Rhino Richards

TJ played well when he had no tag and there was no pressure in the game. His knack for miraculously finding the way to thread through packs morphed into the ability to do just enough without dominating. And MFC really doesnt need supporters making threats to the Club after he was traded. Dont those people all look a tad stupid then and more so now. There were a number of supporters who realised we have got a KOTD deal trading an underperforming talent with a gamboy mentality for a 1st round pick. While I can see how you are stoked I am not sure how your explanation makes TJ a footballers footballer. In fact if my good source was correct, none of the players were dismayed when advised as a group that TJ would be traded. Yup. And so it is.

Richmond went for type of player and erred. Just like they took Fiora over Pavlich years before. The issue with Buddy was that his character/attitude detracted from his ability. It was the question that held him back from being No 1. His ability was highly rated. I wouldnt put Trav or Buddy in with an Angwin or Thorp. Seriously? The fact that he was a No 1 pick with outstanding talent that just did not deliver on it over 11 years at MFC. He did not do enough for mine over the course of that time. We got 2 good years 2002 and 2005 out of him. The rest were so-so. Trading him for a first rounder in 2007 was the win. The career was disappointing given the promise shown.

Agree. And I thought about but dont like that shipping analogy. I cant see how we can go into the next Test with Bollinger (1-130), Doherty (1-158). Taking 6-1137 over the past 2 innings is so damning. Siddle would want to take wickets in Perth too. I cant see how they can play North. He does not make runs and does not take wickets economically. At this point Australia has nothing to lose experiment with the potential pacemen like Cameron. George looked ordinary in Tasmania so I would by pass him. However, cricket can change. All you need is a good session and some momentum with a touch of good fortune and you are back in the game. But FFS, the all sectors of Australia's game must improve to take advantage of it.

Good discussion guys. 1. Its indeed easy to drop players - Katich injured but IMO North, Doherty and Bollinger are in the gun 2. Its hard to pick replacements but here you go - Hughes, Khawaja/D Hussey, Smith, Cameron. 3. Too early to pick Johnson. He was terrible in Brisbane. I know what he can do but I am doubtful whether he believes he can do it at the moment. 4. Clarke was superb in England in 2009 hitting 450 runs at 64 and was the premier batsman where he played some great knocks. But a bad back and a bingle have distrubed his mojo and he is a shadow of himself. 5. Notwithstanding Ponting's struggles I am not sure its wise to look to Clarke at this point as he battles to be a VC. 6. We are only 1-0 and we can still win the Ashes....Well, we can seriously....Ah no

I would add Gillespie, Lee, McGill and he had Ponting at his peerless peak during his reign.

How is Buchanan's role different to Neilsen's current role? You dont know. How could the domestic competition be used more widely? More teams?

He has been given stacks of time to develop since his Test experience at Shield. But at nearly 5 runs an over you dont do that at Test level. And the lack of spinners to replace Warne does not embolden or justify his selection. That's crap. Krejza was selected to tour India with little first class experince and in his one game in India (a start of tour jolly) he got hammered. He was selected in the last Test of the series. He had a day(s) out but with significant question marks. Xavier Doherty was a risk selection. So please put up some substance to your arguments. Thats not a valid measuring criteria for selection. The truth is neither cut it at Test level to sustain a career. One player cant even get a spot at Shield level. What's your solution?

And like I have said before if you dont like it questioned then get a blog and turn off the response meter. You are right it is a discussion board. And you dont participate in discussion because you just dont put up any subatance. Ok Ultra tune what would you have done? BTW, you should check you incisive reading of body language with some facts and figures. Oh right. So it has nothing to with the quality of the team and the selectors then? The fact is the problems with Australian cricket are a multitude of issues and not the golden goose egg solutions you try to provide.

Which were big mistakes and what would you have done? The best comment you have made is that "Its all hindsight". Pity you cant put context and facts to your hindsight judgements

Brett Lee's falt trajectory was picked apart in England in 2005 and against India in Australia a couple of years later. On good batting strips he was too often impotent. But I know what your saying though. We dont have an Australian fast bowler that leads the attack. Good research TU. Should be lesson foe some who struggle for a fact Krejza was terrible in Perth (= Doherty in Adelaide) against South Africa and with exception of one jaffa that got Amla he didnt turn the ball and could turn the tap off on the runs. Notwithstanding his wicket haul in India which reflected a dead rubber jolly where the Indian batsman werent that respectful, Krejza wicket average is about 44 and he goes for 4 to 5 an over. Its not sustainable. I note Hauritz came in at Melb and took six wickets for the game at about 2.5 an over. Krejza had has 2 years to get it right at Shield level but hasn't performed.

Careful on too many facts now! How could they fixture a Shield game near a Test? Brett Lee at 36 with flat trajectory would have been 130 kmh fodder in Adelaide (so long as he did not break down)

Peter George looked lamentable in Tasmania. I will go for Clinton McKay. Krejza leaked over 5 runs an over in Test Cricket when he last played. Its a deathknell. He went back to Shield level to develop and didnt. I dont rule him out in the future but I dont rule him in at the moment. Although they plucked Gavin Robertson from obscurity (but he was from NSW B) )

What specifically should they have done? Who should they have selected? And what guarantees that from the existing talent pool in Australian cricket over the past 12 months would have made a significant change to the situation? Put something of substance up WYL. It cant be that hard can it?

