Anyone for cricket?

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

but going by what i have heard on talk back radio since the loss last night i am not alone.

That's eerie. Because I was thinking you would do well there.

And yes i would love an uncapped young player to rise to the occasion as much as you, but are they being given the chance?? That's what i have been asking.

Smith, Bollinger, George, Harris, Paine have all been blooded in the last 12 months. Smith has already had a taste of Test cricket and is working on the areas he needs to improve. There has been considerable opportunity. In the last 12 months Watson has been reinvented as an opener. You only need to look to find out

Btw "a wasteland of facts" is a bit rich.

Not on form to date.

[Sir Why You Little 37,121]

"List cloggers"....FMD.

They're not playing at Casey WYL. They're representing Australia. This on the back of your statement in another thread that Davey is "now a senior player."

The mind boggles.

You are in fine form, aren't you...or I should say true to form.

Ricky Ponting needs to take at least some ownership as captain on the back of his reply to the criticism from Warnie's 'tweet' re: field placings for Hauritz's bowling. Ponting claimed that Hauritz sets the field to his own bowling and that Warne should get his facts right. Maybe Warne was speaking out of school. But I reckon as a spin bowler with the record he has got, he must know something.

Captains should be liasing with their bowler's and help setting the field. I would be surprised, very surprised, if Ricky didn't have one say or one contribution re: the field placings for Nathan Hauritz's bowling. And staggered, that Hauritz would bowl to his own set fields without any input from Ricky. I think as a captain, you need to know plans (field placings) for certain batsmen for all of your bowlers. Sure, we're not part of the inner sanctum and it may well be that Hauritz can do whatever he pleases. But I would be absolutely dumb founded if that were in fact the case.

That said, after Hauritz got pummelled, Ricky did the right thing in taking him off. And Warne should keep things like that to himself or speak to Ricky behind the scenes and not air them publicly if he had any concern. It's the last thing Ricky needs. Poor form by Warnie, and it's pleasing to see Warne still making yards with his phone (iphone ?).

So you would continue to pick M Hussey and Hauritz?

Personally for mine their time is up as players so yes "list Cloggers" We use the term for the MFC why not the Australian Cricket team, because that is what they are now. We all age, and our time passes. That's the way it is.

I get the feeling on this thread people are too precious of the Aussie XI. We are all prone to bag the Demons at times but never the Cricket side.

Time for The "Mr Cricket" academy or the Commentary job.

Warnie may be out of line a little, but he is just frustrated-He may be a card playing [censored], but he does know how to bowl better than almost all, and what Hauritz was throwing down yesterday was below bad

[Sir Why You Little 37,121]

Smith, Bollinger, George, Harris, Paine have all been blooded in the last 12 months. Smith has already had a taste of Test cricket and is working on the areas he needs to improve. There has been considerable opportunity. In the last 12 months Watson has been reinvented as an opener. You only need to look to find out

Apart from Bolinger none of these guys have had a sustained run at test cricket, to build up any confidence, while M Hussey Hauritz, and dare i say North have all played past their use by dates. You are not shy to get stuck into Players at Melbourne who have stayed too long, so why not the Test Team.

The Age and the Hun were both Scathing today of the performance today, are they both wrong as well?

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Apart from Bolinger none of these guys have had a sustained run at test cricket, to build up any confidence, while M Hussey Hauritz, and dare i say North have all played past their use by dates. You are not shy to get stuck into Players at Melbourne who have stayed too long, so why not the Test Team.

Paine has. Harris is injured. George has just come in. Smith at 20 was given a taste but needs to work on his game.

It easy to say drop x and y behind a phantom nom de plume. But where are the decent replacements? All you have done is call for players necks without a plausible or decent replacements. You have given no viable alternative. Maybe you spend too much time with hot air on talk back?

The Age and the Hun were both Scathing today of the performance today, are they both wrong as well?

Who's arguing that today's performance was acceptable? Another rant in dire need of relevance WYL.

[Sir Why You Little 37,121]

Paine has. Harris is injured. George has just come in. Smith at 20 was given a taste but needs to work on his game.

It easy to say drop x and y behind a phantom nom de plume. But where are the decent replacements? All you have done is call for players necks without a plausible or decent replacements. You have given no viable alternative. Maybe you spend too much time with hot air on talk back?

Who's arguing that today's performance was acceptable? Another rant in dire need of relevance WYL.

