Confusion, madness reign supreme in Australian cricket
By Ryan O'Connell, 20 Nov 2012 Ryan O'Connell is a Roar Expert
Australian Cricket selector John Inverarity speaks with spin bowler Nathan Lyon. AAP Image/Dave Hunt
Related coverage
It’s been a confusing couple of days in Australian cricket. After reading some of the comments in the media, one can only assume that a temporary case of madness has descended over the sport.
First of all, we had Cricket Australia’s High Performance Manager, Pat Howard, and Test captain Michael Clarke stating that all-rounder Shane Watson would need to be fit enough to bowl in order to be selected for the second Test against South Africa.
However, Watson has since confirmed that he won’t be bowling in Adelaide, yet confusingly said that he maintains hope he would still be selected for the Adelaide Test after rejoining the squad this week.
Even more confusing, the Sydney Morning Herald reported that Selection Chairman John Inverarity stated Watson could play as a specialist batsmen, provided he could prove his fitness. This obviously dramatically contradicts what Howard and Clarke said.
It certainly seems that not everyone is on the same page at Cricket Australia.
Yet it’s not just those within the inner sanctum that have been saying some strange things.
Respected cricket writer Malcolm Conn suggested that Watson is not good enough to be selected as a top six batsmen for Australia, and that Rob Quiney should therefore retain his position in the team.
Come again?
Before I launch my spirited defence of Watson, let me first clarify that if Watson cannot bowl due to his calf strain, then I don’t believe he should be selected. But not because he isn’t one of Australia’s top six batsmen, but because it clearly means he’s not 100% healthy.
If there are question marks over your ability to send down a few overs, then you are obviously not 100% fit.
As a top order batsmen, it is expected that you should be sufficiently healthy enough to bat an entire day – something I struggle to believe you could do if you have not completely overcome your injury concerns.
However, I’m no medical specialist, so I spoke to respected Sydney physiotherapist John Panagopoulos from Active Physiotherapy.
Panagopoulos has worked with numerous cricket teams around the world during Twenty20 tournaments, along with having an affiliation with the Sydney Cricket Club.
Understandably, Panagopoulos can’t diagnose Watson from media reports. However, he did tell me that it’s reasonable to think that if Watson can’t bowl, then he can’t be 100% fit, and may have issues running, sprinting in the field, and turning quickly when batting.
So I have no drama in Watson remaining out of the side if he isn’t fit enough to bowl. But only because it suggests he’s not fit enough to bat and/or field either, especially for a five day match.
However, that doesn’t translate to Watson suddenly not being one of Australia’s best six batsmen.
Especially when the player nominated as a better candidate was Rob Quiney. I’m sorry, but by any calculation, that is sheer madness.
I thought Quiney appeared comfortable during his short time at the crease at the Gabba, and Conn said he believed he deserved another chance because he looked ‘polished’. I have no idea when ‘comfortable’ and ‘polished’ became the standard on which batsmen were judged.
Without being rude, I think it’s important to remember that Quiney scored a measly nine runs. Yet you would think he scored 99 the way some experts are suggesting he should take Watson’s spot.
I have nothing against Quiney. I enjoy watching him bat, and was very pleased he got selected, for he thoroughly deserved it. However, he’s simply not in Watson’s class.
Quiney averages 37 in first class cricket. Watson averages 44. Quiney averages 9 in Test cricket. Watson averages 37. And let’s not even discuss Watson’s awards, accolades and accomplishments at the elite level.
Case closed. Nothing more to see here. Jog along.
You could argue that Watson doesn’t convert his starts into big hundreds, and I would agree. You can state that Watson has only averaged 25 runs in five Tests over the last 12 months, and you would be right.
But if you tell me that Quiney is a better batsmen or more accomplished than Watson, I think we’re going to have a serious disagreement.
I have no issue with Quiney taking Watson’s spot if the latter is unhealthy, but that doesn’t mean the Victorian is a better batsmen.
Rule Watson out if he’s injured, but don’t claim he’s not one of Australia’s best batsmen. His record may not be exceptional, but his class is undeniable and Australia do not have an abundance of talented batsmen at present.
While on the subject of madness, riddle me this, those that say Watson should be fit enough to bowl to get selected, but are happy to see him bat number three if he is: if Shane Watson truly is not one of Australia’s top six batsmen, what the hell is he doing batting at first drop, arguably the most important position in the team?
Just to round off the madness, last week Mitchell Johnson stated that he was ready for a Test recall in Adelaide.
