SA Footy

Certainly no cricket expert but i thought Head would be the logical replacement
Left handed, agressive - doesnt seem to disrupt the order as much if he opens and Green bats at 5

beef wrote:Certainly no cricket expert but i thought Head would be the logical replacement
Left handed, agressive - doesnt seem to disrupt the order as much if he opens and Green bats at 5

Yeah agree. If Green has to play then for mine Head would be the obvious one to go open and could do it very well. He's also not in great form at number 5 either.

Since the start of the the Ashes in England he hasn't been in great test match form. 443 runs from his last 15 innings @ 29.53. Even worse in his last 10 innings going at 25.

10, 0, 17, 14, 40, 43, 4, 1, 48, 77, 39, 7, 77, 16, 50

In that same period (15 innings) two other blokes who aren't in the best of touch are:

Labuschagne 35
Smith 32..

whufc wrote: Even worse in his last 10 innings going at 25.

10, 0, 17, 14, 40, 43, 4, 1, 48, 77, 39, 7, 77, 16, 50..

Yeah horrible patch

The Bedge wrote:

whufc wrote: Even worse in his last 10 innings going at 25.

10, 0, 17, 14, 40, 43, 4, 1, 48, 77, 39, 7, 77, 16, 50..

Yeah horrible patch

Sorry the first numbers are his most recent.

Not horrible by any stretch....but if he was to continue to go at 29 for the next 12 months obviously his name would be back in the media.

I think he could be a really successful opener. I think his a better option than Smith, Green, Bancroft, Renshaw, Harris.

"Eye" players ( Smith, Head ) are less likely to succeed against the new ball than "technique" players ( Khawaja, Labuschagne ).

Smith bases his game on his eye, we hear him talk about "finding his hands" when he is in good batting form, perhaps he means finding his "eye" as in getting his hands to where his eye see's the ball being. This year he's looked liked someone who isn't seeing the ball as well as he once did. His timing, in particular, is off like we haven't seen for some time. Perhaps, at 34, the first sign of his "eye" letting him down.

whufc wrote:

The Bedge wrote:

whufc wrote: Even worse in his last 10 innings going at 25.

10, 0, 17, 14, 40, 43, 4, 1, 48, 77, 39, 7, 77, 16, 50..

Yeah horrible patch

Sorry the first numbers are his most recent.

Not horrible by any stretch....but if he was to continue to go at 29 for the next 12 months obviously his name would be back in the media.

I think he could be a really successful opener. I think his a better option than Smith, Green, Bancroft, Renshaw, Harris.

Gotta put those numbers into perspective too - not just take raw numbers.. what did others do? Did the side win? When did he come in? What was the mode of dismissal?

Thats why i placed the averages of Smith and Labuschagne (over 15 innings both are averaging more than Head) who I think most would consider to be going 'average' at the moment, mainly because of the high standard they both set previously. No one would consider them a risk of being dropped at the moment and that's the same for Head but if one of them was to be moved in the batting order now is probably the perfect time.

I'm not sure mode of dismissal would ever look favorably for Trav. He lives and dies by the sword. Even his golden duck in which he was bowled, you wouldnt say was an ideal shot first up. Its obviously the way he plays though and how he has had success.

Armchair expert wrote:Bancroft might aswell tell the truth about everything now, name names blow up the joint.

Edit. Its not like I think Bancroft would do well at the job but what is the value of shield cricket if he isn't selected. Does white ball cricket mean more than shield cricket?

Agreed. Overlooking Bancroft shows how little Shield cricket means (Redbacks haven't taken it seriously in 25 years anyway). Perhaps Bancroft's biggest mistake was implying the three bowlers were in on it, especially now with Cummins captain. If he can't get a gig now he's not going to get another chance. Time to light the fire.

Hector wrote:

Armchair expert wrote:Bancroft might aswell tell the truth about everything now, name names blow up the joint.

Edit. Its not like I think Bancroft would do well at the job but what is the value of shield cricket if he isn't selected. Does white ball cricket mean more than shield cricket?

Agreed. Overlooking Bancroft shows how little Shield cricket means (Redbacks haven't taken it seriously in 25 years anyway). Perhaps Bancroft's biggest mistake was implying the three bowlers were in on it, especially now with Cummins captain. If he can't get a gig now he's not going to get another chance. Time to light the fire.

Picking Green who has been test reserve batsmen over someone dominating Shield cricket isn't ignoring shield cricket. Bringing a Maxwell or someone like that in would be completely ignoring Shield cricket.

FWIW each players records below:
Bancroft FC AVE 39.04 TEST AVE 26.23
Green FC AVE 46.77 TEST AVE 33.59

I think you pick your best 6 bats and go from there. Look how much better than team has been since they replaced Harris with Khawaja to open to even though he wasn't opening in the Sheild at the time,.

Booney wrote:"Eye" players ( Smith, Head ) are less likely to succeed against the new ball than "technique" players ( Khawaja, Labuschagne ).