Sorry RR I Forgot for a moment that you are always Right. The 3 List Cloggers i have mentioned should not be in the team ok, they prove nothing. Smith should have played more during the year, but its too late for the ashes now. So it's going to be more of the same. Channel 9 must be stoked....

Thus my point that the indian Tour proved nothing.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Sorry RR I Forgot for a moment that you are always Right.

You just struggle with a cosidered alternative view that uses evidence and facts to support it that routinely blows holes in your shallow rants.

Thus my point that the indian Tour proved nothing.

Its proved alot of things if you actually pulled yourself away from talk back radio and thought about it.

[titan_uranus 25,043]

Ricky Ponting needs to take at least some ownership as captain on the back of his reply to the criticism from Warnie's 'tweet' re: field placings for Hauritz's bowling. Ponting claimed that Hauritz sets the field to his own bowling and that Warne should get his facts right. Maybe Warne was speaking out of school. But I reckon as a spin bowler with the record he has got, he must know something.

Captains should be liasing with their bowler's and help setting the field. I would be surprised, very surprised, if Ricky didn't have one say or one contribution re: the field placings for Nathan Hauritz's bowling. And staggered, that Hauritz would bowl to his own set fields without any input from Ricky. I think as a captain, you need to know plans (field placings) for certain batsmen for all of your bowlers. Sure, we're not part of the inner sanctum and it may well be that Hauritz can do whatever he pleases. But I would be absolutely dumb founded if that were in fact the case.

That said, after Hauritz got pummelled, Ricky did the right thing in taking him off. And Warne should keep things like that to himself or speak to Ricky behind the scenes and not air them publicly if he had any concern. It's the last thing Ricky needs. Poor form by Warnie, and it's pleasing to see Warne still making yards with his phone (iphone ?).

You've gotta go with Warne on this one. I struggle to believe that Nathan Hauritz is so highly respected by Punter that he gets to set his own field. Furthermore, I struggle to believe that Ponting couldn't change the field if he wanted to.

The problem, though, isn't the field (though our field placements aren't helping. We needed tigher fields and a stump-to-stump line from our pacemen, and needed to attack more on Day 5). It's the bowler. Look at every other Test playing nation. They all have at least one spinner who's better than Hauritz:

Swann, Harbhajan/Ohja, Ajmal/Kaneria, Vettori, Murali/Mendis/Herath/Randiv, Harris (debatable), even Shakib al Hasan from Bangladesh is better. And what's worse is that there's no real stand outs in the Shield. Steven Smith is next but he's way off, and can't yet be selected as an all rounder either.

Thus my point that the indian Tour proved nothing.

It actually proved a lot. Proved that Hauritz is terrible. Proved that our pacemen need to lift. Proved that North is just as bad as he has always been. Proved that India are a much better side.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

You've gotta go with Warne on this one. I struggle to believe that Nathan Hauritz is so highly respected by Punter that he gets to set his own field. Furthermore, I struggle to believe that Ponting couldn't change the field if he wanted to.

Warnie's a maverick. He was that good that you could almost let the Sheik of tweak set his own traps. I dont think its case of Hauritz setting his fields or Ponting overruling his bowler. Both are dysfunctional situations which only blow up when the pressure is on.

My understanding of arrangements is that the Captain and bowler agree fields for various batsman off the field. This includes scope to make changes under various scenarios. The last thing you want is either the Captain making moves without the bowlers approval or the bowler demanding moves that the Captain does not feel he can support. I dont think this was the case here. The basic fact of the matter is that Hauritz is limited spinner to start with. India is probably the hardest venue for visiting spinners to bowl especially spinners who arent bent on flight and bounce. India is also have the premier players of spin in Tendulkar, Laxman etc. However this does not detract from the fact that Hauritz bowled very poorly so poorly that he has bowled himself out of the Test team when we dont have a ready made replacement. Its impossible to have legitimate competitive fields if the (quick and spin) bowlers do not bowl a proper line and length. In Hauritz's case his efforts handed the initiative to the batsman which amplifies the problem of setting a field.

It is interesting though that Warne has had a gratuitous public shot at Ponting and has been silent about Hauritz's performance. One wonders if Warne needs to keep the controversy rating pumping or its just one of a number of lapses of judgement that has symbolise Warne's public life. Greatest bowler I have ever seen but a bogan egghead if ever there was one as a bloke.

