Warne-Muralidaran Trophy (Australia in Sri Lanka) Aug-Sep 2011

[sifter132]

Hmm, just seen the squad and it's not too bad I guess.

Good selections: Copeland, Marsh, dropping Smith

I'm with Sylvester here: Copeland, Harris and Johnson is my preferred attack right now. IMHO Hilfenhaus needs to do a bit of Shield time before he gets back into the team, and Copeland seems the perfect foil for the more attacking style of Harris and Johnson. He might get murdered at the top level with his slower speed, or maybe he'll be the new Stuart Clark, but at least we'll find out sooner rather than later...

Whoever looks best out of Marsh/Khawaja should be at #6. Playing the specialist batter at #6 means that Michael Clarke better be ready to bowl a few overs. Only having one spin option in Sri Lanka would be a bit dangerous - unless Ricky's gonna unveil his post-captaincy off-breaks . A stopgap selection might have been Dave Hussey at #6 because he can play spin well and bowls part time spin that might be needed in the 2nd innings of games. But that was more an idea, I support the idea to 'move on' and get a bit more youth in there.

Was VERY encouraged that Hilditch could spot that Smith can neither bat or bowl at an appropriate level and that he'll do better developing in Shield and short form cricket. Well done Andrew...

Bad selections: Lyon, the explanation for Dougie's absence, Pattinson?

Let's examine Dougie. War you nailed it dude. Hilditch complains in his statement that Dougie can't sustain his effort...Well why the hell wasn't he in Zimbabwe for Aus A?? What better way to prove one's fitness when there are questions marks over it? But no...they picked Siddle who was always going to make the squad, and Butterworth who was never going to make the Test squad. Bad selection.

And why does Pattinson get a free ride into our top squads without playing A level cricket? I don't mind them picking a developmental player as your 5th fast bowler, but please give him some 'A' cricket rather than having him mix drinks...

The other question is the spin question. It's obvious that the selectors have no patience. I mean how does Jason Krejza get a contract, get selected ahead of Lyon to the 'A' tour, and then after 2 games and just 60 odd overs, he's out again? And everyone here knows I'm no Krejza fanboy, I just wish the selectors would stick to a plan... If they didn't like Krejza enough in the first place for 60 overs to condemn him, then why is he on the contract list? Why was he in the 'A' team? It stinks...To me the selectors are just rolling the dice and hoping they get a hit with Lyon. Like they did with Doherty, like they did with Krejza before him... Even if Lyon has one good game, how many bad ones will it take to get dropped? 2 at most, I'd wager...They need to give someone an extended run - whoever gets picked should get the whole series to play.

It's a shame Hauritz isn't fit, because I think it's clear now that he's #1 and that dropping him was an awful call. I mean, EVERY other spinner in Aus needs to play more Shield cricket: Beer, Lyon, Krejza, Doherty, O'Keefe, Smith. ALL need to develop their games before they start thinking of baggy green glory.

 

[angryangy]

The mystery of Krejza's contract is comparable to what was shown with Smith being rated 7th by CA. Smith kept getting picked in all three forms and wasn't being entirely unhelpful; thus he ended the year with a very good performance rating, as opposed to players like Katich or Doug who had average seasons while spending some time injured. Logically, if you've got a fair selection of guys being average, it's sound that whoever plays the least is pushed to the fringe, but holistically, there are lots of blanks that should be filled in to make more sense. Even with Test performances being worth about 50% more than ODIs and about six times a T20I, it's possible for a player to simply rack up the numbers.

When Hauritz and Doherty got injured, they'd played enough to be the top two spinners (behind Smith, of course). Krejza didn't seem like a particularly unconventional third choice, but for the spinner picked to play the World Cup, the string of games meant a massive late sprint in the performance stakes against the likes of Beer or O'Keefe. If it was either of them (or anyone really) who played in India, I doubt Krejza would have a contract and I can't really see why it would have been he to go to Zimbabwe either for that matter.

I think what it shows is that any kind of attempt to objectively measure players is only as objective as the reasons the players were picked in the first place. If the selectors want a guy to play badly enough, then they can pretty well will him towards a contract. Additionally, if there's some algorithm in play to allow comparison of prospects like Cummins with Test veterans, then it's almost doubtlessly flawed and needs to be shepherded by some common sense.

 

[War]

Hmm, just seen the squad and it's not too bad I guess.

