Anyone for cricket?

[dee-luded 2,959]

Terrible results from the Sussex game. Cowan 66, Hughes 84, Smith 98*, Khawaja 40.

Smith may go on to make a 100, which will save his spot, but what do we do about the rest? Can we drop Hughes after making an 84, to go with his (superb) 81* at Trent Bridge? Can we drop Khawaja for only making 40, despite being better than Smith and Hughes at Lord's? Can we drop Watson despite not giving him a chance at Hove?

Warner's 193 now also looks just OK given the South Africans' batting.

You'd expect Warner to get back in, which means someone has to go. I think it should be Watson but surely he can't be dropped without getting a chance at Hove, so if it's not him, I'd pick Hughes, even though this 84 is good. Khawaja looked maybe like he was getting comfortable at number 3.

If Lyon bowls well, don't be surprised if Agar gets 'rested' or something along those lines (I maintain he never should have been picked). Bird and Starc have Pattinson's spot to play for, too (maybe they'll both play if Harris isn't fit).

play Clark @ 4 !!! force him to be a leader & step up. then we could play hughes & others after him.

Warner at 3, as I suggested last year. turn him into a 'david boon' type,,, as he has the gravelly take all challenges on 'attitude'. he needs to be sculpted into that type we need.

@ 1 watson

@ 2 rogers

@ 3 warner

@ 4 clark

@ 5 khawaja

@ 6 hughes/wade

@ 7 smith/agar

@ 8 haddin

@ 9 siddle

@ 10 Harris

@ 11 Bird/faulkner

12th man......

Edited July 27, 2013 by dee-luded

[MadAsHell 4,212]

Terrible results from the Sussex game. Cowan 66, Hughes 84, Smith 98*, Khawaja 40.

Smith may go on to make a 100, which will save his spot, but what do we do about the rest? Can we drop Hughes after making an 84, to go with his (superb) 81* at Trent Bridge? Can we drop Khawaja for only making 40, despite being better than Smith and Hughes at Lord's? Can we drop Watson despite not giving him a chance at Hove?

Warner's 193 now also looks just OK given the South Africans' batting.

You'd expect Warner to get back in, which means someone has to go. I think it should be Watson but surely he can't be dropped without getting a chance at Hove, so if it's not him, I'd pick Hughes, even though this 84 is good. Khawaja looked maybe like he was getting comfortable at number 3.

If Lyon bowls well, don't be surprised if Agar gets 'rested' or something along those lines (I maintain he never should have been picked). Bird and Starc have Pattinson's spot to play for, too (maybe they'll both play if Harris isn't fit).

it does raise some difficult selection questions for the 3rd test. Apart from poor old Matthew Wade making a duck and kissing his chances goodbye at least for this series.

The main spot up for grabs for the 3rd test for me was the number 4 spot, with Rogers and Watson to open, Khawaja at 3, Clarke at 5, Warner in at 6 and Haddin at 7 meaning one of Smith, Hughes or Wade was to bat at 4. With both Hughes and Smith making runs though they could possibly drop Rogers, open Hughes with Watson and bat Smith at 4? Watson will be safe due to his bolwing, for the rest of this series at least IMO.

Meanwhile in the Australia A game at Lunch on Day 4

Australia A 1st Innings 5/474dec

D. Warner 193

G. Maxwell 155*

K. Abbott 2/83 (25)

M. De Lange 2/129 (23)

South Africa A 1st Innings 7/614dec

D. Elgar 268

T. Tsolekile 159

F. Ahmed 3/177 (42)

J. Hazlewood 1/68 (27)

Australia A 2nd Innings 1/90

A. Finch 51*

A. Doolan 20*

S. Harmer 1/32 (9)

K. Abbott 0/10 (6)

Obviously a very flat wicket over there with 4 batsmen making over 150. A good effort from Fawad Ahmed taking 3 wickets and bowling an amazing 42 overs in obviously tough conditions for the bowlers. Hopefully Australia A can bat out the day to secure the draw. Some 2nd innings runs for both Doolan and Warner would be nice. Also worth noting Shaun Marsh who's on this tour (don't know why) made two poor scores on a complete road. How this guy is on our A tour ahead of guys like Silk, Burns, Bailey, Cosgrove, Henry, Handscomb and Lynn is a complete joke!

[dee-luded 2,959]

Article in the Age finally putting the blame for our demise on the head of CA.

BBL,IPL,the weakening of Club and state cricket and the chasing of quick bucks.

Ten years with Sutherland have overseen this .

I once loved cricket with a passion.

Not now-I would rather play park cricket or watch some mates play.

They wrecked it.

Fkn Sports administrators.

dit dit de dit it.... news just in.......

Katich is alive after all, & someone said he was shipwrecked on a lost island somewhere in the maldives???

""" Katich offers selectors a reminder """

Simon Katich has turned out for an Australian team at Lord's – but it was a week too late to help Michael Clarke's side out of the mire they found themselves in the second Ashes Test.

The former Test batsman is enjoying a prolific English summer with Lancashire, in contrast to the fortunes of Australia against England, sitting third of all scorers in county cricket with 874 runs at an average of 72.13.

He chalked up another 85 in a guest appearance for the touring Sydney Cricket Ground XI in their match against a Marylebone Cricket Club selection at the Nursery Ground, next to the main arena at Lord's.

The short boundaries and the standard of competition were a fair stretch from his 56 Tests – the last of which he played in 2010 – but his rich form for Lancashire continues to make a statement while Australian selectors do their best to look the other way.

