Fighting Zone !

MI wrote:Out Of 23 Matches t20 Faulkner Played ..He Played Only Once in the position 3 (was against perth )and never played 4 :O

His Main Position Is At 8th :O

MadMax wrote:

MI wrote:Out Of 23 Matches t20 Faulkner Played ..He Played Only Once in the position 3 (was against perth )and never played 4 :O

His Main Position Is At 8th :O

this is absolutely Joke of the century

Main position is 8th

he batted only twice at 8th that too in his early career

even watson came at 7th so thats his main position or what

Faulkner main position is 6th or 7th ..

now understand..

brb having dinner

MadMax wrote:

MI wrote:Out Of 23 Matches t20 Faulkner Played ..He Played Only Once in the position 3 (was against perth )and never played 4

His Main Position Is At 8th

this is absolutely Joke of the century

Main position is 8th

he batted only twice at 8th that too in his early career

even watson came at 7th so thats his main position or what

Faulkner main position is 6th or 7th ..

now understand..

brb having dinner

Viresh wrote:

MadMax wrote:

MI wrote:Out Of 23 Matches t20 Faulkner Played ..He Played Only Once in the position 3 (was against perth )and never played 4

His Main Position Is At 8th

this is absolutely Joke of the century

Main position is 8th

he batted only twice at 8th that too in his early career

even watson came at 7th so thats his main position or what

Faulkner main position is 6th or 7th ..

now understand..

brb having dinner

Does Position matters ?


Anywayz provide the SC link!

MadMax wrote:I go with James Faulkner.James Faulkner deserved a chance in test ahead of Rob Quiney.
Faulkner did very well for Tasmania with the bat and with the ball as well.

Going with Faulkner also gives Punter to bat at 3rd and also give them an bowler.faulkner can swing the ball both ways and he can bowl at good pace as well a tough above 140.

He can bat at 7 position which gives Punter and Clarke to move up the order.

Faulkner would have perfectly filled the place of Watson and also give balance to the team..

Syed Aqi wrote:

Rish wrote:I think David Hussey is a better choice...

Naah i dont agree i say Andrew Mcdonald would had been the better choice he can bat well he can bowl well he is a genuine all rounder who can trouble the batters with the bowl and can contribute well with the bat

MadMax wrote:

Rish wrote:I think David Hussey is a better choice...

i dont agree at all

They lacked the Variation in the bowling

all are right arm pacers
They lacked in a left arm bolwer

With Left arm Pace of Faulkner and ball swinging back into the right hander

that would have been really threat to the protea batsman

and Faulkner is a decent batsman ..he can score 50 odd runs by coming at 7 which is always useful

and he is a big hitter of Cricket ball

that would have been handy instead of Right arm off spin of DAve which is as same as Nathan Lyon

MadMax wrote:

Syed Aqi wrote:

Rish wrote:I think David Hussey is a better choice...

Naah i dont agree i say Andrew Mcdonald would had been the better choice he can bat well he can bowl well he is a genuine all rounder who can trouble the batters with the bowl and can contribute well with the bat

McDonald is also not a good addition to have
Bowls medium pace which South african batsman can easily face and not a proper batsman..

Already Aussies have Dave Warner as hitter then Why McDonald ??

of no use :bitch:

MadMax wrote:

Arjun wrote:@SJ FOR THE SAKE OF A FIGHT I PREFER DAN CHRISTIAN RATHER THAN FAULKNER :bitch:

Well Dan
Dan is an ODI customer not a Test Cricket

He has even worse Technique than Brett Lee
and his stats are worse as LuKe Butterworth

and as far as Aussies are concerned they needed one who can bat ..
Dan hasnt got yet a 50 in ODI ..

How can he be taken in to Test :bitch: :bitch: :bitch: :bitch:

Syed Aqi wrote:

MadMax wrote:

Syed Aqi wrote:

Rish wrote:I think David Hussey is a better choice...

Naah i dont agree i say Andrew Mcdonald would had been the better choice he can bat well he can bowl well he is a genuine all rounder who can trouble the batters with the bowl and can contribute well with the bat

McDonald is also not a good addition to have
Bowls medium pace which South african batsman can easily face and not a proper batsman..

Already Aussies have Dave Warner as hitter then Why McDonald ??

of no use

did you forgot previous vodafone test series aus vs rsa

mcdonald was pretty decent with the ball and was handy with the bat against the same side he has capability to pick wickets

Mcdonald is a hitter i agree but he adopts test situation pretty good so u cant neglect him

MadMax wrote:

Raminder wrote:James Faulkner and Luke Butterworth

Both of them aren't ready for Int. Test Level.
They are good club cricketer and he need to improve if they want a place in Playing XI.
So Quiney is a good choice.

And if you want an all rounder in the test squad ..then i think Watson is good and the other guy who can play is Mitchell Marsh.

Mitch is much much better than all the above all-rounder you mentioned !

Mitchell Marsh is more of an Batsman now

He isnt bowling well ..
he bowls his full quota but in test cricket you need to take wickets not to complete ur quota of Overs..

