Watto Watch

Skulls was musing about his figures on another thread, along the lines of Zats, "Bell Watch"

I'm finding myself having a growing admiration for the big Qbilly. To me, he's matured no end in the last year or so. I think back to when WI toured Australia, the bloke was a complete anus, who's attitude completely belied his (limited) ability.

14 Tests, 760 runs @33, 6 x 50, 0 x 100, 22 wickets @ 34.45. Ordinary figures if we're being kind, but the send-off he gave Chris Gayle summed him up for me at the time.

He was the bloke for whom the expression " all wind and piss ....... mainly piss" was coined.

Now, after 27 Tests, the improvement is impressive.

1953 runs @ 41.55, 15 x 50, 2 x 100, 43 wickets @ 31.42, 2 x 5wi. Batting average better by 8 runs, and 3 off his bowling. Personally, I don't feel as he gets enough bowling ..... only 437 overs in his career, and over 1/4 of them ( 115 ) were in 4 matches in India. A strike rate of 61.05 and economy of 3.09 is by no means shabby, so 3 x 5 or 6 over spells in a full day in the field shouldn't be too onerous.

Consider the opposition since that WI tour also ......

Paksters at home - 3 games
Shaggers away - 1 game
Paksters in England - 2 games **
Indians away - 2 games
Ashes - 5 games

so no minnow-bashing to fill his boots.

**64 runs @ 16, 11 wickets @10.64 ..... not bad for 4th seamer heh ?

OK, now to the Ashes tour ...... the numbers so far .....

T1 Brisbane
35 (6 x 4) off 76
41 not out (4 x 4) off 97
27 - 4 - 96 - 1

T2 Adelaide
51 (7 x 4, 1 x 6) off 94
57 (10 x 4) off 141
19 - 7 - 44 - 1

T3 Perth
13 (1 x 4) off 40
95 (11 x 4) off 174
Did Not Bowl this game

T4 Melbourne
5 off 12
54 (6 x 4) off 102
10 - 1 - 34 - 0

T5 Sydney
45 (5 x 4) off 127
38 (7 x 4) off 40
20 - 7 - 49 - 1

Test Summary

Batting - 5 matches 10 innings 1 not out - 435 runs @ 48.33, strike rate 48.
0 x 100, 4 x 50, 0 x 0, 57 x 4, 1 x 6

Bowling - 76 overs, 19 maidens, 3 wickets for 223 runs, at an average of 74.33, a S/R of 152 and economy of 2.93 runs/over.

1st T20I - Adelaide
59 (6 x 4, 3 x 6) off 31
4 - 0 - 15 - 4

2nd T20I - Melbourne
17 (0 x 4, 2 x 6) 0ff 10
4 - 0 - 17 - 2

T20I Summary

Batting - 76 runs avg 38 at a strike rate of 180, scoring 6 fours and 5 sixes.
Bowling - 8 overs, no maidens, 6 wickets for 32 runs. ER 4.00 and SR 8.00

Even for thrash 'n' bash that's pretty impressive.

I know we've had one 50 over game, but my head's numb with numbers already. I will update this thread after the next ODI if people are interested ......

Nice work. He'll always be TAYNE POCSON to me, but he has definately improved and he is the one player in the Aus side that looks like he will be there for some time no matter what happens.

Cheers Vilks. He'll be TAYne to me also, but credit where its due.

At 29, he's got at least another 2 or 3 years fitness permitting, probably more, since upcoming Australian stars will be kicking other people out of the XI before Watson.

It's been said before, but worth repeating ...... Aus need to find one new opener soon, to partner Katich when he returns. Watto can then go to number 6 where 1. he can play more of his natural game against tiring bowlers and 2. he can then be given more overs to bowl.

In the short to medium term, he's the player most likely to still be around 5 years from now, so Aus should look to him helping the kids coming through. Probably not as skipper though.

Watson has become a better player since he bowled less. If there is an attempt to get him to bowl more overs I think it would jeopardise his fitness. he could do with shedding a bit of weight too.

He's done ok. As an opener though, 50 and out wont win your team many test matches. Bowling's underrated.

Henry wrote:He's done ok. As an opener though, 50 and out wont win your team many test matches. Bowling's underrated.

He's been ridiuclously consistent to be averaging over 40 with only 2 centuries. It's weird because you obviously want consistency with your opening batsman but like you say, 50s don't win many matches.

He'd be better off at four or five, being Australia's Jacques Kallis. He's done well as an opener, but it will never be his true position.

Henry wrote:He'd be better off at four or five, being Australia's Jacques Kallis. He's done well as an opener, but it will never be his true position.

He thinks it is.

Fine effort, Growls. You have encapsulated why I went from Watto-despiser to unabashed Watto fan. Kudos to him and yourself for digging up the numbers.

skully wrote:Fine effort, Growls. You have encapsulated why I went from Watto-despiser to unabashed Watto fan. Kudos to him and yourself for digging up the numbers.

It was nice of Watson to help Growls with the figures.

Our Watto is a caring, sharing sort of guy. Growls only had to ask, and Watto was there like a shot.

Mick Sawyer wrote:

Henry wrote:He'd be better off at four or five, being Australia's Jacques Kallis. He's done well as an opener, but it will never be his true position.

He thinks it is.

Aye, whilst it may be better for team balance for him to bat at 6 and bowl more I reckon his batting style is far better suited to opening than the middle order. His technique seems well equiped to handle a hard ball with attacking fields. And also because I think he would still be a dodgy starter against spin.

The main point though he is streets ahead of any other opener we have at the moment

Opening also provides certainty. You know who you'll be batting with and have a strong idea of when. It makes a huge difference to some blokes.

Indeed, I ended up volunteering to open because sitting around with pads on waiting for someone to get out made me as nervous as all sh1t.

Although, then I was a quivering wreck when we fielded first and had them 9 down with half an a hour of Day 1 to go

G.Wood wrote:Indeed, I ended up volunteering to open because sitting around with pads on waiting for someone to get out made me as nervous as all sh1t.

Although, then I was a quivering wreck when we fielded first and had them 9 down with half an a hour of Day 1 to go

Good Times. Brings back memories of 15 years as an opening batsman.

G.Wood wrote:Indeed, I ended up volunteering to open because sitting around with pads on waiting for someone to get out made me as nervous as all sh1t.

Although, then I was a quivering wreck when we fielded first and had them 9 down with half an a hour of Day 1 to go

Understood. Makes sense. Late in the day with their big quick bowling with a tree as a sight screen would have been bliss.

I secretly hated wishing someone would get out so I could get amongst it. Come to think of it, if one of them was batting like a poor soul with reduced intellectual capacity, it wasn't such a secret.

You've played cricket with TO then Mick? What's he like?

Brings back memories of 15 years as an opening batsman..

You ever play with Woody?................ No, that's not what I meant. Were you ever in the same team?

Zat wrote:You've played cricket with TO then Mick? What's he like?

Given some of the batting I've witnessed (usually faff about openers) he'd be a prime galoptic. I did like bowling to the likes of TO.

he could do with shedding a bit of weight too.

aye. A stone or so less might mean a sharper mind deeper into the innings.

Mick Sawyer wrote:

Brings back memories of 15 years as an opening batsman..

You ever play with Woody?................ No, that's not what I meant. Were you ever in the same team?

I was an adult by the time we met


but not a pleasant image to start the day with

Hehehe, Woody and I worked together and share a mutual passion for cricket but never played in the same XI. I was playing on the upper North Shore while Woody was bowling his donkey-drops around the Northern beach suburbs.