By Tom Wald
November 16th 2009 @ 6:14am
View The Roar's top cricket writers.
Love new art, fashion, music? Check out Aussie site which unearths all things cool and creative.
Related coverage
Lee not back to full pace, Clarke scratchy
Based on Sunday’s performance, incumbent Test pacemen Mitchell Johnson, Peter Siddle and Ben Hilfenhaus shouldn’t be losing too much sleep over Brett Lee’s form just yet.
The NSW quick is desperate to force his way back in the Test side for the opening clash against the West Indies starting November 26 in Brisbane.
But he looked short [...]
This article is over 2000 days old and has been trimmed.
Get Australia's best Cricket opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(13)
Fisher Price said | November 16th 2009 @ 1:29pm | Report comment
Lee’s broken down again ahead of a first-class fixture.
There’s a surprise.
Still, missing out on another ’selection trial’ allows him to further the myth that he’d actually be an awesome Test bowler if it.
Jameswm said | November 16th 2009 @ 2:23pm | Report comment
I watched some of that gane.
Unless Lee does something drastic in that Shield game, I wouldn’t bother with him. He’s no use bowling in the high 130s and they’d be better off with Bolly or Stuey Clark (the obvious one), if they want to go with 4 quicks. Krejza bowled well again and I’ve always thought of him as a better test option than Haury (and someone who should be given a go as a wicket-taker in one-dayers too).
Clarke really scratched around, but it’s different with tests. With one-dayers you are forced to push the pace and if you’re slightly off with your timing, you’ll struggle. With tests the run scoring pressure’s off.
I thought Hughes struggled too and Jaques must be some chance – he’s outbatted Hughes twice now. I’d still drop Hussey unless Clarke is injured. Taking in 4 specialist quicks with Watson just seems inherently wrong.
I’d go with this team for the first test
Katich
Jaques
Ponting
MClarke (Hussey if unfit)
Watson
North
Haddin
Johnson
Krejza
SClark (the others bowl better when he’s there)
Hilfenhaus/Siddle
Brett McKay said | November 16th 2009 @ 2:32pm | Report comment
Lee’s been ruled out for NSW today…
Michael C said | November 16th 2009 @ 2:49pm | Report comment
Watson in the test side???
Jaques back???
Hussey missing out???
Siddle only half a chance????
Krejza back in????
S.Clark in????
Interesting.
Jameswm said | November 16th 2009 @ 4:11pm | Report comment
Watson in? Absolutely. In the Ashes he was a better batsman than Hussey for one. He is one of our most consistent cricketers right now. That’s a pretty easy choice frankly.
Jaques? Yes, a little from left field, but he’s only been out for the last year because he’s been injured. I know Hughes is supposed to be the long term option but his feet are all over the place and his head moves too much as he plays the shot. Jaques is back looking solid as a rock and cracking the ball.
Tough on Hussey as he’s been doing well in the one-dayers, but he was doing well in them when his test form suffered in the last 12 months. I’d rather have Jaques opening and Watson in the middle order than Watson opening and Hussey in the middle order. As well as he did opening, Watson is a middle order batsman.
Siddle still isn’t quite there. He’s had bouts of inspiring and courageous bowling. Hilfy didn’t do a lot wrong in England. I think that Clarke and Johnson have to be the first quicks picked though, which only leaves one more spot. The selectors don’t get how useful Clark is. They didn’t get it in the Ashes when it was thrown in their faces.
Krejza – as Warney alwas says, you get most of your wickets from your stock ball, and Krejza’s stock ball is better than Haury’s. I think it’s time to give Krejza a run of a few tests, let him settle in and make the spot his own. I think Haury’s done a great job but Krejza’s the better option, now and in the future. Krejza’s form for Australia A was excellent earlier this year and he’s bowled well for Tassie this year too. He’s tightened up now and he’s more of a wicket-taking option. At 9 he’s a very good batsman too.
The toughest choice is two of Siddle, Hilfy and Clark. I won’t get the chance to watch them bowl this week! I could live with going for Sids and Hilfy, but I’d rather Clark. I could live with a horses for courses and at the WACA I’d probably pick all three and make Crazy 12th.
vinay verma said | November 17th 2009 @ 8:39am | Report comment
Jameswm…I saw Krezja on sunday and he is a long way from playing Tests. His run up is too long and just before he reaches the bowling crease he breaks his rythm,then pivots and bowls. Its only slight but enough to make him think about things other than the spot on the wicket he wants the ball to land on. I suggest he shortens his run and keeps an even rythmn through the bowling crease.
In short he is not the finished article and a Test match is not a finishing school.