Good selections: Copeland, Marsh, dropping Smith

I'm with Sylvester here: Copeland, Harris and Johnson is my preferred attack right now. IMHO Hilfenhaus needs to do a bit of Shield time before he gets back into the team, and Copeland seems the perfect foil for the more attacking style of Harris and Johnson. He might get murdered at the top level with his slower speed, or maybe he'll be the new Stuart Clark, but at least we'll find out sooner rather than later...

Ye looking ahead to the S Africa tour and further where 4 quicks should be the the basic of the attack. Based on what ive seen of Copeland he could be the perfect (although i've yet to see his speeds clocked) - he could be the perfect line and lenght bowler to compliment Harris, Johnson, Siddle, Harris, Bollinger.

A stopgap selection might have been Dave Hussey at #6 because he can play spin well and bowls part time spin that might be needed in the 2nd innings of games. But that was more an idea, I support the idea to 'move on' and get a bit more youth in there.

I thought about Dussey as well and althought i am fine with them going for youth at this stage. I would have still picked Dussey as a back-up batsman while picking one of Marsh or Khawaja.

But then again of course Katich still should be in this team.

Let's examine Dougie. War you nailed it dude. Hilditch complains in his statement that Dougie can't sustain his effort...Well why the hell wasn't he in Zimbabwe for Aus A?? What better way to prove one's fitness when there are questions marks over it? But no...they picked Siddle who was always going to make the squad, and Butterworth who was never going to make the Test squad. Bad selection.

Exactly Siddle was the only bowler who left the Ashes with his head held fairly high other than Harris. You didnt need to send him on the A tour to ZIM. Bollinger should have gone if they had any weird worries about his fitness for a 5-day game.

Plus also as i mentioned before, although im glad Harris is in the test squad. Im still skeptical as what has made the selectors so confident his body is going to be fit for test cricket. Given he has not played tests since the perth test, has only played a few IPL games and they did not see it fit to pick him in the ODIs and T20 squads for this tour.

And why does Pattinson get a free ride into our top squads without playing A level cricket? I don't mind them picking a developmental player as your 5th fast bowler, but please give him some 'A' cricket rather than having him mix drinks...

Yea. I like Pattison but he shouldn't be on this tour, they seem to be fast tracking a bit too fast ATM. I think Starc is more impressive young bowler at the moment also.

 

[sifter132]

I think what it shows is that any kind of attempt to objectively measure players is only as objective as the reasons the players were picked in the first place. If the selectors want a guy to play badly enough, then they can pretty well will him towards a contract. Additionally, if there's some algorithm in play to allow comparison of prospects like Cummins with Test veterans, then it's almost doubtlessly flawed and needs to be shepherded by some common sense.

Yah and there's also an algorithm to dump veterans who aren't needed anymore... Why can't they just pick the 25 players most likely to play for Australia in the next year and rank them thus? Or ignore T20 from the calculations and just bump the match payments for a T20I. Why do we need complex formulae to work out who gets paid what anyway? Any player below Steve Smith in the rankings must be cursing the system...

Maybe instead of matches played being the important bit of the ranking, use runs and wickets. That would have bumped Smith down a bit, because he played a lot, but didn't very much.

 

[Left_Hander]

A few comments on the squad.

Smith: Whilst I support him being dropped, Hilditch said that the experiment "didn't work". We knew that before he was batting in the side at 6! And if you ask me, I wouldn't be experimenting with players during an Ashes series!

Lyon: From what I've heard he has made a promising start but surely not enough to warrant a spot on the tour. In my opinion, Krejza should of been picked. He was our World Cup spinner after all.

Copeland: A good choice, has taken wickets in first class cricket and deserves his spot. Hoping for him to be a good selection.

Overall, to me it looks like a very inexperienced side. I'm hoping for the best.

 

[hedger_14]

Ok, I think the selectors have completely lost it. Katich should be in the squad, I don't give a fried chicken about his age. He's better than Hughes and I rate him as the third best Australian batsman (behind Hussey and Watson). Nathan Lyon and Michael Beer? Seriously! Lyon has played 4 FC matches, and hasn't done ████ in any of them although did take 6/200 in one of his matches which is still ████. Michael Beer, well he failed in his first test. I don't care if he looked good, he didn't look attacking enough and should be dropped. I know Hauritz is injured but I'd doubt he'd still be in the test squad since the selectors are fried chickening idiots. I don't think Smith should have been dropped, he's better than both Lyon and Beer with the ball although that doesn't say much. I think it's good that he has been dropped, but when you look at his replacements, you don't know how. And Pattinson shouldn't be in the squad. I rate him as a OD bowler, don't think he's up for it at test level. And what happened to Peter George by the way?

