Australia need to play their strongest possible side against Afghanistan today, which should rule out Shane Watson.
Facing a nation competing in its first World Cup, Australians could be tempted to experiment with their line-up. The reality is they could field a state side and still beat Afghanistan in a 50-over contest.
But now is not the time to start tinkering with their XI. Australia need to vaporise their ill-equipped foes in this match at the WACA.
Fresh from an embarrassing batting display in their loss to New Zealand on Saturday, Australia require a major injection of confidence. A huge boost in their net run rate would also be extremely valuable to try get their noses ahead of Bangladesh, who currently sit one spot above them in third place in Pool A.
The Bangladeshis have an easy match tomorrow against minnows Scotland, followed by a very winnable fixture against the floundering England on Monday.
Australia, meanwhile, will tackle Sri Lanka in their next outing, one which could determine whether they get a soft or a treacherous path to a semi-final berth.
Today they will benefit from the expected return of arguably their most influential player, James Faulkner. The potent all-rounder is an automatic inclusion after missing the first two-and-a-half weeks of the World Cup due to a side strain.
With pace bowler Pat Cummins out because of rib soreness, Australia have the option of replacing him with Faulkner. That would give Australia a phenomenally deep batting line-up, with either Faulkner or keeper Brad Haddin at nine and talented late-order hitter Mitchell Starc at 11.
That would be overkill, however. As I wrote recently, specialist bowlers should not be undervalued and three all-rounders is sufficient for Australia.
One of Shane Watson, Mitch Marsh or Glenn Maxwell must give way for Faulkner. Maxwell is a must due to his underrated spin, which not only offers Australia integral variety but helps them to avoid major over-rate problems.
The choice is between Watson and Marsh. The former is the more proven performer and has been one of the finest limited overs players his country has produced. But Australia require a first drop capable of playing an influential innings when the chips are down. Watson’s recent record in both ODIs and Tests indicate that he rarely produces his best performances when his side most needs them.
Steve Smith, by comparison, has made a habit of scoring runs at crucial junctures for Australia in coloured or white clothing. Smith clearly is the superior option at number three based on recent performances.
Skipper Michael Clarke’s best position looks to be at number four, so should Watson move down to five or six, positions he has not held with any regularity for many years? I don’t think so.
Over the past year or so, Watson has made just 245 runs at 23 in ODIs, while his bowling returns have also dwindled, with only two wickets at 135. In the field he has become increasingly cumbersome. Marsh looks better suited to batting in the middle order, is fresh from a five-wicket haul and is a superior fieldsman.
Watson should sit out today’s clash, with Faulkner slotting straight back in at eight and lanky quick Josh Hazlewood replacing the injured Cummins.
Australia’s pace bowling is a strength, as we saw on the weekend when Starc nearly engineered an unlikely win over the Kiwis. That match highlighted that quality specialist bowlers remain a prized commodity in the modern game, despite the fact it’s evermore dominated by batsmen.
Expectations were that the power-laden batting line-ups boasted by each side would light up the oddly-shaped Eden Park in Auckland. Instead, the stars were Starc and New Zealand pair Trent Boult and Daniel Vettori.
Faced with canny bowling, many of the highly rated batsmen involved in the contest merely combusted. ODI batsmen have become so accustomed to bossing bowlers that they can be swiftly found out when confronted by a searing or clever spell.
Australia have the quicks to skittle even elite batting line-ups like New Zealand, South Africa and India. They should field their strongest possible attack today and aim to do just that to Afghanistan.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Clarke's bowling against Afghanistan I think has pretty much guaranteed Doherty will only be a passenger in this WC squad. He definitely won't play a game now. But considering Harris hasn't played a one dayer in a few years, and that even though coming back and doing okay in the tests, he'd never quite got back to 100% this summer, he certainly wouldn't have been the extra man to come in.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I don't know that the batting depth is a problem. These allrounders have shown over this summer they can actually do a decent job of still piling on a big total even with the loss of early wickets, and the fact that with Cummins in the team they actually bat right down to 11 with players capable of scoring good runs and clearing the fence, all while having a very strong bowling lineup, gives the middle order batsmen the confidence that they can still smack the ball around in the last 15 overs to build a formidable total.
13th Man
Guest
Marsh has had to come in and go for the swing at the end most of the time. When he does come in with time to bat he has made a score. against SA and Eng (tri series final) Watto has done nothing full stop. very good decision by selectors to get rid of him.
factor
Guest
Don Bradman also had a good average (albeit in test matches) - what about Michael Bevan - his average is pretty good last time he played - why don't we pick him? Seriously - Watson is cancer = blight on this team and the sooner he is dropped from all forms of cricket for Australia the better. Seriously (very serious) Watson is a pretender, had we played him v afghanistan, sure, he would have scored 200 - he's a dead rubber, flat track bully - the fact that he is the highest paid cricketer in Australia is an injustice...
