Too Many Games, Not Enough Openers, Still Too Much Hauritz

Australia are playing cricket at the moment. Just thought I'd tell you, becuase noone seems to know or care. They are in Abu Dhabi playing Pakistan in a series of 50 over games. How many pointless ODIs are being played these days? Is anyone outside (or even inside, given the (SA)IPL is on) cricket mad India actually watching these games? In more relevant (and still not blogged about becuase I've been blogging about DT) cricket, we still don't know who the best test side in the world is after Australia beat South Africa 2-1, flipping the scoreline in Australia. There were then 2 T20s and 5 ODIs (after 2 and 5 in Australia). Why do we need this many ODI games? Everyone knows that the only ODI matches that count for anything are the World Cup (and theres far too many games there too). For the record, SA won most of the ODI games and Australia still didn't play Phil Hughes in any of them. This scheduling has gone too far. 

The Aussies have played 708 Tests in 133 years, and 705 ODIs in 39 years. You could drop back the number of ODIs and stop the players bitching about playing too much cricket so easily. 

Now, at the moment the ODI side has any of Haddin, Clarke, Hopes and Watson opening. I'nm disregarding Marsh, becuase he seems to usually be playing, atleast when he isn't injured. None of these players are proper openers. So, clearly Australia must have no-one qualified for the job. Lets look at the candidates:

Phil Hughes:

Averaged 69 in the 3 tests he has played against SA, struck at 58 (Haydos struck at 60, so Hughesy isn't too slow for it). Why oh why is he not in the ODI side?

Matthew Hayden:

Forcefully retired from the test side, now averages 59 at 152 in 8 games in the IPL. In the past 2 years (takes in the last 16 ODIs he played) he averaged 42 and struck at 83. Some players are forced to only play in one form of the game (ie Bracken), why not give Haydos a chance again?

Or you could throw the Huss (Mike) up there where he used to play, and play him into some form. Except that he's being rested, because he has played too many ODIs lately...

How the hell is Hauritz averaging 29 and going for 4.8 an over in ODIs? Well, 14 of his 22(63%) wickets have come caught by a fielder (ie slogging and got caught on the boundary), and 2(9%) stumped (ie slogging and missed). In comparison, that sheik of tweak Michael Clarke has 51 wickets (yes, he has played more games, thats why I'm putting %s)  and 23 caught fielder (45%) with 3 stumped (6%). When it comes to a game that matters (hopefully not the Ashes), Hauritz will stink up the place worse than Bryce McGain's first day. 

In unrelated matters, Stephen Hill has done enough to get taken off the Shit List.