Katich made it clear in commenting to Fairfax Media last week that he would be available in these Ashes should he be called upon, dismissing national selector John Inverarity's statement last month that he thought the gritty left-hander had retired and would therefore not be considered again for Australia.

"I never retired from international cricket," Katich said. "I was told by [former chief selector, Andrew] Hilditch I was never going to be picked again for Australia in 2010 – although he did say the same thing to me in April 2007."

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/sport/cricket/katich-offers-selectors-a-reminder-20130727-2qqpb.html#ixzz2aFdrotrp

[jazza 1,323]

yep deluded. betcha MC would like to have a leader in the sheds with him right now

[dee-luded 2,959]

macca

I think cowan has been overlooked by a lot of people, his technique is better than most in the team atm

Clarke will stay

smith gets another 3 tests at least

warner will be back

wade not sure he will be anything but a stopgap batsman

interesting shield opening this year with a lot of players asking their skippers if they can bat in the top 3.knowing that places are open will generate a free for all at shield level

I can't help but think Cowans loss of sturdiness has coincided with the passed Coach & the internal politics over the last couple of years...

I always thought he was a very handy 'Rock' holding one end up as opener, whilst the other end could 'attack'... that I thought was our strength.

[MadAsHell 4,212]

Final scorecard from both the Australia & Australia A matches.

Australia v Sussex

Australia 1st Innings 5/366dec

S. Smith 102*

P. Hughes 84

M. Panesar 3/70 (24.4)

L. Hatchett 2/38 (14.4)

Sussex 1st Innings 7/368dec

J. Taylor 121*

R. Hamilton-Brown 73

M. Starc 2/43 (18)

J. Bird 2/62 (20)

Australia 2nd Innings 2/152

E. Cowan 77*

P. Hughes 38

L. Hatchett 2/28 (11)

C. Nash 0/10 (2)

A bit disapointing to give up a 1st Innings lead in the tour match. Steve Smith dropping taylor off Bird on 23 was costly in the end. No real standouts from the bowlers. Both Lyon and Agar struggled and both Bird and Starc took 2 wickets each, although Bird should of had 3. Cowan made two 50's and Khawaja was dismissed for 40 and then 1 in his two innings. Hughes an 84 and 38 and Wade 30* in the 2nd dig.

In the Australia A match.

Australia A 1st Innings 5/474dec

D. Warner 193

G. Maxwell 155*

K. Abbott 2/83 (25)

M. De Lange 2/129 (23)

South Africa A 1st Innings 7/614dec

D. Elgar 268

T. Tsolekile 159

F. Ahmed 3/177 (42)

J. Hazlewood 1/68 (27)

Australia A 2nd Innings 6/254

A. Finch 88

A. Doolan 38

M. De Lange 2/42 (15)

S. Harmer 2/94 (30)

Good to see the A team hang on for a draw given they spent the best part of 5 sessions in the field heading into the last day. Warner made 33 in his 2nd dig to go with his 193 in the 1st. Finch two 50's in the match (could we see a breakout season in Shield cricket for him this season?). Was also good to see Fawad Ahmed take 3 wickets on a road of a picth , toiling for an amazing 42 overs. Best figures in any innings for the match from Fawad.

As for changes for the 3rd test for Australia, personally I think Bird in ahead of Starc for Pattinson given Bird's line and length. He took 4 wickets in the last tour match and should of had three in this match when the century maker Taylor was put down by Smith on 23. I think Agar will hold his spot as the spinner as Lyon didn't really impress, although could we see an 11th hour call up for Fawad Ahmed given he's taken 11 wickets in his last 3 innings bowling?

As for the batting it's a real toss of the coin. I expect to see Watson keep his spot at the top of the order, Khawaja to stay at 3, Clarke at 5 and I expect to see Warner come in at 6. That leaves the other opening spot and the number 4 role. Number 4 I expect will go to one of Smith or Hughes as Wade needed a big score in the tour match to give himself a chance. Given Smith's unbeaten century, his ability to play spin better and given he's a right hander (Swann to spin into Smith, away from Hughes), I think we'll see Smith given the number 4 role.

As for the other openers spot, we've got Cowan who made two 50's in the tour match and was one of our better players in India. However played two very ordinary shots in the 1st Test, only averages just over 30 in 18 test matches and has only made 1 century in all that time. Hughes who made 84 in the 1st innings in the tour match, made an impressive 81* in the 1st Innings of the first test, however nothing since, is a natural opener however and that's where he scored all his runs in the last shield season, although showed in the last series in England that he can struggled against the new ball. Or Rogers, who has waited years to add to his 1 test, has had two tets this time around and scored a 50, yet got out in two ugly fashions in the 2nd test. To be fair to him he has had two very stiff LBW decisions go against him, however he's certainly yet to demand his spot. Verdict.... Rogers for me, but only just, you could give it to any of the three and there'd be a strong argument for and against any. Time will tell I guess.

Edited July 28, 2013 by Tall Defence

[dee-luded 2,959]

Hi all.

... can I ask the more experienced cricket playing posters, to write down their top 12 Australian batsmen, including the likes of Katich who are currently out of the touring list, into 2 lists... List 1 rated against swing/seam bowling,,,, & list 2 rated against spin bowling.

[jazza 1,323]

I can't help but think Cowans loss of sturdiness has coincided with the passed Coach & the internal politics over the last couple of years...

I always thought he was a very handy 'Rock' holding one end up as opener, whilst the other end could 'attack'... that I thought was our strength.

yeah that's what I thought

btw on the leadership issue, not that I may know anything about it

my dad always gave the advice of ,:would you follow this man into hades through the gates of hell "

and the easiest answer of that question is . RP yes.SW yes MC no

but you can only answer that yourself .so on the leadership issue would you follow MC

[MadAsHell 4,212]

Hi all.

