The Ashes 2013-14 December 1, 2013

Rogers, Watson seek substance

48

In an opening Australian victory notable for its loud and brutish nature, Chris Rogers and Shane Watson were conspicuous by their muteness. Senior members of the Test team and critical components of the batting order, both men struggled for effect at the Gabba, and are seeking more substantial showings in Adelaide.

Brisbane's bounce was a significant factor in their struggles, startling Rogers on the first morning while also contributing to each of Watson's dismissals, a fend in the first innings and a skied pull in the second. No one knows exactly what to expect from Adelaide Oval's drop-in pitch, but it is fair to surmise that Rogers and Watson will join England's batsmen in not complaining should the ball arrive at hip rather than armpit height as they chase a better batting rhythm.

Before flying west, Rogers visited his Victoria teammates during their Sheffield Shield engagement with South Australia at the MCG. He also ventured to the visitors' dressing room for a chat about how Adelaide's pitches had played in the first two matches since their unveiling, and was happy enough with what he heard.

"I spoke to a few of the South Australian guys, it will be a typical drop-in wicket I think, not dissimilar to the MCG but a bit more flat and that will mean the bowlers will have their work cut out," Rogers said. "It would be nice to see a few runs in this game but also a bit of bounce for our fast bowlers."

Since returning home from England and a northern summer in which he found himself playing for the national side in addition to his county obligations for Middlesex, Rogers has struggled to feel entirely comfortable at the crease. A noted technical theorist, he has worked assiduously between Tests on his balance, and also on ensuring he plays in the straight lines that have served him well over a prolific career.

Another clue to his approach in Adelaide could be found in the first-innings exits of Aaron Finch and Rob Quiney in the aforementioned Shield game. Each perished essaying a cross-bat stroke early on the MCG drop-in, mistakes that helped the Redbacks rush the Bushrangers out for 118 on the first day. Do not expect too many such strokes from Rogers in Adelaide until the Kookaburra's seam has softened.

"I have probably hit the ball a bit better but I was able to do some good work this week and iron out some flaws," Rogers said. "I didn't contribute in the first game as much as I would like to be so it would be nice to get some in this game. I want to be playing the whole series and scoring runs, that's my job, so I probably can't afford too many failures."

Watson's low scores in Brisbane, meanwhile, can be partly attributed to the fact that the opening Test was the first red-ball fixture he had played since the final match of the previous series against England at The Oval in August. In between, Watson fulfilled Twenty20 and ODI duty for Australia while also turning out for Rajasthan Royals in the Champions League.

A hamstring injury cast doubt over his ability to bowl at the Gabba and also prevented him from taking part in the one Shield match available to him between the end of the India ODI tour and the first ball of the Test series. While Watson's bowling is an important element of Australia's combination, it is of far less import than his ability to punch England's fast bowlers through the field and loft Graeme Swann over it.

After David Warner and Michael Clarke showed the value of controlled aggression in Brisbane, Watson wishes to do likewise in Adelaide. Should he and Rogers find their games in time for Thursday, the climb ahead of England will become a decidedly steep one.

Daniel Brettig is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • ScottStevo on December 3, 2013, 14:05 GMT

    @Chris_P, please explain how Rogers has history and form? He was OK in the UK and has failed in both innings here. Is he any better than Watson? Well, Watson outscored him on the last tour. Let me guess, out comes the useless FC stats again....I like Rogers and he should've played years ago, but I can't see him being selected after this series.

  • Chris_P on December 2, 2013, 22:49 GMT

    @Beertjie Agree with you Bailey is a short term option, at best. He hasn't the history to make a huge success at test level over a sustained period, but this ground should suit him so I really wish him the best. I know they'll pick Watson, he better put in a few overs to relieve the front liners & not just a couple of overs of military medium he showed in Brisbane. Rogers will be fine, he has the history, form & this ground suits him perfectly.

  • Jaffa79 on December 2, 2013, 21:52 GMT

    chicko1983...mate you do realise that Australia have won as many Tests as Zimbabwe this year? That 2-7 scoreline not deflating you I see? Also, how many your batters average in the 30s? Do you know what a good cricketer looks like?