Faulkner is best among all at present in Aus Domestic Cricket..

They already have 3 Right arm pacers..
they need a bit of Variety in them

and Marsh has got no Swing ..he just bowls in one length thats it

MadMax wrote:

Syed Aqi wrote:

MadMax wrote:

Syed Aqi wrote:

Rish wrote:I think David Hussey is a better choice...

Naah i dont agree i say Andrew Mcdonald would had been the better choice he can bat well he can bowl well he is a genuine all rounder who can trouble the batters with the bowl and can contribute well with the bat

McDonald is also not a good addition to have
Bowls medium pace which South african batsman can easily face and not a proper batsman..

Already Aussies have Dave Warner as hitter then Why McDonald ??

of no use

did you forgot previous vodafone test series aus vs rsa

mcdonald was pretty decent with the ball and was handy with the bat against the same side he has capability to pick wickets

Mcdonald is a hitter i agree but he adopts test situation pretty good so u cant neglect him

McDonald had pretty good series ??

Forgot how Steyn and Duminy thrashed him at the MCG ??
and at perth too he got the battering what he needed and he deserved that

McDonald's Fc Batting average is 39 and bowling average is 28 ...

and his intl Test average is 21 and bowling average in tests is 33
in 4 test matches he scored 107 runs in which 68 runs came in an Innings

that shows how good he is in batting and when comes to bowling
His best was 3/25 at DURBAN..

only once he took 3 wickets

where as Faulner's average in FC is 25 in batting which is bit less

but his bowling average is outstanding 22.99
he recently scored two half centuries in Sheffield and got a five for as well

So he is in FORM player and he could have been handy instead of Rob Quiney..

Viresh wrote:My Pick : Moises Henriques


As Aggressive as Shane Watson !
Averages abv 50 in First Class
Bowling Avg : 27.67 - Not Bad

His performance in last 3 FC :
6 runs | 0 wickets
161* runs , 50* | 3 wickets
78 runs | 4 wickets



So he was better replacement for Watson who can bat + bowl!

James Faulkner is a bowling all rounder....

Aus need a batting all rounder or a pure batsman ...

Score Update ;)
Australia 40/3 (9.3 ov)

So i don't think he is a better choice...



Or if u want a pure batsman in ur team , Khawaja was far far better than Rob Quiney .
Inclusion of Khawaja would have strengthened the OZ batting

MadMax wrote:

Viresh wrote:My Pick : Moises Henriques


As Aggressive as Shane Watson !
Averages abv 50 in First Class
Bowling Avg : 27.67 - Not Bad

His performance in last 3 FC :
6 runs | 0 wickets
161* runs , 50* | 3 wickets
78 runs | 4 wickets



So he was better replacement for Watson who can bat + bowl!

James Faulkner is a bowling all rounder....

Aus need a batting all rounder or a pure batsman ...

Score Update ;)
Australia 40/3 (9.3 ov)

So i don't think he was a better choice...



Or if u want a pure batsman in ur team , Khawaja was far far better than Rob Quiney .
Inclusion of Khawaja would have strengthened the OZ batting

Even if Moises was there saf would have scored 450 because he is nothing infront of Siddle,HIlfy,Pattinson

but where as Faulkner can bring the ball into or can get it away
he can bat as well
even Faulkner has 2 50's in his last 3 FC's
and a wicket haul and two Four wicket hauls

So inclusion of faulkner would have helped him in bowling and a bit in batting as well

Moises is Similar to that of Rob Quiney

and Siddle can bat as well
So they need a bowler with variety

they have got all same bowlers
that pushed them back

If Starc would have been taken instead of Siddle then it could have set the balance of the team

Faulkner is best in choice as far as i reckon

Moises is kinda Hitter as well

doesnt have that patience

Viresh wrote:2 50s in last 3 FCs ?
LOL :lol:

He didn't even manage to score 37+ in his last 5 matches

And Moises has been in top form and i again say Australia need a batting all rounder not bowling all rounder...

MadMax wrote:

Viresh wrote:2 50s in last 3 FCs ?
LOL :lol:

He didn't even manage to score 37+ in his last 5 matches

And Moises has been in top form and i again say Australia need a batting all rounder not bowling all rounder...

oh yeah sorry that was Luke i was confused

and Faulkner's scores in last 5 Fc's
37*,38,30*,32 and with ball he has got 5/23,4/98, and a couple of 2 for and three times 1 for

so he has been also in Top notch batting at Number 7

remember faulkner is a No 7
and Moises bats above

and if there was a bowling all rounder like Faulkner he would have taken some wickets and as a result Saf wouldnt have scored 450

So then There woudlnt have been such a huge score on the board

and as always Proteas batsman are used to playing Ball swinging away

and Moises doesnt get ball in..so he would have been just like some other Rob Quiney or mike hussey

Faulkner is a best choice among all

if in case they had to take Moises ..Mitchy is lot better than him

MadMax wrote:

NICK wrote:U guys missd a young talent.yea he isnt experiencd..bt itz tym to include him in Aus team...He should be included in the final 11.Iam Talkng abt Glen MAXWELL.

