SA Footy

Ricky Ponting (captain) TAS 31
Adam Gilchrist (vice-captain) WA 35
Michael Clarke NSW 25
Stuart Clark NSW 31
Matthew Hayden QLD 35
Michael Hussey WA 31
Mitchell Johnson QLD 25
Justin Langer WA 36
Brett Lee NSW 30
Glenn McGrath NSW 36
Andrew Symonds QLD 31
Adam Voges WA 27
Shane Warne VIC 37

Interesting. Voges and Symonds in at the expense of Tait and obviously Martyn. Tait is clearly behind Mitchell Johnson in the selectors eyes.

seriously, i don't give a shit anymore.

the symonds experiment has been tried and it has failed. a regressive step of the highest order.

voges. no offence but wtf?????

johnson remains tait does not. say no more.

Selectors are in love with having an alrounder arent they?

Unless they are top notch why bother?

All the good ones in history are exceptional cricketers, none of ours at the moment fit this mould

matt wrote:
voges. no offence but wtf?????

Who would you pick? Jaques is the obvious choice but i get the feeling that he will be picked to open or not at all. I reckon the selectors will wait on Jaques until he can go straight in as an opener.

Dutchy wrote:Selectors are in love with having an alrounder arent they?

Unless they are top notch why bother?

All the good ones in history are exceptional cricketers, none of ours at the moment fit this mould

Agreed although Symonds does have the potential to be a quality batsman IMHO. He is handy as he bowls off spin and meds. Still think that it is probably too late at 31 for him to realise the potential he has with the bat.

rod_rooster wrote:

matt wrote:
voges. no offence but wtf?????

Who would you pick? Jaques is the obvious choice but i get the feeling that he will be picked to open or not at all. I reckon the selectors will wait on Jaques until he can go straight in as an opener.

Jacques.

Hussey's an opener. He seems to be going ok.

Jacques must have had relations with one of the selectors' wives.

Shaun Tait must have as well! Can't believe he has been dropped from the squad completely....

Tait. Get yourself to NSW, you'll be a shoe-in then

regards,

REB

VOGES deserves his spot
He has the fastest o/d hundred in domestic cricket[100 of avout 60 balls]
Just keeps making runs for WA and a very sound technique.
The selection will give VOGES enourmous confidence being picked in
squad full of star barsman. before they retired.

SYMONDS is the fabricated allrounder the selctors and MAL are opting for.
Every Australin bowler appreciates Symonds fielding
His batting at test level needs drastic improvement and needs to play
his natural attacking style, not the dourish ones he produced last year.

JAQUES must feel disapointed.

mal wrote:VOGES deserves his spot
He has the fastest o/d hundred in domestic cricket[100 of avout 60 balls]
Just keeps making runs for WA and a very sound technique.
The selection will give VOGES enourmous confidence being picked in
squad full of star barsman. before they retired.

SYMONDS is the fabricated allrounder the selctors and MAL are opting for.
Every Australin bowler appreciates Symonds fielding
His batting at test level needs drastic improvement and needs to play
his natural attacking style, not the dourish ones he produced last year.

JAQUES must feel disapointed.

Again mal wtf does one day cricket have to do with Test cricket? Stuff all. Otherwise i agree with you on Voges but a slogged hundred in a one day game that no-one really cares about is insignificant to Test cricket. What's a barsman by the way:lol:

Symonds will most likely play. Huge oppourtunity for him. He could be a very good Test batsman but is lucky to have this oppourtunity. He only gets it because he can bowl a bit. Needs to make a big score.

Jaques is very unlucky but i really think the selectors want to see him opening (an in the near future) and don't want to stuff around with him batting in the middle order. Yes Hussey used to open but he was earmarkd as a versatile player from the moment he was picked for international duties whereas i think Jaques is looked at as a long term prospect to open the batting.

voges is an outstanding talent and given the opportunity will be a fantastic player at international level

Jaques, he is not far, even though Langer is in better form then hayden, my guess is Langer like Martyn will be given the option to retire at the end of the series,

The reason I say Langer is because he has taken a fair battering in recent years, Hayden is in better physical shape and can mentor Jaques for 18mths - 2 years before Hayden gets replaces, this way we are not changing two openers within the same period.

Dutchy wrote:Selectors are in love with having an alrounder arent they?

Unless they are top notch why bother?

All the good ones in history are exceptional cricketers, none of ours at the moment fit this mould

Totally agree. Our alrounders are just so so not good enough to be included in the team at either batting or bowling. All the great allrounders could play in there teams as a specialist bat or bowler.

bulldogs wrote:

Dutchy wrote:Selectors are in love with having an alrounder arent they?