I respect Johnson’s positive outlook and I love that the fact he still has ambitions to make it back into the Test arena, but to be blunt, he’s a fair way down the fast bowling pecking order at present.
There is nothing to suggest that if Johnson finds some consistent form and takes a bagful of wickets that he couldn’t wear the baggy green again. But for him to suggest it could have been for the second Test this week is slightly embarrassing, along with a little disrespectful to the many bowlers currently ranked ahead of him.
They say cricket is funny old game, and it’s certainly been a funny old couple of days.
Ryan is an ex-representative basketballer who shot too much, and a (very) medium pace bowler. He's been with The Roar as an expert since February 2011, has written for the Seven Network and NBA Down Under, and been a regular on ABC radio. Ryan tweets from @RyanOak.
The Ashes journey begins
The Australian cricket team have left Australia to begin their tour of England, with a mission to reclaim the Ashes.
Australian captain Michael Clarke and his teammates were optimistic about their chances before jetting off.
Click here to hear the thoughts of our Australian cricket team as they left for England.
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.


November 20th 2012 @ 7:00am
pope paul v11 said | November 20th 2012 @ 7:00am | Report comment
Khawaja is better than Watto, Quiney, Cowan and Warner. He’s probably better than Ponting and Hussey but we will never no because they don’t like him. That is nuts.
November 20th 2012 @ 9:19am
Christo the Daddyo said | November 20th 2012 @ 9:19am | Report comment
+1
November 20th 2012 @ 9:19am
Christo the Daddyo said | November 20th 2012 @ 9:19am | Report comment
And he’s in form too.
November 20th 2012 @ 10:24am
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 10:24am | Report comment
I don’t think Khawaja should have been dropped, as I’ve said before. But I’m not sure I can agree that he’s a better batsmen than Watson, Ponting or Hussey. Better than Quiney, Cowan and Warner? I would tend to agree with you.
November 20th 2012 @ 8:15am
Jason said | November 20th 2012 @ 8:15am | Report comment
Malcolm Conn is a respected writer?
November 20th 2012 @ 9:22am
Quality said | November 20th 2012 @ 9:22am | Report comment
Jason, I thought the same thing! I generally go with the opposite of whatever Conn writes…
November 20th 2012 @ 10:25am
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 10:25am | Report comment
I don’t always agree with what Malcolm Conn writes or says – in fact I quite often completely disagree – but I respect his opinions and writing nonetheless.
November 20th 2012 @ 11:04am
TheGenuineTailender said | November 20th 2012 @ 11:04am | Report comment
I despise the Conn artist. 99% of the crap he writes is exactly that, crap, its rubbish, its a story for the sake of it and for the sake of me, I cannot tell you what’s going on in that guys head some times. The ‘opinions’ he comes up with are well and truly beyond me.
November 20th 2012 @ 8:38am
Brett McKay said | November 20th 2012 @ 8:38am | Report comment
All valid points here mate and I have to agree with you entirely. Watson saying he hopes to be selected as a bat still, to me at least, smacks of a player trying to talk up his fitness if anything, and it’s hard to think of this as being anything other than selfish. He claims to know his body well, yet is willing to risk further injury batting and fielding? That’s even more madness..
The ‘is he in the top six?’ angle seems to be focussing on his conversion rate as a top order bat (still only two 100s, and bloody heaps of 50s), and to a degree, I agree with that. But then I saw something last night that said Warner has only three scores above 50, so therefore if Watson’s figures are coming under scrutiny, then he shouldn’t be alone. But if Quiney’s 9 has suddenly thrust him into the top six, then it truly was the best nine runs scored in the history of cricket!
Robert Craddock had an interesting take on the Watson situation last night on Inside Cricket, that being that Clarke isn’t backing or doesn’t want Watson to return. I’m not sure about that – they have a long history as teammates going back to being C and VC of the Aust U19s – but certainly Clarke doesn’t seem to be prepared to take a risk on anyone not 100% fit…
November 20th 2012 @ 10:35am
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 10:35am | Report comment
Watson hasn’t even completed full training drills or flat out running yet, but he says he’ll be right to bat? I appreciate that he just wants to get back out there, but that is more sheer madness. And you’re right, it’s a little selfish.
The lack of heat on Warner is a little surprising. I know he’s a crowd favourite, but his record is starting to look questionable. Especially if the blowtorch is being applied to Watson’s average/numbers/conversion rates.
