Third Test- Australia v South Africa

[Sproj]

Aside from Maddinson, I really like it. I understand why they have chosen him, he has a lot of upside but would definitely have preferred Patterson and/or Lehmann but so be it.

 

[Dash]

Aside from Maddinson, I really like it. I understand why they have chosen him, he plays for NSW but would definitely have preferred Patterson and/or Lehmann but so be it.

Fixed.

 

[1910]

Maddinson is a pure Chappell and Waugh selection. He's a point of difference and fits the side better. If they bat well he can come in down the order and get quick explosive runs to end the innings. Of course that only works if he comes in at 6/300 not 75.

He's like a Simon O'Donnell type role.

He's matured I watched him last year score a really good 70 against the Bulls, same game Renshaw got his first 100.

 

[Sproj]

Maddinson is a pure Chappell and Waugh selection. He's a point of difference and fits the side better. If they bat well he can come in down the order and get quick explosive runs to end the innings. Of course that only works if he comes in at 6/300 not 75.

He's like a Simon O'Donnell type role.

He's matured I watched him last year score a really good 70 against the Bulls, same game Renshaw got his first 100.

I completely agree. I don't mind him in that role if we had a top five of a decade ago. However, at present, I think Lehmann or Patterson would have been a better fit. That said, I think if they drop Smith to 5, Maddinson could be a smart selection at 4.

I think Handscomb is the ideal number 6 at the moment.

 

[1910]

I completely agree. I don't mind him in that role if we had a top five of a decade ago. However, at present, I think Lehmann or Patterson would have been a better fit. That said, I think if they drop Smith to 5, Maddinson could be a smart selection at 4.

I think Handscomb is the ideal number 6 at the moment.

Which is one of the big issues with such a volatile side; you expose each weakness and they just get more exposed as you go down the line as more pressure is applied.

If Gilchrist comes in at 6/170 most games he isn't the same type of player with the same freedom. He tightens up, feels pressure, tries to be something he isn't and you end up with a Mitchell Marsh situation.

 

[1910]

Fixed.

3/4 selectors are "Bulls."

 

[1910]

My only hope with this squad is that we stick with it, no chopping and changing, let these guys play in Adelaide and guarantee them the entire Pakistan series.

What happened to your calls of accountability every Test?

 

[Browny]

It's a rebuilding stage. You need to give them a decent go

 

[Foordy]

Accountability even test is fine if you have an experienced side.

But when you select a bunch of rookies, you need to give them some time to find their feet, while playing at the highest level.

 

[1910]

Getting a bit excited now; apart from the $9.20 a beer at the Adelaide Oval.

Renshaw is worth a punt- he's been successful to some degree at every level. Club 100 on debut, Shield 100 game 5, 100 at Lord's and now for his Test debut.

They will try and rough him up, as they should. Hope they don't declare and put us in on dusk though.

Wade- will be chirpy and annoying which is what this team needs. He says some ridiculous things behind there but we just need an up beat presence at the moment.

Handscomb- in form after a 200. Great footwork- he's not going to encounter a lot of spin on Thursday though.

Maddinson- can do a job if everyone before him does.

Sayers- Has to bowl, he will nip it around and while it might not be as green as 12 months ago he will get good hoop at his home ground. He will knick them out.

I am still unsure if we need four seamers or Lyon- Lyon bowled well last year at night it's a point of variation but he is so out of form- I'd just go with the four. I think.

 

[Sproj]

I reckon you have to go with Lyon without another point of difference in the side. Bird / Sayers are really similar. I'd suggest we know what Bird can do, give Sayers a shot. If he looks impotent like Mennie did last match, bring Bird back in for Pakistan, if he looks as deadly as we know he can be, we suddenly have four very good pacemen again.

I think if the selectors had gone with Head instead of Maddinson, we might have seen Lyon sit out.

I reckon we are looking at something like this:

1. Renshaw
2. Warner
3. Khawaja
4. Handscomb
5. Smith
6. Maddinson
7. Wade
8. Starc
9. Sayers
10. Hazelwood
11. Lyon

 

[1910]

Australia XI: David Warner, Matthew Renshaw, Usman Khawaja, Steve Smith (c), Peter Handscomb, Nic Maddinson, Matthew Wade (wk), Mitchell Starc, Josh Hazlewood, Nathan Lyon, Jackson Bird

Sayers misses out.

 

[Fozz]

Poor old Faf. He's being picked on.

 

[Broncoman]

Not sold on Wade, he can bat but he can't keep

 

[Sproj]

Australia XI: David Warner, Matthew Renshaw, Usman Khawaja, Steve Smith (c), Peter Handscomb, Nic Maddinson, Matthew Wade (wk), Mitchell Starc, Josh Hazlewood, Nathan Lyon, Jackson Bird

Sayers misses out.

Very excited to see how they go. While I know they won't do it, I'd love to see them swap Handscomb and Smith in the order.

 

[Sproj]

Not sold on Wade, he can bat but he can't keep

I agree to an extent. He has improved but not markedly so. I would have taken a punt on Whiteman but understand why the selectors didn't want to get another rookie into that batting line-up.

The problem is that while Nevill's keeping is great, his batting has truly been a liability.

 

[mitch222]

Poor old Faf. He's being picked on.

for cheating? He gets no sympathy from me. They know what they are doing

 

[Fozz]

for cheating? He gets no sympathy from me. They know what they are doing

I tweeted him to see if he wanted any cheese with his whine.