Fisher Price said | November 17th 2009 @ 3:25pm | Report comment
Good call. I don’t rate Krejza at all. He moved to Tasmania for a reason and he’s not done that well there.
Jameswm said | November 17th 2009 @ 11:35am | Report comment
vinay
I’m no spin bowling expert but how can he be this far along his career with such apparently obvious technical flaws?
Murali has a longer run I think, and he’s done OK. I don’t think there’s one way to bowl off spin – the main thing is that the important bits are doing the right thing at the right time.
Krejza didn’t bowl many loose ones and got terrific grip on his stock ball, as he usually does.
We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one, though I must concede I want to see more of him.
vinay verma said | November 18th 2009 @ 11:23am | Report comment
Jameswm..Murali has an even rythmn. Its not the length of the run up but the rythmn that is important. I beg to differ that Krezja is “..this far along into his career” He is stalled. Even yesterday he went for 4 runs an over. When he got his 12 in India he bowled one jaffa to Dravid the rest were batsmen going after him and getting themselves out. His was the highest number of runs conceeded on debut. Once he has taken 30 plus wickets in a Shield season at under 30 then I would rate him. I dont completely discount him but he has a lot of work to do before he can be considered.
Michael C said | November 17th 2009 @ 2:40pm | Report comment
With M.Hussey – - if they were’nt going to drop him 4 matches into the AShes….they ain’t gonna drop him now.
Jacques – has ground to make up. Ideally, Rogers should be in front of him.
S.Clark….seems a nice guy…so does Hilfy. I reckon it’d be b/w them. Siddle provides a bit of menace which is missing in the others and during the ashes was sadly lacking from Johnson. A test attack can’t be ‘nice’!!!
I’d have McDonald interchange with Hauritz, and/or North. McDonald proved such a steady bowling partner when he bowled last year. Australia played it’s best cricket last summer on those occassions. When spinners were leaking runs at the other end, Australia was unable to sustain pressure.
btw – and get rid of Haddin, he’s a wicket keeping embarrassment and his batting is too much a single gear (which means he too often get’s out when he should just be putting his head down).
Rogers
Katich
Ponting
Clarke (if fit), else Hodge (if fit)
Hussey
North
McDonald
Wade
Johnson
Siddle
Hilfenhaus
12th Hauritz
I know it won’t happen.
Fisher Price said | November 17th 2009 @ 3:32pm | Report comment
That’s a decent team but I suspect you’re a Victorian. Wade’s put some very impressive performances on the board and, despite likely competition from Hartley and possibly Paine, seems destined to be capped, but Haddin is a far superior batsman at the moment, if one who needs to exhibit a bit more patience after the Ponting-Clarke-Hussey middle order does its usual collapsing thing.
I’m a fan of the criminally-ignored Hodge but think it’s a bit late to be recalling him when the likes of North and Watson can do a good middle order job.
Ponting loves Hussey, so the latter will play, but my 12 would be:
Jaques
Rogers (Hughes as ist reserve)
Katich*
Clarke
Ponting
‘North (Watson as middle-order reserve)
Haddin
McDonald
Hauritz
Johnson
Siddle
Bollinger
Jameswm said | November 18th 2009 @ 9:01am | Report comment
I never said I expected my team to be the one they picked, but it’s the one I’d pick, subject to having the chance to watch more of the quicks bowl.
Michael C
Drop Haddin? You’re kidding, right?
Put Wade in instead, ahead of Manou and Paine who appear ahead of him in the pecking order?
McDonald back in?
No Watson?
4 Victorians I see?
And I thought some of my decisions were left field
Fisher Price
Rogers in instead of Watson? What exactly has Watson done to deserve being dropped?
And you’ve got Bollinger in ahead of Hilfy?
Who is 12th – surely you can’t play McDonald AND Hauritz. That leaves you with only 2 quicks at the GABBA.
The results so far this match justify my selections – ie Jaques in. At least one of you has agreed with me on that, and no one has picked Hughes!
The selectors won’t have the guts to drop Hussey and I expect they’ll leave Watson opening. It’s a shame – he’s a middle order batsman and he should be put there, with two specialist openers. Leaving him there though spares the selectors from the tough call on Hussey.
Fisher Price said | November 18th 2009 @ 10:09am | Report comment
Watson is not an opener / we’re well served for opening batsmen. He’s behind Ponting, North and Clarke but in front of Hussey for a middle-order spot in my book.
But we all know Hussey is the new Hayden…
12th: McDonald or Hauritz.
Hilfenhaus did well in England but I’d expect him to do far less well in Australian conditions (especially against good opposition). Bollinger needs to be given a belated run at Test cricket.