When the Media Just Won't Take No As An Answer

Will Selectors Bear the Brunt of Their Wrong Doing?

So now that the XII has been selected for Adelaide (without my help on the selection panel), what can we make of the team, and also the selection panel themselves?
When you look at those that have missed out, it tells a tale in itself.

Both Callum Ferguson and Joe Mennie have been booted after just one Test, and also when the next Test is played on their home ground in Adelaide. What sort of message does this send to those in the Sheffield Shield? We picked them, and they failed in their first shot. Then we told Mennie not to play in South Australia's Shield game, he had to rest. Then we dropped him without a second thought. We also gave Ferguson the flick, despite his experience in first class cricket, and the unfortunate way he was dismissed in both innings in Hobart.
You know what that suggests? This is a selection panel that has no idea who is going to perform and who isn't, and if their selections don't immediately justify their selection, they'll get dumped and they'll try someone else. That is a dangerous position to be in. A very dangerous position.

Peter Nevill is without question the best gloveman in the country. Up until 1999 this is how we chose our wicket keepers. If they scored runs, that was a bonus and a grateful one. Then Adam Gilchrist appeared, and changed the landscape. He was followed by Brad Haddin, who did a similar job on a human level and not a superhuman level. So now it is suddenly expected that no matter how good a keeper you are, if you don't average high with the bat you will be discarded, no matter how good you are. So now we picked an inferior wicket keeper, simply because he may score more runs with the bat, to salvage what the top order has been failing to do. To say it is a disgrace that Wade has been picked in front of Nevill is a complete understatement. And this is the icing - in the Sheffield Shield this season Wade has 113 runs at 28.25. In TESTS this season Nevill has 92 runs at 30.66. This selection has no justification on any level. It is a selection for the sake of change, for the falsehood that one may score more runs than the other, and completely ignoring the fact that the likely more numerous missed chances will be far more costly. More black marks against the selection panel.

Joe Burns was also shown disdain, though he didn't help his own cause. Adam Voges is out concussed, which saved the panel the problematic issue of dropping a batsman with a Test average of over 60. Would he have been given the chance for redemption in Adelaide? Given the decisions made around him, it would appear unlikely. A Test career is likely over, and it deserved a better fate.

Was Nathan Lyon saved by the fact that both Stephen O'Keefe and Ashton Agar are AGAIN injured at the worst possible time? We won't know for sure, but it just appears that Lyon is untouchable. It seems that risks in selection will be taken with every other position in the side except the long reigning spinner. It is a concern. A big one.

So what about the selections to replace them? Peter Handscomb was a given, spoken of for some months as a likely selection, and when the occasion arrived he took it by the horns. He looks a long term prospect. Matt Renshaw did the same, scoring runs easily and competently at a time when an opportunity has arisen. So little is known of him that we will all be watching with interest. Nic Maddinson has been on the radar for a few years, but never really taken a good hold of the chances. His selection smacks of a favoured nation clause with one of the selectors that has pushed his cause through his media commitments for years. His record is only average, but his strength in hitting the ball hard as well as showing a spare arsenal in his part time left arm spin means he has been given his chance ahead of a more likely partner in Kurtis Patterson. Jackson Bird returns, in a reversal of what was said just two Tests ago in regards to his batting. Perhaps that only applies to wicket keepers now. And Chadd Sayers gets what is likely to be another chance to carry the drinks, despite a lack of penetration in the Shield game in Brisbane.

So what have we learned? We've learned that the selection panel doesn't know why this team is losing, and that it's solution to this is to throw a whole range of new and old options into the mix, and see if it becomes the solution. To me, it tells me a lot more about the unstable minds of the panel than the problems our cricket team is facing on the field. It all shapes up to be an interesting Test match in Adelaide, where the blame for failure or the credit for success will not lie with the true source.

Open Letter to James Sutherland re Chairman of Selectors Position

To: James Sutherland, CEO Cricket Australia
Re: Application for Chairman of Selectors of National Selection Panel

James,

Several years ago I sent through my application for a number of positions that had come up as a result of the Argus Report - those being to become coach of the Australian Cricket Team, to fill the new position of General Manager of Team Performance, and to become Chairman of Selectors of the new National Selection Panel. Unfortunately, you chose to overlook my applications for all three positions.

I think on review of our current situation in Australian Cricket, that you will agree that that was a serious error in judgement on your part.

With the resignation today of Rod Marsh as Chairman of Selectors, I again put forward my application to fill this role, and return Australian Cricket to its rightful position as the finest cricket nation on the planet.

Obviously we all understand that the selectors can only choose the players to be a part of the team, and cannot be held responsible for their actual performance. I can be upfront in saying that this is exactly the line I will be using should the team not improve on my watch. Of course, I don’t expect this to be the case, because I will be enforcing several new measures to ensure that our national cricket teams regain their winning ways immediately.

