We had a lot of players that didn't adjust to the seaming pitch. Haddin was the most susceptible. I dare say he is close to the end than the beginning. Especially with Paine as the heir apparent. But he's luck Paine isn't fit yet.

Any chance for Matthew Wade ? He remains in good knick with the bat.

Peter Roebuck found dead in his hotel room in South Africa.

Shocking news.

And Nuggets by your own hand, the selectors are actually doing what you have suggest. Not doing mass changes but certainly changing the scenery. Lyon, Khawaja, S Marsh and Copeland have all been blooded since the Ashes were lost. That's over 40% of your sideI would expect that Haddin, Johnson, Ponting and Hughes will be on rice paper. Paine, Cummins, Hazelwood and Starc should debut this summer.

.

Glad you have it. You should learn from it.

Yes we've blooded a few but my point was that the current 11 is very similar to the one thrashed by England . It seems they started to bite the bullet then revisited again .

Not sure about the "learn from it" bit either . You throw in the 40% bit as if that's how much the side has changed since the Ashes - The current side is only about 20% different and Lyon for Beer is hardly ground breaking - and they've replaced a new player ( Khawaja ) ( who played in the last Ashes Test ) for Marsh . So I'd argue that it's much the same side - almost identical !.

Khawaja should never have been dropped and Haddin should have been moved on a fair while ago . Ponting is a tricky one as he is a "Great"

As for the Bowlers - only Harris can hold his head up

The reality is that we should have been slowly but surely blooding new players way before last years Ashes series . Not a hindsight comment either as I've been saying this for years - youll have to trust me on that one !

Anyway , we're just about on the same page in most area's here .

Nuggets

Edited November 14, 201113 yr by Nuggets

Yes we've blooded a few but my point was that the current 11 is very similar to the one thrashed by England . It seems they started to bite the bullet then revisited again .

Not sure about the "learn from it" bit either - The current side is only 20% different and Lyon for Beer is hardly ground breaking - and they've replaced a new player ( Khawaja ) ( who played in the last Ashes Test ) for Marsh .

Khawaja should never have been dropped and Haddin should have been moved on a fair while ago . Ponting is a tricky one as he is a "Great"

I think you have to look at what has happened during and since the campaign. Hughes did not play much during the Ashes and IMO is a flawed batsman. Against Sri Lanka Khawaja was there with Marsh, Copeland and Lyons. For this Test, we had three relative newbies with little experience. Its a line ball with Copeland getting a guernsey and with Tim Paine out, Haddin has been breathing longer. I think Copeland, Khawaja and Warner are all set to come in.

The debacle that has occurred has blotted a few line ball players futures. Johnson, Hussey,Haddin will go over the summer.Hughes is gone for mine. I think Siddle is warming a spot for a better bowler. Ponting has been a great and needs to be managed professionally out of the team. One of his saving grace is that there have not been better batting performances at home.

I dont we have the calibre and depth of player atm that you refer to 86/87.

Ignore the other "learn from it" its been deleted.

I dont we have the calibre and depth of player atm that you refer to 86/87.

Who knows and you may be right but ....... I remember that series well and don't remember feeling very confident about the Team going forward - if you remember there was a lot of doom and gloom about . 1989 changed all that and still goes dowm as one of my most enjoyable series . 1989 Team btw was dubbed "One of the worst ever" by the English media ! ( prior to the series of course )

As an aside , why aren't the Vics playing Alex Keath in the Shield Team - gotta give the kid a chance . NSW are constantly ahead of the Vics in this area and it somewhat explains why so many of them play Test cricket .

Nuggets, you are arguing against your own points. The Ashes team was a young team, and it was thrashed. The team is still young, yet you want to throw more young players into the mix?

Hussey had a bad game, but is still batting very well. The only 'old' batsman that you could be looking to replace is Ponting, but I don't think he's yet ready to be dumped. He's still got a few more credits in the bank.

You said that Khawaja should never have been dropped .... but the player he was replaced with was Shaun Marsh, who has since averaged nearly 60 in tests.

So list your team, as you would want it now, Nuggets. What is your Australian XI.

Also, it's Alex Keath. He's not playing because he can't make runs at district level at the moment. He will, but these things take time. You can't just throw kids in and expect them to perform. He needs development and he'll do that through the Futures league until he starts putting it together.