... can I ask the more experienced cricket playing posters, to write down their top 12 Australian batsmen, including the likes of Katich who are currently out of the touring list, into 2 lists... List 1 rated against swing/seam bowling,,,, & list 2 rated against spin bowling.

Difficut thing to do, given is it on what they're produced at test level or first class level? What they're capable of or what they're currently producing?

Personally I rate them the follwoing

SWING/SEAM

Michael Clarke: Pretty easy, he's our best batsman by a country mile, whether it's against the quicks or spinners.

David Warner: Has shown he's more then capable against the seaming ball (NZ in Hobart) when all others around him struggle and has dismantled some of the worlds best quicks all over the world. Consistency is his problem.

Shane Watson: See David Warners comments. He's capable of a lot more then what he's producing.

Simon Katich: Eight years ago he really struggled against the seaming ball but worked hard to fix this issue by playing the ball later. Scoring big runs over in England and could easily still be playing.

Phil Hughes: Has shown at First class level that he's more then capable of handling the new ball on all kinds of surfaces from green tops at Belrieve to fast bouncy pitches in Perth. Hasn't been able to do the same at Test level, but whenever he's dropped from the test team, he scores a mountain of runs at Shield level up the top.

Chris Rogers: Has been producing big numbers in First class cricket both here and in England for years now on both seaming and bouncy wickets. I'm still optimistic he could pull out some big innings over the remaining tests. Like Katich, he plays the ball late to combat the swing.

Usman Khawaja: Very good technique and no obvious weaknesses in his game apart from his ability to rotate the strike. Has shown an ability to get starts which bodes well, just a matter on converting them. His move to the greener wickets at the GABBA didn't seem to effect him to much.

Mark Cosgrove: Very good first class cricekter who moved from the flat road of Adelaide to the seaming wicket in Hobart and his game has improvd to go with it. Amazed that he hasn't been mentioned by selectors as far as a potential top order batsman given our issues as he has a good compact game but still with the ability to go big when needed. His fitness and fielding I believe is his biggest issue.

Joe Burns: Young batsman who's been doing it tough up at the GABBA but has an average in the high 30's. Has moved around the batting line up from openning to batting down as low as 5. I think the number 3 or 4 role suits him best. Has a good technique and array of shots against the quicks. Consistency is his issue as he seems at this stage to be a bit feast or famine which does happen sometimes with the young batsmen. One worth watching.

Nic Maddinson: Another young batsman with a lot of potential. Plays a bit like Matthew Hayden in that he enjoys taking it up to the quicks even on the seaming wicket. Made a century recently for Australia A on a wicket that was doing a bit in England, he does however need to learn to reign it in from time to time.

SPIN

Michael Clarke: No comment needed I don't beleive. His footwork is that of Dean Jones though.

David Hussey: After Clarke he's easily our next best player of spin. Very quick on his feet and playing in the IPL has been good for his play against spin which was already good. At 36 has probably missed the boat and shoudl of been given a shot years ago.

Simon Katich: Has played very well for Australia on tours of India & Sri Lanka. In Steve Waughs final test he scored a century on a turning SCG wicket that Anil Kumble described as one of the best he's seen.

Brad Haddin: Actually plays the spinners very well when he gives himself a chance to get in and doesn't go to hard to soon. One of the best staright drivers off the spinners in world cricket.

Steve Smith: I've seen him play very well against the spinners at first class level and played quite well in India, however Swann looks to have him confussed. There is some hope for Smith, it's just a question of how long we give him.

Adam Voges: I've seen him take a lot of spinners apart at FC level in both Shield cricket and the shorter forms. Enjoys using his feet.

Mark Cosgrove: Doesn't use his feet a lot but he knows his limitations. Plays from the crease and is generally pretty careful about what he defends and what he atatcks. If a spinner's bowling well to him however he can get bogged down.

Glenn Maxwell: Very similar to Voges in the way he plays them, but he can get very reckless in his shot selection. Has the ability to become a very, very good player. but I have my doubts at Test level due to his temperment.

Cameron White: Foot work isn't that great, but he has a pretty good ability like Cosgrove of picking what shots to attack and what shots to use his feet to in order to try and get on top of the spinners. Doesn't have the ability to see a spinner off over a long period though when they're playing well as he'll eventually try and play one shot to many.

Aaron Finch: Very simlar to White, although he will attempt to play one scoring shot off them an over whether it's there or not.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Difficut thing to do, given is it on what they're produced at test level or first class level? What they're capable of or what they're currently producing?

Personally I rate them the follwoing

SWING/SEAM

Michael Clarke: Pretty easy, he's our best batsman by a country mile, whether it's against the quicks or spinners.

David Warner: Has shown he's more then capable against the seaming ball (NZ in Hobart) when all others around him struggle and has dismantled some of the worlds best quicks all over the world. Consistency is his problem.

Shane Watson: See David Warners comments. He's capable of a lot more then what he's producing.

Simon Katich: Eight years ago he really struggled against the seaming ball but worked hard to fix this issue by playing the ball later. Scoring big runs over in England and could easily still be playing.

Phil Hughes: Has shown at First class level that he's more then capable of handling the new ball on all kinds of surfaces from green tops at Belrieve to fast bouncy pitches in Perth. Hasn't been able to do the same at Test level, but whenever he's dropped from the test team, he scores a mountain of runs at Shield level up the top.

Chris Rogers: Has been producing big numbers in First class cricket both here and in England for years now on both seaming and bouncy wickets. I'm still optimistic he could pull out some big innings over the remaining tests. Like Katich, he plays the ball late to combat the swing.

