- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Shane Watson of Australia is one of few players who are picked almost automatically, but does he deserve this luxury?
Watson’s figures of late in ODIs have not been impressive and with a bunch of younger, more powerful and potent all-rounders arriving on the scene, it seems unlikely that he will continue much longer in the coloured clothing format.
These are not his only negative points with his inability to convert starts into triple figure totals well known. He does have good line and length but as a fast bowler needing to compete with the likes of James Faulkner, taking two wickets in a year suggests he is not doing enough to contribute to the team’s success.
Australia have the most all-rounders of all cricket teams at national level. James Faulkner, Mitch Marsh and Glenn Maxwell at 24, 23, and 26 years of age are just a few.
With ten years on their side, they are Australian crickets’ future. Watson has always been picked on potential, potential he only showed in 2010 and 2011 and rarely since. At 33, it’s time to stop picking Watson on potential and start picking him on performance.
His scores from the last year include two ducks and five scores between 10 and 20.
Even when the all-rounder did manage a start (40, 41) he couldn’t convert with no half centuries or triple figure scores.
His inability to convert starts into centuries is shown by his career stats that tell us that Watson has converted just one third of his fifties into centuries.
His last hundred for the Aussies was his 102 against India way back in October 2013. All the other mainstay top order batsmen average over 40 in the same period compared to Shane’s measly average of just 16.4.
Once renowned for his powerful hitting, is an average strike rate of 60.5 over the past year justifying his inclusion in the team? As a top order batsmen around the likes of Aaron Finch and David Warner, that’s not a major issue, but he should still be scoring big runs, averaging at least in the high 30s.
Although valued for his low economy rate and ability to keep an end tight, do we really still need Watson? With Marsh much the same bowler and arguably the better batsman with an average of just a tick over 46, we don’t.
Let’s just take a look at Marsh over the same period, an economy rate of 5.3 and three wickets. Watson however did not look as dangerous with an economy rate of 6.2 and just two wickets from a similar number of overs.
Watson has had his opportunity, and blew it. We have lots of bowling options. Just pick a specialist batsmen to play at first drop like Cameron White, or move Smith up the order and get Shaun Marsh in.
We need players who are playing cricket at a high level to play professionally. Watson hasn’t given us any proof of that lately and if he can’t do it, pick someone who can. While I don’t think he deserves to stay any longer but it’s an understandable position currently with Australia wanting the same team consistently on the park but post World Cup he should be dropped.
What do you think Roarers? Should they drop him? Or does he deserve one more chance?
Build your own fantasy cricket team and put it to the test with Draftstars daily fantasy competitions. Pick your match, pick your team and watch the points roll in to take out cash prizes on each match. What are you really gambling with? Set a deposit limit.