The problem, though, isn't the field (though our field placements aren't helping. We needed tigher fields and a stump-to-stump line from our pacemen, and needed to attack more on Day 5). It's the bowler. Look at every other Test playing nation. They all have at least one spinner who's better than Hauritz:

Swann, Harbhajan/Ohja, Ajmal/Kaneria, Vettori, Murali/Mendis/Herath/Randiv, Harris (debatable), even Shakib al Hasan from Bangladesh is better. And what's worse is that there's no real stand outs in the Shield. Steven Smith is next but he's way off, and can't yet be selected as an all rounder either.

In general, Australia have bowled poorly in this Test. Hauritz the worst of them. George did little to excite. Johnson was hit and miss. Hilfy had some flat spell.

I am also concerned about the middle order. Not just Hussey and North but also Clarke. Clarke is a VG bat and made a century on debut in India. He did not look like it this time around. He has not been the same since he had that bingle in that car.

It actually proved a lot. Proved that Hauritz is terrible. Proved that our pacemen need to lift. Proved that North is just as bad as he has always been. Proved that India are a much better side.

And that's for starters.

[H_T 3,049]

So you would continue to pick M Hussey and Hauritz?

Personally for mine their time is up as players so yes "list Cloggers" We use the term for the MFC why not the Australian Cricket team, because that is what they are now. We all age, and our time passes. That's the way it is.

I get the feeling on this thread people are too precious of the Aussie XI. We are all prone to bag the Demons at times but never the Cricket side.

You provide as much spin as Warne did with his flipper. You can call them list cloggers if you want. But when they're taking wickets or making runs they're contributing. List cloggers I presume are ones who can't get a look in the senior side, yet take spots on the list. My point is that if you're selected in the Australian XI you're not a list clogger, you're doing a job and contributing with bat or ball. In this case in India they haven't (or in Hauritz's case anyway), but they are a part of a team. Guys like Daniel Bell of Melbourne, couldn't get a game, yet remained on the list.

See the difference hotshot ? I really don't want to spoon feed again. Ok precious ?

But where are the decent replacements? All you have done is call for players necks without a plausible or decent replacements. You have given no viable alternative. Maybe you spend too much time with hot air on talk back?

WYL, you still haven't answered RR's question^. I'm not surprised. We're all used to it. You've named Smith for Hauritz but that is it.

As 45HG16 stated, how about a little research to support your call for these "list cloggers" of yours....

As for your reference to people on this thread being a little precious re: the Australian XI..I think there is plenty of examples on this thread of 39 pages to argue that. I'll let you read.

[Sir Why You Little 37,121]

It actually proved a lot. Proved that Hauritz is terrible. Proved that our pacemen need to lift. Proved that North is just as bad as he has always been. Proved that India are a much better side.

Correct TU, but don't you think these were things we already knew before the Indian Tests were played? That is exactly what frustrates me.

[Sir Why You Little 37,121]

You provide as much spin as Warne did with his flipper. You can call them list cloggers if you want. But when they're taking wickets or making runs they're contributing. List cloggers I presume are ones who can't get a look in the senior side, yet take spots on the list. My point is that if you're selected in the Australian XI you're not a list clogger, you're doing a job and contributing with bat or ball. In this case in India they haven't (or in Hauritz's case anyway), but they are a part of a team. Guys like Daniel Bell of Melbourne, couldn't get a game, yet remained on the list.

See the difference hotshot ? I really don't want to spoon feed again. Ok precious ?

WYL, you still haven't answered RR's question^. I'm not surprised. We're all used to it. You've named Smith for Hauritz but that is it.

As 45HG16 stated, how about a little research to support your call for these "list cloggers" of yours....

As for your reference to people on this thread being a little precious re: the Australian XI..I think there is plenty of examples on this thread of 39 pages to argue that. I'll let you read.

So you are saying North Hussey & Hauritz are contributing enough to the Australian XI both now and over the last 18 months are you?

Sorry i don't, and thus they are taking up places where younger players should be getting a go. Thus List Cloggers is fair enough-not a nice name i agree & Harsh, but enough is enough.

Is it a possibility that our Test selectors are too conservative??

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Correct TU, but don't you think these were things we already knew before the Indian Tests were played? That is exactly what frustrates me.

So where are the ready solutions? I have already established that a 20yo PT spinner is a very green option on Hauritz. At best Hauritz is a 5 or 6 out of 10. In India he performed like 3 out of 10 and has bowled himself out of the team.