Usman Khawaja: Very good technique and no obvious weaknesses in his game apart from his ability to rotate the strike. Has shown an ability to get starts which bodes well, just a matter on converting them. His move to the greener wickets at the GABBA didn't seem to effect him to much.

Mark Cosgrove: Very good first class cricekter who moved from the flat road of Adelaide to the seaming wicket in Hobart and his game has improvd to go with it. Amazed that he hasn't been mentioned by selectors as far as a potential top order batsman given our issues as he has a good compact game but still with the ability to go big when needed. His fitness and fielding I believe is his biggest issue.

Joe Burns: Young batsman who's been doing it tough up at the GABBA but has an average in the high 30's. Has moved around the batting line up from openning to batting down as low as 5. I think the number 3 or 4 role suits him best. Has a good technique and array of shots against the quicks. Consistency is his issue as he seems at this stage to be a bit feast or famine which does happen sometimes with the young batsmen. One worth watching.

Nic Maddinson: Another young batsman with a lot of potential. Plays a bit like Matthew Hayden in that he enjoys taking it up to the quicks even on the seaming wicket. Made a century recently for Australia A on a wicket that was doing a bit in England, he does however need to learn to reign it in from time to time.

SPIN

Michael Clarke: No comment needed I don't beleive. His footwork is that of Dean Jones though.

David Hussey: After Clarke he's easily our next best player of spin. Very quick on his feet and playing in the IPL has been good for his play against spin which was already good. At 36 has probably missed the boat and shoudl of been given a shot years ago.

Simon Katich: Has played very well for Australia on tours of India & Sri Lanka. In Steve Waughs final test he scored a century on a turning SCG wicket that Anil Kumble described as one of the best he's seen.

Brad Haddin: Actually plays the spinners very well when he gives himself a chance to get in and doesn't go to hard to soon. One of the best staright drivers off the spinners in world cricket.

Steve Smith: I've seen him play very well against the spinners at first class level and played quite well in India, however Swann looks to have him confussed. There is some hope for Smith, it's just a question of how long we give him.

Adam Voges: I've seen him take a lot of spinners apart at FC level in both Shield cricket and the shorter forms. Enjoys using his feet.

Mark Cosgrove: Doesn't use his feet a lot but he knows his limitations. Plays from the crease and is generally pretty careful about what he defends and what he atatcks. If a spinner's bowling well to him however he can get bogged down.

Glenn Maxwell: Very similar to Voges in the way he plays them, but he can get very reckless in his shot selection. Has the ability to become a very, very good player. but I have my doubts at Test level due to his temperment.

Cameron White: Foot work isn't that great, but he has a pretty good ability like Cosgrove of picking what shots to attack and what shots to use his feet to in order to try and get on top of the spinners. Doesn't have the ability to see a spinner off over a long period though when they're playing well as he'll eventually try and play one shot to many.

Aaron Finch: Very simlar to White, although he will attempt to play one scoring shot off them an over whether it's there or not.

... to me we need to get this side steadied, after some awful games in the last couple of years.

So I think we first have to go outside the normal rebuild framework, & plan a short-term campaign to right the ship first, by selecting those with the required toughness, who can do this job, then gradually do the transition to the most skilled.

If we merged the top 6 off each list to find our most hard headed top 5 batsmen, who play well in all circumstances, we may be somewhere near what it takes.

# so obviously clarkes our best bat in the team.

clark/clark

hussey/warner

katich/watson

smith/katich

haddin/hughes

voges/rogers

Watson -shown he can, + bowl

Rogers - tough

Katich - proven performer at the top, fierce competitor, + part time spin + can open

Warner - has the desire to be in the contest, can score quickly & dominate - part time spin + can open

Clark - natural class + can bowl

Smith/agar

Haddin/Wade

------------------------

Siddle

Harris

Bird/Faulkner/Starc

??????

switch warner & clark if you want?

we need a spinner who can remove their top batsmen

# I reckon the ACB & the selectors have to suck it up, & bring back Katich for the good of our countries cricket. Lets hope Boof can get them all past the past...

[jazza 1,323]

I think its to late for kat

a rebuild of the rebuild looks like the only way to go

[MadAsHell 4,212]

... to me we need to get this side steadied, after some awful games in the last couple of years.

So I think we first have to go outside the normal rebuild framework, & plan a short-term campaign to right the ship first, by selecting those with the required toughness, who can do this job, then gradually do the transition to the most skilled.

If we merged the top 6 off each list to find our most hard headed top 5 batsmen, who play well in all circumstances, we may be somewhere near what it takes.

# so obviously clarkes our best bat in the team.

clark/clark

hussey/warner

katich/watson

smith/katich

haddin/hughes

voges/rogers

Watson -shown he can, + bowl

Rogers - tough

Katich - proven performer at the top, fierce competitor, + part time spin + can open

Warner - has the desire to be in the contest, can score quickly & dominate - part time spin + can open

Clark - natural class + can bowl

Smith/agar

Haddin/Wade

------------------------

Siddle

Harris

Bird/Faulkner/Starc

??????

switch warner & clark if you want?

we need a spinner who can remove their top batsmen

# I reckon the ACB & the selectors have to suck it up, & bring back Katich for the good of our countries cricket. Lets hope Boof can get them all past the past...

I've mentioned myself that I wouldn't be against Katich coming back as captain to lead us through the next 18 months as it's going to be a very testing one.