I think Clarke would remember the mistake the selectors made last time South Africa was out here. They picked Andrew Symonds under an injury could, and from memory he broke down on the first day. The team was forced to hide him in the field and not bowl him, even though he was the designated all-rounder. Clarke won’t want a repeat of that under his captaincy.
November 20th 2012 @ 7:21pm
Brett McKay said | November 20th 2012 @ 7:21pm | Report comment
just quickly on this mate, Ponting today in Adelaide has repeated the ‘no-one should play under an injury cloud’ angle that Clarke has said last week, so maybe Crash Craddock is onto something with his thoughts on Watson being on the outer??
November 20th 2012 @ 7:55pm
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 7:55pm | Report comment
Maybe, mate. I recorded Inside Cricket, so I’ll watch Crash’s comment later on.
I personally think its simply a case of Ponting and Clarke remembering the Symonds fiasco and how baldly it hurt the team, and not wanting to repeat the mistake. Clarke is also under more pressure for these decisions now that he is a selector, and I’m sure he doesn’t want to be caught with his pants down (so to speak).
November 20th 2012 @ 8:12pm
lolly said | November 20th 2012 @ 8:12pm | Report comment
Punter is the last person who should be saying that sort of thing. He’s played injured often enough. He did it in the last World Cup and in the Ashes 2010. I guess 100% fitness is always more important when you are talking about someone else.
November 20th 2012 @ 8:32pm
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 8:32pm | Report comment
That’s a fair enough point, lolly. Ponting has played many times when less than a 100%. You could argue that it’s a slightly different case, but really, it’s slightly hypocritical of him.
November 20th 2012 @ 8:46am
Red Kev said | November 20th 2012 @ 8:46am | Report comment
Top six or not is a tough call, regardless he is in the top ten and with his excellent bowling added in that makes him a certain selection.
If he’s not fit enough to bowl he’s not fit enough to bat for 6 hours and therefore not fit enough to play. I like the not gambling on someone who isn’t 100% fit stance.
November 20th 2012 @ 9:10am
Jason said | November 20th 2012 @ 9:10am | Report comment
Agree. This isn’t a must win est but Perth is likely to be. So makes surece is fit and ready to go there.
November 20th 2012 @ 11:03am
Bayman said | November 20th 2012 @ 11:03am | Report comment
Red Kev,
Re Watson being fit enough to bat for six hours – when has he ever done that? Which is precisely why he should never bat in the top five – let alone the top three.
November 20th 2012 @ 12:05pm
Red Kev said | November 20th 2012 @ 12:05pm | Report comment
I’d play him at no.6 too, but he has to at least have the capability of batting an entire day.
November 20th 2012 @ 9:12am
sledgeross said | November 20th 2012 @ 9:12am | Report comment
Yeah Brett, Crash Craddock was certainly interesting last night, made somebig calls.
Ryan, ideally, where do you think Watson should bat? I would like to see him at 6 personally, a 50 is sometimes more vital down there than opening. All he does opening is score 50s and run partners out (poor old Kat, enjoy Lancashire!)
November 20th 2012 @ 10:38am
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 10:38am | Report comment
I’d like him at 5 or 6, Sledgeross. It enables him to rest a little between innings if we need him to bowl, and I agree that a 50 down there is more valuable. Especially if they’re going to pick Warner as an opener.
November 20th 2012 @ 11:36am
Jason said | November 20th 2012 @ 11:36am | Report comment
He’s just about the best player of fast bowling in the country so it has to be in the top 3.
November 21st 2012 @ 11:25am
Christo the Daddyo said | November 21st 2012 @ 11:25am | Report comment
Actually, batting him at the top order gives him plenty of time to rest – seeing as he never comes close to carrying his bat through an innings!
November 20th 2012 @ 9:27am
Brian said | November 20th 2012 @ 9:27am | Report comment
If i was watto i would be extremely upset at being discarded for Quiney because i can’t bowl.
I’ve spent the last 4 years being your best player. I single handedly carried you to the world cup semis in September and now your putting ahead a guy who made 9 because too often I’ve made 99. Clarke aside who has batter better than me. We carried Ponting, Hussey, Cowan, Haddin for how long?
Yes if i was watto i would say its all about the team but would definately remember all this next time an IPL contract comes around.
November 20th 2012 @ 10:39am
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 10:39am | Report comment
To be fair Brian, I don’t think he has been left out for Quiney, I think he’s been left out because he’s not 100% healthy.
