How should Australia use Ryan Harris in the future

[spooony]

^^

Essentially that's problem. AUS from the inception have always been taking a risk with Harris by consistently playing him in tests, ever since it was realized how bad his knee's were.

Strange. Australia have always looked after its sporting stars like hospital babies because of the depth problem and fighting with other codes. These days they are getting a massive amount of injuries. In rugby as well. Surely they rethink their conditioning approach or facilities that the players have access to.

 

[War]

Strange. Australia have always looked after its sporting stars like hospital babies because of the depth problem and fighting with other codes. These days they are getting a massive amount of injuries. In rugby as well. Surely they rethink their conditioning approach or facilities that the players have access to.

Well i don't follow rugby, but with regards to cricket AUS never really had a depth problem much in recent years especially with fast-bowlers. The situation with Harris is just unique.

As i mentioned in my opening post of this thread, he became AUS default spearhead after the 2010 ashes series disaster, when at the end of that series he was the only fast-bowler who seemed test quality.

Thus essentially although he had that terrible injury, the bullet was bit and the selectors had no choice but to try a play him in as much tests as possible.

However in recent months young quicks like Cummins, Pattions, Starc have emerged (Ben Cutting and Josh Hazlewood also on the radar) while Hilfenhaus and Siddle re-emerged after being piss poor in the aforementioned 2010 ashes.

So really i believe a point has been reached where Harris importance to the test attack is not needed as much if at all. Therefore what left of his career should be used in the limited overs formats from now on.

 

[sifter132]

Ok let me get this. They knew he had a injury so instead of the risk of maybe serious damaging him further ending his career and probably will be the reason for thousands of dollars of medical bills after he has long finished cricket, they still played him and used him like a old Durex condom which is only good for 1 use. That is not really a good picture on Australia cricket and looking out for the welfare of their cricketers which is suppose to come first..

I agree with you! Australian cricket has long placed too much emphasis on: a) picking the same team while they are winning, even if they are burning out their players and not giving other players in the squad a chance, and b) the "she'll be right mate", warrior mindset where pain must be played through and no one wants to put their hand up for a rest.

We've already had the case of Nathan Bracken potentially turning into a legal minefield. He contests he wasn't given a correct diagnosis by the physio and was made to bowl on his dodgy knee: Nathan Bracken suing Cricket Australia in Supreme Court for $1 million in lost earnings due to inury | News.com.au

I say they should just have clear rules eg. bowlers under 25 (or injury prone bowlers like Harris) can't play 3 Test matches in a row...at present there are only 'guidelines' and emotional selection decisions get made in the name of victory.

 

[War]

I agree with you! Australian cricket has long placed too much emphasis on: a) picking the same team while they are winning, even if they are burning out their players and not giving other players in the squad a chance, and b) the "she'll be right mate", warrior mindset where pain must be played through and no one wants to put their hand up for a rest.

We've already had the case of Nathan Bracken potentially turning into a legal minefield. He contests he wasn't given a correct diagnosis by the physio and was made to bowl on his dodgy knee: Nathan Bracken suing Cricket Australia in Supreme Court for $1 million in lost earnings due to inury | News.com.au

I say they should just have clear rules eg. bowlers under 25 (or injury prone bowlers like Harris) can't play 3 Test matches in a row...at present there are only 'guidelines' and emotional selection decisions get made in the name of victory.

But the Bracken case is a bit of a one-off still though. However i'm not too sure that the warrior mindset of AUS cricketers which makes them want to play, even while suffering from injury, is something that current and past coaches staff have without showing proper concern to the players health.

Shane Watson i would say has been wrapped in cotton wool for large majorities of his career. While i recall Jason Gillespie and Damien Fleming also being managed carefully as bowlers too.