Glenn is a T20 guy
not useful for tests

His offies are even worse than Lyon's

Viresh wrote:

MadMax wrote:

oh yeah sorry that was Luke i was confused

and Faulkner's scores in last 5 Fc's
37*,38,30*,32 and with ball he has got 5/23,4/98, and a couple of 2 for and three times 1 for

so he has been also in Top notch batting at Number 7

remember faulkner is a No 7
and Moises bats above

and if there was a bowling all rounder like Faulkner he would have taken some wickets and as a result Saf wouldnt have scored 450

So then There woudlnt have been such a huge score on the board

and as always Proteas batsman are used to playing Ball swinging away

and Moises doesnt get ball in..so he would have been just like some other Rob Quiney or mike hussey

Faulkner is a best choice among all

if in case they had to take Moises ..Mitchy is lot better than him

Wrong again :O
Faulkner's last 5 FC matches:

• 1 & 4
  
• 2 & 18
  
• 30*
  
• DNB
  

• 28 & 0
  

And Moises bats abv? :shock: :shock: :shock:

Moises took two 2 wkt haul & a 3 wkt haul ..
Not bad as being a batting all rounder!


When u have Siddle , Pattinson & Hilfenhaus in ur team , why u still want Bowling all rounder in ur team? :O


Moises got 70 FC wkts in 50 inngs ...
Isn't it good enough ?


And debate is going on between Faulkner and Moises , so don't bring MJ here

MadMax wrote:

Viresh wrote:

MadMax wrote:

oh yeah sorry that was Luke i was confused

and Faulkner's scores in last 5 Fc's
37*,38,30*,32 and with ball he has got 5/23,4/98, and a couple of 2 for and three times 1 for

so he has been also in Top notch batting at Number 7

remember faulkner is a No 7
and Moises bats above

and if there was a bowling all rounder like Faulkner he would have taken some wickets and as a result Saf wouldnt have scored 450

So then There woudlnt have been such a huge score on the board

and as always Proteas batsman are used to playing Ball swinging away

and Moises doesnt get ball in..so he would have been just like some other Rob Quiney or mike hussey

Faulkner is a best choice among all

if in case they had to take Moises ..Mitchy is lot better than him

Wrong again :O
Faulkner's last 5 FC matches:

• 1 & 4
  
• 2 & 18
  
• 30*
  
• DNB
  

• 28 & 0
  

And Moises bats abv? :shock: :shock: :shock:

Moises took two 2 wkt haul & a 3 wkt haul ..
Not bad as being a batting all rounder!


When u have Siddle , Pattinson & Hilfenhaus in ur team , why u still want Bowling all rounder in ur team? :O


Moises got 70 FC wkts in 50 inngs ...
Isn't it good enough ?


And debate is going on between Faulkner and Moises , so don't bring MJ here

nah nah he scored 30* vs Victoria and 28 against NSW

that what even i am saying
when u have Siddle,Hilfy,Pattinson in ur team why u need another Right hand bowler
You need a bowler who can take wickets and bat as well

Faulkner is a lefty and can bat as well

He is just similar to Starc in bowling

So Faulkner ahead of Quiney would have given them an extra option in bowling and a decent batsman as well

and Moises isnt as good as Faulkner i guess and Moises FC average is just 31 and Bowling is 27

so almost bit below Faulkner..

Aussies now need a bowler who can bat and bowl well as well

Watson is a WICKET TAKER not a guy who completes 20 overs quickly

Watson is used as Partnership breaker and a Wicket Taker..

MadMax wrote:

Viresh wrote:

NICK wrote:

MadMax wrote:

NICK wrote:U guys missd a young talent.yea he isnt experiencd..bt itz tym to include him in Aus team...He should be included in the final 11.Iam Talkng abt Glen MAXWELL.

Glenn is a T20 guy not useful for testsHis offies are even worse than Lyon's

He has a grt record in Fc,i gues he avg above 40+ that too in 10 or 11 matchz...He is a playng a imp role for Victoria in ryobi cup too..

Averaging 40+ in 10 or 11 matches is not great

And yea he is inform , scoring 50+ in every match and picking 1+ wkt
But he need some experience in domestic level...

u already have Lyon as an Off Spinner

i dont think aus need another off spinner..

and all know how good Kallis and Amla are at playing Spin bowlling

How they took apart Lyon was just amazing and pleasure to watch

Viresh wrote:

nah nah he scored 30* vs Victoria and 28 against NSW

that what even i am saying
when u have Siddle,Hilfy,Pattinson in ur team why u need another Right hand bowler
You need a bowler who can take wickets and bat as well

Faulkner is a lefty and can bat as well

He is just similar to Starc in bowling

So Faulkner ahead of Quiney would have given them an extra option in bowling and a decent batsman as well

and Moises isnt as good as Faulkner i guess and Moises FC average is just 31 and Bowling is 27

so almost bit below Faulkner..

Aussies now need a bowler who can bat and bowl well as well

Watson is a WICKET TAKER not a guy who completes 20 overs quickly

Watson is used as Partnership breaker and a Wicket Taker..