November 20th 2012 @ 3:33pm
Brian said | November 20th 2012 @ 3:33pm | Report comment
If thats the case fair enough but someone needs to tell Watson rather than having him declared fit to bat and compete with Quiney
November 20th 2012 @ 8:00pm
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 8:00pm | Report comment
I agree, that’s fair enough. Watson is clearly under the impression he’s still a chance to be selected as a specialist batsmen, even though his captain, ex-captain and the high performance manager have all said that’s not going to happen.
That’s farcical.
November 20th 2012 @ 9:50am
Timmuh said | November 20th 2012 @ 9:50am | Report comment
Madness was when “cricinfo” declared that Mitchell Johnson was in the frame for selection. Sheer bloody lunacy that.
Any comparison between Watson and Quiney is utterly sane compared to that. Most of Senator Bill Heffernan’s rants are sane compared to that.
November 20th 2012 @ 11:36am
Brett McKay said | November 20th 2012 @ 11:36am | Report comment
Timmuh, it’s not just CricInfo putting Johnson back in the frame, John Inverarity himself mentioned Johnson only last week. To be fair, he is bowling pretty well and pretty quick again for WA, so I don’t think we can completely rule his recall out..
November 20th 2012 @ 1:50pm
jameswm said | November 20th 2012 @ 1:50pm | Report comment
The Fox Sports cricket guys also mentioned him. I couldn’t believe my ears.
I watched him bowl in a one-dayer the other day – and as much as it pains me to say it he was quick, accurate and moved the ball back in to the right hander.
I don’t begrudge him coming back, but he has to earn his spot by more than a few good spells. If he’s the best Shield bowler this season, he comes back. It’s that simple.
November 20th 2012 @ 4:58pm
Tom Dimanis said | November 20th 2012 @ 4:58pm | Report comment
Don’t be surprised if Mitch Johnson gets selected for the Third Test at the WACA:
1. Has a great record at the WACA
2. Has a good record against South Africa
November 20th 2012 @ 6:19pm
Matt F said | November 20th 2012 @ 6:19pm | Report comment
That’s my view as well James. I try and never write any player off forever and judge them on their performances. If he is one of the best Shield bowlers this season and has fixed his many issues then he will deservedly come back into consideration. He has looked pretty decent in the Ryobi Cup so far though I’m always hesitant in picking a player based on performances in a different format.
It’s too early to bring him back at the moment. His returns this Shield season have been pretty good but not fantastic, and he’s only played 2 Shield matches. Given our much vaunted fast bowling depth it seems unfair to propel him to the front of the queue based on a couple of half-decent Shield matches.
November 20th 2012 @ 9:56am
A1 said | November 20th 2012 @ 9:56am | Report comment
The funny thing is that Clarke is also a selector now. So the head of the selectors and one of the selectors aren’t even aligned on selection policy.
November 20th 2012 @ 10:51am
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 10:51am | Report comment
Well, the captain being a selector is just another example of Australian cricket madness, in my humble opinion.
November 20th 2012 @ 1:51pm
jameswm said | November 20th 2012 @ 1:51pm | Report comment
+1
November 20th 2012 @ 11:18pm
pope paul v11 said | November 20th 2012 @ 11:18pm | Report comment
And the coach selector too.
November 20th 2012 @ 10:27am
Cameron Rose said | November 20th 2012 @ 10:27am | Report comment
This article sums things up pretty accurately I’d have to say – if you aren’t fit enough to bowl, particularly when the issue is a soft tissue in the legs, you’re not fit enough to bat to the required level a test match may require.
As for whether Watson is in the top six batsmen, I believe he is, and in fact, I can make a case that an in-form, settled Watson can be the best in the land. To me he is the perfect number three – technically sound, good defence, ability to take the game to the bowler, plus the mindset to do so, and can score quickly when on top. His experience as a successful opener holds him in good stead when walking to the crease after an early wicket.
It’s been well documented about his lack of converting starts, and this is an area that needs rectifying, but his body issues may prevent that from being the case. One senses that Watson will ultimately go down as an unfulfilled talent.
November 20th 2012 @ 10:44am
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 10:44am | Report comment
To play Devils Advocate to those accusing Watson of not converting his scores into big innings (and I’ve been one of them) – you could argue that at least he gets starts.
When there are numerous batsmen scoring big runs and knocking down the door, starts aren’t good enough to keep your place in the team. However, as has been well documented, that is not the current state of play in Australian cricket. If you were the selectors, you would almost be thinking ‘We’ll take starts at the moment!’