After this Ashes leg is over we have England for 5 tests out here, then a trip to South Africa for 3 tests, then a three test series against Pakistan in a neutral venue (England or UAE no doubt) followed by a 4 test home series against India. These are all big challenges! I believe that the future of our batting is in the likes of Joe Burns, Nic Maddinson, Jordan Silk, however I don't think these next 15 test matches are the environment to debut them in.

Bring Katich back for those 15 tests as captain and also bring in George Bailey or Tim Paine as Vice Captain to take over after next summer against India. He's a fighter Katich and will bring back some of the qualities we saw in Steve Waugh and AB and this could be a chance for a good legacy to be left to one of Bailey or Paine to take forward.

After next summer against India it does get a bit easier. We have two tests against the West Indies in the windies. That is followed by another Ashes campaign which isn't easy, but that is then followed by 2 tests against Bangladesh in Bangladesh, 3 at home to both New Zealand and the West Indies, a 3 test tour of New Zealand, the same in Sri Lanka before the next big series, being a three test series at home v South Africa.

This would allow a 2 test series against the Windies for whoever Kat's replacement is and the new captain to get their game together before an Ashes campaign. Once that Ashes campaign was over, they would then have 14 test matches against the likes of Bangladesh, New Zealand, West Indies and Sri Lanka to establish themselves again before the next big series.

These next 3 tests will tell a lot. If they can somehow turn things around a big turnover of players may not be required, but if things go as they look like they may, then starting with the 1st Ashes test out here I'd be more then keen to see Katich come back in as captain. Paine given the gloves, Faulkner replace Watson and bat at 6 and then some stabilty around the other openers spot and the number 3 and 4 spot. Khawaja, Warner, Doolan, Cosgrove, Bailey. Pick 3 of those players to play in those roles and try and leave them there for as long as possible. Once Katich's reign is at an end and our run becomes a little easier, then we can look at a rebuild with youth, who hopefully will have used these next two summers to make a truck load of runs at Shield level.

Edited July 29, 2013 by Tall Defence

[jazza 1,323]

your right imo , but they are still in love with goldenballs and wont stand him down as skip

[Macca 16,962]

'dl' ... it's almost impossible to judge players (batsmen) who haven't played Test cricket yet. And those who haven't played Test cricket need to play a certain amount of games in order for anyone to be able to judge their ability against pace and spin.

Of those who have played, the only player who does very well against pace and spin is Clarke. That's it. The rest have one issue or another ... Hughes has struggled against spin but at times has played pace well. Smith plays spin ok and is now playing better against pace. Warner struggles against spin but plays pace well. Cowan is reasonable against both pace and spin but gets out when he is set. Watson just can't go on with it after getting starts.

I believe we have to place our faith in youth but not all at once. I'd have Maddinson and Burns in now but that probably can't happen for a while. It's rare for the selectors to go outside the squad when picking the batsmen in the team on an overseas tour (although Smith was added to the squad)

Interesting aside ...Maddinson is 21 years old and has made 5 first class centuries. Steve Waugh was 20 years old when he made his Test debut and had only made 2 first class centuries leading up to his debut.

And ... Burns is 23 years old and has made 5 first class centuries. Allan Border was 23 years when he made his Test debut and again, had made only 2 first class centuries leading up to his debut.

Both Border and Steve Waugh were virtual unknowns before they played Test cricket (our memory plays tricks with us) The only 2 young batsmen (in the last 30 years) who were quite well known before their Test debut's were Ponting and Clarke. Mark Waugh was well known but a bit older (25) Hussey and Gilly the same.

Comparing a young batsman in cricket to an 18 year old draftee in footy is like comparing chalk and cheese. For the most part a young batsmen has been playing grade or district cricket for 6 or 7 years (against men) and will probably have played Ist class cricket for at least a couple of years.

[jazza 1,323]

yes macca , and steve Waugh didn't shine with the bat until he played a few tests

same with boony at 6, until he earnt stripes

it takes at least 35_40 tests to get your position down pat, and atm we haven't been willing to let players do that. that's why losing 5_0 might be the catylist for a general overhaul

don't wish it , but think it needs to happen to justify the big knife

[Macca 16,962]

yes macca , and steve Waugh didn't shine with the bat until he played a few tests

same with boony at 6, until he earnt stripes

it takes at least 35_40 tests to get your position down pat, and atm we haven't been willing to let players do that. that's why losing 5_0 might be the catylist for a general overhaul

don't wish it , but think it needs to happen to justify the big knife

15 - 20 Tests tops (and they have to have shown something) Steve Waugh was a real late bloomer and really, an aberration. Most batsmen start hitting their straps after they've played 10 - 15 Tests (or earlier) Or, they get found out.

If a player hasn't established himself after 15 - 20 Tests then it's time for a spell. A young player can always make a reappearance later on down the track. Langer, Hayden, Martyn and others have come back better players after being dropped for lengthy spells. You can't just gift a player 15 - 20 Tests either - they have to perform.

The key is to pick them when they're young. It is a tried and true method in Australian cricket and for the most part, it works. England do it now and many other countries do as well. We've gone away from it a little bit but it's not the sole reason we are struggling. A generation of gun players all retired over a 5 year period and we always had to rebuild.

[dee-luded 2,959]

I've mentioned myself that I wouldn't be against Katich coming back as captain to lead us through the next 18 months as it's going to be a very testing one.

After this Ashes leg is over we have England for 5 tests out here, then a trip to South Africa for 3 tests, then a three test series against Pakistan in a neutral venue (England or UAE no doubt) followed by a 4 test home series against India. These are all big challenges! I believe that the future of our batting is in the likes of Joe Burns, Nic Maddinson, Jordan Silk, however I don't think these next 15 test matches are the environment to debut them in.