U said :

Faulkner's scores in last 5 Fc's
37*,38,30*,32

:O

And even Moises Henrique is a partnership breaker ..
And he is not a guy who will bowl more than regular bowlers ;)


Saying u again :
Moises is a batting all rounder | Faulkner is a bowling all rounder
so obviously his bowl avg need not to be better than Faulkner

Moises Bowl Avg : 27.67 | Bat : 31.07 ( 60 inngs )
Faulkner Bowl Avg : 22.99 | Bat : 25.02 ( 40 inngs )

NICK wrote:

Viresh wrote:

NICK wrote:

MadMax wrote:

NICK wrote:U guys missd a young talent.yea he isnt experiencd..bt itz tym to include him in Aus team...He should be included in the final 11.Iam Talkng abt Glen MAXWELL.

Glenn is a T20 guy not useful for testsHis offies are even worse than Lyon's

He has a grt record in Fc,i gues he avg above 40+ that too in 10 or 11 matchz...He is a playng a imp role for Victoria in ryobi cup too..

Averaging 40+ in 10 or 11 matches is not great And yea he is inform , scoring 50+ in every match and picking 1+ wkt But he need some experience in domestic level...

th wat u want frm a guy who jst startd hz career.he has a gud technque that is suitable for test crickt..And i dnt thnk faulkner is a suitable replacememt...aus team doesnt need a bowlng alround.they jst need a pure batsman as of now...Glen maxwel is the mst suitable for that spot

Viresh wrote:

NICK wrote:

Viresh wrote:

NICK wrote:

MadMax wrote:

NICK wrote:U guys missd a young talent.yea he isnt experiencd..bt itz tym to include him in Aus team...He should be included in the final 11.Iam Talkng abt Glen MAXWELL.

Glenn is a T20 guy not useful for testsHis offies are even worse than Lyon's

He has a grt record in Fc,i gues he avg above 40+ that too in 10 or 11 matchz...He is a playng a imp role for Victoria in ryobi cup too..

Averaging 40+ in 10 or 11 matches is not great And yea he is inform , scoring 50+ in every match and picking 1+ wkt But he need some experience in domestic level...

th wat u want frm a guy who jst startd hz career.he has a gud technque that is suitable for test crickt..And i dnt thnk faulkner is a suitable replacememt...aus team doesnt need a bowlng alround.they jst need a pure batsman as of now...Glen maxwel is the mst suitable for that spot

Glenn Maxwell is not good as a pure batsman :O

Hughes & Khawaja are far better than him as a pure batsman..

NICK wrote:

Viresh wrote:

NICK wrote:

Viresh wrote:

NICK wrote:

MadMax wrote:

NICK wrote:U guys missd a young talent.yea he isnt experiencd..bt itz tym to include him in Aus team...He should be included in the final 11.Iam Talkng abt Glen MAXWELL.

Glenn is a T20 guy not useful for testsHis offies are even worse than Lyon's

He has a grt record in Fc,i gues he avg above 40+ that too in 10 or 11 matchz...He is a playng a imp role for Victoria in ryobi cup too..

Averaging 40+ in 10 or 11 matches is not great And yea he is inform , scoring 50+ in every match and picking 1+ wkt But he need some experience in domestic level...

th wat u want frm a guy who jst startd hz career.he has a gud technque that is suitable for test crickt..And i dnt thnk faulkner is a suitable replacememt...aus team doesnt need a bowlng alround.they jst need a pure batsman as of now...Glen maxwel is the mst suitable for that spot

Glenn Maxwell is not good as a pure batsman Hughes & Khawaja are far better than him as a pure batsman..

maxwel has improvd a lot :O he is the future of aus bating line up :O And khawaja scord a 100+ tis week..i agre khawaja is a grt bat..bt presntly maxwel deservs a chance in the test team :O

Viresh wrote:SO u wanna say Maxwell bats well than Khawaja ?

Khawaja Last 6 Matches :

• 138
  
• 54, 54
  
• 19, 26
  
• 28, 3
  
• 88, 20
  
• 71, 72*
  

So u think Maxwell still a better batsman than Khawaja?

@arjun im FOR Khawaja , Nick is against

MadMax wrote:

Viresh wrote:

nah nah he scored 30* vs Victoria and 28 against NSW

that what even i am saying
when u have Siddle,Hilfy,Pattinson in ur team why u need another Right hand bowler
You need a bowler who can take wickets and bat as well

Faulkner is a lefty and can bat as well

He is just similar to Starc in bowling

So Faulkner ahead of Quiney would have given them an extra option in bowling and a decent batsman as well

and Moises isnt as good as Faulkner i guess and Moises FC average is just 31 and Bowling is 27

so almost bit below Faulkner..

Aussies now need a bowler who can bat and bowl well as well

Watson is a WICKET TAKER not a guy who completes 20 overs quickly

Watson is used as Partnership breaker and a Wicket Taker..