Everyone knows what the problem is. You are no hot shot ranting in the fashion you are about it. The solutions are not so obvious. And shouting the cliche "Play the kids" is a typical all care no responsibility where you can never be proven wrong. You have provide no ready plausible solutions. And maybe that because there aren't any ready calls. Test cricket is a tough gig and the step up from Shield to Test is large. And Ashes series is more so. 5 Tests where the opposition works you over proper. Phil Hughes is a perfect example of player that got found out in that comp. There is a justification to play experienced hardened players like North and Hussey if they are in form. They have struggled and opportunities now open up that werent as prominent before.

Given the results in India many of the changes that may not on judgement basis six months have been brought forward due to the failings of the incumbent.

I dont have too much problem going into the Ashes series as the underdog. There is an expectation that England will win away. They have not done this for 25 years. Its a tough gig in Australia. They rely on a few people to really fire. Much can go wrong for them here.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

So you are saying North Hussey & Hauritz are contributing enough to the Australian XI both now and over the last 18 months are you?

Duhhh! He isnt saying that. And asserting that shows you cant consider another point of view while being unable to coherently develop your own argument.

Sorry i don't, and thus they are taking up places where younger players should be getting a go. Thus List Cloggers is fair enough-not a nice name i agree & Harsh, but enough is enough.

Is it a possibility that our Test selectors are too conservative??

You have been unable to provide a sensible case for any young player to replace beyond "PLAY THE KIDS"

Is it a possibility the Test Selectors have a better grasp of the problems and the solutions than you?

Anyway call up talkback radio and use the list clogger line. They'll think your real sharp.

[Sir Why You Little 37,121]

So where are the ready solutions? I have already established that a 20yo PT spinner is a very green option on Hauritz. At best Hauritz is a 5 or 6 out of 10. In India he performed like 3 out of 10 and has bowled himself out of the team.

Everyone knows what the problem is. You are no hot shot ranting in the fashion you are about it. The solutions are not so obvious. And shouting the cliche "Play the kids" is a typical all care no responsibility where you can never be proven wrong. You have provide no ready plausible solutions. And maybe that because there aren't any ready calls. Test cricket is a tough gig and the step up from Shield to Test is large. And Ashes series is more so. 5 Tests where the opposition works you over proper. Phil Hughes is a perfect example of player that got found out in that comp. There is a justification to play experienced hardened players like North and Hussey if they are in form. They have struggled and opportunities now open up that werent as prominent before.

Given the results in India many of the changes that may not on judgement basis six months have been brought forward due to the failings of the incumbent.

I dont have too much problem going into the Ashes series as the underdog. There is an expectation that England will win away. They have not done this for 25 years. Its a tough gig in Australia. They rely on a few people to really fire. Much can go wrong for them here.

I agree with you RR, i know Test Cricket is a Tough Gig, 11 spots-1 mistake as a batsman and that's your day finised-i understand all that.

Yes the selectors have a hard job for those and more reasons, In the case of Hussey though its not a case of him being out of form. He is past his best as a batsmen. It's not his fault, happens to us all. So i can't see the point in playing him any more.

North has been way to Hot & Cold, & has had a dream run from the selectors. Brad Hodge comes to mind, imagine if Brad was given all those chances, A lot of the problem comes from the fact that we the Public do not know the selectors agenda, they are not accountable. Time they were IMO.

Hauritz a 5-6/10 is probably fair, but is that a reason to continually play him-is he ever going to be a 7-8 player? I doubt it, we are not going to get any more out of Hauritz.

This situation is not a new one, we all know that. And yes i will admit, i don't know all the young replacements around the country. But playing the 3 afore mentioned i see no gain for anyone. While Cameron White for one is not being played. If he was from NSW he would be in for sure.

I do not expect all cricketers to make 50-100 runs every innings & bowlers to take 5 fors each match, but when they continually fail and the average just keeps plummeting it is time to move aside.

Have some faith in raw kids, and come out and tell the public. Then we will be cool about it.

But if the current team stays the same for the ashes series & Punter keeps telling the Media that everything is ok, & we played good Cricket in patches-People will not watch or not turn up to games.

The selectors should become more transparent..take some chances, & it should have started last summer against the Paki's as i said earlier.

[H_T 3,049]

So you are saying North Hussey & Hauritz are contributing enough to the Australian XI both now and over the last 18 months are you?

No, I'm not. You're conveniently trying to twist things around and put words in my mouth.

I've said previously at different times that these 3 guys might becoming to the end of their tether through poor form. Particularly North, quite a few times. When I have stated this I have put forward a possible replacement or different alternative line-up at different instances. On the flipside you really haven't. (Apart from the Smith-Hauritz case).

