http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia-v-sri-lanka-2012/content/player/6033.html

One swallow. Sri Lanka have been awful and Johnson was Player of the Series in 2008/09 vs South Africa.

That said, if he was playing as a bowling all-rounder that might help because I think he's a confidence player and he may feel less pressure when bowling. I'm not convinced his batting is going to be consistently good enough, but I wouldn't be shocked.

And talent definitely isnt the issue.

Guys who can bowl some very good bowls, but also bowl plenty of rubbish, often get talked up as very talented - albeit wayward or whatever - but I think that bowling talent involves having the ball go where you want to. If you're too often not able to land the thing where you want I reckon that's a big black mark on your talent assessment.

Never a good time, but they may have juggled the lineup to bolster the middle order, or maybe Ponting would have held off for 8 months.

Sorry to see Hussey go so suddenly.

Ponting was done.

I really liked Hussey so I'll be disappointed to see him missing. However, the wheel turns. I'd love if he retired now in the hope that his brother would get a gig.

The third test in Sydney provides the selectors with a fantastic opportunity to "Blood"spinner Glenn Maxwell but will they?

Probably not, but If I were them I would play him instead of Nathan "I don't spin the ball much" Lyon.

I don't believe based on what I have seen that Lyon will ever be a match winner, tidy slow medium line and length seems about it I'm afraid.. If Lyon plays and doesn't fire here It might push him down the spin bowling order I feel.Jon Holland is also a possibility for a tour pending fitness.

Let's be Bold and see what Glenn Maxwell's got and rest Lyon to canvas all spin bowling possibilities and prepare for the Indian tests and ultimately the next ashes series with a bit of foresight!

Eh?

That said, if he was playing as a bowling all-rounder that might help because I think he's a confidence player and he may feel less pressure when bowling. I'm not convinced his batting is going to be consistently good enough, but I wouldn't be shocked.

Guys who can bowl some very good bowls, but also bowl plenty of rubbish, often get talked up as very talented - albeit wayward or whatever - but I think that bowling talent involves having the ball go where you want to. If you're too often not able to land the thing where you want I reckon that's a big black mark on your talent assessment.

Ponting was done.

I really liked Hussey so I'll be disappointed to see him missing. However, the wheel turns. I'd love if he retired now in the hope that his brother would get a gig.

Did Johnson miss his targeted spots in Tasmania & in Perth tests? He seemed to be very effective, but I admit to not watching it as closely as did years ago.

In fact I listen with my back to the TV whilst on the computer.

Ponting, maybe we should have retired him 12 months ago to reshape the team, in hindsight.

Timing, when rebuilding for a targeted test series has its problems.

12 - 18 months ago I wanted Ponting to retire with Hussey this year.

Maybe that would have been a better transition? Or one or the other first.

no indication is performance was waning. Quite the opposite.

Appreciate your logic, moot point however.

Lyon retained - predictable.

HNY all.

Attended the 3rd days play at the Boxing Day's Test and whilst it was disappointing day as far as how little cricket there was, it was pleasing to see a win and the performances of Johnson and Bird with the ball.

Sad to see Hussey go, however it may just be a good call by MH to go out in good form, leaving a series in India to introduce and blood a player who can gain some experience and perhaps confidence before the Ashes. Unfortunately for Australia we'll miss a very handy middle order player who ultimately occupies the crease and ticks the scoreboard over and produces partnerships. Big shoes to fill no doubt.

Also sad to see Greigy pass away. RIP TG.

"Oh, blow it owt your orse, Bull"

One swallow. Sri Lanka have been awful and Johnson was Player of the Series in 2008/09 vs South Africa.

That said, if he was playing as a bowling all-rounder that might help because I think he's a confidence player and he may feel less pressure when bowling. I'm not convinced his batting is going to be consistently good enough, but I wouldn't be shocked.

Guys who can bowl some very good bowls, but also bowl plenty of rubbish, often get talked up as very talented - albeit wayward or whatever - but I think that bowling talent involves having the ball go where you want to. If you're too often not able to land the thing where you want I reckon that's a big black mark on your talent assessment.