U said :

Faulkner's scores in last 5 Fc's
37*,38,30*,32

:O

And even Moises Henrique is a partnership breaker ..
And he is not a guy who will bowl more than regular bowlers ;)


Saying u again :
Moises is a batting all rounder | Faulkner is a bowling all rounder
so obviously his bowl avg need not to be better than Faulkner

Moises Bowl Avg : 27.67 | Bat : 31.07 ( 60 inngs )
Faulkner Bowl Avg : 22.99 | Bat : 25.02 ( 40 inngs )

Well well well

I am saying again now
There are already 3 RIGHT ARM QUICKS
I dont think a guy who doesnt even swing the ball either way will be a threat to the batsman who thrashed the three BEST QUICKS in AUs at present

A Variation in bowling would have helped him a lot
Faulkner is that kinda guy
and the batting average just differs a bit because Moises played more innings than Faulkner and Moises bats up the order rather than Faulkner

Moises sometimes opens the innings some times comes at 1 down

So usually Batting average will be a bit higher

and Yes Moises is a batting all rounder

when u already have 3 Right arm quicks then why u need another Right arm Fast Medium to come in and bowl ..??

You only need Moises for batting ? then Khawaja is a better option because he scored Century on a Greenish tinge pitch (remember Tasmania the home team was all out for 98 odd)

So Faulkner is a better option than Moises...because Faulkner does swing the ball both ways and a threat to batsman and adds variety in the bowling rather than having another Right arm pacer

and Mind you Moises doesnt have that Swing which those 3 quicks have..

Viresh wrote:Im saying u again , OZ need a batting all rounder rather than bowling all rounder...

When u already have 3 bowlers who can swing then whats the use of Faulkner ?

If u want Faulkner then take him in the line up by dropping one bowler out of 3 bowlers...

Im saying again : FAULKNER IS BETTER THAN MOISES IN BOWLING...but he is not as good as Moises in being good replacementfor Watson!

OZ need batting all rounder not bowling all rounder!

You only need Moises for batting ? then Khawaja is a better option
because he scored Century on a Greenish tinge pitch (remember Tasmania
the home team was all out for 98 odd)

OZ need BATTING ALL ROUNDER who can bat and have the capability to break partnerships ...

MadMax wrote:

Viresh wrote:Im saying u again , OZ need a batting all rounder rather than bowling all rounder...

When u already have 3 bowlers who can swing then whats the use of Faulkner ?

If u want Faulkner then take him in the line up by dropping one bowler out of 3 bowlers...

Im saying again : FAULKNER IS BETTER THAN MOISES IN BOWLING...but he is not as good as Moises in being good replacementfor Watson!

OZ need batting all rounder not bowling all rounder!

You only need Moises for batting ? then Khawaja is a better option
because he scored Century on a Greenish tinge pitch (remember Tasmania
the home team was all out for 98 odd)

OZ need BATTING ALL ROUNDER who can bat and have the capability to break partnerships ...

i dont think u are getting me...
You need Faulkner to have some variety in the bowling ...

The Batsman get used to face the Right arm bowlers..

When the three quicks cant get rid off the batsman then how can Moises tell me..
The thing is that they need a bowler who can swing into the batsman and who has some variety in him

Left Arm Bowler would have been good and superbly balanced the team..

and Faulkner CAN bat as well.

Being born in Aus and brought on The bEllerive Pitch he has to be a GOod Puller of the ball..

So Faulkner is that kinda guy who can BAT decently and Bowl SUPERBLY

If they get in Moises they will only be benefitted in batting but not in Bowling

where as if they get in Faulkner they could get benefitted in Bowling and as well as Batting a bit too..

Faulkner comes in at 7 at that time all Bowlers would be little tired off and So Faulkner can play his Natural Hitting game..But if Moises comes into team he has to bat at 4 because Punter Moves to 3 and everyone knnows that Clarke is Superb when he comes out at no 5..

So getting IN faulkner would be very much beneficial and adds good balance to the team

Moises is just equal to Rob Quiney and Michael Hussey

Bowls Medium pace and Bats as well..

Saad Shafi Ahmed wrote:

Is it good to replace an all rounder with a Pure Batsman instead an All rounder ?

No It is not good to have an All rounder replaced by a pure batsmen as they will miss their fifth bowler and it is quite nessecary to have an allrounder in a test match atleast 1

Viresh wrote:

MadMax wrote:

i dont think u are getting me...
You need Faulkner to have some variety in the bowling ...

The Batsman get used to face the Right arm bowlers..

When the three quicks cant get rid off the batsman then how can Moises tell me..
The thing is that they need a bowler who can swing into the batsman and who has some variety in him

Left Arm Bowler would have been good and superbly balanced the team..

and Faulkner CAN bat as well.

Being born in Aus and brought on The bEllerive Pitch he has to be a GOod Puller of the ball..

So Faulkner is that kinda guy who can BAT decently and Bowl SUPERBLY

If they get in Moises they will only be benefitted in batting but not in Bowling

where as if they get in Faulkner they could get benefitted in Bowling and as well as Batting a bit too..

