sproj]

The backward staffer who needs to go is the one who has been needing to go for the last decade or whatever - Pat Howard. The guy has done everything within his power to the achieve the very opposite of what his job description calls for.

 

[tommy]

Du Plessis under investigation for ball-tampering in the second test.

 

[Battler]

As for the spinner, it really is nothing against Lyon at all, maybe a break might freshen him up and reignite the fire in him. SOK would be my first choice as he would have been before Lyon was chosen BUT he is getting on and should these days just be kept for sub-continental conditions. Agar has been very impressive of late and may well develop into a Vettori style lower-order all-rounder which this side badly needs given our penchant for collapsing.

SOK could easily play into his late 30's, plenty of spinners do. So at 31 SOK still has 5-8 years left in the tank. Agar is developing into a special player, but he still needs a year or two for both his batting and bowling to develop - it's worth the wait.

 

[Sproj]

SOK could easily play into his late 30's, plenty of spinners do. So at 31 SOK still has 5-8 years left in the tank. Agar is developing into a special player, but he still needs a year or two for both his batting and bowling to develop - it's worth the wait.

That is very good reasoning, you have me on board.

 

[1910]

You're overlooking the fact that left arm finger spin in Australia is an impossible task; Australia hasn't produced one that has taken more than 80 wickets.

Sauders took 79 wickets in his 14 Tests- his last Test was 1908!

 

[Sproj]

You're overlooking the fact that left arm finger spin in Australia is an impossible task; Australia hasn't produced one that has taken more than 80 wickets.

Sauders took 79 wickets in his 14 Tests- his last Test was 1908!

To be fair, the Chicago Cubs hadn't won in 108 years either. So we are due to have a decent left-arm spinner. Haha

 

[Unbreakable]

Warming to this side, arguably the 3 best young batsmen in Australia, all in good recent form, there's no reason not to select them, especially with Marsh & Voges injured, Burns & Ferguson failing.

Jake Lehmann, Travis Dean next men up.

1. Warner
2. Renshaw
3. Khawaja
4. Smith (c)
5. Patterson
6. Handscomb
7. Wade (wk)
8. Starc
9. O'Keefe
10. Hazlewood
11. Bird

 

[Sproj]

I think you are pretty spot on with that. Is Whiteman a genuine smokey for keeper after Wade's failure with the bat?

 

[Unbreakable]

Considering his last 9 scores have been 2, 9, 5, 16, 0, 13, 9, 1, 4 - I'm gonna go with no.

We need Wade's counter-attack ability in the lower order, Nevill doesn't have it, he's a plodder.

 

[Unbreakable]

Lehmann failed.

If Patterson scores runs I think the top 6 picks itself now.

 

[1910]

Warming to this side, arguably the 3 best young batsmen in Australia, all in good recent form, there's no reason not to select them, especially with Marsh & Voges injured, Burns & Ferguson failing.

Jake Lehmann, Travis Dean next men up.

1. Warner
2. Renshaw
3. Khawaja
4. Smith (c)
5. Patterson
6. Handscomb
7. Wade (wk)
8. Starc
9. O'Keefe
10. Hazlewood
11. Bird

How do you justify O'Keefe getting a spot?

1/107 on his home ground and a guy got 200 taking a quarter of his runs off O'Keefe.

What role is he going to have in Adelaide?

 

[Unbreakable]

What role is he going to have in Adelaide?

You mean apart from being a more useful version of Nathan Lyon? Nothing much, it's not a spinner friendly pitch.

 

[1910]

Considering his last 9 scores have been 2, 9, 5, 16, 0, 13, 9, 1, 4 - I'm gonna go with no.

We need Wade's counter-attack ability in the lower order, Nevill doesn't have it, he's a plodder.

Plodders don't really score 200 and average 76.4 for a Shield year.

Second ever keepr to plod to a 200 for New South Wales. His form is down at the moment but his batting has been excellent in the past- he's a better bat and keeper than Wade.

Wade is just better suited to Test cricket at the moment.

 

[1910]

You mean apart from being a more useful version of Nathan Lyon? Nothing much, it's not a spinner friendly pitch.

How is he more useful than Lyon? They are nothing alike. One is off spin and one is left arm. They don't spin it the same way.

Why play him then? Why do you even need him?

This is like the we must have an all-rounder debate- if no one is up to it then don't play one.

 

[Unbreakable]

How is he more useful than Lyon? They are nothing alike. One is off spin and one is left arm. They don't spin it the same way.

Why play him then? Why do you even need him?

This is like the we must have an all-rounder debate- if no one is up to it then don't play one.

He's more useful than Lyon because he's a better player, I didn't think that needed clarification.

 

[1910]

He's more useful than Lyon because he's a better player, I didn't think that needed clarification.

Where has O'Keefe been hiding his 200 Test wickets?