Bring Katich back for those 15 tests as captain and also bring in George Bailey or Tim Paine as Vice Captain to take over after next summer against India. He's a fighter Katich and will bring back some of the qualities we saw in Steve Waugh and AB and this could be a chance for a good legacy to be left to one of Bailey or Paine to take forward.

After next summer against India it does get a bit easier. We have two tests against the West Indies in the windies. That is followed by another Ashes campaign which isn't easy, but that is then followed by 2 tests against Bangladesh in Bangladesh, 3 at home to both New Zealand and the West Indies, a 3 test tour of New Zealand, the same in Sri Lanka before the next big series, being a three test series at home v South Africa.

This would allow a 2 test series against the Windies for whoever Kat's replacement is and the new captain to get their game together before an Ashes campaign. Once that Ashes campaign was over, they would then have 14 test matches against the likes of Bangladesh, New Zealand, West Indies and Sri Lanka to establish themselves again before the next big series.

These next 3 tests will tell a lot. If they can somehow turn things around a big turnover of players may not be required, but if things go as they look like they may, then starting with the 1st Ashes test out here I'd be more then keen to see Katich come back in as captain. Paine given the gloves, Faulkner replace Watson and bat at 6 and then some stabilty around the other openers spot and the number 3 and 4 spot. Khawaja, Warner, Doolan, Cosgrove, Bailey. Pick 3 of those players to play in those roles and try and leave them there for as long as possible. Once Katich's reign is at an end and our run becomes a little easier, then we can look at a rebuild with youth, who hopefully will have used these next two summers to make a truck load of runs at Shield level.

your post about the availability of Katich was where I got the thought from, I'm just following on from your theme.

But I have felt that Clark is a bit of a Punce for years, since he was just a batsmen, & even Punter, I wasn't fully convinced about as aleadder but we had success... but looking back in hindsight it was probably all the talent in that team, that papered the cracks...

# In a strange sense, I almost hope Clark has a back issue & misses a test or even 2... they will almost have to reinstate Katich...

..... the direction they have been trying to take the Aussie team in, & change the culture IMO... has a feel about it like the demise of the acid tongued Norm Smith, removed by those who wanted a smoother appealing Coach.

& both Teams had 'Change' forced on them after the Team Enjoyed a prolonged period of domination. they thought it was a good idea at the time.

IMO the Cricket Board, the past Coach, & Clark, have a lot of questions to answer.

Edited July 29, 2013 by dee-luded

[dee-luded 2,959]

'dl' ... it's almost impossible to judge players (batsmen) who haven't played Test cricket yet. And those who haven't played Test cricket need to play a certain amount of games in order for anyone to be able to judge their ability against pace and spin.

Of those who have played, the only player who does very well against pace and spin is Clarke. That's it. The rest have one issue or another ... Hughes has struggled against spin but at times has played pace well. Smith plays spin ok and is now playing better against pace. Warner struggles against spin but plays pace well. Cowan is reasonable against both pace and spin but gets out when he is set. Watson just can't go on with it after getting starts.

I believe we have to place our faith in youth but not all at once. I'd have Maddinson and Burns in now but that probably can't happen for a while. It's rare for the selectors to go outside the squad when picking the batsmen in the team on an overseas tour (although Smith was added to the squad)

Interesting aside ...Maddinson is 21 years old and has made 5 first class centuries. Steve Waugh was 20 years old when he made his Test debut and had only made 2 first class centuries leading up to his debut.

And ... Burns is 23 years old and has made 5 first class centuries. Allan Border was 23 years when he made his Test debut and again, had made only 2 first class centuries leading up to his debut.

Both Border and Steve Waugh were virtual unknowns before they played Test cricket (our memory plays tricks with us) The only 2 young batsmen (in the last 30 years) who were quite well known before their Test debut's were Ponting and Clarke. Mark Waugh was well known but a bit older (25) Hussey and Gilly the same.

Comparing a young batsman in cricket to an 18 year old draftee in footy is like comparing chalk and cheese. For the most part a young batsmen has been playing grade or district cricket for 6 or 7 years (against men) and will probably have played Ist class cricket for at least a couple of years.

I'm not against the idea of bringing in a (Kid), if he's that talented & ready... but only one at a time, whilst getting the experienced old heads back inplace to maintain the composure, & hard edged competitiveness & smarts. as far as the others they have to earn it, if their not proven performers.

IMO Katich has with his stats in county.

this team has lost its self belief, like the MFC... & trying to change the culture when all those greats had retired was Foolish.. a great way to setup the future, NOT.

Edited July 29, 2013 by dee-luded

[Macca 16,962]

I'm not against the idea of bringing in an newbie, if he's that talented & ready... but only one at a time, whilst getting the experienced old heads back inplace to maintain the composure, & hard edged competitiveness & smarts.

this team has lost its self belief, like the MFC... & trying to change the culture when all those greats had retired was Foolish.. a great way to setup the future, NOT.

It's been so long since we've had to rebuild that people have forgotten that the last time we did it, we did it with youth. Border was the only real mainstay when we last did it.

If we draw a line through the 1989 Ashes team as when we 'finally' came good after a horrible period, then it's interesting to look at the ages of players in that team when they debuted (and I'm specifically talking about the batsman)

Player ... Age on debut ... Age just prior during the 1989 tour.

