Matthew Hayden vs Mike Hussey

[greg]

Too much logic in that choice the way your selectors have been going.Kasprowicz will play instead of Tait.Hayden has to go though.

[Seamer]

Originally Posted by anthman

I still think Hayden needs to go, his dismissal proves that. Not looking at the ball at all. But I'm now starting to wonder if we have too many lefties in our side and England (Flintoff especially) is bowling too well against them. Maybe we should bring in a right handed batter instead. Hussey is left handed isn't he?, so maybe he's not the answer. Any other suggestions people?

Well lets look at the overall picture. Out of the batsmen Hayden was the second top scorer in the second innings and top scorer in the first innings. He is consistantly getting starts unlike the rest of them.
If you want to get rid of someone - what about the feeble and useless Kattitch. Both his dismissals were pathetic and reinforced my opinion of him - no ticker and inept. Fancy leaving a ball aimed at your stumps. Send him back to grade cricket i say.
You want a villian and scapegoat - Kattitch is your man. While the Aussie squad has no specialist opener to replace Hayden, and in the process break up one of the greatest opening partnerships in history, we have a ready-made middle order replacement of Kattitch in Hodge.
Hayden won't be dropped IMO, but Kattitch possibly will. Hopefully the selectors do there job this time.

[anthman]

The big picture is that it took a day of rain and 7 hours of batting from Ponting to save that Test. In 3 Tests, Langer, Martyn, Ponting, Clarke and Warne are the only batsman who have looked even vaugely close to comfortable against the English bowling.

The fact that Hayden scored 36 (which was the third highest score) has everything to do with Vaugh being too cute and not having a third slip, and nothing to do with Hayden displaying anything vaugely resembling form or composure at the crease.

Hayden, Katich and Gilchrist are the weak batting links at the moment. You can't really drop the keeper, but I'd be perfectly happy to lose the other two, and Hayden first. At least Katich has done something this series, he did make a handy half century in the first Test did he not? Hayden just hangs around swinging and missing, and looking at everything except the ball until even Vaughan's ****ty captaincy can't prevent the law of averages getting him out.

Langer wasn't a specialist opener IIRC, but he turned into a pretty handy one didn't he.

[Beny]

Langer
Gilchrist
Ponting
Martyn
Clarke (if fit otherwise Hussey)
Hodge
Watson
Warne
Lee
Tait
McGrath

Watson the useless bowler? He has'nt shone with the bat yet either- he's way down on the list...

OK here's what I'm thinking at the momment.

Langer
Hussy
Ponting
Martyn
Clarke/Hodge if Injured
Gilly
Katich/ Hodge if Clarke is fit
Warne
Lee
Tait
McGrath

[Seamer]

Originally Posted by anthman

Hayden, Katich and Gilchrist are the weak batting links at the moment. You can't really drop the keeper, but I'd be perfectly happy to lose the other two, and Hayden first. At least Katich has done something this series, he did make a handy half century in the first Test did he not?..

anthman, this is a continuation of our discussion at the end of the second test. I think we ended up on "what if hayden fails in the next test?"
Well he did not excactly fail nor did he succeed. He got two starts though and no other Aussie achieved that save Warne. In context of how the rest of the team performed, he did enough to get another test surely? And it must be said that he was given out LBW in the first innings with a ball that hit him outside the line of off stump and was unlucky to be given. On performance, he was our third best batsman so he cannot be dropped.
I do agree that his time is coming to an end. He looks tired, jaded and somewhat lumbersome. And i now agree that changes need to be made mid-series to strengthen our team, but not wholesale ones.
Kattitch surely is the one that has to go. He looks timid, uncertain, and generally lacks the ticker required to perform under pressure. His two dismissals were atrocious. Leaving a ball that was dead straight and aimed at the stumps smacks of a batsman uncertain and unwilling to use his bat. His dismissal in the second innings was just as bad - a streaky swipe at a ball wide of off stump smacked of a batsman that had finally cracked under the pressure. Hayden has produced four thirty-odds and two failures, Kattitch has produced one fifty-odd and five failures. If i had to choose between the two, Kattitch would be the easy choice to drop
Why not drop both? Because going into such a crucial test with two debutants is far too risky. If Tait gets the nod, then you have three. Too much change in too short a time and at too crucial a juncture.
All in all, i think we are in agreement on the future direction of the Aussie teams make-up and who should be replaced. It is the timing of those changes that we don't agree on. Hayden does have to go - but at the end of the series.

[anthman]

I take your point, but I suppose what it comes down to whether one feels the difference between the sides is only one underperforming bowler (Gillespie), and one failing batsman (Katich). I think the margin has looked bigger than that for most of the last two tests. If we go 2-1 down after the next test, it will be too late to say "well we should have made bigger changes".

As to there being too many debutants, the batsmen people are talking about as replacements are hardly fresh faced teenagers. Most of them are in there late twenties - early thirties; have played county cricket, and represented Australia in some capacity.

[acker]

Shane Watson has had a reasonable trot with the bat domestically, I'm sick of players like Kattich leaving their native state (West Australia) on what seems to be a promise (Australian selection) by moving to New South Wales.

P.S: Can somebody please tell me how the hell Stuart Clarke got on the radar screen, never has somebody with such a run of ordinary form been contemplated for test selection; were they using Woeful Gillespie as the benchmark or is it because he plays for NEW SOUTH WALES. I notice Clark stunned the cricketing world with a brilliant Gillespie like performance for Middlesex against Sussex in their current match. 0 for 109 at about 5 runs per over, I suppose this is typical of the callibre of aspiring Australian test pace bowlers currently..

Total (9 wickets, 104 overs) 522


Bowling O M R W
Clark 22 3 109 0 (2nb)

[Beny]

Clarke averaged 25 this domestic season.

[acker]

Originally Posted by Beny

Clarke averaged 25 this domestic season.

Bracken, Tait, Nicholson, Dawes, Lewis and Bichel all averaged better than him ?

And Shane Watson returned averages of 31 with the ball and 42 with the bat this domestic season (not a bad return for an all-rounder I would have thought)

[Seamer]

Originally Posted by anthman

As to there being too many debutants, the batsmen people are talking about as replacements are hardly fresh faced teenagers. Most of them are in there late twenties - early thirties; have played county cricket, and represented Australia in some capacity.

You may well be right. I think Hayden has done enough to keep his spot for the next test, but if Hussey gets the nod over Hayden, i won't begrudge the decision. So long as Gillespie is replaced for Kasprowicz, and Kattitch replaced for Hodge (or Hussey) i will be happy enough. Regardless, i think Hayden should be pushed at the conclution of this tour unless his form changes dramatically.