Changes for Perth

[amer]

http://blogs.espncricinfo.com/myashes/archives/2010/12/a_time_for_sparrows_feet.php

People say baggy green caps are never given away lightly. It’s a myth. Budding baggy green wearers, you hear it said, must first conjure a rainbow of runs or a thunderclap of wickets. That’s bollocks. Mark Cameron, Phil Hughes, Mitchell Starc, Usman Khawaja and Steve O’Keefe have not done enough to be considered compelling baggy green candidates. So goes the logic. The logic is bollocks built on a myth and it is holding Australia’s cricket back.

Some quarter of a century ago, Australia’s selectors laid the foundations for a dynasty by picking then sticking with a carefully identified handful. This handful had reasonable form, nothing more, to recommend them. But they all looked sort of game. The selection criterion was something less tangible than black digits on white paper – something more to do with personality. The selectors’ eyes saw something.

People say swapping five players mid-series equates to panic. But that’s more myth-making bollocks. Hilditch and company have had their conservative, insouciant, keep-both-eyes-on-the-scorebook go. Over to you, Greg Chappell.

 

[Drummond]

http://blogs.espncricinfo.com/myashes/archives/2010/12/a_time_for_sparrows_feet.php

People say baggy green caps are never given away lightly. It’s a myth. Budding baggy green wearers, you hear it said, must first conjure a rainbow of runs or a thunderclap of wickets. That’s bollocks. Mark Cameron, Phil Hughes, Mitchell Starc, Usman Khawaja and Steve O’Keefe have not done enough to be considered compelling baggy green candidates. So goes the logic. The logic is bollocks built on a myth and it is holding Australia’s cricket back.

Some quarter of a century ago, Australia’s selectors laid the foundations for a dynasty by picking then sticking with a carefully identified handful. This handful had reasonable form, nothing more, to recommend them. But they all looked sort of game. The selection criterion was something less tangible than black digits on white paper – something more to do with personality. The selectors’ eyes saw something.

People say swapping five players mid-series equates to panic. But that’s more myth-making bollocks. Hilditch and company have had their conservative, insouciant, keep-both-eyes-on-the-scorebook go. Over to you, Greg Chappell.

Senfreakingsational.

Marvellous stuff.

 

[eddiesmith]

http://blogs.espncricinfo.com/myashes/archives/2010/12/a_time_for_sparrows_feet.php

People say baggy green caps are never given away lightly. It’s a myth. Budding baggy green wearers, you hear it said, must first conjure a rainbow of runs or a thunderclap of wickets. That’s bollocks. Mark Cameron, Phil Hughes, Mitchell Starc, Usman Khawaja and Steve O’Keefe have not done enough to be considered compelling baggy green candidates. So goes the logic. The logic is bollocks built on a myth and it is holding Australia’s cricket back.

Some quarter of a century ago, Australia’s selectors laid the foundations for a dynasty by picking then sticking with a carefully identified handful. This handful had reasonable form, nothing more, to recommend them. But they all looked sort of game. The selection criterion was something less tangible than black digits on white paper – something more to do with personality. The selectors’ eyes saw something.

People say swapping five players mid-series equates to panic. But that’s more myth-making bollocks. Hilditch and company have had their conservative, insouciant, keep-both-eyes-on-the-scorebook go. Over to you, Greg Chappell.

Funny stuff, obviously 8 NSW players isnt enough for them they now want blokes who are injured and also in NSW 2nd XI playing for Aus, classic

 

[amer]

Eddiesmith failing at identifying talent. Delicious.

Could I coax a disparaging remark about a Hazlewood or a Starc out of you to keep for future reference young lass?

 

[aussie1st]

Not the worst side, I really hope whatever the coaches have been doing with Johnson pays off else picking him again is a shocker. The rests I'm happy with, O'Keefe was the only other option but he's not playing for NSW so always hard for him to make it.

 

[Spudregus_87]

Will never happen, but here's who I think the selectors should play next up:

Phil Hughes
Shane Watson
Michael Clarke*
Usman Khawaja
Michael Hussey
David Hussey
Brad Haddin+
Steve O'Keefe/Jason Krezja
Ryan Harris
Ben Hilfenhaus
Trent Copeland

OUT: Katich, Ponting, North, Doherty, Siddle & Bollinger.
IN: Hughes, Khawaja, D.Hussey, O'Keefe/Krezja, Hilfenhaus & Copeland.

 

[stickman11]

That is an embarrassing effort.

 

[Bucking Beads]

For all the talk about our bowling and how poor it is you would think Copeland would be at the very least in the squad. His career so far has been stunning and surely deserves a chance.