Unless they are top notch why bother?

All the good ones in history are exceptional cricketers, none of ours at the moment fit this mould

Totally agree. Our alrounders are just so so not good enough to be included in the team at either batting or bowling. All the great allrounders could play in there teams as a specialist bat or bowler.

Disagree most off the great allrounders were skilled in one aspect and were handy at the other.
FLINTOFF is a great bowler but would NOT make the team as a batsman
POLLOCK is a great bowler but would NOT make the team as a batsman

If the criteria is could play equally as a speciallist batsman or bowler then there is only
a very small select few players to achieve this in the history of the game.

RODROOSTER
VOGES is in great form in the pura cup this year
I only mentioned his record o/d score in his regime.

Voges has one ton MAL, and less than 300 runs, Rodgers 638 runs at 93 and North 498 runs at 81......

Rodgers 29, North 27 Voges 27.....

Voges a triffle lucky IMHO North and Rodgers a trifle unlucky......

Still a good pick for the future though......

1980 Tassie Medalist wrote:Voges has one ton MAL, and less than 300 runs, Rodgers 638 runs at 93 and North 498 runs at 81......

Rodgers 29, North 27 Voges 27.....

Voges a triffle lucky IMHO North and Rodgers a trifle unlucky......

Still a good pick for the future though......

He bowls left hand spin, maybe an allrounder
TASSIE Rogers is an opener, but NORTH must have been close.

mal wrote:

bulldogs wrote:

Dutchy wrote:Selectors are in love with having an alrounder arent they?

Unless they are top notch why bother?

All the good ones in history are exceptional cricketers, none of ours at the moment fit this mould

Totally agree. Our alrounders are just so so not good enough to be included in the team at either batting or bowling. All the great allrounders could play in there teams as a specialist bat or bowler.

Disagree most off the great allrounders were skilled in one aspect and were handy at the other.
FLINTOFF is a great bowler but would NOT make the team as a batsman
POLLOCK is a great bowler but would NOT make the team as a batsman

If the criteria is could play equally as a speciallist batsman or bowler then there is only
a very small select few players to achieve this in the history of the game.

RODROOSTER
VOGES is in great form in the pura cup this year
I only mentioned his record o/d score in his regime.

Flintoff bats at 6 which is a batsmens spot - enough said.

Tell me then what is Symonds and Watsons strengths? Batting or bowling?

Dutchy wrote:

mal wrote:

bulldogs wrote:

Dutchy wrote:Selectors are in love with having an alrounder arent they?

Unless they are top notch why bother?

All the good ones in history are exceptional cricketers, none of ours at the moment fit this mould

Totally agree. Our alrounders are just so so not good enough to be included in the team at either batting or bowling. All the great allrounders could play in there teams as a specialist bat or bowler.

Disagree most off the great allrounders were skilled in one aspect and were handy at the other.
FLINTOFF is a great bowler but would NOT make the team as a batsman
POLLOCK is a great bowler but would NOT make the team as a batsman

If the criteria is could play equally as a speciallist batsman or bowler then there is only
a very small select few players to achieve this in the history of the game.

RODROOSTER
VOGES is in great form in the pura cup this year
I only mentioned his record o/d score in his regime.

Flintoff bats at 6 which is a batsmens spot - enough said.

Tell me then what is Symonds and Watsons strengths? Batting or bowling?

FLINTOFF batting average 32 not good enough as a speciallist number 6
but good for an allrounder.

SYMO had chances but a great fielder.

WATSON would be a good batsman in my opinion who can bowl.

STEVE WAUGH was similar to WATSON when he started a bit of a bowler a good batsman
and look what happened a great batsman who could bowl.[how long for his first 100?]

Trouble with people on this site they think allrounders should
average
50 with the bat
25 with the ball

Apart from SOBERS I dont think you would find too many.

Fact - He is batting at No. 6 therefore must be considered as a batsmen, he also opens the bowling therefore must also be considered a bowler - He is a genuine alrounder!...If he batted at 7 or 8 then you could consider him a Bowler who bats a bit.

mal wrote:He bowls left hand spin, maybe an allrounder
TASSIE Rogers is an opener, but NORTH must have been close.

Agreed which is why I mentioned North in another post and not Rodgers, FWIW Voges is averaging 160 with 320 runs in the bank this year....

BTW the WA selectors dropped Voges earlier this year when Martyn and Gilchrist returned from India, but retained North and Rodgers...