Selections for India: A simple case of elimination and logic

Dave Richardson Roar Pro

By Dave Richardson, Dave Richardson is a Roar Pro

Tagged:
 , , ,

14 Have your say

    Do Australians still love the Australian cricket team? (AAP Image/Julian Smith)

    Related coverage

    There is a fair bit of conjecture regarding the squad for the forthcoming India tour but I’m not sure it is that complex.

    It seems to me a simple case of elimination and getting into the mindset of the newly-formed selection panel and working out the strategy that will apply.

    My guess is it should be a logical and explainable one.

    A useful starting point is to look who has been picked in the last 12 months and work back from there.

    From Sydney 2016 to Sydney 2017, 24 players have been used in 12 Tests.

    Out of those 24 either due to form, failure, age or injury there are only nine definitely on the plane to India.

    They are Steve Smith, Dave Warner, Usman Khawaja, Josh Hazlewood, Nate Lyon, Mitch Starc, Matt Renshaw, Peter Handscomb and Steve O’Keefe, the latter of which who was all but confirmed on Monday by Pat Howard.

    Likely to join them are Jackson Bird and Shaun Marsh. Bird is reliable, did well in the Tests he played and is the current third seamer.

    Shaun Marsh played the first Test of the summer and can bat anywhere in the top 6. He is rated highly against spin and will be on the plane.

    Those not under consideration accounts for nine players out of the 24.

    This includes Joe Burns, Adam Voges, James Pattison, Peter Siddle, Jon Holland, Moises Henriques, Callum Ferguson, Joe Mennie and Nic Maddison

    Those under possible consideration are wicketkeepers Matt Wade and Pete Nevill, along with all rounders Mitchell Marsh and Hilton Cartrwight

    So, who will be selected?

    Nevill will come in for Wade, the logic being that the selectors will want their best keeper for the tour given the conditions. Wade, while improved, didn’t score enough runs to justify ongoing selection.

    Mitchell Marsh will also replace Cartwright on the basis of being a superior bowler who did reasonably well in Sri Lanka. Cartwright’s four overs in Sydney has already labelled him as a batsman and more of a part-time bowler

    That brings the squad to 13 with the need for three additions, namely another seamer, spinner and a utility player.

    For the seamer, they will go with consistency and the current fourth seamer is Chadd Sayers. He can swing the ball, which could come in handy and other hopefuls are not fully under consideration.

    For the spinner, they will not risk blooding a youngster who will get mauled in India and it will be a stand-off between Glen Maxwell and Ashton Agar, with the end result that it will go Maxwell’s way on the basis he is the better batsman and if needed could bat at six.

    That leaves one spot, which I predict goes to James Faulkner. It is useful to have another left armer if anything happens to Starc, can score useful runs and is just short of being an all-rounder.

    So, there you have, not as tricky as some are suggesting.

    The final squad will read:
    Smith, Warner, Renshaw, Khawja, Handscomb, S Marsh, Nevill, Starc, O’Keefe, Hazlewood, Lyon, Bird, M Marsh, Maxwell, Sayers and Faulkner

    You heard it here first.

    Oldest | Newest | Most Recent

    The Crowd Says (14)

    • January 11th 2017 @ 8:12am
      Basil said | January 11th 2017 @ 8:12am | ! Report

      Actually not a bad squad and took me no time to read. Double thumbs up.

    • Roar Rookie

      January 11th 2017 @ 9:41am
      Lancey5times said | January 11th 2017 @ 9:41am | ! Report

      I have another few bits of logic to go with your logic (a lot of which I agree with)

      Mitch Marsh
      After an extended run in the side and a lack of runs is he still considered a guy who can bat in the top 6? This seams the priority as evidenced by the Cartwright selection. If not, will he get a seat on the plane? Given his output with ball is he a chance to take the spot you have allocated Sayers?

      Chad Sayers/James Faulkner
      Will the need to provide back up for Mitch Starc be about having another seamer (Sayers being currently part of the setup), another left armer (Faulkner) or another strike bowler (Cummins)? I suggest the latter due to Bird being a somewhat backup for Hazlewood and a certainty to be on the plane already

      • January 11th 2017 @ 9:53am
        Adrian said | January 11th 2017 @ 9:53am | ! Report

        Cummins is not an option, until he can prove he can last more than 4 overs without breaking down.

      • Roar Guru

        January 11th 2017 @ 9:40pm
        Chris Kettlewell said | January 11th 2017 @ 9:40pm | ! Report

        Cummins should play at least 2 Shield matches on the back-end of this season, those will overlap with the start of the India test series. No chance for him to to get those first class matches in then make the India tour. They’ll be looking to get him ready for the Ashes next summer.

    • January 11th 2017 @ 9:46am
      bearfax said | January 11th 2017 @ 9:46am | ! Report

      I can live with those selections Dave, though I’d like the selectors take a risk and bring in Agar and I think Cartwright deserves more than one test. He didnt do anything wrong in his only test. Why drop him? But not sure who to drop. Faulkner would be one…we have enough pace and all rounders.

    • January 11th 2017 @ 9:53am
      Adrian said | January 11th 2017 @ 9:53am | ! Report

      I agree 15/17. Only changes: out goes Mitchell Marsh and Glenn Maxwell, as both are out of form, and in comes Chris Lynn and… much as I don’t think that Zampa or Swepson are ready or suitable, the flexibility of having a 3rd specialist spin bowler is tempting, especially if the squad is as large as 17. While Swepson’s numbers look better, Zampa’s experience makes me prefer him. Zampa could well be one of those players with a poor domestic record who steps up in the big time, like one Michael Clarke did, or like Shane Warne. Certainly, Zampa’s T20I and ODI form suggests he might be one of those players. Zampa is unlikely to get a game, but I’d put him in there. Oh, and as for Lynn, that’s a hunch too, and a more sensible option is probably either Jake Lehmann or Kurtis Patterson, but the guy is in extremely good form, maddeningly good, and it couldn’t hurt to take him as a spare batsman.

      • Roar Guru

        January 11th 2017 @ 9:42pm
        Chris Kettlewell said | January 11th 2017 @ 9:42pm | ! Report

        Lynn is a bit like Cummins, come back from injury in the BBL but has no recent Shield form to go on at all. He’s also a player who’s really strong against pace, and spin is definitely a major weakness for him. I think it would be unlikely that India would be the place they’d pick to debut him.

        • January 12th 2017 @ 10:04am
          Adrian said | January 12th 2017 @ 10:04am | ! Report

          If not Lynn, then Jake Lehmann or Kurtis Patterson, as I said. Pick players in form not when they are out of form.

    • Roar Pro

      January 11th 2017 @ 11:59am
      Andy Hill said | January 11th 2017 @ 11:59am | ! Report

      Recent First class form would suggest Mitch Marsh and Faulkner don’t deserve a spot in the squad and that Jon Holland should at least be considered.

      • January 13th 2017 @ 8:13am
        Costas said | January 13th 2017 @ 8:13am | ! Report

        A first class average of 35 and is currently injured. No way

    • January 11th 2017 @ 1:16pm
      Harvey said | January 11th 2017 @ 1:16pm | ! Report

      Not a day goes by when i see an article saying Maxwell should be selected. He isnt a test player and too much of a risk that he would throw his wicket away in the middle of a collapse. On top of that, he is a park cricket spinner at best. It is also clear that Smith doesnt like bowling ‘all-rounders’. Australia need only genuine spinners to remotely compete in India.

    Have Your Say



    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.

    Explore:
    , , ,