Fair changes. I am not sure who you would pick for Bollinger but I would certainly drop him. Dont agree about Krejza. Had a day when he numbers came up in India but has bowled poorly since then and struggles at Shield level now. He can certainly come back if he shows form but he is patchy atm. We didnt have a spinner pre Warne and this is more of the same. Agree. They could hide him and bat him at 5 knowing he probably never get a hit. The Ashes is already theirs physically and otherwise. Not that they would do this but they could draw the next 2 and get the same outcome.

So you want Australian cricket to bottom out and toss games for 3 years to get draft picks?? I dont think anyone is in agreement with you WYL because you cant articulate or substantiate a consistent, thoughtful and plausible point of view beyond sweeping generalisation and puffing your chest with statement that show you have a lack of understanding about what you are talking about. No one is happy with the result but I dont think the solutions are at all straightforward and there is not any goose to lay the golden egg. And has been pointed out, you have not despite being requested to do so put forward any plausible answers.

I think I see the fat lady now..... I am sure I saw her a couple of days ago as well. B) On a more serious note would you drop both North and Doherty for the Perth Test? What ever replacement spinner you pick then goes it alone in the spin department. Hate to say it but I am not comfortable with Smith... Hauritz?...That hurts.

The word is "naive". Given some of your past misunderstandings about the operations of cricket, its brave and some unsubstantiated claim on another poster. And again you have the pins into the selectors voodoo dolls over selections over the past 12 months (and not the four years you have tried to hide behind. Any chance you might document your address the selection of the 11 or the changes you would have made that would have changed this situation? You are very good at sticking the boots in to public figures often without substance, knowledge or accuracy but cant put up a plausible case or a sensible alternative arrangement.

You should definitely ask the fat lady for a rain dance then. B) Its definitely not looking good at all for the Aussies, Punter double ton or not.

Done. Barring weather delays we are odds on to be 1-0 down.

Doherty has 2/268 from his first two tests. 0/227 from his last 2 innings. That's hardly productive. He leaked 5 runs per over in Adelaide. While its hard to come on the back of your quicks who dont take wickets, he just doesnt have the variation atm to trouble batsman at this level. He must go. I would even plumb for Steve Smith at this point. I mean what have we got to lose!! Although we are 1-0 down, the difference is about 4-0 the way we are playing. Only Hussey, Haddin and Watson are performing. Harris has been the best of our bowlers. But all our quicks are honest 1st changes with no one leading the attack (Johnson's loss of form is hurting us very badly). We need to get Ponting and Clarke right. Haddin is apparently limping. Hughes to come in. Adelaide has been a disaster on the back of the finish of Brisbane. Its like the Ashes of 1989 except the shoe is on the other foot this time. Unless North hits a face saving innings, he is out. And I would think Bollinger might get dropped. He has not kicked on since last year and bowled really poorly in Adelaide Out: Katich (inj), Doherty/ North, Bollinger In: Hughes, Khawaja/ White, McKay/Cameron

I am not questioning it in the least. There is no doubt in my mind or others how little you know about it and how much you naively think you do know. Its embarrassingly obvious. You did well to dispel any uncertainty there. Now do you have that 11 requested or the selections?

Typical crap WYL. You have moved from 12 months to 4 years and then if someone challenges you, you feebly challenge them that they think the selectors are doing a good job. Doesnt come much more dumber than that. False pretence with no substance. Here is a couple of times you have focussed on the past 12 months and have stated that has always been your argument. So you have been asked to put up an 11 you would have selected by 45? I have asked what selections you would have made to change things. I have asked you to advise that for 12 months. You have welched everytime. Its hard to fault your arguments WYL. You dont hold a sound or supportable position on anything. Whether its debt or cricket you know little of either.

There is no evidence to suggest that the selectors only chose a side to win the series last summer. That's your self serving spin on it. And even if they did do that then I dont see how it could be an objective that is mutually exclusive from winning the Ashes. And throughout this process you have not come up with one plausible selection change that could have been reasonably expected to have had an impact on a side whose Captain and VC are not firing and their strike bowler has lost his mojo. And for the record the most important games are the Ashes. nothing in the world comes close to history, integrity and prestige. I think the Cricket Australia realises that.

Punter got a cracker from Anderson first up and was good enough to get a touch on it. Katich's run out was 80% Katich and 20% Watson. While Watson apparently did not call, surely an opening batsman knows to watch his partner at the other end for the split second opportunity to turn the strike. If he wants to watch the ball he may have his opportunity from the other side of the fence sooner than he thinks. Hopefully Doherty learns from his error. North is one fail away from being dropped. Slack shot at the wrong time. England shot Australia out for 245 on a belter and neither Broad or Finn bowled well and up to Hussey's dismissal, Australia had Swanns measure too. Anderson has been the pick of the bowlers throughout this series. Every spell has been a trump. Unless something strange happens, Australia could be batting again to stave off the innings defeat on day 4 about 250 to 300 runs behind. That after spending 2 days in 35C+ weather chasing the ball.

You have yet to put one plausible change to the side in the last 12 months that the selectors should have undertaken despite repeating being asked to do so. The selectors have chosen the sides on the basis of who they believe would be the best side to take on the Ashes. You need to prepare 12 to 18 months out. The only bright ideas you have put is the sacking of Hussey (288 at 144. Good one) and the selection of Smith over Hauritz (bizarre). How can the selectors properly plan for the next 12 months when 4 of the mainstays of the side....Ponting, Clarke Johnson, Hify are not performing. You cant cover that sort of underperformance. And part of the issue is that the players that could potentially replace them are not stepping up when it counts. There is no certainty that "punting on youth" would have had us in any better position today. Cricketers are not "made" in 12 months as Smith for Australia and Anderson, Cook and Broad would attest for England.