  • on December 2, 2013, 17:46 GMT

    If Rogers can rotate the strike when Warner is in the zone and farm it when he's having some trouble then thats all we need from him. We don't need an all guns ablazing opening partnership. Australia needs to maximise the potential of getting runs out of Warner, Clarke and maybe a solid half century from someone else.

  • Beertjie on December 2, 2013, 9:35 GMT

    Bailey simply won't make it either. By all means give him Adelaide (in order to be fair) but unless he scores big, someone else will be needed. Who? North would permit you to pick Faulkner as fourth seamer since he would also give you the off-spin variation. Before Lyon's fans crucify me, just note that Davison is not accompanying him to Perth. Seems like he'll be carrying the drinks there. If North does OK, he might see out the rest of the series, but he's clearly no solution. Phil Hughes needs to come back in at some time soon, given his experience. Hope he seizes his chance this time, but he would be better off batting #3. Musical chairs!

  • milepost on December 2, 2013, 8:26 GMT

    Broad bowled one good innings in Brisbane. Anderson has lost his mojo. So England have no 2nd or 3rd seamer and their spinner got carted in Brisbane. Need I mention the batsmen were rolled twice and failed again in Alice Springs. It's hard to see how England can win a game.

  • Shaggy076 on December 2, 2013, 5:38 GMT

    FFL- Pretty sure you will find his nemesis in ENgland was Bresnan. As soon as he went out of the team he knocked up a ton. There is no issues with Anderson who hasnt picked up a decent wicket haul since Lords which is now 4 tests ago. His averahe in Ashes tests is going back the way he started and will be over 40 soon.

  • chicko1983 on December 2, 2013, 5:00 GMT

    @ Front-Foot-Lunge - Watson was the second highest runs scorer of both teams during the English series and he was on the verge of being dropped! If he gets it right, watch out. How's Anderson's Ashes average going again? 36 odd and 38 in Australia...English supporters don't know how to judge a good cricketer.

  • cricket_tragic99 on December 2, 2013, 2:54 GMT

    Rogers did well to protect the middle order from the new ball. If he can bat 30 overs innings and only score 20-30 runs then I would call it a job well done.

  • Dave1970 on December 2, 2013, 2:44 GMT

    If Faulkner is picked over Bailey the balance of the side would be uneven. If Rogers keeps his opening spot then Watson's position would be the one to go for me. This then leaves who do you put at three?

    Warner, Rogers (Watson), Bailey, Clarke, Smith, Faulkner, Haddin, Johnson, Siddle, Harris and Lyon. Or leave the team as is.

    The Adelaide pitch is not made for dashers who like cross bat shots, so Warner and Watson will be a concern - having both in the side even more so - and could fall cheaply due to their aggressive nature.

    Time will tell - can;t wait.

  • ScottStevo on December 3, 2013, 14:05 GMT

    @Chris_P, please explain how Rogers has history and form? He was OK in the UK and has failed in both innings here. Is he any better than Watson? Well, Watson outscored him on the last tour. Let me guess, out comes the useless FC stats again....I like Rogers and he should've played years ago, but I can't see him being selected after this series.

  • Chris_P on December 2, 2013, 22:49 GMT

    @Beertjie Agree with you Bailey is a short term option, at best. He hasn't the history to make a huge success at test level over a sustained period, but this ground should suit him so I really wish him the best. I know they'll pick Watson, he better put in a few overs to relieve the front liners & not just a couple of overs of military medium he showed in Brisbane. Rogers will be fine, he has the history, form & this ground suits him perfectly.

  • Jaffa79 on December 2, 2013, 21:52 GMT

    chicko1983...mate you do realise that Australia have won as many Tests as Zimbabwe this year? That 2-7 scoreline not deflating you I see? Also, how many your batters average in the 30s? Do you know what a good cricketer looks like?

  • on December 2, 2013, 17:46 GMT

    If Rogers can rotate the strike when Warner is in the zone and farm it when he's having some trouble then thats all we need from him. We don't need an all guns ablazing opening partnership. Australia needs to maximise the potential of getting runs out of Warner, Clarke and maybe a solid half century from someone else.