Ponting was done.

I really liked Hussey so I'll be disappointed to see him missing. However, the wheel turns. I'd love if he retired now in the hope that his brother would get a gig.

You and I clearly differ on the definition of talent.

No one is arguing his chronic inconsistency and his up down form.

But few players in the past generation for Australia other than the Warnes, McGraths and Gilchrists could have delivered in the way he did against the top ranked SA team in 2009.

"Johnson, 31, showed his potential as an all-rounder during Australia's three-Test tour of South Africa in 2009 when he topped the batting averages for the tourists with 255 runs at 85 including his only Test century, 123 not out in Cape Town, and an unbeaten 96 in Johannesburg. The left-arm quick also took 16 wickets at 25 as was named man of the series in Australia's 2-1 series win." - The Age today

He had just come off a series at home against South Africa where in an undermanned attack he managed a further 17 wickets at 25 and who could forget his hostile spell against a dominant SA batting line up where he finished with 8/61.

Few bowlers bowling consistently at 140+ have done that. He has a special talent which he has not delivered on. And for that reason, I am not comfortable with him over the course of a 5 test series in England. I would prefer Pattinson and Cummins to be fit and firing. The media have played up his Sri Lankan efforts and he has done everything he has been asked to do (albeit a bit expensive). However the Sri Lankans have been tripe!

Johnson is an enigma. A bowler that is mistakenly just lumped in with other also ran bowlers

no indication is performance was waning. Quite the opposite.

Appreciate your logic, moot point however.

Agree. Just dont know how you came up with the mistaken belief that Morkel had the wood on him.

Just when I thought SL were appalling.

At Capetown, NZ won the toss and batted first. *Cough* But you always do that.

SA have bowled out NZ for 45 off 19.2 overs on the 1st day of the Test. At one stage the were 0/7. Philander has taken 6-3-7-5.

SA are 1/15 and its not even lunch yet..

http://www.espncricinfo.com/south-africa-v-new-zealand-2012/engine/current/match/567356.html

You and I clearly differ on the definition of talent.

No one is arguing his chronic inconsistency and his up down form.

But few players in the past generation for Australia other than the Warnes, McGraths and Gilchrists could have delivered in the way he did against the top ranked SA team in 2009.

"Johnson, 31, showed his potential as an all-rounder during Australia's three-Test tour of South Africa in 2009 when he topped the batting averages for the tourists with 255 runs at 85 including his only Test century, 123 not out in Cape Town, and an unbeaten 96 in Johannesburg. The left-arm quick also took 16 wickets at 25 as was named man of the series in Australia's 2-1 series win." - The Age today

He had just come off a series at home against South Africa where in an undermanned attack he managed a further 17 wickets at 25 and who could forget his hostile spell against a dominant SA batting line up where he finished with 8/61.

Few bowlers bowling consistently at 140+ have done that. He has a special talent which he has not delivered on. And for that reason, I am not comfortable with him over the course of a 5 test series in England. I would prefer Pattinson and Cummins to be fit and firing. The media have played up his Sri Lankan efforts and he has done everything he has been asked to do (albeit a bit expensive). However the Sri Lankans have been tripe!

Johnson is an enigma. A bowler that is mistakenly just lumped in with other also ran bowlers

Agree. Just dont know how you came up with the mistaken belief that Morkel had the wood on him.

I don't agree. not an enigma,

thats just a term conventional people use when they throw they're hands up over someone who they've given up on. they don't understand them & so they don't understand how to get the best from them.

I don't think Johnson has the Black & white self belief to be a huge Ego like Warne or a Botham.

but very talented. inconsistent of course.

To me that Is why he has failed as THE Australian strike bowler. because,,,,, well at least he wasn't in the past; a type to be the immediate frontline bowler, shyness give it whatever type description you wish, lack of total self belief undermines the talent one has.

