John Crow Batty

It amazes me why India will still not agree to 3rd umpire reviews. Supreme arrogance or something more sinister?

I don't think it would be a bad idea to get in some proven players with maturity, experience and form. Professional cricketers play a lot older than most sports. Some one in their late 20's can still have 10 good years in them. Gilchrist is a recent example. Hauritz is a player who's been around and still appears to be getting better. This youth stuff seems to be getting too PC. The Australian team has serious problems that appear long term. Leadership is one. Ponting has had it. Clark appears to be flaky and backsliding fast. As for other current team members who could lead? Hussey I'm not sure. Best bring in someone like Cameron White who is a proven performer and leader IMO. Perhaps a poison chalice for him but the team could not be any worse with him leading..

QUOTING DAPPA DAN As with most of these suggestions for fixture changes, there's an immediate merit to it. But then, a season isn't 11 games long. It's a marathon. If, say, we won our first 6 games... then went badly at the end of the year, I'd feel jibbed. Also... if you think it'll make the end of the season better, it'll almost certainly make the start of the season less important. Teams will be trying harder at the end of the year when their situation becomes clearer, and taking their foot off the gas at the start of the year. As with most of these suggestions, the league will only change them when MADE to... Like when new clubs come in. I love the idea that it'll stay a final 8, even though that's less than half of the teams in the league.

I think you misunderstood me. I don't advocate a conference system but want to see the current very long season and finals system improved. I want to see action at all stages of the footy season. I want to see teams sitting at 10, 11, 12 and so on at midseason having a real crack in the later half of the year. The draft system rewards mediocre teams for tanking. Offering a wildcard for the top performing team that finishes below seventh from mid to end of the season is of far more value and interest. It would develop a secondary race for a finals spot that could create enormous interest and genuine competative games at the lower levels. It may also scare a few of the top clubs too.

Thanks Dapper for the info. In response to Benno, the teams play each twice in their division then play the balance of games against teams(once) from other divisions and also I believe the other conference too. Not sure of the exact details or fixture formula. As for the wildcard system, I believe it could have merit for our comp and is worth investigating even for academic interest alone. For example the best performed team that finishes below seventh for the second half of the season gets the eigth wilcard sport irrespective to where they finish on the ladder. Thsi will provide incentive for lower ranked teams and slow starters to play out the season in full and also fuel interest. Could not be any worse than the current system and will also discourage tanking to a degree.

Which was the last Wildcard team to win the Superbowl? Was it the Oakland Raiders but that seems a long time ago?