Rogue

Watts is destined to play a different role IMO. Why would he be compared to Brown over one of many forwards? I think a comparison with someone like Reiwoldt is far more likely.

I doubt it.

The treatment of Hodge is bizarre. Despite getting another CA contract he's not picked for the Ashes or the 20/20 World Cup. Why are we giving him a contract if he's not good enough to make any of the squads? It's not like it's one of the encouragement award signings for a youngster. If he's not good enough to make the Test or 20/20 squads how is he good enough to get a contract? Put another way, if he's good enough to get a contract how is he not good enough for the Test or 20/20 squads? I'm not sure I would have taken him on the Ashes tour but I'd certainly have taken him to the 20/20 World Cup - he's one of the best. PS. Since we're talking of Victorians, how many more chances does David Hussey have to establish himself as a quality player at international level?

Dead cat bounce?

A 14-year sample is probably long enough to draw some decent conclusions. The key one is that some grounds get the 'short straw' when it comes to staging the high-profile touring sides, so that could have had an impact. the other problem is that the pitches can change quite a bit, but I still think it was a useful exercise.

I didn't see it, but I understand where you're coming from. What a mistake by Dyson! In this era you'd think there would be some D/L software so these mistakes were limited. In other news, this wasn't bad - MG Johnson not out 123 A shame about everything else. What a contrast with Harris and McGain.

That's why I'm hoping he'll do well if he gets another bowl, rather than asserting that I'd like to see him do well when he gets another bowl. It's looking even less likely now that Katich has been dismissed. I'm not sure the go-slow is the right decision...

Hilfenhaus will be in his element in England. While we can argue about who the four bowlers should be, I think it's clear we should include four bona fide bowlers in the side. On the note of Lee, he might have Ashes experience but I'm not sure his record's that great, is it? I heard the stats from the 2005 tour and they were pretty ordinary. Yeah, he's a fair way back in the queue. I think Katich's decent with the ball and Clarke seems to have the magic touch. I think this is the view the selectors will take. I hope he gets a chance to bowl in the second innings, if only for his own pride.

I agree that McGain should play, particularly with injury clouds over a couple of our quicks. I also think that Hilfenhaus could be a major weapon in England, as I've said a few times. Btw, does Siddle remind anyone else of McDermott?

I'm not sure about that. Around 300 on the last day is a big ask with Smith injured. However, it's a decent pitch and we don't have a spinner, so it's not impossible.

I read this in 'The Age': Not a bad trio. It's a shame Hughes got a duck in his first innings. Yeah, I agree. Apparently the second venue won't be so pace-friendly. McDonald's hung on, which is good for the one-eyed Victorian fans - now we've got two Test players, and I'm sure Rogers will be feeling a little frustrated after Hughes' failure. I don't really like the idea of picking a number 8 based on his batting ability, but it might come in handy during the fist innings considering we lost three quick wickets up front.

For sure He's been pretty unlucky, with his injury in India and then gastro in SA. I hope he gets a cap at some stage on this tour. Since we're playing North, who is a legitimate middle-order bat, at six I'd like to see our four best bowlers picked. In that case Hilfenhaus gets the nod over McDonald. McDonald would definitely strengthen the tail but that would leave us with just there front-line bowlers, and the aim of the game is to take 20 wickets. IMO let the top six - and the keeper - worry about scoring the runs, and choose the bowlers most likely to take 20 wickets.

It was nice to read that David Boon wants Australia to show faith in a core group of players, just like they did in the mid-80's. Craddock wrote a piece about this back in November which reflected my thoughts on our recent selection woes, although a few others didn't see it quite the same way. I agree. I'd still bat him higher than McDonald. It's probably a moot point as I imagine North will get picked.

In that team Haddin should bat above McDonald. I'd prefer to see Hilfenhaus play in South Africa with a view to the Ashes, but Bollinger probably deserves first crack.

What have the crowd figures like? I heard commentators mentioning the size of the crowd was a little disappointing on the first day. What's his role? If he's not bowling I can't see how he can claim a spot in the team as he's far from the best #6 we could play. You're probably short on bowlers in the first scenario unless one of the bats can reliably bowl a few overs. You're definitely short on bowlers in the second scenario, particularly given our inexperienced attack. Johnson's not an all-rounder. His batting might develop, but it's got a fair way to go IMO. PS. In case anyone wanted to chime in on Lee, he's not an all-rounder either.

