BBC Home

Explore the BBC

52 comments

user rating: 2 star

Yes Aussies still weak, very weak

International Tests
by RoyleBlue (U2851122) 26 December 2010
comment on the article

After the Perth match I pointed out that the Aussies are still a weak team and that has once again been shown at the MCG.

The selectors committed suicide by retaining Hughes and not selecting a spinner given the 4 seamers as a group are at best average.

But the Aussie batting is not only the worst in the history of Australian cricket but easily the worst in the whole of current test cricket. Even without 2 first choice bowlers England still run through the Aussie batting with consumate ease.

Watson is NOT an opening batsman and never will be - ever. Move him to number 6.
Smith is way out of his depth at this level.
Hughes should never wear a baggy green again absolutely hopeless.
Clarke is not fit mentally or physically fit and 100% out of form -drop him too.
Ponting a great player gone to seed must be dropped as soon as possible.
Hussey will have to pay another year given he's shown plenty form but must move to 4 or even 3.
Haddin a godd player in a hopeless team - it would be unfair to blame him for the inability of the batters to score runs.

Harris is okay but hardly the future of Australian cricket at his age.
The other 3 are largely hopeless unless the the wicket is entirely bowler friendly.

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own
comment by Esscee (U13699866)

posted Dec 27, 2010

Excellent batting from England, Maybe Ponting has been watching too much English football, when players harrass the ref over a disputed throw in!! One swallow doesn`t make a summer and retaining the Ashes is not the same as WINNING the Ashes, so the South African contingent playing for England (S.P &T) should remember that they were not good enough to play for S.A and had to come and play for England via their geat great granmothers connection to England

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 27, 2010

When some dumbster refers to the number of people in the English team who aren't true blood natives, they well do well to also refer to the number of 'foreigners' who have played for other countries.
For example: the following all played Test cricket for Australia yet were born overseas.
ENGLAND (10): Charles Bannerman, John Hodges, Tom Kendall, William Midwinter, Percy McDonnell, William Cooper, Henry Musgrove, Hanson Carter, Tony Dell and Andrew Symonds.
SCOTLAND (1): Archie Jackson.
IRELAND (2): Tom Horan, Tom Kelly.
SOUTH AFRICA (1): Kepler Wessels.
NEW ZEALAND (3): Tom Groube, Clarrie Grimmett and Brendon Julian.
INDIA (2): Bransby Cooper and Rex Sellers.
SRI LANKA (1): Dav Whatmore.

In this civilised world, under fair circumstances we allow people to choose their nationality, over time, if they commit to that country.
This is surely fair.
Some people need to grow up.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 27, 2010

Blobvilla - thay are South Africans full stop.. When the team is full of foreigners will you be happy or is it win at all costs? Sooner or later the English Football team will follow suit and I do not believe it is right.

Yet to hear Trott talking with a Brummie accent, should be entertaining.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 27, 2010

The Aussie batting lineup isn't that bad - its just horribly out of form. Hussey, Ponting and Clarke would get into an international 11 if the latter 2 were in form.

However Hughes and Smith are not Test class and Watson isn't an opener.

Personally I don't think there is too much between these two teams...England have bowled better with more consistency and discipline and the batsmen, bar Perth, have applied themselves more efficiently. Apart form a half an hour spell in Perth, Johnson has been dreadful and without him, the Aussie bowling looks lightweight. For England, Tremlett has been the find for me.

As for Ponting, I have no sympathy at all after the humiliations we have endured Down Under at the hands of the Aussies for so many years. However it must be difficult to play in a team that is made up of lesser individuals after being spoiled for so long with the likes of Langer, Warne etc, coupled with the fact his own power on the wane.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 27, 2010

"On form, then yes, the current Australian team lags far, far behind the likes of SA, India, England and Sri Lanka. Heck, even we managed to beat them in the summer!

But when on form, Katich, Watson, Ponting, Clarke and Hussey probably is the equal of SA and India and probably better than England's"


The fact that only Siddle at a pinch, would be the only bowler to get in any of the above teams side, is the problem. It's actually not their batting


As ususal teams tend to bst poorly, when they have a bowling attack they know they cannot rely on

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 27, 2010

"The Aussie batting is not only the worst in the history of Australian cricket but easily the worst in the whole of current Test cricket"

No it isn't the worst. Australia had an even worse batting lineup in 1985 which included a certain happy hooker Andrew Hilditch. In 1970, Australia had a just as poor batting lineup which included Bill Lawry and Ian Chappell.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Tidbit (U14280080)

posted Dec 27, 2010

If Ponting or Clarke were in any form then the whole series would be taking an entirely different shape. Look at the series batting averages for proof. There isn't a great deal of difference. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/batting/most_runs_career.html?id=5540;type=series

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 27, 2010

Once this series is over australia should think of the future and play this team:

Watson
Maddinson
Khawaja
Hussey
Hughes
Ferguson
Haddin (c)
Johnson
Okeefe
Harris
Copeland

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 27, 2010

"If Ponting or Clarke were in any form then the whole series would be taking an entirely different shape"

Don't you find it significant that their two most 'senior' batsman are in poor form???

That's because the fact they have a bowling attack, not much better than the NZ one is a shattering psychological blow

So then we see these two great players bat nervously knowing that (along with Hussey) if they don't get runs then they're a toast

Contrast this to 2007!! Even in the unlikely event of Hayden, Langer, Martyn and even Gilchrist ALL failing, they could still rely on McGrath, Lee and Clark ALL of which were better than ANY of the current seamers. And I haven't even mentioned a certain Shane Warne

You try keeping your chin up, with that kind of drop in fortune!!

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by jgmj (U14715305)

posted Dec 28, 2010

It's great to see the success England are having. But listening to Geoff Boycott wax lyrical on TMS is a bit much considering on the opening morning of this Test match he told Jonathan Agnew England had no chance of winning. He told Agnew he knew these things and thats why he was an expert and Agnew a commentator. Maybe save the predictions Mr. Band show some respect for fellow commmentators.

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article

Sorry, you can only contribute to 606 during opening hours. These are 0900-2300 UK time, seven days a week, but may vary to accommodate sporting events and UK public holidays.

RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5 26.67%
    4 votes
  • 4
    0 votes
  • 3
    0 votes
  • 2 6.67%
    1 votes
  • 1 66.67%
    10 votes

average rating:
2.13 from 15 votes