He is a 3rd bowler, or alrounder. help take the pressure off these types & watch them go.

I don't agree. not an enigma,

thats just a term conventional people use when they throw they're hands up over someone who they've given up on. they don't understand them & so they don't understand how to get the best from them.

Dont tell me, you do? FMD.

He has failed at any position on the bowling order. He has been bowled both at opening and 3rd bowler with similar results. His problem is he cant place the ball in the right spots often enough.

And he will struggle to be a No 3 bowler given we have Siddle. CA have kept Siddle just for Tests and he has delivered.

He is either a strike bowler who bowls with better economy and similar strike rate or does not bowl at all. His batting is added benefit. But without the bowling the batting is useless on its own and he is not a Test player.

SA have bowled out NZ for 45 off 19.2 overs on the 1st day of the Test. At one stage the were 0/7.

0/7? Goodness, at that pace, they should've made at least 70 runs.

Dont tell me, you do? FMD.

He has failed at any position on the bowling order. He has been bowled both at opening and 3rd bowler with similar results. His problem is he cant place the ball in the right spots often enough.

And he will struggle to be a No 3 bowler given we have Siddle. CA have kept Siddle just for Tests and he has delivered.

He is either a strike bowler who bowls with better economy and similar strike rate or does not bowl at all. His batting is added benefit. But without the bowling the batting is useless on its own and he is not a Test player.

This is a good summary and I don't think he will be in the side for much longer because history shows he'll lose the plot again soon enough.

He is a handy weapon for the moment though (forgetting the fact we are playing Sri Lanka at home).

0/7? Goodness, at that pace, they should've made at least 70 runs.

I heard part of the news last night on the way home from dinner and thought it was a T20 game.

Philander's comeback figures of 5/7 pretty stunning.

SA batted out 64 overs till stumps for a handy 3/252. IMO they should introduce the mercy rule for situations such as this although, as they say in the classics, cricket's a funny game

Disappointed in the Maxwell 12th man decision. With a 2-0 lead in the series, Watson a doubtful all rounder in the future and two batting champions leaving the game in such quick succession, I would have thought playing Maxwell in this test was a no brainer.

Dont tell me, you do? FMD.

He has failed at any position on the bowling order. He has been bowled both at opening and 3rd bowler with similar results. His problem is he cant place the ball in the right spots often enough.

And he will struggle to be a No 3 bowler given we have Siddle. CA have kept Siddle just for Tests and he has delivered.

He is either a strike bowler who bowls with better economy and similar strike rate or does not bowl at all. His batting is added benefit. But without the bowling the batting is useless on its own and he is not a Test player.

totally understand, & I've always pushed for Siddle to be an automatic selection as bowlers with heart & grit are required & necessary.

Johnson is a real handful, but he's not got the EGO/self belief to be put on the frontline pedestal. Not initially at least.

It's become too late to move him back to the 3rd bowler in a test series when he's already lost his mojo. You have to start him in that position from the start of the series with his mojo recovered from the previous season.

He now looks to be growing emotionally with age & domestic circumstances. This may also help. He may grow into a frontliner but I doubt it.

* 3rd seamer, yes Siddle, but today Siddle is more like the 2nd...

with Bird more the 3rd because he's green.... enter Johnson as I suggested as an allrounder, & this helps with the teams stability & cohesion. Maybe not a permanent thing, & maybe it'll work.

I'd like to see Watson come back & just bat.

# some people understand some things but fail to understand other things that differ to their ways & cultures.

Others may understand whats considered more difficult, yet may struggle understanding the simple.

Edited January 3, 201312 yr by dee-luded

Our selectors are not known for daring choices Jack, perhaps they should take a leaf out of Collingwood's book

Or perhaps they still regret the failure of Ian Craig ?

Maxwell could have been played at the expense of one of the quicks . With the tour of India coming up it was the perfect time to play 2 spinners (or a spinner and a spinning all-rounder) . I'm surprised Beer wasn't in the team but once Maxwell was in the squad then there wasn't room for Beer as well .