Sorry i don't, and thus they are taking up places where younger players should be getting a go. Thus List Cloggers is fair enough-not a nice name i agree & Harsh, but enough is enough.

So fess up and provide your solutions (name replacements) and give your reasoning.

Is it a possibility that our Test selectors are too conservative??

Ask your buddy Chappell. According to you, he's been in the hotseat long enough, hasn't he ?

[Sir Why You Little 37,121]

No, I'm not. You're conveniently trying to twist things around and put words in my mouth.

I've said previously at different times that these 3 guys might becoming to the end of their tether through poor form. Particularly North, quite a few times. When I have stated this I have put forward a possible replacement or different alternative line-up at different instances. On the flipside you really haven't. (Apart from the Smith-Hauritz case).

So fess up and provide your solutions (name replacements) and give your reasoning.

Ask your buddy Chappell. According to you, he's been in the hotseat long enough, hasn't he ?

Cameron White should be in the side, i have already mentioned him, but of course he is a victorian!! silly me.

I used G S Chappell as an example only (Big Changes have been made-Not) Hilditch deserves to face the media no doubt, He is protected species for sure on a good (part time) wage!!

Lets see how G.S. Chappell goes in the next few weeks, as he came from the Australian Cricket Academy he should have good information on the young players around the country.

It is a better option than playing the 3 "list Cloggers"

[45HG 1,559]

I agree.

Cameron White should replace North, Hussey and Hauritz...We should go into the Ashes with 9 players.

Do you honestly, honestly, believe the selectors don't have good information on the young players around the country?

[Sir Why You Little 37,121]

I agree.

Cameron White should replace North, Hussey and Hauritz...We should go into the Ashes with 9 players.

Do you honestly, honestly, believe the selectors don't have good information on the young players around the country?

I am sure they do 45-Far more than i have, and i wish they would take a few more risks, that is just it.

The Bowling of Hauritz on the last day just gone, could not have been worse than someone else, but he keeps getting a game.! Why?

Imagine if Donald Cockatoo Collins was played for MFC week after week just on the off chance he would produce a "Blinder"....The Selectors would be lynched by the members. What is the difference with the Cricket selectors?

[45HG 1,559]

Hauritz has played 17 matches over 6 years with a bowling average of 34.

Smith has played 12 first class matches for a bowling average of 48.84.

Cameron White has played 4 tests for an average of 68 and 108 First Class matches for an average of 40.

I'm all for trying new blood, but can see why Hauritz was played.

[Sir Why You Little 37,121]

Hauritz has played 17 matches over 6 years with a bowling average of 34.

Smith has played 12 first class matches for a bowling average of 48.84.

Cameron White has played 4 tests for an average of 68 and 108 First Class matches for an average of 40.

I'm all for trying new blood, but can see why Hauritz was played.

Fair call, but does it give it give Hauritz the right to play this summer? I don't think so, but he may well do so because there is not enough time to make a replacement.

Does that mean the selectors have been doing their job Fully?? It is a tough call 50/50

I think the biggest problem the ACB has is the Handing out of the "Golden 25 Contracts" (i think its 25) I do not agree with that at all. That just causes to big a gap between those that do & those that don't have. It also gives the Golden few the chance to lose that edge & get away with it IMO.

It's the same philosophy as a long AFL contract eg 5 years. I don't like them as too many things can change in that time. 1-3 year contracts i favour. You play well you get rewarded.

I think in some ways we are seeing the ACB backed into a corner of it's own making, and the results are the current Test Team.

I have never liked the Golden Contracts concept, Each player should be able to make a claim for a spot on form and mental toughness, and not so much on a long term Handshake to the lucky few.

Edited October 15, 2010 by why you little

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Yes the selectors have a hard job for those and more reasons, In the case of Hussey though its not a case of him being out of form. He is past his best as a batsmen. It's not his fault, happens to us all. So i can't see the point in playing him any more.

To be replaced by ....??? Its easy to call for someone's head. Its harder to find the perfect replacement.

North has been way to Hot & Cold, & has had a dream run from the selectors. Brad Hodge comes to mind, imagine if Brad was given all those chances, A lot of the problem comes from the fact that we the Public do not know the selectors agenda, they are not accountable. Time they were IMO.

Hodge is 36 and you want to play the kids. Hodge is a tweener. Brilliant at Shield and struggles at Test level.

Hauritz a 5-6/10 is probably fair, but is that a reason to continually play him-is he ever going to be a 7-8 player? I doubt it, we are not going to get any more out of Hauritz.