Marsh ........ 26 ... 30

Taylor ........ 24 ... 24

Boon ......... 23 ... 28

Jones ........ 22 ... 28

Border ....... 23 ... 33

S Waugh ... 20 ... 24

Summary ... we picked them when they were young and we bore the fruits at a later date. We did the hard yards through the mid to late 80's but it paid off (apart from when we persevered with Hilditch, Wood and a few others for too long)

Picking young blokes in cricket is the way to go. If you pick an old bloke and it doesn't work you've got nothing to fall back on. For this reason I believe that Rogers, Cowan, Katich, Jacques and others should be overlooked. You would only pick an older batsman if he's had an outstanding few years. You might look at Bailey (30) or North in a 'bridging' fashion but ordinarily no.

[dee-luded 2,959]

It's been so long since we've had to rebuild that people have forgotten that the last time we did it, we did it with youth. Border was the only real mainstay when we last did it.

If we draw a line through the 1989 Ashes team as when we 'finally' came good after a horrible period, then it's interesting to look at the ages of players in that team when they debuted (and I'm specifically talking about the batsman)

Player ... Age on debut ... Age just prior during the 1989 tour.

Marsh ........ 26 ... 30

Taylor ........ 24 ... 24

Boon ......... 23 ... 28

Jones ........ 22 ... 28

Border ....... 23 ... 33

S Waugh ... 20 ... 24

Summary ... we picked them when they were young and we bore the fruits at a later date. We did the hard yards through the mid to late 80's but it paid off (apart from when we persevered with Hilditch, Wood and a few others for too long)

Picking young blokes in cricket is the way to go. If you pick an old bloke and it doesn't work you've got nothing to fall back on. For this reason I believe that Rogers, Cowan, Katich, Jacques and others should be overlooked. You would only pick an older batsman if he's had an outstanding few years. You might look at Bailey (30) or North in a 'bridging' fashion but ordinarily no.

I remember well, when we were going so poorly, we had to bring back Bobby Simpson, & he turned out a harder working side, with excellent fielding, & we built from there.

we are in a similar position, but not quite as weak in talent now, but we have lost our invincable beliefs. & the poor leadership & arrogance has contributed to a loss of confidence in one another, & a fragmenting of team spirit.. for mine this is the fault of the board & team leadership.

Boof is the type I feel who can rebuild this,,,, but the board, & selectors need to step back, & any who contributed to the breaking of the team spirit, should remove themselves.

[Macca 16,962]

I remember well, when we were going so poorly, we had to bring back Bobby Simpson, & he turned out a harder working side, with excellent fielding, & we built from there.

we are in a similar position, but not quite as weak in talent now, but we have lost our invincable beliefs. & the poor leadership & arrogance has contributed to a loss of confidence in one another, & a fragmenting of team spirit.. for mine this is the fault of the board & team leadership.

Boof is the type I feel who can rebuild this,,,, but the board, & selectors need to step back, & any who contributed to the breaking of the team spirit, should remove themselves.

Yeah, that's all well and good and I don't disagree, however, it still comes down to individual talent. Cricket is made up of individual performances that add up to a team effort. It doesn't resemble a lot of other team sports. Baseball for instance, is more of a team sport yet is probably looked upon as more of an individual thing. Cricketers in a lot of ways need to be selfish (but not to the point of upsetting team harmony)

A coach and or captain can only do so much in cricket. They can help you prepare for games with the right specialist training and the right environment, but the player himself still has to have the talent to get the job done. When a batsman is facing Shane Warne or Dale Steyn he needs to have excellent technique, patience, temperament, good attitude and good fighting qualities. A top batsman should have those type of qualities before he makes it to the Test side.

By the time a batsman gets to Test level they should be ready to go. That is a lot different to many other team sports. Allowing for nerves and getting adjusted to a higher level, a batsman is going to get 'tested' immediately. There's nowhere to hide (although we used to have a policy of batting a new young batsman at no.6 or sometimes even as low as no.7)

My view of wanting to place the faith in youth is a conservative one 'dl', yet you may see it as high risk. Just about all our best batsmen in history were picked when they were young and with a few exceptions, most were largely unknown. I see no reason to go away from that tried and true method of picking our future stars.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Yeah, that's all well and good and I don't disagree, however, it still comes down to individual talent. Cricket is made up of individual performances that add up to a team effort. It doesn't resemble a lot of other team sports. Baseball for instance, is more of a team sport yet is probably looked upon as more of an individual thing. Cricketers in a lot of ways need to be selfish (but not to the point of upsetting team harmony)

A coach and or captain can only do so much in cricket. They can help you prepare for games with the right specialist training and the right environment, but the player himself still has to have the talent to get the job done. When a batsman is facing Shane Warne or Dale Steyn he needs to have excellent technique, patience, temperament, good attitude and good fighting qualities. A top batsman should have those type of qualities before he makes it to the Test side.

By the time a batsman gets to Test level they should be ready to go. That is a lot different to many other team sports. Allowing for nerves and getting adjusted to a higher level, a batsman is going to get 'tested' immediately. There's nowhere to hide (although we used to have a policy of batting a new young batsman at no.6 or sometimes even as low as no.7)

My view of wanting to place the faith in youth is a conservative one 'dl', yet you may see it as high risk. Just about all our best batsmen in history were picked when they were young and with a few exceptions, most were largely unknown. I see no reason to go away from that tried and true method of picking our future stars.

I think most of our players have shown those qualities at 1st class level, in shields & what not, but thus far have failed to progress look at Hughes 4 years ago.. his numbers in the shield were fantastic, but couldn't translate into tests.

I think the culture has gradually gone to the pits since we lost the likes of Tugga, Warne, Mcgrath, Gilly, Hussey, Langer, Martyn,,,, & then we remove one of the bearers of that team culture, for a playboy... Katich was in that team as well, and did his apprenticeship in that team learning the winning ways...