They have made a couple of good selections though. Shaun Marsh, I've been wanting him in the test side for ages. Had a great FC season last year and definately deserves his spot. I think he should be opening rather than Hughes but I'm guessing he will bat at 6. Trent Copeland also got a deserved callup and I reckon he will do well. With the lack of bowling quality in this tour, I think he will stand out. Much will rely on Johnson and Harris though. Bollinger? Was he just dropped cause if he was, it just shows how crazy the selectors are again? Anyway, if I had to choose a starting XI from the current squad, I'd go with.

1. Shane Watson
2. Phil Hughes
3. Usman Khawaja
4. Michael Hussey
5. Shaun Marsh
6. Who can I choose from, I've got the two most fried chickening overrated players in the world to choose from (Clarke and Ponting)
7. Brad Haddin
8. Mitchell Johnson
9. Ryan Harris
10. Trent Copeland
11. Again, no options but I'd go with Pattinson out of the rest.


There is a reason why I follow South Africa now.

 

[sifter132]

So in that potential XI you've got no one who can bowl spin at all - for a tour of Sri Lanka Khawaja or Clarke (if you picked him) would be #1 spinner.

Agree with your vibe on a few points though. Some not.
*Katich is good, but we can't keep going back to his well forever so I can handle moving on.
*Our spinners suck yes, with no Hauritz available they definitely suck, dare I say Lyon/Beer is about as good as could have been done here. O'Keefe and Krejza are the 2 that might have had a chance, and I've hardly got confidence in those 2 either.
*Yeah Bollinger has been treated harshly. The selectors have had more than enough chances to pick him since he bowled himself to a standstill in Adelaide, but I guess they just don't want him. They like golden boy Pattinson...
*And Peter George, yeah I dunno. I think he was alright for SA last season, but everyone seems to have forgotten about him. Again, golden boy Pattinson somehow leaps above the pack. It seems anyone who can bowl 140kph automatically gets a free contract these days I'm afraid, ask Pat Cummins about it.

 

[karnog]

Why can't Brad Hodge and Stuart Macgill be 10 years younger... Not a bad choice. Marsh should be in at 6 because I don't see too many good players of spin. Also perfect opportunity for Phil Hughes to cement a spot. I don't see a strong pace attack so he might benefit. The middle order will have a tough job ahead.

 

[cricketmad09]

My team would be

Watson
Marsh
Ponting
Khawaja
Hussey
Clarke
Haddin
Johnson
Lyon
Harris
Siddle

The team would probably be

Watson
Hughes
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
Khawaja
Haddin
Johnson
Lyon
Harris
Siddle

The team should be

Watson
Katich
Marsh
Hussey
Clarke
Ponting
Haddin
Johnson
O'Keefe/Hauritz
Siddle
Harris


Just a few of my thoughts.

The selection policies are riddled with inconsistencies and the selectors have no understanding about developing and nurturing talent.

Lyon - plays 4 FC games and gets into the test squad with an average of 43. Steve O'Keefe has an average of 25 across more matches and doesn't even get in the Australia A team

Pattinson - Last season I wouldn't have had him in my best 5 Victorian bowlers. He has only played 6 first class matches. How is he ready or good enough for test cricket?

They never pick players on form. Hughes and Smith were in the team despite repeated poor performances in both the international and domestic arena.

McDonald has been on fire the last 12 months, scoring a ridiculous amount of runs. Yet he does not even get in the A team. How is that justified?

Simon Katich has been our leading run scorer and therefore arguably our best player. But he doesn't even get a contract. How is that justified?

Khawaja didn't make runs in the A series and didn't make runs while playing in England. If he is selected, how is that justified?

Copeland will never be an effective test bowler. You simply can not penetrate the defenses of the best players in the world when you're bowling at 120km/h.

With more resources and more money going to T20's there is little incentive for players to focus on test cricket. Test cricket is the number 1 priority.

I think that cricket australia needs a COMPLETE overhaul. Get rid of the BBL and go back to the old Big Bash with the real teams that I grew up watching. Put more resources into 4 day cricket. Having consistent and transparent selection policies. Select players who have been performing and who are playing well.