Because the other options are under 5 out of 10. Bryce McGain... no thanks. Krejza...cant land a ball at Shield level.

This situation is not a new one, we all know that. And yes i will admit, i don't know all the young replacements around the country. But playing the 3 afore mentioned i see no gain for anyone. While Cameron White for one is not being played. If he was from NSW he would be in for sure.

Smith is from NSW. I have given you fair reasoning on White. On top of which he failed on his last tour of India.

I do not expect all cricketers to make 50-100 runs every innings & bowlers to take 5 fors each match, but when they continually fail and the average just keeps plummeting it is time to move aside.

To be replaced by??? Name the better option and you haven't done so.

Have some faith in raw kids, and come out and tell the public. Then we will be cool about it.

Hodge at 36?? I dont think playing raw kids in India is fair or sensible. If selectors were doing that I would be asking questions about their nous and commitment. I want the selectors to pick what they believe is the best Test team. They get abused when we lose and forgotten when we win.

But if the current team stays the same for the ashes series & Punter keeps telling the Media that everything is ok, & we played good Cricket in patches-People will not watch or not turn up to games.

Should Punter break down and sob in front of the media? FFS, what needs to be said gets said behind closed doors and not in the media.

The selectors should become more transparent..take some chances, & it should have started last summer against the Paki's as i said earlier.

Crap. Taking chances or punts is nothing to do with transparent it just shows they are being desperate. The process has started but you have missed it.

[Sir Why You Little 37,121]

To be replaced by ....??? Its easy to call for someone's head. Its harder to find the perfect replacement.

Hodge is 36 and you want to play the kids. Hodge is a tweener. Brilliant at Shield and struggles at Test level.

Because the other options are under 5 out of 10. Bryce McGain... no thanks. Krejza...cant land a ball at Shield level.

Hodge at 36?? I dont think playing raw kids in India is fair or sensible. If selectors were doing that I would be asking questions about their nous and commitment. I want the selectors to pick what they believe is the best Test team. They get abused when we lose and forgotten when we win.

I use Hodge as an example of a cricketer who was never given nearly as much chance to prove himself as others have been. I never said Hodge should be used now RR. His time has passed sadly.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Fair call, but does it give it give Hauritz the right to play this summer? I don't think so, but he may well do so because there is not enough time to make a replacement.

You dont know and its not being argued that he is not good enough. The issue is there is no ready replacement.

Does that mean the selectors have been doing their job Fully?? It is a tough call 50/50

Selection is a process not based on the number of head you chop.

I think the biggest problem the ACB has is the Handing out of the "Golden 25 Contracts" (i think its 25) I do not agree with that at all. That just causes to big a gap between those that do & those that don't have. It also gives the Golden few the chance to lose that edge & get away with it IMO.

It's the same philosophy as a long AFL contract eg 5 years. I don't like them as too many things can change in that time. 1-3 year contracts i favour. You play well you get rewarded.

I think in some ways we are seeing the ACB backed into a corner of it's own making, and the results are the current Test Team.

I have never liked the Golden Contracts concept, Each player should be able to make a claim for a spot on form and mental toughness, and not so much on a long term Handshake to the lucky few.

The contracts are given to the ACB assessed 25 best players in the country. The selectors can choose a Test side from that group or from outside that group. The last one was Peter Siddle.

The rest you write is crap based on your own lack of understanding of the process. The current Test team is a reflection of the stock of players in Australian cricket.

Mental toughness??? I would have thought Hussey has show more mental toughness than most others. Which raw kid has developed mental toughness at 20 or younger??

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I use Hodge as an example of a cricketer who was never given nearly as much chance to prove himself as others have been. I never said Hodge should be used now RR. His time has passed sadly.

Hodge hit his peak at a time when Australian cricket was strong. Unfortunately as the positions opened up, Hussey was well on the wrong side of 30. And they may have played a kid instead (Michael Clarke??)

[H_T 3,049]

Cameron White should be in the side, i have already mentioned him, but of course he is a victorian!! silly me.

I used G S Chappell as an example only (Big Changes have been made-Not) Hilditch deserves to face the media no doubt, He is protected species for sure on a good (part time) wage!!

Lets see how G.S. Chappell goes in the next few weeks, as he came from the Australian Cricket Academy he should have good information on the young players around the country.

It is a better option than playing the 3 "list Cloggers"

So you've got White for North ? Is that right ?

Smith for Hauritz ?

Still waiting for your replacement on "list clogger" Hussey ?

This will be interesting... better still name your starting Australian XI for us ?