Rogue

Bell won't bat at 3 (at least not while Cook is opening).

Agreed, titan - David Hussey isn't in the picture at the moment. If they make changes they'll go young. On England, it's weird they don't have a back-up opener given Cook's been in poor form even before this tour. If he goes out they're going to have to make big chances to their team, given they won't open with Morgan (the likely replacement). Trott, their current #3, is the best candidate to open if Cook's left out, but Morgan is unlikely to replace him at #3 so there'd be another shuffle - maybe Bell back to the spot he's struggled in, with Morgan sliding into ~6 or so? No wonder Flower is saying Cook will be fine.

I don't get why we're naming our Test side closer to the match. I agree regarding Smith.

Ages ago in this thread I said the selectors need to pick a bunch of players and stick with them. While talking primarily about the Test team, consistently applies to the shorter forms of the game too.

So bad.

HT: Pretty sure I read a quote from the selectors that Haddin is still #1.

I haven't commented in this thread for a long while so a few quick points: I'm not criticising Clarke's strike rate in the latest game because we were in dire trouble early, but it's no surprise his was almost the lowest strike rate of the entire match. IMO he needs to do more in ODIs. Did reforming his game to secure a Test spot mean he lost the sparkle needed for ODIs? Far too often his strike rate is languishing in the 60s. Hodge not playing at least T20 cricket over the past couple of years has been bizarre (particularly when he's been in or around the contracted list of players). Haddin should be scared. Very scared. Not sure about Paine opening though.

Yep. Batting up the order in the ODIs shows this. Indeed!

Zing!

Haha :>

Clarke doesn't deserve his spot in the T20 team - I think his strike-rate is even a worry in ODIs these days. As he admitted, the selectors will need to re-think his position in the team, and thus the captaincy. Cam White hasn't done his chances any harm lately..!

Great innings by Hussey. I saw Bond retired from all forms of international (?) cricket recently (following on from his Test retirement). It's a shame - I liked Bond. I wonder how long until Lee follows him.

Only plays T20 and we hardly play any of those.

It seems like Clarke may bat at #4 from now on: I think it's a good move. I also think it's over-due, and I bet our obsession with having a left-hand batsman followed by a right, and so on, has meant Hussey has batted higher than he should have.

The Vics are in with a good show - the percentage of Shield finals won by the home team in recent times must be very high. I think plenty of employers would allow you some time off when in the midst of a relationship breakdown, particularly if you're working overseas at the time.

It's fair enough to ask the question, but I wouldn't drop him for the last match of this series. If Hauritz was out, Jaded would have to be a chance. (We've tried just about everyone else).

Bond > Lee is a good call from 45HG. I'll refrain from also having some shots at WYL (:D) but will just say that there's no surprise Waugh won when he bowled first - he would have only done so if it was going to confer significant advantage, and he was leading a very good side. I don't think we've been 'settled up top for so long'. For example, Hughes and Watson have both nabbed opening gigs relatively recently. Cam White would be a decent replacement for North - both somewhat handy with the ball and White can slip. Whether he's the next best bat waiting in the wings I'm not entirely convinced, but we could do worse. As RR said, Haddin's place is 7 (I'm not sure, but I thought you were having some jabs at his batting a while back). McDonald isn't good enough to bring in as a batsman and we don't need an all-rounder atm IMO. Damn :<

Pretty good timing, given the public pressure put on him by Hilditch about needing a spinner who could play a big role in the final innings of a Test!

I very much dislike the concept of a 'nightwatchman'.

I think the stats indicate that McGain deserves to be the next cab off the rank. I also agree that Smith's selection seems unwarranted. PS. Maybe you're remembering Smith from the Champions League 20/20 games?

To me it sounds like you're describing someone else I'm pretty sure Clarke got dropped because he kept getting caught attempting to hit through or over the in-field. While he's reined in his natural instincts a bit (bizarrely, in the case of ODI games), he still has a penchant for hitting in the air. I wouldn't be so harsh - my opinion is a middle-ground between the views you and H_T have put forward. Yesm that's what's been mentioned by numerous journalists and players (which is what I was trying to communicate). The key phrase in my sentence was used to. He hasn't played any T20 games either. Oops You also said Smith is seen as a future prospect but more of a batsman. I contend that White fits that bill (and he has great ODI form, which apparently matters more than Shield). Most states would have a better spinner than Smith is at the moment. Krejza and McGain are the two that spring to mind, given they've played a couple of Tests. Shield wickets @ average this season (career average) for selected spinners (and some part-time spinners): Adam Voges 4 @ 26 (35) //has represented Australia in 7 ODIs and 4 T20's from 2007 to 2009 Steve O'Keefe 3 @ 34 (33) Bryce McGain 13 @ 34 (36) //represented Australia in 1 Test 2008 Beau Casson 2 @ 35 (43) //represented Australia in 1 Test 2008 Dan Marsh 5 @ 35 (45) Marcus North 8 @ 35 (42) //season figures includes Tests Aaron O'Brien 12 @ 42 (50) Steven Smith 3 @ 45 (75) Jason Krezja 13 @ 47 (48) //represented Australia in 2 Tests 2008 Cullen Bailey 5 @ 50 (44) //2007-08 CA contract Fwiw, here are the 'list-A' wickets and averages of some spinners this season (and some part-time spinners): Chris Simpson 8 @ 30 Bryce McGain 4 @ 33 Aaron O'Brien 6 @ 34 Aaron Heal 6 @ 34 Marcus North 3 @ 37 Steven Smith 7 @ 38 Jason Krezja 3 @ 72 Yes, very odd (and dangerous).

Everyone makes mistakes, and getting caught is the risk you take for playing the aerial game. Think about how often Clarke was caught earlier in his career when trying to hit over the off-side in-field.

'I'll hit this over the top'. He hits in the air - that's his game. He got one today. If you suggest he's playing for his future it seems he's done. However, I thought he not only made runs but also looked decent at the crease, so I'd retain him for the next series and see whether he's turned the corner or is yesterday was an abberation. It used to be a fast bowler's strip. Most comments about the pitch I've heard have mentioned this. In fact, it's been the topic of a few interviews/articles. I'm not sure what your point is here. Smith has played zero ODI games. (Say hi to a guy called Cam). There are plenty who should be "in the selectors eyes" before Smith. *three pace bowlers

Maybe you are To me, their thinking is virtually impenetrable. For sure - I think this is a fair assumption to make. Everyone's happy except the host of spinners that feel they should be in front of Smith in the pecking order! Surely the #2 coming in and playing well is a good thing for all (except perhaps Hauritz, in a selfish sense)? I don't think there'd be a huge amount of pressure on the selectors, given that Hauritz has done okay and no other spinner is knocking the door down (but plenty deserve to be chosen before Smith atm IMO). That said, if the selectors are making decisions to protect their reputations we're in more trouble than I thought. It'd be nice to have been a fly on the wall in selection meetings over the past year or so, wouldn't it? (Better to have been a selector, of course!) RE: SA v ENG - Pretty interesting game in SA. Interesting that England are going in with just three bowlers. I assume a batsman or two - Collingwood and perhaps KP - will roll the arm over at times.

I can't see the sense in that. If you felt playing any of our spinners was going to be dicey then why not play a fast or medium-pacer? Surely we wouldn't consider throwing a Smith to the wolves to protect a Krejza. Surely... :| I'm sure that's the plan, yeah. Anyway, moot point now