When Merv Hughes was selector and Mitchell Johnson was in bad form, he said that it would "destroy his confidence" to drop him and that he should be kept in that team. That is probably the worst idea I have ever heard of in cricket ever. That goes to show the caliber of the people on the selection panel.

Hildich said the selectors did a "very good job" last Ashes series. It's a fact that they did a very poor job so that comment shows they've got their heads so far up their own arses that they can chew their food twice and that they have no credibility when it comes to selecting a team.

There needs to be at least 2 full time selectors. One full time selector travels with the team, attends training sessions and matches and gets a first hand idea of how the players are traveling. There also needs to be another full time "development" selector so to speak, focusing on identifying the best players currently not playing for Australia. So attending Sheffield Shield matches, Centre of Excellence, state training ect. and really sussing out who is playing well at state level.

 

[ferg512]

I am just absolutely astonished that O' Keefe misses out again, what the heck does the man have to do?? Hes the only spinner out of the lot of them that has respectable first class stats plus he can bat as well. Looks to me like a better version of Smith, but I might be jumping the gun a bit haven't seen a lot of him. Guys like Lyon and Beer need at least another full season of Shield cricket before they can even think about being selected.

----------

Also what a bad time for them to implement that BBL, with the Australan cricket team in the position its in now its not a good look. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the Big Bash I found it the most exciting of all the twenty20 domestic league and then now they go and kill it with this city based crap.

 

[Left_Hander]

I would post a huge rant about the BBL but I don't know if this is the right thread for it. But I do have to agree that Australian cricket needs a huge overhaul, mainly the off the field aspects.

 

[hedger_14]

I am just absolutely astonished that O' Keefe misses out again, what the heck does the man have to do?? Hes the only spinner out of the lot of them that has respectable first class stats plus he can bat as well.

Yeah, I find it surprising. The two best spinners in Australia are Hauritz and O'Keefe, both have similar FC averages over the past few seasons, it's only that Hauritz had averaged around 48 up until like 2 or 3 seasons ago, so his recent averages are much the same as O'Keefe. But yeah, for a tour of Sri Lanka, my test lineup would be:

1. Simon Katich
2. Shane Watson
3. Shaun Marsh
4. Michael Hussey
5. Usman Khawaja
6. George Bailey
7. Brad Haddin
8. Mitchell Johnson/Steve O'Keefe
9. Nathan Hauritz
10. Ryan Harris/Peter Siddle
11. Doug Bollinger

There needs to be at least 2 full time selectors. One full time selector travels with the team, attends training sessions and matches and gets a first hand idea of how the players are traveling. There also needs to be another full time "development" selector so to speak, focusing on identifying the best players currently not playing for Australia. So attending Sheffield Shield matches, Centre of Excellence, state training ect. and really sussing out who is playing well at state level.

Or they could just get some selectors who knew something about cricket and actually watched games. They're probably more interested in the Rugby League rather than cricket.

 

[sifter132]

^I think one of the older heads in State cricket should be a selector ie. a current player like Hodge, Stuart Clark, Katich - those type of guys who are past selection but still know the trends of cricket, know how good each of the players up for selection is and aren't relying on playing days 30 years ago for their understanding of cricket.

Guys like Lyon and Beer need at least another full season of Shield cricket before they can even think about being selected

I think the only guy who DOESN'T need a year of Shield is Hauritz, and he was injured for this... It's a pretty dire situation really. Lyon and Beer will hopefully be passable, but geez where's a Brad Hogg type when you need him?

 

[aussie1st]

Stats show O'Keefe best spin option

Finally an article about O'Keefe being screwed over. What really gets me is Hilditch hasn't told him why he hasn't been picked.

 

[sifter132]

The quicker Rod Marsh gets Hilditch's job the better. Marsh would be tougher, and wouldn't be afraid to talk to the players that missed out on selection and tell them what to work on. Hilditch seems to be scared of doing that. In fact it seems a requirement that the chairman of selectors is a bad communicator. Trevor Hohns used to get the same complaints. How is it that Steve O'Keefe hasn't been able to talk with Hilditch? Shouldn't that be half of the selectors job - guiding players with advice on what they can do to make the team?

Too often selectors talking with players who aren't in the team gets seen as a negative thing because they supposedly need to point out every fault a player has and explain why they couldn't make the team. But why not look at the glass half full side? Talking with players who aren't selected is a great chance for the selectors to guide them, and get them practising things that will help their selection case.