 

[Vader]

I can't understand why the selectors can't see past MJ as Bollinger's replacement. Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over & over again and expecting to get a different result?

 

[BarneyBent]

http://blogs.espncricinfo.com/myashes/archives/2010/12/a_time_for_sparrows_feet.php

People say baggy green caps are never given away lightly. It’s a myth. Budding baggy green wearers, you hear it said, must first conjure a rainbow of runs or a thunderclap of wickets. That’s bollocks. Mark Cameron, Phil Hughes, Mitchell Starc, Usman Khawaja and Steve O’Keefe have not done enough to be considered compelling baggy green candidates. So goes the logic. The logic is bollocks built on a myth and it is holding Australia’s cricket back.

Some quarter of a century ago, Australia’s selectors laid the foundations for a dynasty by picking then sticking with a carefully identified handful. This handful had reasonable form, nothing more, to recommend them. But they all looked sort of game. The selection criterion was something less tangible than black digits on white paper – something more to do with personality. The selectors’ eyes saw something.

People say swapping five players mid-series equates to panic. But that’s more myth-making bollocks. Hilditch and company have had their conservative, insouciant, keep-both-eyes-on-the-scorebook go. Over to you, Greg Chappell.

I was reading that article last night and actually thought it was absolute rubbish. The selection and retention of North and Siddle, the retention of Hussey through his prolonged drought, the selection of Doherty, the selection of White and later Smith as a specialist spinner, these were all choices made regardless of the stats. Only Hussey's selection so far could beverages a success, and that's only after a good few years of severely crippling our middle order.

The NSW boys, Usman Khawaja, Phil Hughes, Trent Copeland, Steve O'Keefe, possibly Steve Smith, they are in contention because of their performances. Khawaja averages over 50 at 23 and plundered runs last year, Smith hit 4 centuries last year while taking a 6 wicket haul, Hughes has a FC average of 55 and a Test average of 52, Copeland was the 4th fastest in NSW history to take 50 wickets and has a FC bowling average sub 20. Those are not the intangibles. Those are performances.

 

[i_hate_scams]

its beyond belief that copeland is not at least in the squard.

 

[Martha D]

How stupid can ya get, we need a captain a la Border in his early years, who can hang in and bring on a team over the next 4 or 5 years. Not an over rated twerp who'd last one season tops. Bring on Pup, sack all but Haddin and bring in all new young players and let them take a few hammerings coz this shower or geri's and never weres (or will be's) are gonna get smacked anyway.

Maybe if all our cricketing greats stopped coaching overseas and look after their own country we wouldn't be stuck in this mess. What happened to all the money and time pumped into the AIS?

What about the ACB Centre of Excellence???????????????????????????????

 

[The 747]

oh and he mentioned the chance of Siddle out for Hilf but that seems very unlikely to me.

I would like the Hilf back in for Siddle. Siddle is out of gas after one great innings, bring him back for Melbourne when Harris inevitably breaks down.

But that would be 5 changes (if the others are correct).

On Bollinger, I wonder if there is some subtext there. He said he was right to go, fully fit and then bowled embarassing mid 120s. Grudges might be held.

MJ has done nothing to come back - but he was dropped after Brisbane which was a draw because we wanted better. Now we have just been flogged might as well play him.

 

[Beth]

Its going to be fascinating to hear the justification for bringing back Johnson. Has he miraculously rectified his horrendous bowling/pie chucking action in the last week, is he suddenly 10 clicks quicker? Go on CA dazzle me.

 

[Vader]

"North out, Smith in
Bollinger out, Johnson in
Dohers out, Hauritz in
Katich out, Hughes in"

Believable and highly likely to be true, but very disappointing.

• Smith vs North is the only change which will actually improve the team.
• Doherty vs Hauritz is a nil-all draw, neither of them can bowl to save their lives. I guess Hauritz is a better batsman, but we're only talking test averages of 25 vs 9.
• Katich vs Hughes is a massive loss, given the form shown by both players this season. Hughes has the potential to be very good, but his confidence at the moment is absolutely shattered. Probably negates the gain from replacing North with Smith.
• Bollinger vs Johnson is another nil-all draw, with neither player able to justify their position in the side. Should have been replaced by Cameron or Copeland instead.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Believable and highly likely to be true, but very disappointing.