Smith bases his game on his eye, we hear him talk about "finding his hands" when he is in good batting form, perhaps he means finding his "eye" as in getting his hands to where his eye see's the ball being. This year he's looked liked someone who isn't seeing the ball as well as he once did. His timing, in particular, is off like we haven't seen for some time. Perhaps, at 34, the first sign of his "eye" letting him down.

Your could make a case our 3 best opening partnerships in modern times were a combination of eye/technique players.

Warner / Khawaja
Slater / Taylor
Hayden / Langer......ill concede Hayden had both a great technique but he also played a lot of eye, walking down to fast bowlers, crashing balls away from his body through the offside, hitting balls outside over mid on etc.

whufc wrote:

Booney wrote:"Eye" players ( Smith, Head ) are less likely to succeed against the new ball than "technique" players ( Khawaja, Labuschagne ).

Smith bases his game on his eye, we hear him talk about "finding his hands" when he is in good batting form, perhaps he means finding his "eye" as in getting his hands to where his eye see's the ball being. This year he's looked liked someone who isn't seeing the ball as well as he once did. His timing, in particular, is off like we haven't seen for some time. Perhaps, at 34, the first sign of his "eye" letting him down.

Your could make a case our 3 best opening partnerships in modern times were a combination of eye/technique players.

Warner / Khawaja
Slater / Taylor
Hayden / Langer......ill concede Hayden had both a great technique but he also played a lot of eye, walking down to fast bowlers, crashing balls away from his body through the offside, hitting balls outside over mid on etc.

No love for the Katman and Watto?

whufc wrote:

Booney wrote:"Eye" players ( Smith, Head ) are less likely to succeed against the new ball than "technique" players ( Khawaja, Labuschagne ).

Smith bases his game on his eye, we hear him talk about "finding his hands" when he is in good batting form, perhaps he means finding his "eye" as in getting his hands to where his eye see's the ball being. This year he's looked liked someone who isn't seeing the ball as well as he once did. His timing, in particular, is off like we haven't seen for some time. Perhaps, at 34, the first sign of his "eye" letting him down.

Your could make a case our 3 best opening partnerships in modern times were a combination of eye/technique players.

Warner / Khawaja
Slater / Taylor
Hayden / Langer......ill concede Hayden had both a great technique but he also played a lot of eye, walking down to fast bowlers, crashing balls away from his body through the offside, hitting balls outside over mid on etc.

At 34...?

Aaron Hardie is my roughie to replace Warner in the 13 man squad announced tonight.

doesnt matter who gets the gig, they will be compared against that bloke who retired for the next few games

locky801 wrote:doesnt matter who gets the gig, they will be compared against that bloke who retired for the next few games

The disrepect!

Booney wrote:

whufc wrote:

Booney wrote:"Eye" players ( Smith, Head ) are less likely to succeed against the new ball than "technique" players ( Khawaja, Labuschagne ).

Smith bases his game on his eye, we hear him talk about "finding his hands" when he is in good batting form, perhaps he means finding his "eye" as in getting his hands to where his eye see's the ball being. This year he's looked liked someone who isn't seeing the ball as well as he once did. His timing, in particular, is off like we haven't seen for some time. Perhaps, at 34, the first sign of his "eye" letting him down.

Your could make a case our 3 best opening partnerships in modern times were a combination of eye/technique players.

Warner / Khawaja
Slater / Taylor
Hayden / Langer......ill concede Hayden had both a great technique but he also played a lot of eye, walking down to fast bowlers, crashing balls away from his body through the offside, hitting balls outside over mid on etc.

At 34...?

That’s why I’m going with Head. Offers an opening partnership with some variety in the way they bat.

whufc wrote:

Booney wrote:

whufc wrote:

Booney wrote:"Eye" players ( Smith, Head ) are less likely to succeed against the new ball than "technique" players ( Khawaja, Labuschagne ).

Smith bases his game on his eye, we hear him talk about "finding his hands" when he is in good batting form, perhaps he means finding his "eye" as in getting his hands to where his eye see's the ball being. This year he's looked liked someone who isn't seeing the ball as well as he once did. His timing, in particular, is off like we haven't seen for some time. Perhaps, at 34, the first sign of his "eye" letting him down.

Your could make a case our 3 best opening partnerships in modern times were a combination of eye/technique players.

Warner / Khawaja
Slater / Taylor
Hayden / Langer......ill concede Hayden had both a great technique but he also played a lot of eye, walking down to fast bowlers, crashing balls away from his body through the offside, hitting balls outside over mid on etc.

At 34...?

That’s why I’m going with Head. Offers an opening partnership with some variety in the way they bat.

Didnt Head tell the selectors he wouldnt do it

locky801 wrote:Didnt Head tell the selectors he wouldnt do it

Yes, AE posted about that yesterday.

Armchair expert wrote:

mal wrote:David Warner is not irreplaceable if OZ open with Travis Head
I would leave The Trav in the middle order though

Head doesn't want to do it

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/trav ... er-1412233

David Brent wrote:Aaron Hardie is my roughie to replace Warner in the 13 man squad announced tonight.

Sounds like Green into the team and Renshaw into squad as reserve