Watson breaks down again.......

[Seamer]

After claiming 2-13 off three overs, Watson has injured i different part of his body.
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/aust...ry/272878.html

While this is terribly bad news for Watson, it might well extend Symonds test career.

While i am sad for Watson, i am happy that Symonds (my favorite player) might yet get another chance to nail down a spot. The guy brings excitement to the game, and is capable of absolute brilliance with the bat, ball and in the field - a match winner on his day.

Who would you prefer as Aussie test allrounder? Or do you think we should not have one at all.

[Aussie-Yank]

I like Symonds as well, but he never fills me with confidence when he goes out to bat.

I am not interested in having an allrounder for the sake of having one. If someone is good enough to be selected for there batting or the bowling and they can do the other then great. But I would prefer a batsman if thats what they want or a bowler.

[Aussie-Yank]

Symonds out for 1, he keeps wasting his chances.

[Andy Mellon]

Aussies don't need an all-rounder as long as they are playing 3 of Warne, MacGill, McGrath, and Clark. Clark looks class. With the support of Michael Clarke to be the 'fifth bowler' if they ever need it.

Mind you, with the way the batting of Hussey and Ponting has been firing, maybe Aussie should play with only ten players?

[greg]

Shame.

Good job you can't strengthen the side,you are thrashing us easily enough already.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Seamer

While this is terribly bad news for Watson, it might well extend Symonds test career.

Boycott's view (when told, live on air, of the incident, was that this (however unfortununate for Watson) was more bad news for England: he likes the idea of Australia playing folk like Watson and Symonds as he regards scoring runs off them as rather like taking candy from a child.

I trust this one, solitary Test will be the be all and end all of Symond's Test career: I can't think of any player in test cricket who looks less worthy of a place.

If in the Aussie selector's shoes I'd see many better options:

{i} Bump Gilchrist up to six and bring in MacGill (strongest move, aiming at whitewash)

{i} Bump Gilchrist up to six and bring in Johnson (for experience, only with Ashes already won)

{iii} Bring in a batsman like Voges or Jaques (long term solution)

(iv) Bring in Cameron White (can't be worse than Symonds).

With all that said... the team for the final two Tests could be totally experimental if the Ashes are already won: blood the likely 2009 Ashes side with Jacques, Hussey, Ponting, Clarke, Voges, White, Haddin, Bailey/Cullen, Johnson, Tait and Clark - not exactly a "weak" side!!!

[Seamer]

I think the White option is a good call. As a player of the future, some test experience during an Ashes series would be good and he is a superior batsman (longer game) to Symonds and probably equal as a bowler.

But i do like watching Symonds play though. Sad he dissapoints so often.

[KennyG]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Boycott's view (when told, live on air, of the incident, was that this (however unfortununate for Watson) was more bad news for England: he likes the idea of Australia playing folk like Watson and Symonds as he regards scoring runs off them as rather like taking candy from a child.

I trust this one, solitary Test will be the be all and end all of Symond's Test career: I can't think of any player in test cricket who looks less worthy of a place.

If in the Aussie selector's shoes I'd see many better options:

{i} Bump Gilchrist up to six and bring in MacGill (strongest move, aiming at whitewash)

{i} Bump Gilchrist up to six and bring in Johnson (for experience, only with Ashes already won)

{iii} Bring in a batsman like Voges or Jaques (long term solution)

(iv) Bring in Cameron White (can't be worse than Symonds).

With all that said... the team for the final two Tests could be totally experimental if the Ashes are already won: blood the likely 2009 Ashes side with Jacques, Hussey, Ponting, Clarke, Voges, White, Haddin, Bailey/Cullen, Johnson, Tait and Clark - not exactly a "weak" side!!!

Good post.

Symonds is not an all-rounders Bum hole.
He is an part time bowler who has a 19 test batting average.
If (when) we win this test he should get dropped.
I would like to see C.White play at the M.C.G.
MacGill will play at the S.C.G.
McGrath will play,S.Clark is our best bowler at the moment and Brett Lee is the selectors pet, so he is safe.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by KennyG

and Brett Lee is the selectors pet, so he is safe.

In fairness.... he bowled some passable spells on the final day at Adelaide... and hasn't been too bad in this match... but it's a pretty damning inditement of his bowling overall that Boycott thought Clark and McGrath should have taken the new ball today.

Great bloke, gutsy no 8-9 batsman but NOT a great bowler: roll on Mitchell Johnson!

ps. Gilchrist at 6, Warne at 7 and Lee at 8 would surely be more than acceptable as a lower-middle order: Warne and Lee, rather like Boucher and Pollock, often look quite capable of batting higher than they do!

[KennyG]

I have always liked the idea of Gilchrist batting at #6.

S.Clark,S.MacGill and McGrath are all very ordinary batsmen so it will be interesting to see the team that will play in Sydney.
Will Watson be fit. (doubtful)
Will Symonds have earned his place if picked. (more doubtful)
MacGill has to play in Sydney and B.Lee is the obvious quick that should go.

So I think they will reverse their policy on Gilchrist batting six and squeeze in their darling(Lee).