I think that having four great bowlers has allowed us the luxury. However, with five bowlers there's always someone who's not getting utilised enough to hold his place. I think it's important to have a fifth option that can at least tie up an end with some level of threat. Talking of batsmen that can bowl a bit, Katich is more than handy IMO. I wonder if he was also carrying a shoulder injury in India - it would explain why he wasn't used. Btw, I agree with you re: planning for the Ashes, and IMO there are almost half the spots up for grabs. Haddin's secured his spot atm, while Johnson and Clark should be two of our quicks. Ponting, Hussey (despite a blip atm), Clarke and Katich should be afforded an opportunity, although it'll be interesting if Kat can keep his form over there. That leaves another quick, a spinner, an opener, and a middle-order bat / all-rounder spot up for grabs. For the quick, I like Hilfenhaus and think he'd perform well in England. It'd be nice to have a bona fide swing bowler. Lee will attempt to play on, while Bollinger and Siddle are also thereabouts. With regards a spinner, McGain deserves an opportunity if he can regain fitness and form. I heard a radio interview with him and he's aiming to play for Victoria in Jan, and despite his age I'd look to give him a berth. It's almost pot-luck after that, but I think Casson and then Kreza have been treated poorly. Hauritz is a spinner of the type that Australia generally views with disdain - a relatively accurate spinner who isn't very threatening. I don't think Hayden will make it to the Ashes and his form in '05 doesn't suggest he'd be a key player anyway. Jaques and Rogers should be considered in that order, although Hughes is a tantalising option. As for the 'all-rounder', it's a case of last man standing with Symonds, Watson, and Noffke battling fitness issues. grazman, I also haven't been convinced on on the need for an all-rounder, and thought we could have been better served in the past by a player who could hold his own. If Haddin can convert his Shield batting prowess to Test match performances it would give us a very capable top six and with a few bowlers who can bat a bit we may be able to churn out enough runs. However, our bowling attack is likely to be pretty inexperienced so we may need some support there. Regardless of who we choose I think they need to be given a reasonable opportunity. It's fine to drop young players after a few games, but they need an extended run unless chosen as temporary injury replacements. Haddin has a better record with the bat and bats higher than McDonald at state level so that would make sense. However, McDonald's batting average over the past few years is pretty good. I think that says more about our spinner than it does about White's bowling. Cameron White's bowling is unspectacular even at State level, where he's been reluctant to bowl himself. Maybe he could make a decent future captain but he'd need to cement a spot in the side first.

Considering he and Siddle went to India, and Bollinger and Hilfenhaus went on the WI tour, you're probably right

I agree with Nasher. I mentioned Hilfenhaus earlier in this thread and hope he gets a look-in. He could be a handful in South Africa and England, our upcoming tours. Bollinger'd feel unlucky though. Hysterical. Pretty sure a) Australia were far better than they are now and B) South Africa are far better now than they were then.

Likely to last until the end of the series IMO, particularly if we win this game.

I agree.

Yeah, it's frustrating how many teams don't seem to do the basics right. Whether it's positioning of the slip cordon or running between the wickets they constantly put themselves at a disadvantage. I agree. It was weak for NZ to give in to the BCCI, but they're not in a strong position at the negotiating table so I can understand the capitulation even though I don't agree with it. NZ know this, and McCullum knows this. That's why he was batting at #5 previously. Fwiw, I don't think he should open, but he can be wasted at #7 (particularly when you've got a tail like NZ do atm). I agree.

I think he generally does a job. Not everyone's going to be the out-and-out wicket-taker but he can create opportunities for others while also taking the odd bag (particularly in favourable conditions). I'd like to see us play a bona fide swing bowler, so here's hoping Hilfenhaus can stay fit and in-form in the lead-up to Ashes 2009.

Haha, yeah. However, the NZ'ers apparently gifted their wickets away. Whatever it is they need to get off it, ASAP. I think it's fair enough that Lee, Johnson and Clark have been chosen ahead of him atm - they have the runs on the board (or not, but you catch my drift). I think we'll see Siddle by Perth though.

No doubt he will. IIRC Hohns said that we'd like a spinner in our team but the state of the Gabba pitch made us readjust our plans.

Cricinfo > *