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/64062.html

..... how did the powers of Australian cricket get it all so wrong since?

[Macca 16,962]

I think most of our players have shown those qualities at 1st class level, in shields & what not, but thus far have failed to progress look at Hughes 4 years ago.. his numbers in the shield were fantastic, but couldn't translate into tests.

I think the culture has gradually gone to the pits since we lost the likes of Tugga, Warne, Mcgrath, Gilly, Hussey, Langer, Martyn,,,, & then we remove one of the bearers of that team culture, for a playboy... Katich was in that team as well, and did his apprenticeship in that team learning the winning ways...

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/64062.html

..... how did the powers of Australian cricket get it all so wrong since?

I doubt whether Arthur, Lehmann or any other coach for that matter could turn an average batsman into a great batsman. It just doesn't work that way in cricket. Do you reckon Buchanan made Ponting a better batsman or Warne a better bowler?

Hughes' numbers might have been good in Shield cricket but there are no guarantees anyone can make the next step. Any good young batsman from Shield cricket tried at the Test level either makes it or he doesn't. Plenty don't make it but that doesn't mean you abandon the idea and start picking blokes who are past it or too old to start off with.

Hughes had technique issues which were exposed when he got to Test level. It was only a couple of years ago when he was giving slips practice to the fieldsmen behind the wicket. He's come back a better player but I'm far from convinced he'll ever be a great player. Same goes for Smith and to a lesser extent, Warner. Watson is a limited player and can't seem to score freely when the field is set in a run saving fashion.

You've just got to keep turning young players over until you find a gem (though a young player should be given a good go at it) Older players like Rogers, Cowan, North and Quiney need to fire almost immediately. Quiney played 2 Tests and unless Rogers makes runs soon, he won't play many Tests either.

[dee-luded 2,959]

I doubt whether Arthur, Lehmann or any other coach for that matter could turn an average batsman into a great batsman. It just doesn't work that way in cricket. Do you reckon Buchanan made Ponting a better batsman or Warne a better bowler?

Hughes' numbers might have been good in Shield cricket but there are no guarantees anyone can make the next step. Any good young batsman from Shield cricket tried at the Test level either makes it or he doesn't. Plenty don't make it but that doesn't mean you abandon the idea and start picking blokes who are past it or too old to start off with.

Hughes had technique issues which were exposed when he got to Test level. It was only a couple of years ago when he was giving slips practice to the fieldsmen behind the wicket. He's come back a better player but I'm far from convinced he'll ever be a great player. Same goes for Smith and to a lesser extent, Warner. Watson is a limited player and can't seem to score freely when the field is set in a run saving fashion.

You've just got to keep turning young players over until you find a gem (though a young player should be given a good go at it) Older players like Rogers, Cowan, North and Quiney need to fire almost immediately. Quiney played 2 Tests and unless Rogers makes runs soon, he won't play many Tests either.

I keep talking about culture & team environment that helps players output...

You keep talking about players & individuals...

... at the moment its not individuals that are the problem,,, its the team environment & the lost winning ways/culture. fix the culture first, or all the kids we bring in will all continue to struggle in a festering team environment.

I think the removal of the coach was the first shot at starting this procedure, & I reckon Boof is the one who seems to me to understand it. I think a few ex players are pushing for this change like Dizzy & Warne etc. & maybe quietly AB... who was over there at that time watching things.

... the first thing is to get a harmonious climate for the players to operate in together as a Unit.

then we will start to see players at their best, & work out who stays,,, & which players need to make way for young talent.

# Buchanan didn't make players more skilled, but IMO helped to create & maintain a winning environment.. even if warnie didn't like him. he may have helped with a more Pro attitude & disciplines?

Hughes did have a great Eye, but that didn't translate into the test arena, & IMO that flamboyant attitude that may have grown from having that great eye in juniors, has I think caused him to grow into a risky player... thats why I do Not want him in the top order... but his rapid scoring ability I think could be handy in the middle.

Edited July 29, 2013 by dee-luded

[Macca 16,962]

I keep talking about culture & team environment that helps players output...

You keep talking about players & individuals...

... at the moment its not individuals that are the problem,,, its the team environment & the lost winning ways/culture. fix the culture first, or all the kids we bring in will all continue to struggle in a festering team environment.

I think the removal of the coach was the first shot at starting this procedure, & I reckon Boof is the one who seems to me to understand it. I think a few ex players are pushing for this change like Dizzy & Warne etc. & maybe quietly AB... who was over there at that time watching things.

... the first thing is to get a harmonious climate for the players to operate in together as a Unit.

then we will start to see players at their best, & work out who stays,,, & which players need to make way for young talent.

# Buchanan didn't make players more skilled, but IMO helped to create & maintain a winning environment.. even if warnie didn't like him. he may have helped with a more Pro attitude & disciplines?

Hughes did have a great Eye, but that didn't translate into the test arena, & IMO that flamboyant attitude that may have grown from having that great eye in juniors, has I think caused him to grow into a risky player... thats why I do Not want him in the top order... but his rapid scoring ability I think could be handy in the middle.

I talk about individuals and their talents because that's how I see the game. I acknowledge where your emphasis lies but I don't place as much importance in those areas (though it is important of course)

If we were talking about footy and more importantly, the Demons, I would be in almost total agreement with you. Like golf, technique is ultra important in cricket. Specialist coaching is more important in my eyes (that goes for the bowlers as well)

I would acknowledge that you don't want a 'toxic culture' in any team sport but I'm not convinced that the culture is all that different to how it's ever been. Winning can cover up a few things as you well know. Losing exposes all sorts of mud.