mal wrote:Australian selectors norMALly get it right overall
Not this test
2 off break bowlers- and no Ashton Agar= unbalanced attack[ even worse without Mitchell STARc scuffing up the pitch for the offies]
Although Todd Murphy has done ok in his first test so far
The selections of David Warner, Matt Renshaw and Pete Handscombe in front of Travis Head is a shocker
The selection logic appears to be Trav cant play spin
For sure he is better v pace than spin
However the other 3 have all failed in India
The Trav is in the form of his life, HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN PICKED for at least 2 tests
In India
Warner 389 runs 22.88 average
Renshaw 232 runs 25.77 average
Handscombe 229 runs 28.62 average
If you replaced Head with proven players of spin in India, guys that maybe avergae 35 to 45, I would understand
The above 3 collectively in India have had 35 innings for 850 runs
The only logic I think of not picking Travis Head, is the selectors wont play him and ruin his confidence, in case he fails disMALly v spin
That seems the only logical reason
I can understand Handscomb's inclusion given the hype about the pitch, I didn't see a need for Murphy to get a gig though, not when we have Head, Renshaw, Smith and Marnus who aren't cheaper versions of Lyon.
I think it was a given that we were going to win or lose it with the bat, we should've strengthened our batting depth, India play for a draw initially and then try turning it into a win, we need to bat as long as we can against them.