  • Beertjie on December 2, 2013, 9:35 GMT

    Bailey simply won't make it either. By all means give him Adelaide (in order to be fair) but unless he scores big, someone else will be needed. Who? North would permit you to pick Faulkner as fourth seamer since he would also give you the off-spin variation. Before Lyon's fans crucify me, just note that Davison is not accompanying him to Perth. Seems like he'll be carrying the drinks there. If North does OK, he might see out the rest of the series, but he's clearly no solution. Phil Hughes needs to come back in at some time soon, given his experience. Hope he seizes his chance this time, but he would be better off batting #3. Musical chairs!

  • milepost on December 2, 2013, 8:26 GMT

    Broad bowled one good innings in Brisbane. Anderson has lost his mojo. So England have no 2nd or 3rd seamer and their spinner got carted in Brisbane. Need I mention the batsmen were rolled twice and failed again in Alice Springs. It's hard to see how England can win a game.

  • Shaggy076 on December 2, 2013, 5:38 GMT

    FFL- Pretty sure you will find his nemesis in ENgland was Bresnan. As soon as he went out of the team he knocked up a ton. There is no issues with Anderson who hasnt picked up a decent wicket haul since Lords which is now 4 tests ago. His averahe in Ashes tests is going back the way he started and will be over 40 soon.

  • chicko1983 on December 2, 2013, 5:00 GMT

    @ Front-Foot-Lunge - Watson was the second highest runs scorer of both teams during the English series and he was on the verge of being dropped! If he gets it right, watch out. How's Anderson's Ashes average going again? 36 odd and 38 in Australia...English supporters don't know how to judge a good cricketer.

  • cricket_tragic99 on December 2, 2013, 2:54 GMT

    Rogers did well to protect the middle order from the new ball. If he can bat 30 overs innings and only score 20-30 runs then I would call it a job well done.

  • Dave1970 on December 2, 2013, 2:44 GMT

    If Faulkner is picked over Bailey the balance of the side would be uneven. If Rogers keeps his opening spot then Watson's position would be the one to go for me. This then leaves who do you put at three?

    Warner, Rogers (Watson), Bailey, Clarke, Smith, Faulkner, Haddin, Johnson, Siddle, Harris and Lyon. Or leave the team as is.

    The Adelaide pitch is not made for dashers who like cross bat shots, so Warner and Watson will be a concern - having both in the side even more so - and could fall cheaply due to their aggressive nature.

    Time will tell - can;t wait.

  • Dashgar on December 2, 2013, 2:23 GMT

    The Brisbane bounce wasn't that severe. In fact the pitch was really flat. It was just good bowling that brought about the wickets. Remember 2 years ago Gautam Gambhir was complaining about how unfairly bouncy the Adelaide pitch was. And that was the old pitch which was the flattest in the world. Johnson and Harris will still be dangerous.

  • MinusZero on December 2, 2013, 0:53 GMT

    How much longer do we have to put up with Watson. Most overrated player ever!

  • Not_Another_Keybored_Expert on December 2, 2013, 0:04 GMT

    @Front-Foot-Lunge what a surprise that a top order batsman gets out to the two front line new ball bowlers, shocking that, What's next Cook nicking one off Harris again? Who would have thought?

  • OneEyedAussie on December 1, 2013, 23:56 GMT

    I'm a bit clunky with the stats on this site, but I'd love to see a comparison of the amount of domestic FC cricket games Watson has completed in Australia over the past 4 years in comparison to how many games he has completed for foreign t20 franchises.

  • Bonehead_maz on December 1, 2013, 23:04 GMT

    For the sake of unborn generations it is essential that Australia beat England in this series. It's bad enough that this English side is compared to the 1953 - 1956 side having won 3 in a row. The idea that it was going to do what Peter May's side of 1958/59 couldn't, is sheer cricket blasphemy.

  • DragonCricketer on December 1, 2013, 22:22 GMT

    My prediction is a high scoring draw. Australia will bat well and England will knuckle down. Bowlers will find it much harder. Lyon could be a dark horse late in the match, playing on his old ground.