November 20th 2012 @ 11:03am
Timmuh said | November 20th 2012 @ 11:03am | Report comment
This is why I would like him to move back to opening. He also tends to play straight early in an innings, at least when in form.
I used to be one of those highly cricitcal of his selection. He was for a long time a second-string bit-part player who got picked because he was that thing which seemed to be magical to selectors, an “all-rounder” who was not good enough with bat or ball, but almost good enough with both.
That has changed, he is clearly among our best batsmen – and he gets starts consistently, something Warner does not do. With the batting the way it is, i.e. highly suspect, an opener who can be relied on to see off the new ball regularly i worth far more than onw who can post a big score every now and then, but fail half the time.
Opening would affect his bowling, but he isn’t a strike bowlker and should not be bowling that much anyway – and virtually never to the tail. As such, bowling should not tire him for batting purposes.
November 20th 2012 @ 11:48am
Bayman said | November 20th 2012 @ 11:48am | Report comment
I think he has already gone down as an unfulfilled talent. His body issues are well documented but his main problem seems to me to be his mind. He’s made several fifties but relatively few sixty plus which suggests someone who has trouble concentrating for more than about two hours – hence his great results in short form cricket which seems to be about his mental limit.
Note the number of times Watson is dismissed within minutes of resuming after a break – and that can be lunch, tea or stumps. It also suggests someone who is easily satisfied – “I’ve got my forty or fifty, maintained my average so nobody can say I’ve not contributed.”
Talk all you like about Watson’s so-called great technique (how does he get LBW so often) but it’s big runs which set players apart. Clarke has now scored three times over two hundred in the past twelve months, one of them 300 plus n.o. I don’t know if Watson ever dreams of doing this even once but, if he does, he must realise it can’t be done in a single session.
Let’s not forget he has only two Test centuries and one of them came on the back of a sitter being generously put down by Pakistan when he was on 99. He had one glorious twelve month period when he made a couple of nineties and immediately committed suicide – as he tried to do against Pakistan but he forgot about the possibility of bookies being involved and accidentally made a hundred.
Let’s be serious here, Watson should never bat in the top five. Despite his apparent “style”, he doesn’t really have the necessary. During the last Ashes series I was speaking to David Lloyd and asked him, “Is Watson really an opener?” Lloyd replied, “Absolutely not – but he’d be a bloody good number seven.” I’ve been more generous and suggested number six.
Certainly, Watson may, or may not, be as good as anyone going around today in Australia but that’s not saying much right now. I certainly believe Quiney is a better bet at the top than Watson if only for the fact I know what I’ll get from Watson – and it’s not much. I’m happy to give Quiney a go until he proves, one way or another, his true worth at Test level.
Would I love Watson to come out firing and start peeling of tons, and double tons? Too right I would because I know it would also be exciting, even exhilarating. Until he does, however, he will always be marked down by me and, in Cameron’s words, an “unfulfulled talent”.
Watson’s problems are in his head as much as his calf. Incidentally, just how does someone who runs in to bowl at half rat power strain a calf muscle. He always looks like he’s running up hill when he comes in to bowl. I often feel like I should get out there and help him to the bowling crease. And in the field he’s a dead set liability – he’s slower than David Boon, or Greg Ritchie, or Mark Cosgrove.
I’m rating Watson against Harvey, Walters, the Chappells, the Waughs, Taylor, Slater, Boon and Ponting et al. Not against whatever counts for batting rivals today. As such, he is as Jack Dyer used to say in the VFL, just a “good, ordinary player”.
Let’s not forget, also, that he’s missed more games than most and he’s in his thirties. If he was batting he’d be getting ready to get out. He didn’t play last summer, he won’t play at least the first two this summer. At what point does CA just cut its losses and move on? He’s a good short form player. Currently, and for some time, that’s all anyone can say about Shane Watson.
November 20th 2012 @ 11:52am
Jason said | November 20th 2012 @ 11:52am | Report comment
To be fair, he’s a GREAT short form player. Easily the best in the game at the moment.
November 20th 2012 @ 12:02pm
Bayman said | November 20th 2012 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
Jason,
I’m not arguing that……..I tend to agree with you.
November 20th 2012 @ 12:09pm
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 12:09pm | Report comment
Thanks for the considered and thoughtful reply, Bayman.
I actually agree with the vast majority of what you have written. There are a couple of things I disagree with, but they are not major enough to have a debate about.
