• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*Official* Australia in decline thread

Will Australia Fall into a Slump?

  • Yes

    Votes: 8 25.8%
  • No

    Votes: 23 74.2%

  • Total voters
    31
  • Poll closed .

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Bloody hell, it's sounding like the Aussie team has had its own Munich air crash here.

They won't be rebuilding, they'll tweak around the edges and find the best blokes they can for those who've retired or get dropped.

Working on the basis that the WC is really the only ODI tournamentthat counts (though of course it's always good to win :)) the blokes who come in now have 3 years to establish themselves in the side.

Don't really see its as a full on rebuild, more like renovating one room in the house.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Bloody hell, it's sounding like the Aussie team has had its own Munich air crash here.

They won't be rebuilding, they'll tweak around the edges and find the best blokes they can for those who've retired or get dropped.

Working on the basis that the WC is really the only ODI tournamentthat counts (though of course it's always good to win :)) the blokes who come in now have 3 years to establish themselves in the side.

Don't really see its as a full on rebuild, more like renovating one room in the house.
Yeah absolutely. Too many people keen on sensationalising the matter, IMO, not that that's anything new, the same thing's been happening for 3 or 4 years, at least.
 

gwo

U19 Debutant
You know my opinion on that: bowling well and turning-out poor figures is little use. There has never been a good player without good statistics. If Noffke bowls well and is expensive without taking wickets in his ODI career, no-one will be very happy.

Double standards much?

You say Hayden isn't a good player despite his great figures whilst you rule out Noffke as being a good player in OD cricket becuase of the fact that his figures seem "poor" (according to you).

If you accept the fact that figures can determine whether or not a player is good, then you have to accept Hayden is an excellent opener. Otherwise, you can harp on Hayden being a poor player, but you would have to give up your opinion on figures determining whether a player is good or bad.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Double standards much?

You say Hayden isn't a good player despite his great figures whilst you rule out Noffke as being a good player in OD cricket becuase of the fact that his figures seem "poor" (according to you).

If you accept the fact that figures can determine whether or not a player is good, then you have to accept Hayden is an excellent opener. Otherwise, you can harp on Hayden being a poor player, but you would have to give up your opinion on figures determining whether a player is good or bad.
No, I never once said "there has never been a poor player with good statistics". Only the other way around.
 

kwigibo

School Boy/Girl Captain
:huh: Hussey has always stated he'd prefer to open has he not? It's been those responsible for selection who've had him down the order.
He's a FC opener by trade but has stated he's happy in the test middle order, and who can argue with the results?

As far as OD, he's never been an opener really, not for WA and hence not for AUS. For the better part of a decade he's been filling the Bevan role for WA, and doing it pretty well for Aus for the last few years. It would be stupid to push him up to open in ODI's.

As far as openers, Hayden needs to decide when he's going to pull up stumps, he's not doing anything special outside of venues like in the world cup where he can swing away and not run 2's and 3's. Should have quit ODI's after the WC and left on a high, by miles better than any other stretch in his career. Haddin did used to do some damage at the top, it's worth a flutter at least, Gilchrist was a gamble that worked, why couldn't it work again? Otherwise Watson if fit can do it, might reduce his bowling though. Hopes has done it well for Queensland. I don't see opening as crucial in ODI's as in tests, you can give a good striker license and get results. If they had done the right thing and not dropped Jaques right after a run-a-ball 90-odd on ODI debut this might not be an issue, but that would require foresight AND smarts from the selectors.

Middle order is tricky. D Hussey needs to be there, but the current 4 never lose enough form to be dropped. If exhaustion is an issue like they say, they should put ego aside and do genuine rotation of the lineup, but that won't happen for obvious reasons.

ODI spinner, you could do worse than Hauritz, he is a genuine OD wicket-taker, always has been. Can bat and field too, at least more than the alternatives. Doherty maybe, has had a good ODD season. With wrist spinners you have to choose, good or not too old.

Seamers already tied up. Brendan Drew as a bolter.

Jaques/Hopes
Watson/Haddin
Ponting
Clarke/Hussey
Symonds
Hussey
Hopes/Haddin
Lee
Hauritz
Johnson
Bracken

12th man Clark/Hilfenhaus/Drew
 
Last edited:

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
As far as openers, Hayden needs to decide when he's going to pull up stumps, he's not doing anything special outside of venues like in the world cup where he can swing away and not run 2's and 3's. Should have quit ODI's after the WC and left on a high, by miles better than any other stretch in his career.
Agree fully with that TBH.
Haddin did used to do some damage at the top, it's worth a flutter at least, Gilchrist was a gamble that worked, why couldn't it work again?
Because random gambles fail far more often than they succeed?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
No, it wouldn't, but it's still a random guess, and mostly those are unsuccessful. Because Gilchrist's case provided a rare success-story doesn't mean there's any likelihood of Haddin's doing similar.
 

kwigibo

School Boy/Girl Captain
No, it wouldn't, but it's still a random guess, and mostly those are unsuccessful. Because Gilchrist's case provided a rare success-story doesn't mean there's any likelihood of Haddin's doing similar.
There's a good chance it would work, Haddin played some very Gilchrist like innings early in his domestic career opening the batting.