• Smith vs North is the only change which will actually improve the team.
• Doherty vs Hauritz is a nil-all draw, neither of them can bowl to save their lives.
• Katich vs Hughes is a massive loss, given the form shown by both players this season. Hughes has the potential to be very good, but his confidence at the moment is absolutely shattered. Probably negates the gain from replacing North with Smith.
• Bollinger vs Johnson is another nil-all draw, with neither player able to justify their position in the side. Should have been replaced by Cameron or Copeland instead.

surely bringing in Hauritz for Doherty is a win for the team. Hauritz is a better bowler than Doherty a better batsmen than Doherty and more than likely a better fielder than Doherty. O'keefe would be good but questions have to be asked why he can't get a game ahead of Hauritz in shield cricket if he is actually better than Hauritz.

 

[i_hate_scams]

smith north - tick (but then again i perfer White)
Doh for hauritz - should be o'keffe
Katich - hughes - should be Marsh
Bollinger for Johnson - should be Copeland

plus one

Siddle for Hilf to bowl into the wind.

 

[Martha D]

We will lose the series 4-0 unless it rains.

So they may as well play the kids.

 

[JMc#5]

If they are in fact the changes then i can live with that...

• Hughes for Katich - good move! Hughes is going to play a lot of cricket for Australia and was unlucky to be dropped in the first place. Have a look at the first 2 ashes tests in England and if we win the 1st test (which we should have) Hughes stays in. Young gun who with opportunity will develop into a great opener for us.

• Smith for North - can't do worse than North at the moment. Smith IMO can hold down as spot as a batsmen only, but his bowling is a bonus.

• Hauritz for Doherty - O'Keefe looks liek he has a future, but is a little too early i believe. Hauritz to tie down an end, whilst Smith attacks.

• Johnson for Bollinger - Johnson was terrible in Brisbane, but we need him to fire to win the Ashes... simple as that.

1. Hauritz/Smith as the 2 spinners work well i think... Hauritz pretty defensive while Smith can attack a bit more.
2. I'd get Hilfenhaus in there for Siddle.
3. I'd be just as happy with Bollinger in Johnson's place.

 

[Vader]

surely bringing in Hauritz for Doherty is a win for the team. Hauritz is a better bowler than Doherty a better batsmen than Doherty and more than likely a better fielder than Doherty. O'keefe would be good but questions have to be asked why he can't get a game ahead of Hauritz in shield cricket if he is actually better than Hauritz.

It's the difference between a bowler taking 1 for 150 and 0 for 150. The difference is so small that it's not worth worrying about.

There is no spinner in the country at present who is even close to test match standard. I don't rate Hauritz or Doherty (or any of the other contenders) as even being Sheffield Shield standard, but they're getting games because they're the best of a bad bunch.

 

[BlueandGoldforever]

It's the difference between a bowler taking 1 for 150 and 0 for 150. The difference is so small that it's not worth worrying about.

There is no spinner in the country at present who is even close to test match standard. I don't rate Hauritz or Doherty (or any of the other contenders) as even being Sheffield Shield standard, but they're getting games because they're the best of a bad bunch.

That is a ridiculous comment. You don't take 63 wickets in 17 Tests (Hauritz) if you can't bowl or are not at Test match standard. Anyone can see Smith and O'Keefe have the ability to play at a higher level.

 

[i_hate_scams]

That is a ridiculous comment. You don't take 63 wickets in 17 Tests (Hauritz) if you can't bowl or are not at Test match standard. Anyone can see Smith and O'Keefe have the ability to play at a higher level.

i would like to see two of them in. Smith as a batting all rounder and one of the other two. my preference is Okeffe but hopefully with the inclusion of the other two okeffe will get a run in the nsw state team.

 

[Bomber Bears]

I'm at a loss really, they all seem like deck-shuffling on the Titanic moves.

Dont really wanna see youth get hung out to dry after performances in these tests, if taltented players are chosen they have to be backed.

 

[The Convert]

It's the difference between a bowler taking 1 for 150 and 0 for 150. The difference is so small that it's not worth worrying about.

There is no spinner in the country at present who is even close to test match standard. I don't rate Hauritz or Doherty (or any of the other contenders) as even being Sheffield Shield standard, but they're getting games because they're the best of a bad bunch.

Hauritz actually averages about 4 wickets per test which is the equivalent to most test bowlers in history. Only the greats get to 5 wickets per test eg McGrath. So if you can go about 4 wickets in an ordinary team it is OK. He is not that good but probably the best we have. I have a horrible suspicion we will go with North and Smith

It is like batting. Traditionally 40+ is a good average and 50 is a great one. New bats and ropes have suggested that 45 is probably the bench mark now. Anything below this is unacceptable in a test batsman.

 

[Martha D]

We are broken.