I bring to the table immense experience in both captaining and selecting some of the losingest teams in the history of cricket. No one has captained with such a stunning lack of success on the field, nor been a selector in eras of local cricket club teams that have performed so woefully on my watch. I am generally accepted as one of the finest losing cricketers of my generation, if not all generations. With this amazing track record, I can assure you that all it will take to ensure that I can turn around Australia’s cricket fortunes, is for me to go against every instinctive selection policy I will come up with, and by doing the exact opposite of this, I will be able bring success to our great nation once again.
I haven’t played a lot of representative cricket. I haven’t played for my state or country. I haven’t won awards, and I haven’t played on the great grounds of the world. I have tried to make a mockery of myself on social media, and have tried to pick fights with famous cricketers on Twitter in order to have my words slapped back in my face.

What I have done is watched a shitload of cricket over the past 40 years, at all levels. I can tell you stats don’t always tell the tale. 200 Test wickets doesn’t mean you are a great off spin bowler who is safe from being dropped. Just because you have taken a five wicket haul and scored a half century does not make you an all rounder. Just because you average 40 with the bat doesn’t mean the five catches you drop and the two stumpings you miss and the byes you fumble can be overlooked and have you chosen as the team wicket keeper. An opening batsman in Tests should not be caught behind in the first over slashing at a ball six feet wide of the off stump. If you can’t pay a forward defensive shot and a backward defensive shot you can’t play Test cricket.
It’s not just Test cricket – in all forms of the game we are spiralling, and that is because we don’t play our best team all of the time. Rotation doesn’t work. Resting players doesn’t work. It’s time to pick our best team all of the time, with less changes between players and formats. Obviously as Chairman of Selectors I can’t dictate the program, but I will certainly be airing my views on what should be done about it.

It is time to identify the right players now – the ones who have the talent, but also the constitution for the fight, the determination to succeed, the ability to adapt – and stick with them. Build them up, and give them their opportunity. Losing to Sri Lanka was disappointing, being completely outplayed by South Africa is becoming a similar story in Australia, but with major Test series coming up against Pakistan, India and then England, we need to use what little time we have and get our players in order.

In essence, I’m your man. Choose me now, and I can assure you that I will take on the difficult, mind numbing and crushingly dreadful job of touring the country and watching cricket at first class and international level from the horribly comfortable private boxes serving only gourmet pies and beer, suffering while being torn away from my wife and children on business class flights around the country and the world, in order to provide Australia with the right team to once again dominate the game. I am willing to sacrifice myself for this.

Or, ignore my application again. Of course, if you do, I will be chasing your job in a few short months.

Yours in Cricket,
Bill Peters
Cricket Tragic and Chairman of Selectors Elect.

Time for Australian Cricket to Return to the 1980's

In the 1980’s, when Australian cricket was perhaps at its lowest point, the selection panel led by the incomparable Lawrie Sawle, realised they had to find the cricketers in the country who not only had the talent, but the strength mentally to be a part of the team, work to the situation of the game, and eventually become great players, even if their records at the time didn’t necessarily warrant selection. From those years, led by a strong selection panel, a coach (a SINGLE coach) in Bob Simpson who was absolutely committed to the basics of batting and bowling, but incredibly strong in the area of fielding and catching, and a captain in Allan Border who was not only one of the greatest ever produced in Australia, but the hardest, gutsiest and most determined batsman I’ve seen, Australia rose to become the best in the world.

It’s time to draw a line in the sand and do this again.

I’m not sure we have the selection panel currently good enough to do this and stick with this. I think the coach is good enough, but given he has already put 2019 as his expiration date, we need his replacement to be in the system now (yes that should be Justin Langer). And while the captain may not be as savvy on the field as other recent captains, there is no doubting his passion or his determination in a fight.
Following the debacle that was the Test tour of Sri Lanka, and the one day of dominance in Perth, followed by five days of decimation, these performances have given selectors, players, coaches and fans alike plenty of time to dissect what is happening in Australian cricket, and what should be done to start to build the team once again.
Is it really that difficult? Is it really such a tough task to pick players who are tough enough mentally and good enough technically to play their part in the side, as well as being of a standard in the field that they aren’t embarrassing?
With the Australian season set out as it is, the remaining four Tests are all played out in the next eight weeks, after which the ODI’s are played before the Test team tours India in late February through March. In essence, no matter what is to happen through the course of the remaining three days of the Test in Hobart, the selectors have to accept that five consecutive losses (should that occur) is unacceptable, and that the right players with the right constitution need to be found.

I’m not a selector. I am a fan, and I’m a tragic. I love this game, and I like to think I have some worthwhile thoughts on it. I think Shaun Marsh has had his chances and is too injury prone. I don’t think Joe Burns has the defence to be an opening batsman, and may have thus burned his chances of a middle order spot. As much as I admire Usman Khawaja I think his technique of no foot movement as well as his fielding are a liability. I think Adam Voges has had a great run, and copped a pearler yesterday, but it is time to look elsewhere. I think Mitch Marsh has a future, but only if he can prove he can score runs at first class level. I think Nathan Lyon is a liability, even though he gets all the donkey work on the most unresponsive wickets.

