James Rew has certainly merited consideration. Yes, you back them but do it for too long and it leads to complacency. Competition is always necessary and healthy
I wouldn't know unless they're given opportunity. Try reading posts before you respond to them. The key word in your post I've put in bold.
Would you drop him, you can have good indicators, that's like saying you don't know Dan Neil isn't as good as our current midfielders because he hasn't had the chance.
Those current midfielders,pre AFCON,weren't displaying weaknesses hence not a need for replacement
He can have the odd weakness if he's going to score amount he does
Instead of?
Aye,anything you say,pointless trying to reason as usual I'm on a completely different wavelength to you
Aye fancy thinking our second best player shouldn't be left out what a crazy opinion
Are you saying Rew > Brook?
I refer you to the current England batting averages for this series.
Yeh,you're fully entitled to your opinion even if lacking a little in diplomacy Each to is own.
No,I'm floating the idea of the need to freshening the batting.
Then replace Crawley pope and smith not the second best player
Probably Duckett on current form.
You mention Rew. His numbers are basically the same as anyone in the team. There’s always the opportunity for someone to smash the door down and get in. Brook did it himself.
Yeh,that's the point I'm making. Guaranteed places leads to complacency. It's that and staleness That 's purely my humble opinion.
Beat England sides I’ve seen picked the best batters and backed them.
And those players have certainly been backed. I wouldn't argue with that but the downside,and danger, is it can,and has imo,led to complacency and staleness
I just don’t think we produce high quality batters for Australia Test conditions.