Faulkner comes in at 7 at that time all Bowlers would be little tired off and So Faulkner can play his Natural Hitting game..But if Moises comes into team he has to bat at 4 because Punter Moves to 3 and everyone knnows that Clarke is Superb when he comes out at no 5..

So getting IN faulkner would be very much beneficial and adds good balance to the team

Moises is just equal to Rob Quiney and Michael Hussey

Bowls Medium pace and Bats as well..

You need Faulkner to have some variety in the bowling
The Batsman get used to face the Right arm bowlers..

Look at his bowling stats.. :O
70 wickets in 50 Inngs
Its good enough to be a bowler!!!
Bowling Style doesn't matters here...
Even Watson was right arm bowler...
So there is no wrong in replacing Watson with Moises......

Im saying again and again OZ need a BATSMAN who have capability to pick wickets ( to break partnership )
Moises CAN!!

When the three quicks cant get rid off the batsman then how can Moises tell me..

So drop all three bowlers from the team and pick others na? ...
The topic is who is the better replacement for Watson not who bowls better......

Moises is just equal to Rob Quiney and Michael Hussey

LOL ...
Rob Quiney just have 3 wickets in FC where as Moises have 23*3=69+1=70 wickets ..
The probability that Rob Quiney bowls is very very less just like finding spam post of Deep Dey and he is part time bowler :O

Bowls Medium pace and Bats as well..

So wat ?
Medium Pace ain't good for tests ?
Even Faulkner is Medium Pacer ..
Faulkner : Bowling style Left-arm medium
Moises : Bowling style Right-arm fast-medium



As said by u :

You need Faulkner to have some variety in the bowling

Hifenhaus ,Siddle & Pattinson are fast bowlers while Moises is medium pacer ..
So isn't there variety? ;)
So don't look at their bowling style....
Even Pattinson have same bowling style as Moises.. :O

Faulkner comes in at 7 at that time all Bowlers would be little tired
off and So Faulkner can play his Natural Hitting game..But if Moises
comes into team he has to bat at 4 because Punter Moves to 3 and
everyone knnows that Clarke is Superb when he comes out at no 5

at 4? :shock: :shock:
Moises bats at 6/7 :O
And he is BEST at that position ...

So Faulkner is that kinda guy who can BAT decently and Bowl SUPERBLY

Moises is the guy who can pick wickets and can break partnership .. and BATS superbly
OZ need such player...

Viresh wrote:Rob Quiney is good as an opener.. so he shuld replace David Warner
He is agressive too.

MI wrote:

MadMax wrote:

2nd topic

2) Is it a fair decision to give Rob Quiney a place in test team ahead of James Faulkner,Luke Butterworth,Moises Henriques,Andrew McDonald,Steve Smith,Dan Christian etc..

is it good to replace an all rounder with a Pure Batsman instead an All rounder ?

Please do post against whom u wanna fight as well.

Do Fight hard..
MadMax/-

I Am With Daniel Christian

Ofcourse HE Is the best choice
His Average Is Quiet Good

And AMong The above players he is the most experienced one also

Sanjay wrote:dan christian is one of the worst all rounders i hav ever seen :bitch:
And wats wrong in giving a guy his first chance

Saad Shafi Ahmed wrote:

MI wrote:

MadMax wrote:

2nd topic

2) Is it a fair decision to give Rob Quiney a place in test team ahead of James Faulkner,Luke Butterworth,Moises Henriques,Andrew McDonald,Steve Smith,Dan Christian etc..

is it good to replace an all rounder with a Pure Batsman instead an All rounder ?

Please do post against whom u wanna fight as well.

Do Fight hard..
MadMax/-

I Am With Daniel Christian

Ofcourse HE Is the best choice
His Average Is Quiet Good

And AMong The above players he is the most experienced one also

But iving Quiney chance is also a good choice as he is performing excellnt in First Clss and List A

sai wrote:Watson is also a Right arm bowler but u cant compare Moises with Watson
Watson is a guy who is capable of picking wickets at regular intervals the thing HE IS USED AS PARTNERSHIP BREAKER

Moises dont have that Ability of breaking partnerships
If you Check Sheffield matches most of the wickets Moises took were of Tail Enders..

Even Sreesanth picks wickets of tail enders so you cant say that Sreesanth is better bowler than Zaheer

Moises isnt much as good as Faulkner where as he is slightly a touch above in batting..

Aus need an all rounder who can bat decently and bowl quite well as Shane Watson

FAulkner can do that..

So varying of the pace doesnt matter here..because if he have Variation in pace thats it or what

In test Cricket you need to Swing the ball and pitch the ball in right areas..that will cause problems..

Mind you if u ever saw Moises Bowling in ODI that was disastrous because he always pitches it in Full or else bangs in short..

