Well, as long as Watson is eligible, he is a much better bat than McDonald, and I'm pretty sure that his bowling is probably of a similar calibre. So, despite my misgivings (and Rachael's) Watson should be in.

Now, I'm assuming that we've decided to strengthen the bowling by dropping White? Out of Heal and Bailey, I have to go with Rachael and say 'Heal'. Just because he isn't in the Aussie selectors minds yet, doesn't mean that we can't steal a march on them and recognise him as a better talent than his peers. The only thing in Bailey's favour is he's a leggie and thus represents a more 'attacking' option. Despite this, his figures for the past season look woeful, so I'd prefer Heal.

Chris Rogers (open)
Phil Jaques (open)
Shane Watson (3-6) (c)
Dominic Thornely (4)
Marcus North (4)
Adam Voges (5)
Luke Ronchi (7)
Mitchell Johnson (8-10)
Aaron Heal (9/10?)
Shaun Tait (11)
Ben Hilfenhaus (11)

Then the only question mark would remain over Dominic Thornley, who Acker seems to think is not up to the challenge. So can McDonald or White be considered a better batting talent than Thornley??

Can we have a poll

McDonald & Thornley
Thornley & Watson
McDonald & Watson

&

Heal V Bailey

Do you think that would get us close to a final team.
As you may have guessed I have omitted White as the poll indicated.

Well White has been selected for Australia in ODI's as a batsman not an allrounder, so maybe he might be concidered for Thornelys spot.

Ok lets look it this way

Thornely is a better batsman than White, but White is a better bowler than Thornely on the same level McDonald is a better bowler than White but not as good a batsman as Whtie

My ratings
FC Career Batting

1. Thornely - 58 mat, 3839 runs at 42.65, hs 261*, 8x100, 21x50 (8/10)
2. White - 73 mat, 4025 runs at 37.26, hs 260*, 9x100, 17x50 (7/10)
3. McDonald - 27 mat, 1151 runs at 32.88, hs 150* 1x100, 7x50 (4/10)

FC Career Bowling

1. McDonald - 27 mat, 66 wickets at 29.93, Econ 3.02, bb 6/34, 2x5wi (6/10)
2. White - 73 mat, 136 wickets at 39.77, Econ 3.53, bb 6/66, 2x5wi, 1x10wm (3/10)
3. Thornely - 58 mat, 37 wickets at 41.35, Econ 2.95, bb 3/38 (1/10)

I think if we are throwing in a batsman we should put the best batsman in the side, but we have to look at it this way White will most likely be a better batsman than Thornely at the same age. Thornely is 28, McDonald is 25 and White is 23. One thing that White has over the other two is captaincy, youngest ever first class captain and has captained his state and county side last year when he was only 22 years old.

__________________
Bill Ponsford - The only one who could play in Bradman’s company and make it a duet.

I think I know where you are going with this Quaggy. But I thought the 3-1 vote on the poll option at the top of the page had definitevly voted White out of contention ?

Can we have a poll

McDonald & Thornley
Thornley & Watson
McDonald & Watson
White & Thornley
White & Watson
McDonald & White

&

Heal V Bailey

Do you think that would get us close to a final team.
As you may have guessed I have omitted White as the poll indicated.

It seems to me that the following ought to be proposed as a provisional side.. and that we all accept that this side is balanced, consists entirely of dependable performers and would be acceptable (even if we think it could be improved).

Nominations:

Chris Rogers
Phil Jaques
Dominic Thornely
Adam Voges
Marcus North
Andrew McDonald
Luke Ronchi
Mitchell Johnson
Aaron Heal
Shaun Tait
Ben Hilfenhaus

Now.. that leaves the obvious "prospects": Watson, White, Bailey and Butterworth. I suggest we all agree that this quartet have been identified as players for the future in a way that the likes of Thornley, McDonald and Heal have not.

I'd then be open to challenges to the provisional side of proven players: anyone getting three backers for a motion to replace one proven player (say Thornley) with one "prospect" (say Watson) should have their case accepted (without complaint).

ps. My suspicion is that we'll struggle to agree on who the "prospects" should replace...

I agree with your side Rachael but the only thing that I think should be switched is Watson for McDonald. I can't see McDonald or Heal ever getting a game for Australia so I would prefer to go with Watson and Bailey. But More people have picked Heal over Bailey so Heal is in.

So in my opinion the team will be settled, the only thing that I have on my mind is Watson vs McDonald.

__________________
Bill Ponsford - The only one who could play in Bradman’s company and make it a duet.

I can live with Heal in the side because I only held Bailey marginally ahead of him, and I can live without White being in it.

But I do have strong feelings about Watson's deservedness to be in the squad.
I would be happy with that squad providing we had a poll
Watson or Thornley
I vote Watson.

How about we have a poll

Who should Watson replace.

Thornely or McDonald

I think that McDonald would barely get a bowl with Tait, Hilfenhaus, Johnson, Heal and Watson alond with the part timers. Plus McDonald is a number 8 or 9 batsman for Victoria.

__________________
Bill Ponsford - The only one who could play in Bradman’s company and make it a duet.

Sounds like a good idea.
Watson's obviously got at least 2 votes to be in the side.
My argument for McDonald revolves around with this selection being for the 06/07 A team the 06/07 figures must weighted into the argument. It's easy to do this with Thornley v McDonald because neither played international cricket this year. Watson in my point of veiw earned his spot by coming back and batting very well at international level.
I dont think McDonald batted 8 or 9 much this year.
Batting 06/07
DJ Thornely 11 21 2 801 138 42.15 51.84 2 2 11 - NSW
AB McDonald 10 18 5 750 150* 57.69 54.74 1 6 7 - VIC
Bowling 06/07
DJ Thornely 11 113.1 35 284 6 47.33 2-23 - - 113.1 2.50 NSW
AB McDonald 10 307.5 79 874 29 30.13 6-34 1 - 63.6 2.83 VIC

Full Career Batting
Thornely - 58 mat, 3839 runs at 42.65, hs 261*, 8x100, 21x50
McDonald - 27 mat, 1151 runs at 32.88, hs 150* 1x100, 7x50
FC Career Bowling
McDonald - 27 mat, 66 wickets at 29.93, Econ 3.02, bb 6/34, 2x5wi
Thornely - 58 mat, 37 wickets at 41.35, Econ 2.95, bb 3/38

Yes but are we selecting a batsman or a bowler because Thornely is a batsman and McDonald is more of a bowler. Thornely was nearly selected to go over to England for the 2005 ashes. McDonald has only ever made one hundred which was this season. Sorry this season he has batted at 6 & 7, depending on who is in the side. In past years he batted further down the order. Yes I think that the 2006/07 Pura cup season has alot to do with who we select but the previous seasons also have to come into the picture

Thornely Vs McDonald (There best season with the bat will be in bold, funny thing is both are red heads)

Over the last three seasons

2006/07

21 inn, 801 runs at 42.15, hs 138, Sr 51.84, 2x100, 2x50
18 inn, 750 runs at 57.69, hs 150*, Sr 54.74, 1x100, 6x50

2005/06
16 innings, 688 runs at 45.86, hs 123, Sr 6.23, 1x100, 4x50
TNP

2004/05
19 innins, 1006 runs at 62.87, hs 261*, Sr 55.76, 4x100, 4x50
4 innings, 51 runs at 12.75, hs 36, Sr 39.23,

Its just that McDonald has not done enough for me to pick him as a genuine Australian contendor because one first class hundred is not enough.

__________________
Bill Ponsford - The only one who could play in Bradman’s company and make it a duet.