Who knows and you may be right but ....... I remember that series well and don't remember feeling very confident about the Team going forward - if you remember there was a lot of doom and gloom about . 1989 changed all that and still goes dowm as one of my most enjoyable series . 1989 Team btw was dubbed "One of the worst ever" by the English media ! ( prior to the series of course )

As an aside , why aren't the Vics playing Alex Keith in the Shield Team - gotta give the kid a chance . NSW are constantly ahead of the Vics in this area and it somewhat explains why so many of them play Test cricket .

Not sure how my bit ended up as your bit but anyways .................

Bob raises good points Nuggets.

You are also trying to argue the 1986/87 side against the 1989 side. I think you are looking at two different team with different experience levels. The team that went to England was indeed very capable. I dont know why you would use the English press hoopla to support just playing the kids.

Nuggets, you are arguing against your own points. The Ashes team was a young team, and it was thrashed. The team is still young, yet you want to throw more young players into the mix?

Hussey had a bad game, but is still batting very well. The only 'old' batsman that you could be looking to replace is Ponting, but I don't think he's yet ready to be dumped. He's still got a few more credits in the bank.

You said that Khawaja should never have been dropped .... but the player he was replaced with was Shaun Marsh, who has since averaged nearly 60 in tests.

So list your team, as you would want it now, Nuggets. What is your Australian XI.

Also, it's Alex Keath. He's not playing because he can't make runs at district level at the moment. He will, but these things take time. You can't just throw kids in and expect them to perform. He needs development and he'll do that through the Futures league until he starts putting it together.

Ok - here goes

Marsh

Watson

Khawaja

Warner - is next cab off the rank according to the selectors .

Clarke

Hussey

Paine - when fit or Wade if not .

Harris

Pattinson - was in the Sri Lankin Test squad

Cummins

Beer / Lyon or "pluck a leggie from somewhere"

Experience - Harris , Clarke , Watson , Hussey - Marsh and Paine are 27 I believe so they're hardly youngsters .

Out of the team go Ponting , Haddin , Johnson , Siddle , Hughes , Punter deserves a "farewell test"

Hughes , Johnson and Siddle can all get back in if form warrants it .

The current team has two 36yo's , a 34 yo , a 32yo , and three 30yo's - it's not a young team .

To be fair - post your team .

Bob raises good points Nuggets.

You are also trying to argue the 1986/87 side against the 1989 side. I think you are looking at two different team with different experience levels. The team that went to England was indeed very capable. I dont know why you would use the English press hoopla to support just playing the kids.

A lot of the 86/87 team played in the 89 team - one got thrashed , the other did the thrashing .Check the lineups through cricketarchive.com

Edit - The 11 that I picked is a team "Going forward" - A Future 11 - possibly by the end of the Indian Tests .

Edited November 14, 201113 yr by Nuggets

Bob raises good points Nuggets.

You are also trying to argue the 1986/87 side against the 1989 side. I think you are looking at two different team with different experience levels. The team that went to England was indeed very capable. I dont know why you would use the English press hoopla to support just playing the kids.

And Rhino , how about you post your team as well - the team I posted is a going forward team - Whilst Hussey keeps making runs he has to stay .

A lot of the 86/87 team played in the 89 team - one got thrashed , the other did the thrashing .Check the lineups through cricketarchive.com

The 1989 was a far more experienced team. If your saying their young players then another 2.5 years is a hell of alot of experience and players like M Taylor, M Waugh, Hughes were all better players in 1989 than when they were 1986/87. You could argue thoese players alone were not inexperienced at all . So the 1989 team does not support your argument at all.

And Rhino , how about you post your team as well - the team I posted is a going forward team - Whilst Hussey keeps making runs he has to stay .

Depends how forward looking you are being. Hussey Ponting, Haddin should not be in the team by the end of the Australian summer. Hughes is an easy drop but he too is relatively inexperienced and young. Johnson has burnt his tickets up in Sri Lanka and South Africa but had credits to continue after the Ashes in the absence of better options. And the better options for strike bowlers Hazelwood, Starc and Cummins are very young.

My forward team (out six months) wont be much different to yours give or take. Its just many of those players have not been ready (or fit) in the period from the Ashes to now.

FWIW, i am not sure there could be lost of options for Johnson, Siddle or Hughes unless they really change their stripes. Performances to date are not encouraging.

The 1989 was a far more experienced team. If your saying their young players then another 2.5 years is a hell of alot of experience and players like M Taylor, M Waugh, Hughes were all better players in 1989 than when they were 1986/87. You could argue thoese players alone were not inexperienced at all . So the 1989 team does not support your argument at all.

FWIW, i am not sure there could be lost of options for Johnson, Siddle or Hughes unless they really change their stripes. Performances to date are not encouraging.