  • Chris_P on December 1, 2013, 22:14 GMT

    @xtrafalgarx. You're correct in saying his numbers are world class, the problem is that his numbers for the past 3 years are very poor, & I mean really poor, numbers that shouldn't even earn him a spot in the NSW side, let alone Australia. That's where the problem is. Even his one day record is not as strong as it once was recently as T20 mode has kicked in (where he is one of the top players in the game). Rogers will be fine, he is too good of a player not to come back, although he has never been a great scorer on quick decks.

  • Dave1970 on December 1, 2013, 22:10 GMT

    If Faulkner is picked over Bailey the balance of the side would be uneven. If Rogers keeps his opening spot then Watson's position would be the one to go for me. This then leaves who do you put at three?

    Warner, Rogers (Watson), Bailey, Clarke, Smith, Faulkner, Haddin, Johnson, Siddle, Harris and Lyon. Or leave the team as is.

    The Adelaide pitch is not made for dashers who like cross bat shots, so Warner and Watson will be a concern - having both in the side even more so - and could fall cheaply due to their aggressive nature.

    Time will tell - can;t wait.

  • on December 1, 2013, 19:20 GMT

    The noly change I'd consider is Faulkner for Bailey. Pity for Bailey but I reckon Faulkner is just as likely to scores runs on a flat Adelaide deck and he offers overs which will keep Johnson and Harris for short sharp spells. Otherwise we shouldn't make changes to a team that has England back in its usual place. England have only held the ashes for about 25 years since 1934 - Australia for 45 years :)

  • jb633 on December 1, 2013, 19:02 GMT

    @xtrafalgatz, you will find that the Aussies are now huge favourites to win the series and by the accounts of the fans, media and bookies it will be a miracle if England can get anything out of it. I have been commenting on our slide for two years now and we are done as a decent outfit. Our batsmen are too timid and we don't seem to know how to play good bowling any more. In all fairness if Aus don't win this series from here every single player deserves dropping.

  • xtrafalgarx on December 1, 2013, 16:19 GMT

    England are getting credit they don;t deserve, they aren't anywhere near as good as they think they are, and the stats prove it.

    Over the space of two years, England have only ever passed the 500 run mark in an innings ONCE! ONCE! They havn't passed the 400 mark for EIGHTEEN test innings!

    We talk about Australia's batting being weak, but in the same time period Australia has passed the 500 mark SEVEN times, 2 of which were 600. England are favorites to win this series on past glories, but are we looking at the facts here?

    Bradman still has a good record, no one would pick him now.

  • on December 1, 2013, 15:32 GMT

    My expected 11 for Adelaide 1. Rogers 2. Warner 3. Watson 4. Clarke 5. Bailey/Smith 6. Haddin 7. Faulkner 8. Johnson 9. Siddle 10. Harris 11. Lyon

  • Front-Foot-Lunge on December 1, 2013, 15:07 GMT

    The sight of Watson falling to Anderson or Brad has become a commonplace sight in Ashes cricket. I wouldnt be surprised if Watson has a similar series this time too.

  • Sachit1979 on December 1, 2013, 14:39 GMT

    I don't think it's correct to point finger on Rogers so early. He was most consistent Australian batsmen in last Ashes just 2 months back and in last test also though he could not score big but he had a solid start with Warner in the first inning that actually gave Australia a launch pad to score big and sweep the match. I have strong hope that Rogers would definitely come strong and prove a point that Australian selectors did a huge mistake by ignoring him for years.

  • xtrafalgarx on December 1, 2013, 14:13 GMT

    If you look at Watson as a batsman he might not cut it, but as an all-rounder, his numbers are world class, so he definitley fits into our best team, the question is just where? I think no.6 but we don't have a decent no.3 in the country yet, so he has to take the brunt of it at no.3

  • KnightRider12155 on December 1, 2013, 13:59 GMT

    Lliam Flynn: You just said what's on my mind mate! If they want to bring JF in, drop Watto not Bailey. Even in this series, watto will fail miserably BUT he will do something good with the bat or ball in just one game to be given a chance to play the next series... Just pick him for ODIs & T20s but not for test matches...

  • heathrf1974 on December 1, 2013, 13:06 GMT

    This test will be a ripper. It will give a good indication whether England is on the slide and the Aussies on the rise or the status quo as been re-asserted.