Gav
Guest
Time to eat my hat
ausi
Guest
Agreed - good assessment. There will be the normal Watosn cheer squad - why? I have no idea. He is finished - a lumberer now - always has been really. A problem if Afghans bat first - no batting practice.
13th Man
Guest
Personally I would have picked an extra quick in Ryan Harris who could just play the important games like against NZ and SL. And the finals obviously. Or possibly a spare batsman like Voges. Either way it would have been a better option than Doherty.
John
Guest
The best all round cricketer in the world is Faulkner.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
I know less than Jon Snow. Modest stats to date would suggest Marsh is blessed.
Dog's Breakfast
Guest
moaman
Guest
Does he have your blessing too>? ;-)
Dog's Breakfast
Guest
Agree the best XI should play today. Have an issue with the number of all-rounders in the team you've picked. Especially if you want this side moving forward into the knockout games. At the risk of repeating myself from other forums (apologies in advance), I would have Bailey in for Watson and Faulkner in for Marsh. Smith is our best 3 at the moment. Bailey showed his value to the team in the first game. We looked too light on with batting experience in the middle order when things went pair-shaped last game. This order would tighten that up. Agree Marsh is certainly the future, and will hopefully be around to win the next World Cup for us. But in the short-term you need experienced heads. Also, Faulkner's form with the bat suggests his output there could match Marsh's at the moment and his bowling is hands-down better. We've been trying (not that we've needed it with the form of our new ball attack) to eke 20 overs out of Marsh, Watson and Maxwell. Watson has hardly been bowled so it's more or less been 20 overs between Maxwell and Marsh. That, for mine, is more than compensated with 10 overs of a fully fit Faulkner and 10 overs of (mostly) Maxwell, with Clarke and Smith as backups. Boof stated he wanted Clarke bowling in the World Cup. We've all seen what a golden arm he can be. Marsh had a fantastic haul in the first game. But he's been shown to be equally as expensive as Maxwell on an off day, just as Maxwell has been equally as potent as Marsh was against England on a good day (eg tri series final). To my mind, Marsh and Maxwell are the like for like players in style. You can only have one of them. Having so many all rounders suggests a line of thinking that blokes are going to have a bad day and may need cover. How about backing the specialists to the hilt to do their job? Anyway, it's all a bit of fun putting on a selector's hat, isn't it?
TheTruth
Guest
Yeah the bowling is not the issue (I consider Faulkner a frontline bowler in ODI's), moreso the batting depth. Only four genuine batsman in the team at the moment. I would prefer a 5th batsman and Maxwell/Marsh fighting for a spot, dependent on form and conditions. But options are limited due to the 15 man squad.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
He's a Marsh, Moaman, that's all anyone needs to know over here apparently.
Gav
Guest
Not a bad call Chris, I don't think many people consider Faulkner a specialist bowler in ODI........perhaps they should. He has the performances on the board
Gav
Guest
There's no way they are going to drop Watson for this match. They want him in form and in the team. The Afgan match gives Watto the opportunity to rediscover some form and confidence, without any great risk of losing, and giving us a strike, experienced player for the finals. If his a flop against Afghanistan, I recon they'll move on Watson then.
moaman
Guest
Marsh has one 60 and no other score above 23 in his last 10 digs. I don't know anything about him but assumed he was a middle-order bowling allrounder: he looked like a tailender on Saturday but he wasn't alone in that! I'm intrigued you think he can handle #3 which is traditionally reserved for the side's premier batsman. Interesting.
Gav
Guest
It won't happen today But if he doesn't bounce back to form with the blade, I recon its on the cards for the Srilanka match
TheCunningLinguistic
Guest
Couldn't disagree more. You say Marsh hasn't done enough- how does that compare to Watson done? He has really lit things up lately, hey?! Sorry, Marsh is the future, Watson is the past. Let's move on, thanks for the memories, Watto.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
If you drop Marsh for Faulkner and replace Watson with a pure batsman (which means you are bringing Bailey into the side) then you have a side with only 5 bowlers INCLUDING Maxwell. Maxwell is good enough to be the sixth bowler in the team at the moment, not the 5th bowler. That selection leaves you very short of options in the field if the batsmen start getting after someone. You generally want a 6th bowling option unless you are going to pick 4 specialist bowlers plus Faulkner as the fifth, which doesn't help the batting anyway. Nobody has ever suggested Marsh would bat at #3. Marsh replacing Watson would see Marsh bat in the middle order and either Clarke or Smith move to #3.