MOST? PEOPLE I KNOW THINK THAT YOU'RE CRAZY

Lose 2-1 to a great side and you can conclude that some things went pretty well. Lose 2-1 to a shit-house England and, even if your assessments are statistically valid across all categories (bar the obvious one: scoreboard, mate), it's a bit rich to conclude that most things went pretty well:

Australian chairman of selectors Andrew Hilditch digs in

"The only thing I know about selections is if you don't win the match of the series, you are fair game because anyone can say anything and you can't prove them wrong.

"It's not a very popular thing to say at the moment because we lost the Ashes, and that was devastating, but the reality is that most things went pretty well during the Ashes.

"Selection wise I was really pleased until the fifth Test."

In defining "most" Hilditch will doubtless claim that an audit of the key performance indicators revealed Australia won the "things" 51% to 49%.

Comments

[Carrot]

Hear hear. And the selection quote about the 5th Test is just plain stupid.

Is Michael Hussey getting back to his best, do you think? 313 runs in the series from six innings, 3 not outs, at an average of 104.33 and a strike-rate of 97.50. That makes him the highest run-scorer, with the highest average, and the second-highest strike-rate (amongst meaningful contributors with the bat) next to Sehwag, who is averaging 23. When you consider who he's beating to those statistics - Dhoni, Tendulkar, Ponting - that's not bad going.

[Tony]

It's difficult to compare Tendulkar and Ponting at the top of the order with the middle order Hussey, who gets to face the middle over trundlers and also gets not outs.

[Carrot]

Well, sure. That said, the not-outs boosted average is one thing - and I'm of the view that he's faced just as much good bowling - but you could argue that by batting in the middle-order he doesn't have as much opportunity to score "big" runs, making the highest-runscorer stat more impressive by consequence. Quid pro quo, innit.

Whatever. He's playing well, is all.

[Hangover Black]

Carrot - I was about to write nearly the exact same post (your first comment) in Hussey's defence after Tone's unintended gibe about him being the "cherry on top" of Australia's batting. More like half the cake and most of the icing too.

And if the selectors think that a specialist opener should be used in the Test team, it's up to Watson to show why he shouldn't be the one making way. If there isn't a position in the team where you normally bat, then find another position and make it your own. That's how Katich, Hussey, and North for that matter are all currenly in the team.

If there's a weakness in our current attack, it's spin rather than pace, and Watson doesn't help much in that regard.

[Tony]

I wasn't jibing, I was complimenting. Every side needs a batsman to bring the innings home a-la Bevan. Hussey has been doing that job to a tee after the top order have built a solid base. Nor was my comparison between middle-order Hussey and top-order Tendulkar in any way pejorative; it was more a reflection of my earlier comment in the other post that the batting gets easier once the first 20-odd overs are gone.

As an addendum: BJ and the Boys (MW, DF, GB), like McArdle O'Hanlon, AB and SC on Sunday, again spent time talking about Hussey's tenure in the Test side. Just saying. Is all.

I hate you people.

[Hangover Black]

I know that you were complimenting (the jibe call was tongue-in-cheek), but it seemed more damning with faint praise to me. A cherry on top is rather superfluous to the cake itself. Nice to have, but more pretty to look at than anything else. Sure, his digs of 30 or so have been cherry type innings, but there are substantial knocks of 73(54),81(82) in there as well.

Maybe the ball isn't swinging around much by the time Hussey gets in, but keeping the score ticking against Harby with the ball spinning away is no mean feat either.

*HTF do you spell jibe/gibe anyway?....google....both versions acceptable.....please carry on.