  • dunger.bob on December 1, 2013, 12:49 GMT

    @FreddyForPrimeMinister: I don't necessarily want him out of the team, but I don't want him in the top 5. There's a nice spot that Bailey's keeping warm at 6 for him but guess what, he said he doesn't really want to bat there. He wants to open, three at a pinch. That's what annoys me about Watto. .. Short form cricket, he's the first bloke picked though.

  • rickyvoncanterbury on December 1, 2013, 12:45 GMT

    Sorry Freddy being average is just NOT good enough

  • rickyvoncanterbury on December 1, 2013, 12:40 GMT

    @ AussieSam . I knew someone would find an innings , SORRY WATTO.

  • rickyvoncanterbury on December 1, 2013, 12:18 GMT

    @ FreddyForPrimeMinister on (December 1, 2013, 11:45 GMT) that's the difference freddy, England have regularly put up with just good enough is enough, that's why Australia come back much quicker than they go away, being average is just good enough.

  • AussieSam on December 1, 2013, 12:12 GMT

    @rickyvoncanterbury: He made 176 at the Oval. That was a pretty extraordinary innings.

  • milepost on December 1, 2013, 12:03 GMT

    We don't need to change a winning team, we will canter to an Ashes series win but I think all us Aussies know Watson has had plenty of time to come good and hasn't. On his day he is among the best to watch but his conversion rate is no where near good enough for a top order batsman. I'd have no problem with him at 6 or 7 if his bowling warranted selection. He will probably score a double hundred in Adelaide though, especially against a weak English attack.

  • CodandChips on December 1, 2013, 11:52 GMT

    @xtrafalgarx "Each of Australia's top 5 batsmen have scored a century in their last 3 tests, the same can't be said for England." Fair point. Only 3 of England's squad scored a hundred in Ashes tests this year. This is why we need fresh faces.

  • on December 1, 2013, 11:49 GMT

    Watson looked as if he would certainly lose his spot in the side after the Ashes series in England. Then in the final match he made his Test match personal best score and so he got himself a reprieve. Fortunate for him, not so for the Australian cricket team. Since the start of 2011 he has only averaged 29 with the bat and if that daddy hundred is taken out it drops to 25-odd. He is injury prone and can't bowl a spell without risking being carried off. By now Australia could put anyone else in (batsman or bowler) and they are all-but guaranteed to do better. Keep him in the short form where he excels, but make his spot in the Test team available for someone else; either a kid with tons of potential and let him learn on the job (eg. Maddinson, Silk) or a seasoned veteran (eg. White, Cosgrove).

  • rickyvoncanterbury on December 1, 2013, 11:45 GMT

    What worries me about Watson is that everyone knows he can do it, the thing is, it does not matter what sportsman or what sport it is, when the average Aussie supporter gives it to a champion that is out of sorts, they come out and do something extraordinary and say get that up ya, but unfortunately Watto never has.

  • FreddyForPrimeMinister on December 1, 2013, 11:45 GMT

    I never understood why people criticized Watson so much (much as I don't particularly like the guy!) The fact that he wasn't converting regular 50's into 100's as an opener was never an issue with me - if I was a number 3 batsman, I'd much sooner have an opener taking the shine off the ball pretty much every innings and seeing the opening bowlers off, rather than a guy scoring a big hundred every 4th innings but letting me to bat against a new ball with 15 on the board and the opening bowlers fired up after knocking over an early wicket! Remember, for a long time, Watson averaged around 50 as an opener, without getting the big scores - which shows real consistency. The fact that he can hold up a bowling end for 15 overs an innings, giving nothing away and picking up the odd wicket or two, makes him indispensable to the team in my eyes - and I'm an England fan! Here's hoping you Aussie boo boys manage to oust him from your team - I'm sure the English team will be very happy....

  • Cricmaths123 on December 1, 2013, 11:32 GMT

    I think both Rogers and Watson should be given one more chance. Both are quality players and will surely make a lot of runs.

  • rickyvoncanterbury on December 1, 2013, 11:22 GMT

    Warner, Rodgers, Hughes, Clarke, Smith then either Bailey/Watson/Faulkner/whoever is brave enough to stand up, Haddin, anyone of 6 or 7 bowlers. and Lyon.

