Australia v India, 2nd Test, Brisbane, 17-21 December, 2014

Rogers answered his critics to some degree. He will be probably the only hometown player in the Boxing Day test. With a few injuries to batsmen there is no way they would omit him now.

Red wrote:Rogers answered his critics to some degree. He will be probably the only hometown player in the Boxing Day test. With a few injuries to batsmen there is no way they would omit him now.

After the tension of Match 1, this was a bit disappointing. It is hard to see who on the Indian side can turn this around.

PeterCS wrote:A lot of Watto hate on here.

Gawd knows what it'd have been like if, despite his tight, wicket-nipping overs and all-round contributions, Aus had lost.

I'm not sure if he should be scapegoated for the home side's win. (btw: What's the current opinion on Haddin, Rogers?)

Do you actually read the forum?

PeterCS wrote:A lot of Watto hate on here.

thats because hes a useless peahearted ****** poser of a softcock who shouldnt be allowed within twenty metres of a baggy green.  bowling a couple of decent short spells in the second innings doesnt make up for complete failures with the bat at #3 in game after game.  
as for ****** haddin...kept a bit better this game although there were still some massive ****** but his batting just keeps getting worse

theyre the only two changes i would make but even jgks money would be safe in betting theyll still be in the ****** team all the way to the end of the series

taipan wrote:

PeterCS wrote:A lot of Watto hate on here.

Gawd knows what it'd have been like if, despite his tight, wicket-nipping overs and all-round contributions, Aus had lost.

I'm not sure if he should be scapegoated for the home side's win. (btw: What's the current opinion on Haddin, Rogers?)

Do you actually read the forum?

Not all the time, or every page of it. Hence my genuine (secondary) question - for a view from anyone who might reply - about Haddin and Rogers. Because both of these too have copped a good bit of flak in the past - and last I saw, they still cop a bit.

But *mainly* I was talking about Watson and about the last few pages of this thread (hence "Watto hate on here") . I did read that, and was a bit surprised at the severity of the battering. So that wasn't a question. But more an observation.

Pretty obviously (see T3 thread) I would keep Rogers, and would under current circumstances keep both Watson and Haddin for the next Test. For me, Watson is the one who is most likely to not make the England tour.

Less likely than Haddin?

Well, that's two (very conflicting) views of the sort I was interested in reading!

Henry wrote:Less likely than Haddin?

Yes, i think Watson is even less likely to make the Ashes tour than Haddin.

I think Haddin is on his last legs. Averages something horrid with the bat this year, and there are younger contenders below him pushing for a spot.

Agreed that his batting is in decline, but he is actually keeping well at present. If we were not touring England in 6 months I think he would be gone, now, but I think they want him to stay around for that tour. I've posted more of this conjecture on the T3 thread.

See what happens, I guess.

Henry wrote:I think Haddin is on his last legs. Averages something horrid with the bat this year, and there are younger contenders below him pushing for a spot.

But we all know he will average over 50 against England and continually get them out of difficult situations with the bat if he plays.

In Australia, maybe. But overseas his record is pretty poor. Off the top of my head I think he averages around 25 outside Australia.

I'd much rather we were up against a raw young keeper with no experience of English conditions. Then it would be up to Mitchell Johnson to rescue them when the top order crumbles...

I just hope we prepare decent pitches for the next Ashes, and not slow, low dust bowls.

Well I meant Johnson with the bat in that context... but it's a good point that there must be a temptation to neutralise his bowling by producing the sort of pudding of a pitch we saw at Trent Bridge this year. It would definitely be at the expense of entertaining cricket, which we desperately need.

beamer wrote:Well I meant Johnson with the bat in that context... but it's a good point that there must be a temptation to neutralise his bowling by producing the sort of pudding of a pitch we saw at Trent Bridge this year. It would definitely be at the expense of entertaining cricket, which we desperately need.

We should back our quicks to exploit the conditions just as well as their's can. In helpful conditions Jimmy is pretty much unparalleled, and the Aussie batsmen aren't great against the moving ball.

I'm not sure if either of them will make it, but if i had to pick one not to make it, it would be Haddin rather than Watson. That's not a comment on the form of either but rather what the selectors are most likely to do. Perhaps Haddin should have been told this was his farewell series and be thankful he was actually getting one.

In England in 2013, Haddin made 206 runs @ 22.89. And his wicketkeeping has rarely been up to test standard throughout his career. The 9 catches he held on to in Brisbane mean nothing. They were all sitters. A drunk with a belly-full of beer would have caught them all.

The only reason he was ever selected to play test cricket was because he was capable of averaging around 40 with the bat. At the moment, his batting is dreadful. He is an old man. He has to be dropped.

Sage, W.

BTW, MrK asked a Q about most no. of players making 20 or over in an innings. Aus fell short of the record of 10 in their first innings in this Test (Puddle made 11 and Haddit made 6):

Most players scoring 20 or more in a Test innings:

TEN:

Eng (636) v Aus, Sydney(2), 1928-29
JB Hobbs 40; H Sutcliffe 11; WR Hammond 251; DR Jardine 28; EH Hendren 74; APF Chapman 20; H Larwood 43; G Geary 66; MW Tate 25; G Duckworth 39*;
JC White 29

WI (616) v Aus, Adelaide, 1968-69
RC Fredericks 23; MC Carew 90; RB Kanhai 80; BF Butcher 118; CC Griffith 24; SM Nurse 40; GStA Sobers 52; CH Lloyd 42; DAJ Holford 80; JL Hendriks 37*; LR Gibbs 1


Aus's 9 players with 20 or more in their 505 in I1 was the 28th time this feat has been achieved.

Coupla handy batting sides there.

skully wrote:BTW, MrK asked a Q about most no. of players making 20 or over in an innings. Aus fell short of the record of 10 in their first innings in this Test (Puddle made 11 and Haddit made 6):

Most players scoring 20 or more in a Test innings:

TEN:

Eng (636) v Aus, Sydney(2), 1928-29
JB Hobbs 40; H Sutcliffe 11; WR Hammond 251; DR Jardine 28; EH Hendren 74; APF Chapman 20; H Larwood 43; G Geary 66; MW Tate 25; G Duckworth 39*;
JC White 29

WI (616) v Aus, Adelaide, 1968-69
RC Fredericks 23; MC Carew 90; RB Kanhai 80; BF Butcher 118; CC Griffith 24; SM Nurse 40; GStA Sobers 52; CH Lloyd 42; DAJ Holford 80; JL Hendriks 37*; LR Gibbs 1


Aus's 9 players with 20 or more in their 505 in I1 was the 28th time this feat has been achieved.

OK - what's the lowest total with 9 x 20s in it. Just would have comfortable had the lowest of 10 x 20s if not for another 9 runs from Puddle.

JGK wrote:OK - what's the lowest total with 9 x 20s in it.  Just would have comfortable had the lowest of 10 x 20s if not for another 9 runs from Puddle.

302

Closely followed by 307

Oz made 456 vs the Pom at the WACA in 2002

NLWL was run out for 19 (by MTFTB) and Pigeon was 8 not out

everyone else was 27 plus

Extras was 24