Your team for the third Test

[aussiecricketer]

I agree on the Mennie and Ferg statement, I think they've unfairly copped some individual blame over the performance.

I disagree with Renshaw being picked, a 20 year old with 11 games worth of experience. I like taking a punt but not one that could see the player's confidence shattered after 1 game at the highest level.

Maddinson is too inconsistent for me.

I'm hoping for Sayers to get the nod over Bird, purely from a South Aussie point of view.

I will throw a challenge to you Keaton, how many games of shield did Michael Slater and Michael Clarke both play before wearing the baggy green?

Regardless of games played at whatever level, selector/mentors have been watching many of these debutants for most of their teenage years. They are often identified young and nurtured to stay in cricket as retention of players in this great sport is one of the worst. Off topic for one moment, my nephew, at the tender age of 11, has Andy Bichel and Michael Kasprowicz as his mentors. He was approached by QLD cricket when 10 and they expressed there interest in keeping him involved in cricket and didn't want to lose him to other more popular sports.

Back on topic, Renshaw has the talent and most importantly, knows how to leave a ball outside off stump. He is a test player through and through, not an ODI or T20 player. Today, I believe the mistake is often made that we choose players who can score quickly and throw there bat about. IMHO, that's not test cricket, that's smash and bash. Same for bowlers, we need to select bowlers who want to bowl, not rest after 4 overs...

The Aussies currently only have 3 players who have played more than 30 tests. They don't have that anchor or smart head that can lead them when the chips are down... rotating and resting will make his hard but Australian cricket needs to select players who have the right temperament to focus on test cricket. I believe Renshaw has this.

I had the pleasure of watching QLD beat SA today not from a winning/losing perspective, but a bloody good game of good ol fashioned cricket where it went to the wire. 12 balls to go and a result was had. A real thriller. Batsmen defending and bowlers attacking! That's why I love shield and test cricket, it's a war and the battle can swing at any moment, with the chance to re group and plan your next move.

 

[Keatoboy]

I will throw a challenge to you Keaton, how many games of shield did Michael Slater and Michael Clarke both play before wearing the baggy green?

Regardless of games played at whatever level, selector/mentors have been watching many of these debutants for most of their teenage years. They are often identified young and nurtured to stay in cricket as retention of players in this great sport is one of the worst. Off topic for one moment, my nephew, at the tender age of 11, has Andy Bichel and Michael Kasprowicz as his mentors. He was approached by QLD cricket when 10 and they expressed there interest in keeping him involved in cricket and didn't want to lose him to other more popular sports.

Back on topic, Renshaw has the talent and most importantly, knows how to leave a ball outside off stump. He is a test player through and through, not an ODI or T20 player. Today, I believe the mistake is often made that we choose players who can score quickly and throw there bat about. IMHO, that's not test cricket, that's smash and bash. Same for bowlers, we need to select bowlers who want to bowl, not rest after 4 overs...

The Aussies currently only have 3 players who have played more than 30 tests. They don't have that anchor or smart head that can lead them when the chips are down... rotating and resting will make his hard but Australian cricket needs to select players who have the right temperament to focus on test cricket. I believe Renshaw has this.

I had the pleasure of watching QLD beat SA today not from a winning/losing perspective, but a bloody good game of good ol fashioned cricket where it went to the wire. 12 balls to go and a result was had. A real thriller. Batsmen defending and bowlers attacking! That's why I love shield and test cricket, it's a war and the battle can swing at any moment, with the chance to re group and plan your next move.

You make a fair point and I respect your opinion. In response to your question, Michael Clarke played 32 games of shield (31 if I miscounted) and and 12 games of county cricket. I'm unsure of Slats' stats.

Matt Renshaw could be the next big thing for Australian cricket, but I can't help but feel that he's being thrown to the hounds.

 

[aussiecricketer]

You make a fair point and I respect your opinion. In response to your question, Michael Clarke played 32 games of shield (31 if I miscounted) and and 12 games of county cricket. I'm unsure of Slats' stats.

Matt Renshaw could be the next big thing for Australian cricket, but I can't help but feel that he's being thrown to the hounds.

I hope not mate, in fact I hope no player is thrown to those damn hounds!! Regardless of state or games played, you pick a player on their merits and give them a red hot crack! One game doesn't constitute this!

 

[Keatoboy]

I hope not mate, in fact I hope no player is thrown to those damn hounds!! Regardless of state or games played, you pick a player on their merits and give them a red hot crack! One game doesn't constitute this!

And I think that is the point that @Wookiedragon was making about Ferguson and Mennie Michael Hussey said the same thing too

 

[aussiecricketer]

And I think that is the point that @Wookiedragon was making about Ferguson and Mennie Michael Hussey said the same thing too

In which I totally agree with Wookie!!

 

[220]

Wade selection is the only one I have real issue with, he is not to Neville's standard behind the stumps, if they were looking for a batsman keeper then they have picked one in Handscomb.
Lyon was lucky, from reports SOK was set to get the nod ahead of him until injured.
Patterson was unlucky very similar record to Renshaw but with a few more years of shield cricket experience under his belt. I hope Renshaw makes a go of it and doesn't mirror Haydens early test career.
Don't think Maddinson is quite there as a test batsman, I think his selection is partly due to his ability to roll the arm over and if he plays Lyon wont.

 

[Scotty_WCE]

Wade selection is the only one I have real issue with, he is not to Neville's standard behind the stumps, if they were looking for a batsman keeper then they have picked one in Handscomb.
Lyon was lucky, from reports SOK was set to get the nod ahead of him until injured.
Patterson was unlucky very similar record to Renshaw but with a few more years of shield cricket experience under his belt. I hope Renshaw makes a go of it and doesn't mirror Haydens early test career.
Don't think Maddinson is quite there as a test batsman, I think his selection is partly due to his ability to roll the arm over and if he plays Lyon wont.

Maddinson will definitely play as there are only six batsmen in the squad. Since we aren't playing any all-rounders Lyon will surely play as well; you wouldn't play four quicks with no-one to give them a rest. Maddinson wouldn't bowl enough overs to cover this. I honestly don't think his spin would've been a factor in his selection.

 

[220]

Didn't mean I expected Maddinson to bowl the number of overs Lyon would, but Maddinson, Smith & Warner between them could certainly offer a few options and get through a few overs to give the quicks a spell.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

FFS - Wade is colourblind and can't easily pick up the pink ball.

Maybe Matador can sponsor Wade's helmet...plaster the target on the side of it...free sausage sizzles to the crowd every time Rabada cleaves his head orf!?