During the innings break at the WACA tonight, certain commentators made a big deal out of the idea that Warner "hasn't played here", and "certainly hasn't played here for NSW". That would be news to Warner and his NSW team-mates, and indeed so far he is doing better tonight than some with much more local experience. I wonder whether Slater and co. got caught up in the "hasn't played a first-class game" hype, which is really more to do with the selection policy in different forms of the game than how early Warner was picked.
Of course, the depth of batting talent in NSW, especially at the top of the order, is also relevant. Ian Chappell has acknowledged this when insisting that Warner should be given a chance to prove himself in the longer form. He has a point, and as Warner's last outing at the WACA shows, there's no need to assume it would be at the expense of an opener. Mind you, such an assumption wouldn't be as silly as the fuss made over another NSW opener who is certainly no stranger to the WACA. Even this morning, long after the first stories appeared, the radio news was reporting that Katich would go down the order to number 3 to allow Jaques and Hughes to show their stuff. Hardly a surprise - he hasn't been a "NSW opener" recently, and in the end he came in at second drop!
6 comments:
That's gotta be the worst way to get out!
But it would be worth Warner's while if he got in a few games in isn't it? And do you think he could be a better idea as a finisher at 5/6?
I certainly agree that Warner should be given a chance in the longer form - I haven't seen any reason to pigeonhole him. From his point of view, I'm sure he'll take his chances batting at any positions. NSW would missing a trick if they were only considering him as an opener, especially considering the talk over going interstate if they can't give him a place. I'm a true blue Sydneysider, but I couldn't blame him.
Would he be better lower down the order? He's certainly done well for Eastern Suburbs in positions 1-4 over the last few years. Given his capacity to make quick one day hundreds, I can see why he's been labelled as an opener. That's no reason not to put him in the Shield team at the expense of Rohrer, for argument's sake. Not an easy decision, but spreading the selections by pigeonholing players can only do so much.
While we're talking about flexibility in the batting lineup, let's remember that there is another Australian player with significant List A opening experience for NSW - Brad Haddin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cricket/Australian_biography_worklist/Invinc
Hi JPD. I dunno if you still have an interest in WP, but we're close to getting the whole Invincibles to a featured topic and could do with a few hands...especially as you seem to have an interest in the good ol days (olde players)
Have you noticed that several times every match Slats will say," I thought such an such would have happened today but...."
The bloke is wrong in his assumptions so often that it is beyond a joke. I'd like to see him dropped with a guy like Damien Fleming coming in who actually knows a bit about the game.
I've given up on the TV commentary of late and listen to the ABC with the telly mute even though it is usually a ball behind.
Warner. I'm glad they've sent him back into the ranks. He'll come good with more experience and should be in the T20 stuff for many years to come regardless.
It's tough for a boy when doing a man's job.
Fleming would certainly be an improvement on Slats.
I think the pressure has got to Warner, among other things. Some first-class cricket with NSW would be the best thing for him, at the moment.
Post a Comment