I dont think so Kallis,Abd,Amla arent good enough in playing him while they played those three quicks.
quite well

Faulkner was very impressive with his accurate Line and length and ability of Swinging ball both ways ..

and He is a decent batsman ..A guy who has scored 5 fifties in 41 innings with an average of 25 by playing at 7 is good enough i guess..

where as Moises scored 10 fifties and a century in 61 innings averaging 31..Thats not quite good for a BATTING all rounder ..

so ..what i say is If There was Starc in the line up Moises would have been handy and good pick but as there is no Starc The guy who deserves to be picked ahead of Quiney is James Faulkner.

thats for sure..

sai wrote:Can i know why u prefer Dan ahead of Faulkner ??

Averaing 29 in FC which is just above Faulkner
and averages 34 as a bowler in FC

thats poor record to have in FC..
and he hasnt done anything OUTSTANDING in ODI nor in FC to give him a Chance in test Squad

So The worse ever option you can have after Steve Smith in test cricket is dan Christian

sai wrote:Giving a PURE BATSMAN a chance in place of an ALL ROUNDER isnt good enough

I agree Quiney performed OUTSTANDINGLY in last years Sheffield and Ryobi Cup he has been the Key player afer Bradley for Victoria but he isnt good to repalce Watto

If he replaces Warner or Cowan i would be the first one to feel HAPPY in the world

fardin wrote:Supposingly, you didn't understand the main motto to bring Quiney. Watson is a No.3 or an opener. It was obvious he was going to play at NO.3 this series as Cowan and Warner are there to open the innings. Now Quiney was brought in as he has good skills of an batsmen and can be up the order. At this moment, switching Watson with someone like D. Christian, S. Smith would mean that they would have to disturb the finishing order and hence the top orders would have to go up a spot. In order to main their tail ender and the top order combination, they chose Quiney over everyone else

sai wrote:Watson said even before the series that he is going to bat at 4 and Punter will bat his fav spot no 3
and Michael Clake will be at his best position no 5

So obviously there is no need to bring in Quiney because Watson will be at 4 and they could have brought in Faulkner and thus they could have made sure that Punter will be 3,Clarke at 4,Hussey 5,Wade 6 and Faulkner at 7 .

Faulkner is kinda player like Gilchrist who likes to HIT the ball and FAulkner is a sweet timer of the ball

and more over FAulkner can bowl Superbly even better than some quicks in the XI.

The thing they brought in Quiney just because he scored 85 Vs South Africans..

thats only reason they brought in

sai wrote:Moises can do that but Faulkner is better than Moises

addin moises means there will be four same kinda bowlers..

So batsman get used to it so that they can play them as easy as they can

Getting in Faulkner adds Left and Right Combo and Good Balance to the team as well

thats what i can say

sai wrote:Watson was there FOR HIS BOWLING AS WELL

Watson always gave them a breakthrough when it was needed

he was also there for bowling

if he wasnt there for bowling then why he wouldnt have been allowed to bowl in CLt20 2011 ?

because if he bowls that will ensure that his back wouldnt be set right by Saf vs aus series 2011 and he cant bowl

They also needed him for Bowling ..

If watto was there in this match

i am sure they would have gone with Starc instead of hilfy or Pattinson

NICK wrote:Dan christian the best choice? Sory i nevr agree with u...1st let hm prove in Odi format,thn cme to the test arena.at present conditn he is jst a t20 material :O and acordng to me if u ask who deserves a chance among faulkner and Moises,thn i wil go with moises bze as vm said Aus doesnt neEd a bowl alroundr,instead they need a batng alroundr who needs to bATS wel and handy with the bowl....As per my choice i Want Glen maxwel Or Khawaja in the team..Maxwel has already provd that he is gud at longr format.so itz tym to CA to includ him in the longer format as he is young,energetic,talentd and dnt try to create a New brad hodge..khawaja has scord a 100+ tis week in shieldcup..he has shown glimpse of form...bt he needs to be consistant.he has a grt record in fc as he avg 40+. he is the anthr best gud replacement 4 quiny.Bt my Vote goes to Maxwel as he is a pure bat and can bowl sme off spins toO

Ishaq wrote:

NICK wrote:Dan christian the best choice? Sory i nevr agree with u...1st let hm prove in Odi format,thn cme to the test arena.at present conditn he is jst a t20 material and acordng to me if u ask who deserves a chance among faulkner and Moises,thn i wil go with moises bze as vm said Aus doesnt neEd a bowl alroundr,instead they need a batng alroundr who needs to bATS wel and handy with the bowl....As per my choice i Want Glen maxwel Or Khawaja in the team..Maxwel has already provd that he is gud at longr format.so itz tym to CA to includ him in the longer format as he is young,energetic,talentd and dnt try to create a New brad hodge..khawaja has scord a 100+ tis week in shieldcup..he has shown glimpse of form...bt he needs to be consistant.he has a grt record in fc as he avg 40+. he is the anthr best gud replacement 4 quiny.Bt my Vote goes to Maxwel as he is a pure bat and can bowl sme off spins toO

Deadline over fool U are late And Deep The way you decide is awesome I am reading em all

NICK wrote:

Ishaq wrote:

NICK wrote:Dan christian the best choice? Sory i nevr agree with u...1st let hm prove in Odi format,thn cme to the test arena.at present conditn he is jst a t20 material and acordng to me if u ask who deserves a chance among faulkner and Moises,thn i wil go with moises bze as vm said Aus doesnt neEd a bowl alroundr,instead they need a batng alroundr who needs to bATS wel and handy with the bowl....As per my choice i Want Glen maxwel Or Khawaja in the team..Maxwel has already provd that he is gud at longr format.so itz tym to CA to includ him in the longer format as he is young,energetic,talentd and dnt try to create a New brad hodge..khawaja has scord a 100+ tis week in shieldcup..he has shown glimpse of form...bt he needs to be consistant.he has a grt record in fc as he avg 40+. he is the anthr best gud replacement 4 quiny.Bt my Vote goes to Maxwel as he is a pure bat and can bowl sme off spins toO

Deadline over fool U are late And Deep The way you decide is awesome I am reading em all

My hand is stil paining..typd that much with MOB :O hope tmw it wil be Dada vs Msd my fav topic

Ishaq wrote:

NICK wrote:

Ishaq wrote:

NICK wrote:Dan christian the best choice? Sory i nevr agree with u...1st let hm prove in Odi format,thn cme to the test arena.at present conditn he is jst a t20 material and acordng to me if u ask who deserves a chance among faulkner and Moises,thn i wil go with moises bze as vm said Aus doesnt neEd a bowl alroundr,instead they need a batng alroundr who needs to bATS wel and handy with the bowl....As per my choice i Want Glen maxwel Or Khawaja in the team..Maxwel has already provd that he is gud at longr format.so itz tym to CA to includ him in the longer format as he is young,energetic,talentd and dnt try to create a New brad hodge..khawaja has scord a 100+ tis week in shieldcup..he has shown glimpse of form...bt he needs to be consistant.he has a grt record in fc as he avg 40+. he is the anthr best gud replacement 4 quiny.Bt my Vote goes to Maxwel as he is a pure bat and can bowl sme off spins toO

Deadline over fool U are late And Deep The way you decide is awesome I am reading em all

My hand is stil paining..typd that much with MOB hope tmw it wil be Dada vs Msd my fav topic

Haha Sad story xDYeah THat will be aWESOME Even I will participate then Deep will have a hard time tomorow if thats the topic

NICK wrote:

Ishaq wrote:

NICK wrote:

Ishaq wrote:

NICK wrote:Dan christian the best choice? Sory i nevr agree with u...1st let hm prove in Odi format,thn cme to the test arena.at present conditn he is jst a t20 material and acordng to me if u ask who deserves a chance among faulkner and Moises,thn i wil go with moises bze as vm said Aus doesnt neEd a bowl alroundr,instead they need a batng alroundr who needs to bATS wel and handy with the bowl....As per my choice i Want Glen maxwel Or Khawaja in the team..Maxwel has already provd that he is gud at longr format.so itz tym to CA to includ him in the longer format as he is young,energetic,talentd and dnt try to create a New brad hodge..khawaja has scord a 100+ tis week in shieldcup..he has shown glimpse of form...bt he needs to be consistant.he has a grt record in fc as he avg 40+. he is the anthr best gud replacement 4 quiny.Bt my Vote goes to Maxwel as he is a pure bat and can bowl sme off spins toO

Deadline over fool U are late And Deep The way you decide is awesome I am reading em all

My hand is stil paining..typd that much with MOB hope tmw it wil be Dada vs Msd my fav topic

Haha Sad story xDYeah THat will be aWESOME Even I will participate then Deep will have a hard time tomorow if thats the topic

Yea bt here who wil suport Msd :O dnt knw whethr Vm wil suport msd or dada.i wil always suport DADA.

Ishaq wrote:

NICK wrote:

Ishaq wrote:

NICK wrote:

Ishaq wrote:

NICK wrote:Dan christian the best choice? Sory i nevr agree with u...1st let hm prove in Odi format,thn cme to the test arena.at present conditn he is jst a t20 material and acordng to me if u ask who deserves a chance among faulkner and Moises,thn i wil go with moises bze as vm said Aus doesnt neEd a bowl alroundr,instead they need a batng alroundr who needs to bATS wel and handy with the bowl....As per my choice i Want Glen maxwel Or Khawaja in the team..Maxwel has already provd that he is gud at longr format.so itz tym to CA to includ him in the longer format as he is young,energetic,talentd and dnt try to create a New brad hodge..khawaja has scord a 100+ tis week in shieldcup..he has shown glimpse of form...bt he needs to be consistant.he has a grt record in fc as he avg 40+. he is the anthr best gud replacement 4 quiny.Bt my Vote goes to Maxwel as he is a pure bat and can bowl sme off spins toO

Deadline over fool U are late And Deep The way you decide is awesome I am reading em all

My hand is stil paining..typd that much with MOB hope tmw it wil be Dada vs Msd my fav topic

Haha Sad story xDYeah THat will be aWESOME Even I will participate then Deep will have a hard time tomorow if thats the topic

Yea bt here who wil suport Msd dnt knw whethr Vm wil suport msd or dada.i wil always suport DADA.

Dont worry I will Support MSD