  • xtrafalgarx on December 1, 2013, 11:12 GMT

    @Batsmanwhobowls: Stop looking at Watson as a batsman, he is an allrounder, unfortunately for him, we don't have a no.3 in the country so he has to cop it there. Ideally, i would have him come in at 6 if we could find someone to come in at no.3

    Also, to be fair. Each of Australia's top 5 batsmen have scored a century in their last 3 tests, the same can't be said for England.

  • dunger.bob on December 1, 2013, 10:53 GMT

    @ BatsmanWhoBowls: One of these days we'll have a proper no.3 I'm sure. Just not while ever Watto is being given one final series to prove he can cut it. .. I note with interest the Ed Cowan is now batting at 3 for Tassie and scoring runs. .. I wonder if he thinks there could be a spot opening up there soon. .. I'm not sure Ed's the answer either, but we have to get someone in there who can convert a nice 50 or 60 into big tons. At least convert some of them. If Watson had been able to do that his average would look a lot healthier and more importantly he would have won/saved a lot more games for his team.

  • RandyOZ on December 1, 2013, 10:51 GMT

    Rogers obviously deserves another chance after the way he acquitted himself in England, but Watson must surely be dropped. Either Hughes or Faulkner could come in and have a much better effect on the team both literally and in terms of morale.

  • lok900 on December 1, 2013, 10:26 GMT

    Whilst @popcorn is right about patience, i'm sure the patience is running out from Australia re Watson. He's been given too much oppotunities and he should face reality that he is not a top-order batsman. This whole fiasco of No.6 could have been stopped if Watson moved down there and a regular top-order batsman came in; Hughes, Head, North or even White would have been a better option. Not to mention that White has bowled before and can handle 5 over spells I'd guess.

    Furthermore, Hughes is the best young batsman in the country. It's time that selectors stick with him, and his unorthodox technique as it has shown to be effective anywhere he plays.

  • Abdul319 on December 1, 2013, 10:17 GMT

    bringing in Hughes for watson is a better idea

  • CodandChips on December 1, 2013, 10:08 GMT

    Can't see Rogers or Carberry playing after this series, even if they play well. Both countries will want younger openers having a go, like Joe Root or Phil Hughes.

  • Redbackfan on December 1, 2013, 10:05 GMT

    Rogers needs to score in Adelaide or he will be in trouble. He sounds determined so good luck to him. Watson, theres always excuses for him. He's been in the team long enough now to perform consistently but he's not mentally up to test cricket. Most players have to earn there way back in the team through shield after an injury but not Watson. Hopefully Boof will soon get him out of the test line up soon. Before all those Watson lovers start banging on about how good he is let me just say, Watson would be the first guy I would pick for T20 and ODI cricket cause that is where he is good. Hey I like Ferguson but he's not up to test cricket at the moment but he is very unlucky not to be in the ODI squad. Go Aussie Go

  • popcorn on December 1, 2013, 9:49 GMT

    EVERY Aussie batsman cannot make a century every Test,can he? Let's just be patient. Their time will come during this Ashes series. Remember Darren Lehmann's winning formula: One Century from a batsman EVERY Test.

  • BatsmanWhoBowls on December 1, 2013, 9:37 GMT

    Chris Rogers will be fine. He knows his game inside out. He copped a good ball that rose sharply on him in the first innings, and he was over-zealous in an attempt to punish a poor loosener from Broad in the second innings. Rogers will look at those dismissals, analyse anything he feels is questionable, and then just go about his game in the same way he always does, business as usual, and the runs will come one way or another. Shane Watson is an entirely different case. I'm no batting expert (although I did once score a very classy century at the age of twelve, in a friendly game against the fourth grade team. Ladies please, one at a time.), so I'll refrain from quoting the flawed technique theories that surround him. However, I think it's obvious that Watson has probably used up his one "fighting" innings for the decade, and the one-wicket-down-for-not-many-runs repair-job (a daily job for any number three batsman) is not likely to ever be Shane Watson's modus-operandi.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • BatsmanWhoBowls on December 1, 2013, 9:37 GMT