We're 2 up in the series and there is very little chance of Sri Lanka winning this Test anyway . Great time for some experimentation . There's a reasonably good chance that Maxwell will be going to India so why not play him now ? Especially when you consider that we'll probably play 2 spinners in some or all of the Tests over there .

4 for 41 for Jackson Bird . His style of bowling could be invaluable in England .

Edited January 3, 201312 yr by Macca

I thought our bowling today was very poor by all concerned.

Bird however slotted into his rhythm earlier then the others, but that is birds go.

Starc & Johnson I thought really over-tried, & only served to not find their rhythm or menacing aggression.

Clarke won the toss and bowled and backed his bowlers to deliver. Bird and Siddle did.Johnson and Starc didn't. Starc did take 3 wickets, he's 22 and should have played in Melbourne to maintain rhythm.

But what to do with Johnson?

The fragility of the SL batting saved Clarke's decision. All be it, the bowlers only partially did there job.

I thought our bowling today was very poor by all concerned.

Bird however slotted into his rhythm earlier then the others, but that is birds go.

Starc & Johnson I thought really over-tried, & only served to not find their rhythm or menacing aggression.

Starc was all over the place, and bowling short balls to the tail was just stupid. He should have kept it full and straight and probably would have cleaned them up much quicker.

Starc was all over the place, and bowling short balls to the tail was just stupid. He should have kept it full and straight and probably would have cleaned them up much quicker.

I didn't see much of it.

But I was listening over my shoulder. when I did stop to have a look, I thought the bowling was pedestrian, impotent, & it looked like they were trying to hard, & because of that, I think they were all over the place without rhythm or good form. totally unmenacing.

got better in the afternoon but well short of our best, IMO. Not enough bouncers mixed in with good line & length.

we need more Venom. even Siddle seemed on best behaviour.

Starc was all over the place, and bowling short balls to the tail was just stupid. He should have kept it full and straight and probably would have cleaned them up much quicker.

Starc, that throw at the keepers wicket that went for 4. He looks very immature & ahead of himself in attitude. not sure I would take him to England.

Barring injury and form, Starc is a must for the future of Australian cricket. At only 22, tall, left handed and fast. We have a real star prospect. I would rather him in the Ashes squad than Johnson and Hilfy. With Cummins and Pattinson, Starc is another reason to get excited over our fast bowling stocks.

Glad to see Bird do well. Definite for India and in the mix for the Ashes too. Good comment in the Hun today that Birds rise makes Hilfy redundant. It's true if Bird keeps his form up.

Barring injury and form, Starc is a must for the future of Australian cricket. At only 22, tall, left handed and fast. We have a real star prospect. I would rather him in the Ashes squad than Johnson and Hilfy. With Cummins and Pattinson, Starc is another reason to get excited over our fast bowling stocks.

Glad to see Bird do well. Definite for India and in the mix for the Ashes too. Good comment in the Hun today that Birds rise makes Hilfy redundant. It's true if Bird keeps his form up.

I agree rhino, that he's a must for the future, but looking after his attitude is part of the development of his cricket representing Australia.

His dropping for Melbourne IMO was as much about his 'mouth' than anything else.

Hilfy is on the edge imo, but his swing & seam could be handy in England. time will tell. experience & maturity is also important.

I agree rhino, that he's a must for the future, but looking after his attitude is part of the development of his cricket representing Australia.

His dropping for Melbourne IMO was as much about his 'mouth' than anything else.

Hilfy is on the edge imo, but his swing & seam could be handy in England. time will tell. experience & maturity is also important.

I would have thought with the 3 young fast bowling tyros that CA are putting considerable time into their development.

And if Starc was dropped because of his "mouth" then Pattinson, Siddle and Wade should be out until after the Ashes. Seriously, what evidence do you have to support that theory?

The problem for Hilfy is that in both England and Australia he has had significant periods where he has neither swung nor seamed the ball. He is not on my Ashes radar.