It's not random at all, there's reasoning behind it, no one's rolling 11-sided dice to choose an opener. Gilchrist wasn't random either, and as far as I know he never opened for WA before he opened for AUS. Gilchrist averaged 36 with SR in the high 90's. Haddin can't replicate that in your opinion I'm sure, but I don't see a genuine reason why he couldn't do an adequate imitation.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
There's almost no way Haddin will be able to play a Gilchrist-like role - there've only been 7 or 8 or so better openers than Gilchrist in the modern ODI era.

Sure, he's played the odd decent knock at the top of the order domestically - common consensus seems to be that he's performed in an occasional televised game and most of his best work has been done down the order.

There must surely be several better opening batsmen around Australia than Haddin, so not justifying taking an unneccessary punt.
 

itduzz

Banned
Welcome to life without McGrath and Warne. As I mentioned when they retired last year, I expect them to still dominate matches, but the main issue was going to be bowling on the last day. If the Test goes to the last day and you need 10 wickets it's going to be tough.
:thumbup:

We've gone backwards: Punter's assessment is as blunt as his attack

Alex Brown in North Sound
June 5, 2008

RICKY PONTING began the post-McGrath-Warne era with all the optimism and hubris historically associated with Australian captains, but recent experiences have led to a substantial downgrade in his predictions.

After a gruelling draw with the West Indies in Antigua, Ponting conceded for the first time that his bowling attack had "come back to the pack a little bit in Test cricket" since the retirements of Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne. That is a massive concession for Ponting, a man not given to backward steps or outward signs of weakness. At the start of the home series against Sri Lanka, the Australian captain boldly declared his new-look side could be "even better" than that of recent summers, with no expected decline as generational change took effect. Eight Tests later, those forecasts have been adjusted.

Try as they might, Australia's bowlers could manage no more than five West Indian wickets on the last day of the second Test. Only Brett Lee (3-51) threatened consistently on the docile Sir Vivian Richards Stadium wicket, with Stuart Clark playing the role of miser for 1-22 from 18 overs. Mitchell Johnson, meanwhile, again struggled for a consistent line and length and showed few traces of the swing for which he was once renowned. And Stuart MacGill's forgettable performance reaffirmed the reasoning behind his retirement.

Speaking after the draw, which retained the Frank Worrell Trophy for Australia, Ponting outlined plans for change, including the elevation of Clark to new ball-duties and a preference to blood rookie spinner Beau Casson as soon as possible. Ponting also hinted at more experimental and creative bowling strategies, such as the greater use of Michael Clarke and Andrew Symonds in part-time spinning capacities, and even the injection of Simon Katich and Michael Hussey into the attack for short bursts. Hussey bowled six probing overs on Tuesday, more than doubling his career output to that point.

"As far as our attack goes, we've probably just come back to the pack a little bit in Test cricket," Ponting said. "We've got Brett and Stuey [Clark], who are outstanding Test bowlers, and we've got Mitch, who is a work in progress, and we could very well have a young spinner the next game. I'm excited about that. It certainly is a challenge when you haven't got some of the other guys who have been around. It's a great challenge for me and the rest of the guys but, more importantly, it's a challenge for the bowlers to stand up and make a name for themselves as very good Test bowlers. I think Brett's done a very good job of standing up in Glenn's absence over the last 12 months and will continue to lead the attack well I'm sure. The next spinner is the interesting one for me. We'll see how that pans out."
Ponting barely concealed his disappointment at his side's inability to claim victory in Antigua, after five days of milestones, emotion-charged centuries and a somewhat sudden retirement announcement. Kept at bay by Ramnaresh Sarwan (128) and Shivnarine Chanderpaul (77 not out), who batted for the majority of the fifth day during a fourth-wicket stand of 143 runs, the tourists' bowlers were unable to close out the match in the manner expected of recent Australian sides.
Ponting declared Australia's innings closed over night at 6-244, setting the West Indies an impossible last-day target of 372. Thanks almost exclusively to the efforts of Sarwan and Chanderpaul, the Windies finished with 5-266 after Ponting, having cast an eye over his exhausted bowlers, agreed to conclude the match five overs earlier than scheduled. The West Indies pair have now scored a combined 525 runs in the two Tests thus far this series, including three centuries and two 50s. Clearly, Australia need to rethink their approach. "We could have done better today," Ponting said. "Stuey MacGill was someone we were going to need to take wickets today if we were going to win the game, and we didn't get the wickets from him.
"I don't have any concern with [Johnson]. We're probably going to look at Stuey [Clark] opening the bowling more often than not now, for a number of reasons, like in these sorts of conditions. [Johnson] is a great athlete, and generally he'll do what I ask of him. So Stuey now moving on, the other guys have been good for the last couple of years in Test cricket, and I think Michael Clarke and [Symonds] at times in this game have done a reasonable job as well and they're guys that I'm probably going to have to call a little bit more on now, with Shane and Glenn not being around now."

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/06/04/1212258909254.html
 

Top