    Chris Rogers will be fine. He knows his game inside out. He copped a good ball that rose sharply on him in the first innings, and he was over-zealous in an attempt to punish a poor loosener from Broad in the second innings. Rogers will look at those dismissals, analyse anything he feels is questionable, and then just go about his game in the same way he always does, business as usual, and the runs will come one way or another. Shane Watson is an entirely different case. I'm no batting expert (although I did once score a very classy century at the age of twelve, in a friendly game against the fourth grade team. Ladies please, one at a time.), so I'll refrain from quoting the flawed technique theories that surround him. However, I think it's obvious that Watson has probably used up his one "fighting" innings for the decade, and the one-wicket-down-for-not-many-runs repair-job (a daily job for any number three batsman) is not likely to ever be Shane Watson's modus-operandi.

  • popcorn on December 1, 2013, 9:49 GMT

    EVERY Aussie batsman cannot make a century every Test,can he? Let's just be patient. Their time will come during this Ashes series. Remember Darren Lehmann's winning formula: One Century from a batsman EVERY Test.

  • Redbackfan on December 1, 2013, 10:05 GMT

    Rogers needs to score in Adelaide or he will be in trouble. He sounds determined so good luck to him. Watson, theres always excuses for him. He's been in the team long enough now to perform consistently but he's not mentally up to test cricket. Most players have to earn there way back in the team through shield after an injury but not Watson. Hopefully Boof will soon get him out of the test line up soon. Before all those Watson lovers start banging on about how good he is let me just say, Watson would be the first guy I would pick for T20 and ODI cricket cause that is where he is good. Hey I like Ferguson but he's not up to test cricket at the moment but he is very unlucky not to be in the ODI squad. Go Aussie Go

  • CodandChips on December 1, 2013, 10:08 GMT

    Can't see Rogers or Carberry playing after this series, even if they play well. Both countries will want younger openers having a go, like Joe Root or Phil Hughes.

  • Abdul319 on December 1, 2013, 10:17 GMT

    bringing in Hughes for watson is a better idea

  • lok900 on December 1, 2013, 10:26 GMT

    Whilst @popcorn is right about patience, i'm sure the patience is running out from Australia re Watson. He's been given too much oppotunities and he should face reality that he is not a top-order batsman. This whole fiasco of No.6 could have been stopped if Watson moved down there and a regular top-order batsman came in; Hughes, Head, North or even White would have been a better option. Not to mention that White has bowled before and can handle 5 over spells I'd guess.

    Furthermore, Hughes is the best young batsman in the country. It's time that selectors stick with him, and his unorthodox technique as it has shown to be effective anywhere he plays.

  • RandyOZ on December 1, 2013, 10:51 GMT

    Rogers obviously deserves another chance after the way he acquitted himself in England, but Watson must surely be dropped. Either Hughes or Faulkner could come in and have a much better effect on the team both literally and in terms of morale.

  • dunger.bob on December 1, 2013, 10:53 GMT

    @ BatsmanWhoBowls: One of these days we'll have a proper no.3 I'm sure. Just not while ever Watto is being given one final series to prove he can cut it. .. I note with interest the Ed Cowan is now batting at 3 for Tassie and scoring runs. .. I wonder if he thinks there could be a spot opening up there soon. .. I'm not sure Ed's the answer either, but we have to get someone in there who can convert a nice 50 or 60 into big tons. At least convert some of them. If Watson had been able to do that his average would look a lot healthier and more importantly he would have won/saved a lot more games for his team.

  • xtrafalgarx on December 1, 2013, 11:12 GMT

    @Batsmanwhobowls: Stop looking at Watson as a batsman, he is an allrounder, unfortunately for him, we don't have a no.3 in the country so he has to cop it there. Ideally, i would have him come in at 6 if we could find someone to come in at no.3

    Also, to be fair. Each of Australia's top 5 batsmen have scored a century in their last 3 tests, the same can't be said for England.

  • rickyvoncanterbury on December 1, 2013, 11:22 GMT

    Warner, Rodgers, Hughes, Clarke, Smith then either Bailey/Watson/Faulkner/whoever is brave enough to stand up, Haddin, anyone of 6 or 7 bowlers. and Lyon.