If we are going to lose, then let’s at least get some kids into the team and give them the chance to develop in the way they were in the late 1980’s. The following is a list of those players I would be pushing. None of them average over 40 with the bat, or under 30 with the ball. But they all have qualities that demand investigating and encouraging.

Cameron Bancroft. Age 24. An opening batsman identified two seasons ago as our next opening bat, who has been kept on ice ever since. His technique and temperament appear to be exactly what Australia needs at the top of the order.

Peter Handscomb. Age 25. Top order batsman with good technique and equally at home against pace and spin. An excellent fieldsman and with leadership qualities as well as a back up keeper he looks a good prospect.

Kurtis Patterson. Age 23. A century on debut at 18 years of age, and now beginning to show the consistency that opens eyes. Much better defensively and temperamentally than his NSW contemporary Nic Maddinson. Looks a likely number five.

Ashton Agar. Age 23. Shone on debut with 98 at age 20, injury has curtailed his development. Has shown excellent progress with his batting, but it is his left arm orthodox that is what is most required. Ten wicket haul in Sydney last week should have him firmly in selectors sights this summer.

Chadd Sayers. Age 29. Almost a veteran, but his constant and consistent wicket taking must have him securing a chance sometime soon. Why not with the pink ball in Adelaide and Brisbane, where his best qualities as a seamer will work best?

Marcus Stoinis. Age 27. Outside of Mitch Marsh and Moises Henriques, Stoinis appears the best bet in the allrounder category. Has opening the batting and bowling in first class cricket, and while he also is not a genuine all rounder, his batting appears a strong point that could develop while maintaining a handy presence with the ball.

Pat Cummins. Age 23. Everyone has been awaiting the return of Cummins, and if he remains uninjured during this season, and gets the overs under his belt that he needs, then it may be time to unleash him finally in the five day format.

Adam Zampa. Age 24. With Fawad Ahmed, somewhat unbelievably, having been discarded from the selectors notebooks, and Cameron Boyce becoming a short form specialist, Adam Zampa is currently the best equipped leg spinner in the country to be pushed as a Test bowler. Averages 55 with the ball in first class cricket, but Shane Warne’s average wasn’t flash when he was fast tracked to the national set up.

These aren’t out and out solutions, but it is plainly obvious changes need to be made to find players with better mindsets for Test cricket.

Aren't Bowlers Chosen to Take Wickets?

I have a lot of respect for what Rod Marsh did as a player for Australia, and as a coach of the Academy in its formative years.

But seriously...

Jackson Bird was taken to New Zealand as a back-up seamer earlier this year. Because of injuries, he got the call up, and he took a five wicket innings in the final Test. He then was taken to Sri Lanka, where he did not get a game on the spin friendly wickets.
In the Shield match currently taking place, he took 3/75 off 30 overs and 3/59 off 14 overs against Victoria. He is a specialist bowler who bats down the order, so his runs are not valid.


Well, apparently now they are. Because the reason that Rod Marsh has given Jackson Bird for his omission from the Test squad in favour of the uncapped Joe Mennie is because his batting is better than Bird's, and the bottom order has to contribute runs as well as take wickets.

This is the biggest and most vile heap of bullshit I have ever heard in regards to picking a player for any team ever.
How many of the top six are contributing wickets to the bowlers cause in the Test team? Answer - none.
Moreso than this, how many RUNS are Mitch Marsh and Peter Nevill contributing to the cause at the moment? Answer - none.

The bowlers job is to take wickets. The batsmen's job is to score runs. Should the bowlers get some runs, that's a bonus, just like it is when a batsman jags a wicket or two.

This is a gutless call from the Chairman of Selectors, and by insinuation the other selectors as well. Believe me, I have a lot of time for Joe Mennie, and do think he is going to be a valuable contributor to Australian cricket in the next few years. But is there any genuine effort to reward recent performance in cricket anymore, or are our selectors just picking favourites. Bird has done everything that can be asked of him since his recall to the Test side, and he has been cast aside with a piss poor excuse that wouldn't wash in an Under 11's representative team. Meanwhile, an under-performing so-called "all-rounder" who truly cannot make the team in either capacity is still one of the first selected. And no, it isn't Shane Watson, but it is now the exact same thing that we lived through for all those years. And while I support Nevill as our keeper, under the ground rules laid down here by Marsh to Bird, then surely Matthew Wade should be being picked as our keeper because of the runs he has scored in comparison.

No matter what the result of the 1st Test is, and no matter how well or not the individuals perform, this selection and the reason given for it has again changed the landscape of selecting the national team, and in the worst way possible. If I was Jackson Bird I'd be suing for unfair dismissal.