Comments on: Phillip Hughes is bound for glory

By: Viscount Crouchback

Viscount Crouchback — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 16:56:12 +0000

What do you think now, Spiros, old fruit? Hughes has been rumbled, what?

By: Jameswm

Jameswm — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 06:53:41 +0000

Harry – Hussey finished the Aussie summer back close to his best in the one-day game. I don’t think his reflexes have slowed; I think he’s cluttered in the mind. I’d say leave him there to play the one-dayers. That got him going last time (he did start this series with a 50, albeit a laboured one) and could give his confidence a shot. I don’t know that he’s the sort of player that needs a break, though if he has a couple of failures rest him for a game. If his confidence gets back up, he’ll be back to his best in the tests.

By: Tom

Tom — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 03:35:23 +0000

Just a minor point Spiro, why are people only suggesting he can be there for the next decade? Almost all cricketers are playing well into their 30′s; if he plays to 35, which is not unrealistic in the slightest, that is 15 years away, not a decade or so. Hence why I think selecting 20 year olds is such a good idea (if they are good enough, of course).

By: Harry

Harry — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 03:07:58 +0000

So James, Brett and Selwyn, how do you feel about the current ageing champion Mike Hussey … another modest score yesterday and he got routed in the 1st innings after a less than flowing 50 … remmber he is is no spring chicken at 33, will be 34 by the time the Ashes start.

For what its worth I think he should be kept for the final test then sent home, missing the one-dayers in SA and give him time to freshen up for the Ashes series, he has played a lot of cricket in Engalnd and scored a lot of runs in the last series against them so i reckon he’ll go well.

Hayden clearly stayed too long – the time for him to retire was his 100th test match against NZ – what a difference Hughes has made eh.

By: Jameswm

Jameswm — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 02:35:22 +0000

Selwyn – leaving an out of sorts Hayden in when kids like Hughes were around isn’t the only recent selection blunder.

I know I could come in for some flak here, but I thought they left Gilchrist in for a year too long. His batting reflexes were waning, but because he was such a legend (not denied) they let him write his own ticket. Haddin was just as good then as he is now and you’ll see he scores consistent runs at test level. Gilchrist didn’t for his last year or two.

Leaving Brett Lee in last series was another example. You could see the batsmen lick their chops when he was brought on to bowl and they played him easily and with no respect.

Just look at how seasoned pros like Katich, Hussey and North have gone when brought in later in their career. These guys are better value than waning superstars like Haydos, Gilchrist and Langer in their later years and the selectors listen to the team captain too much, who is understandably loyal to the guys who he’s been through wars with. There can’t be room for sentiment at the selection table, I’m afraid.

By: Brett McKay

Brett McKay — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 01:30:33 +0000

Selwyn, I suspect the selectors are too busy celebrating their “gamble” in picking the untried, inexperienced Hughes over the seasoned Jaques, to be embarrassed by past series losses and perceived selection blunders. In fact I’d wager that had Australia won the series at home against SA, the selectors may well have gone with Jaques, with the view to adding experience to a team ready to consolidate their ranking.

However with series lost, they then really had nothing to lose gambling on Hughes, and the rest, as they say…..

By: Hatchet

Hatchet — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 00:47:07 +0000

Spiro,
Keith Miller always used to get very upset whenever a co-commentator would give the 87 – thirteen short of a hundred line.
Howerver, I always missed out on hearing the background to the phobia. I remember when he rebuked ” young Jim Maxwell …” for getting it wrong. Perhaps Jim could assist.

By: Selwyn

Selwyn — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 00:34:51 +0000

I hope our selectors are feeling suitably embarrassed. Our team was forced to carry an out of form and slow reflexed Hayden through the series against India and then again against SA. Both series lost. It shows that carrying one person can make a huge difference to a team. Thank goodness Hayden pulled the plug. Otherwise we’d still be hearing from the selectors and the captain that his experience is required.

By: craig

craig — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 23:44:31 +0000

HA HA Thats great. I bet the Saffa’s are feeling something aint right!

By: sheek

sheek — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 22:11:20 +0000

I like the SMH banner line – “Stuck in the middle with Hughes”.

By: Harry

Harry — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 21:38:22 +0000

He is actually quite orthodox in his driving and defensive play to fuller/length balls.

By: Spiro Zavos

Spiro Zavos — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 21:31:51 +0000

The other points I missed in my analysis of Phillip Hughes’ batting technique is that he sees the ball very quickly. When he blocks, for instance, he is in position for what seems ages before the ball hits his straight back. And the leg-side bouncer theory stuff the South Africans bowled to him was handled very well (much better than Grame Smith) by leaning away and dropping his hands to ensure there was no contact with the ball.
He doesn’t hook. which is smart as he is very short and ould find it difficult to keep his hooks and pulls along the ground. He cuts instead, rather like radman in the Bodyline series. It was an attempted cut from a high bouncer that caused his duck in his first Test inning.
His technique is unusual. But so was Bradman’s (although I would never put any batsman remotely in the Bradman class). Bradman was told or warned in a newspaper article by the captain of Surrey Percy Fender that he couldn’t score runs in England with his cross-bat method. If my memory is correct the first time Bradman batted against Surrey for Australia he scored a double century.
The South Africans have made the same mistake with Hughes as Fender made with Bradman. They haven’t seen the pluses from the unusual technique. The South African coaching staff, particularly, and their TV commentators have been going on about the way Hughes pushes away slightly to the off-side to give himself room to cut. He doesn’t do this to wide balls, though, something they haven’t noticed.
Unusually for a left-hander he scores the majority of his runs on the off side. When he develops his leg-side play to the level of the off-side play, the bowlers will have nowhere to bowl to him.

By: Harry

Harry — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 21:30:24 +0000

Well he’s one NSW much-hyped progidy whi is certainly living up to it – they don’t always Spiro. Last nights partnership with Ricky was fantastic viewing, the best Australian batsman since Bradman scoring 81 runs with his usual superb clean strokeplay. Hughes in my view is less asthetically pleasing in his strokes but as you say he scores quickly, clearly has a superb temprament and a style that works for him. I think its fair to say he plays the cut shot quite well for instance! He has delivered massively having to make his debut against what was the best fast bowling attack in the world on their home turf. Imagine what will happen when this bloke gets in against some of the more pedestrian test attacks on flatter pitchs.