Rhino Richards

Watson with only one string to his bow batting or bowling is not good enough. As an all rounder he offered scope for the side. I don't think his body is up to either. Cowan has more to worry about from his own brainfades. Thought he played a steadying knock in the 2nd innings.

Its was not Warnie...it was Joe the cameraman. And its all good publicity for a 20/20 competition that thrives on media attention. Still think that Botox boy is a bit of a clown these days. Hated the vision of the silly incident. Warne only got a slap on the wrist. An injection in his cheek would have hurt more.

We were 9 down for FFS. The biggest issue was to go into the Sydney Test with 4 quicks on a dry wicket.

Agree on Hastings. Totally agree on all that. Wade is maturing well. Batting was terrific.

Yes. Add him. I knew there would be one. But perennial injuries are getting him shot. Had he been fit this summer he would have been in the mix. If the ODI in Perth was the first time you have seen him then you have missed an energetic hard working bowler who is better suited to Tests. And you expect fire and brimstone in a batsman friendly containment game like an ODI? In the Tests he is far more aggressive and is an opening bowler. And Siddle is hard at it but he isnt fire and brimstone....Siddle is far smarter bowler than to just rely on pace and bowler..He has to be when he is regularly around 135-136kph.

Not sure the relevance of the reply given I just outlined the fast pool and if all we fit Hilfy would really struggle even more than he does now. The culture sermon was irrelevant...nothing defensive about it...the spiel was turgid.

No The Kiwis were batting to plan. Tough trot for McCollum in his 1st Test as captain.

Who is dropping out of the pool of options??? If fit we have Cummins Pattinson Hazelwood Starc Siddle Johnson Bird Hilfy. It's a recognition of the reality that he will need others to be out of form or injured to get a gig. Spare us the culture lecture.

It used to be Benaud. So it's not Starc's mouth its allusions from a commentators mouth. So you have no real evidence of the alleged issue.

Shame on Starc for saying that he wants to be a Test cricketer. What was he thinking??? Seriously any "mouth" from Starc happened while he was rotated out of the team not prior to. Hilfy has struggled to move the ball for at least 4 years. And the ability to move/seam the ball is important in the long and short forms of the game. Even Hilfy's mum would not blame T20!!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Well he batted a long time in both Bris and Perth and batted in double century partnerships while scoring tons. In the last series, he batted 4 times for 2 tons with an average of near 60. Steyn and Morkel got him twice. Morkel is a very good bowler. He beat Clarke's bat alot too but I would not read too much into that. Its a bit rich to claim a bowler has any wood on a batsman when they average around 60! While the decision was ultimately Mr Cricket's there was no indication is performance was waning. Quite the opposite. With demanding tours of India and England, aged 37 with 4 kids, its a big demand on a consumate professional who believed he was prepared to battle the Test rigours.

Ha ha. A so called smartphone. It should read Hussey! !!!

After Clarke Hussey has been our best performing bat. I don't the records in front of me but Hussein has been v good over the past 12-18 months and leaves cricket at the top of his game.

You are kidding. It has been Hussey and Clarke that has held the batting together for the past 2 years. A wonderful player and ambassador who goes out on top. Was hoping he would do the Ashes one more time. Big loss.

If Johnson is bleeding 5 runs an over against the No 6 Test side then he still has chronic problems At best he is a strike bowler and not a 3rd in line seamer. And while we have Siddle in lion hearted good form he has the 3rd seamers role stitched up. Regardless of his talent I don't want to go into another Ashes series reliant on his erratic delivery

Not when Watson bats from opening to no 4. He needs to do more with the bat. He needs to turn 50s into 100s. Notwithstanding his calf injury he really needed to make runs against that broken attack. And Johnson for someone who is "not actually that talented" did win man of the match. Fancy that. And there is no disputing the distance at times between his best and his worst. And at times we have seen too much of the latter. But his record speaks for itself. http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia-v-sri-lanka-2012/content/player/6033.html And talent definitely isnt the issue.

Watson is a batting all rounder who needs to get his body right. When batting and bowling he looked haggard. Its affecting his confidence. At the moment he either bats at 4 and makes or he doesn't. Clarke and Hussey have mortgage on 5 and 6. I am not sold on Hughes at 3 and would hope Khawaja takes his spot. Hughes looks brittle against the SL short ball. The Poms must be laughing. Hughes's run out was a bad mental fade out. I would persvere with Cowan. He is learning the ropes. I recall pundits being critical of Alistair Cook who was meagre in his early years. Cowan works well with Warner. Mitch Johnson is a bowler first and foremost. His batting is an added gain like Brett Lee's batting. But his bowling is still a worry. Its unsustainable in top line cricket to leak 5 runs per over. He needs to take a lot of wickets to cover the flaw. And he does not do that. He is a real enigma of a cricketer. Talent ....yes. Mindset....who knows. Agree with Nasher that I would prefer a du Plessis type allrounder. Bats well and bowls competently. But would not say no to a Jacques Kallis type though!!

Cripes he's a Tasmanian!!! You have been reading the rule book too much. BTW, I take back what i said weeks ago about Bird. I thought he looked really impressive.

Agree. Pitch good just a tad slow but it will be good to bat on tomorrow. Annoyed the top 3 threw their wickets away. What was Philip Hughes thinking? Kudos to Mathew Wade on an outstanding catch. When you are facing an attack of District Cricket quality then why not?