I deleted the rest of your piffle. And checked - on last ten knocks I beat Mr Hughes by nearly a hundred fifty total, though at a rather lower level (well, some of those Sri Lankan seamers were pretty woeful so maybe not THAT much lower....).But anyway, lets look at a few of the things you neglected to mention in pathetically posturing bullet point form:I doubt anyone on here has ever gone ona run of "form" at our chosen level like Phillip-dear did in India. What was it, 5 dismissals in 32 balls for 4 runs or something?I doubt anyone on here has had to have a (suposedly) lesser player cover for them against good opposition lest they fail and it affect their confidence.The fact is, once that initial three test burst of form against South Africa passed, Hughes has managed a few cheap runs against one of the worst Test attacks in living memory....and not much else. He can't play the short ball, the ball close to his body, the inswinger or any form of spin - I actually admire his tenacity for continuing to try (or at least, I would until I think about the pathetic conversations he must have had before the South Africa series).
I think you guys are missing one key factor, neither Hughes nor Robson are good enough for test cricket, there must be better players whether they be in aus or england and an aussie.in my personal opinion i honestly think chris rodgers would be the perfect guy to bat at 3 to bring in some experiance (not much test having only played one) as he has hit 19000 fc runs!!
6.) Shane Watson / Steve Smith ( Would make it difficult to justify having Lyon in the squad if you have Smith, but if you have Watson you might, MIGHT need one less pacer)