I agree that Watson will probably go down as unfulfilled talent, but generally, I tend to feel that you’re selling him just a smidgen short. History probably won’t judge him as an all-time great for Australia, but he’s been a very important player during his international career. And though we may always wonder what ‘could have been’, he’s certainly gotten a lot more out of his career than a lot of other talented cricketers throughout the years (Ian Harvey, Shane Lee, Greg Blewett, etc).
November 21st 2012 @ 12:24am
Rhys said | November 21st 2012 @ 12:24am | Report comment
I’d place Watson right along side Andrew Symonds in the ‘what could have been’ column. Both players potential match winners on any given day. Both occasionally delivered, but more often than not fell short of that mark.
Maybe it’s something in the make up of the modern day all-rounder. Kallis is the stand out, but few others of the last 20 years have come close to the records of the 70s/80s greats – Botham, Dev, Imran, Hadlee et al.
Could it be the increase in demands of limited overs cricket?
November 20th 2012 @ 12:48pm
tenschooners said | November 20th 2012 @ 12:48pm | Report comment
I don’t get why so many sports commentators (in mainstream media anyway) think Quiney was unlucky to be caught out on the boundary. Since when is hitting it down the throat of the only leg-side outfielder unlucky? Very poor shot selection.
November 20th 2012 @ 1:35pm
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 1:35pm | Report comment
It’s a classic case of writing (or talking) to your own agenda.
If Ricky Ponting had scored 9 runs and hooked one down fine leg’s throat, I sincerely doubt his innings would be described as ‘polished’.
November 20th 2012 @ 2:49pm
Andrew Marmont said | November 20th 2012 @ 2:49pm | Report comment
I almost choked on my cereal with laughter when I read Quiney made a “polished” 9 too! Maybe they were doing it in jest… or maybe not. Nice article by the way Ryan, enjoyed it.
November 20th 2012 @ 8:02pm
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 8:02pm | Report comment
Cheers Andrew.
November 20th 2012 @ 4:45pm
tenschooners said | November 20th 2012 @ 4:45pm | Report comment
true, kinda like claiming that Starcs 4 for 72 in a shield match (which included two tailenders) will fast-track him into the test team. Well I hope not based on those figures anyway.
November 20th 2012 @ 2:15pm
Timmuh said | November 20th 2012 @ 2:15pm | Report comment
But it was almost six, and that is enough in the T20 generation.
Seriously, what happened to the idea of rolling the wrists and attempting to play the ball down. It just doesn’t seem to be in the modern player’s arsenal.
I actually think he looked OK for the short time he was there, but 9 runs and getting out in avoidable fashion is hardly enough to say it was “polished”. I have no qualms with him having another chance, but I agree that many are over-stating his innings.
November 20th 2012 @ 3:39pm
Sir Peter Poon said | November 20th 2012 @ 3:39pm | Report comment
Almost a 6? Clearly there was a bowling plan and Quiney fell victim to it. Every other batsman has worked out how to bat in the different formats, I don’t see why Mr Quiney should be any different.
I agree with Ryan, he looked awkward and I would never consider an innings of 9 to be polished. I do believe 4 of those 9 were an edge through slips? I wouldn’t even say he was OK, I was at the Gabba when he batted and I was far from impressed with what I saw.
There are plenty of other options, Quiney is also 30 years of age and he is no Hussey.
November 20th 2012 @ 8:26pm
lolly said | November 20th 2012 @ 8:26pm | Report comment
It was a classic set-up and a batsman fell for it but somehow that has been ignored by almost every journalist and commentator I’ve heard speak or write on Quiney’s innings. It’s been very amusing following the surreal nature of the write-ups about Quiney’s 9 runs. It reminds me of the over-the-top stuff about Usman’s 38 in the last test of the last Ashes only the bar is set hilariously low in this case.
I’m hoping he gets a beautifully crafted 3 in the next match for Aus just to read the descriptions of his poise. Well, that’s not quite true if he’s picked I hope he gets real runs but there is much unexpected amusement to be had in failure this summer.
November 20th 2012 @ 8:36pm
Ryan O'Connell said | November 20th 2012 @ 8:36pm | Report comment
The praise for Khawaja was over-the-top. And I’ll be the first to admit I was guilty of it myself. Having said that, I feel more comfortable gushing out the praise for someone that scores 38.
But 9 runs? C’mon! And 4 of them came off an edge through slips!