We won the World cup in 1987 with a lot of that 86/87 team so maybe that was the turning point .Strangely enough we never got to see that triumph live as Ch9 didn't show the 2nd half of the Match - they did show highlights at about 10.30pm that night . The only place we found that it was "on" was the "Whale's" pub in South Melbourne - couldn't get in !

And , I'm with you on those 3 you mentioned - though Hughes is still very young .

Edited November 14, 201113 yr by Nuggets

We won the World cup in 1987 with a lot of that 86/87 team so maybe that was the turning point .Strangely enough we never got to see that triumph live as Ch9 didn't show the 2nd half of the Match - they did show highlights at about 10.30pm that night . The only place we found that it was "on" was the "Whale's" pub in South Melbourne - couldn't get in !

And , I'm with you on those 3 you mentioned - though Hughes is still very young .

Nuggets, the World Cup I think was indeed a turning point in confidence that really flowered in 1989. Yes Ch 9 did not show the final live. Curse them!

With regards to Ricky Ponting - he's been a truly great player and in some ways should be able to retire on his own terms - they should have a chat to him and maybe arrange a "farewell" Test . Like all great players he doesn't know the meaning of the word "Quit" so this may not be possible .

One major issue is that if it's the selection committee that sits down with Punter , this will include Michael Clarke ( If Pup opts out then .......)

I don't agree with the Captain being a selector because of issues like these .

Btw - getting dropped is not always the end - I will stand corrected on this one but I usually don't stick my neck out before checking the relevent facts - The great Glenn McGrath was dropped 5 times in his 1st 9 tests ! I am not absolutely sure whether he might have been injured once or twice in that time period but I don't remember this being the case .

And re Alex Keath - I'd rather the Vics play as many young blokes as is reasonably possible and take our chances on winning the Shield .Of course , they can't all be young blokes but lets face it - the Vics don't produce too many Test players these days .

Edited November 14, 201113 yr by Nuggets

I think the new Chairman of Selectors John Inverarity needs to have a number of discussions with Ponting leading to an agreed departure at the CA's basis. He needs to be told hook or by crook, you have until the SYD test at most if your form holds. Either SYD is your last Test.

If getting dropped is not the end then someone please tell Ben Hilfenhaus that. He is finished at Test level. The McGrath analogy is not a good one. I am not sure being dropped 5 times in 9 tests measures my point. Mitch Johnson has been around for 4 years and nearly 50(?) Tests. We know quite a bit about Mitch. And if he cannot sort out his appalling inconsistency and all too infrequent high points at Shield level for a sustained period, he is finished. The same with Hughes. If he cannot demonstrate an ability to properly address chinks in his technique then he is finished at Test level. Unless Siddle can develop a consistent killer delivery to survive at the top level then he is just honest fodder at Test level and will only appear if there are injuries.

All three have been on scene for four years or so. We know what we get from them. What we have seen to date is not good enough. They could well change and improve but I would want extra evidence to suggest that is the case. And they would want to change as cricketers. Some could change but I think a couple could go the way of Hilf and be a handy Shield bowler. For example, I have felt for Ponting and Clarke as captains when your apparent strike bowler serves the sub standard rubbish that he does.

http://blogs.espncricinfo.com/itfigures/archives/2011/11/test_100s_everything_anyone_wa.php

A great read

http://blogs.espncri...g_anyone_wa.php

A great read

Thanks for that. That is an awesome read of stats 45.

Bradman obviously stands out in much of that. Hayden & Martyn also stood out for me for Australia is some of the stats.

Pat cummins has looked right at home so far today.

Pat cummins has looked right at home so far today.

Yep , and he's 18 . He's got McDermott as his Coach at international level as well , which might help him develop a good outswinger .

Early doors but you'd reckon he will get quicker and better with maturity - huge prospect .

Edited November 17, 201113 yr by Nuggets

Pat cummins has looked right at home so far today.

Looks like Kreuzer from Carlton.

At 0/100 in the first innings we've doubled our score from the last innings played and haven't lost a wicket!

Enjoying this!!!

0/112 after all out 47.

Hughes and Watson should keep their heads down and take full advantage of the position they're in.

What's that about a week being a long time?

seeya Ricky!

FFS Ponting retire. Your reflexes are gone. Dam Gold contracts. Worst thing cricket Australia ever introduced. Time to go home to Tasmania Ricky. Said it for 2 years.

Surely Ponting and Haddin have to make way for Marsh and Wade for the first test against New Zealand now. And unless Johnson can take some wickets without going for 4.5+ runs an over he should get lost also!

Pat Cummins. Ripping prospect.