*Official* Fourth Test at the MCG

[Uppercut]

Disagree, tbh. Knee jerk reactions are bad, but 2-3 tests is more than enough to see if someone's in form and/or up to the job. It's that sort of thinking that kept North in a gig for so long.

To take the most extreme alternate example, it's also the sort of thinking that kept Alex Ferguson in a job for so long.

Anyway, it would be silly of them to expect anything from someone making their test debut at three against bowling this good. It's a good opportunity for me to rant about how pathetic the selectors are for always refusing to pick Brad Hodge no matter how bad Australia's batting got. "Team spirit" was always more important than scoring some ****ing runs. If someone repeatedly turned down an applicant that much better and more qualified than the rest of the competition for any other job on such personal grounds they'd get dropped from recruitment and possibly even face a lawsuit.

 

[Redbacks]

At what point do the selectors stop giving Ponting their unqualified backing?

Not mid-series for that's for sure. He would have another series after this one to turn it around I reckon.

 

[Spark]

Disagree, tbh. Knee jerk reactions are bad, but 2-3 tests is more than enough to see if someone's in form and/or up to the job. It's that sort of thinking that kept North in a gig for so long.

It's also the sort of thinking that's kept Michael Hussey in the side.

Apples and oranges. North kept getting picked when all he'd done is string together a large number of genuine, full-blown failures then pull out a hundred. And then he'd do it again. It's not like he was being picked out of form, he was picked based on the same cycle of inadequacy that basically defined 3/4ths of his test career. In his case "coming good" was just another hundred... and then nothing for five tests.

In other words, it's unlike Ponting/Clarke/Hussey who are/were being picked through patches of bad form but having had extended periods of consistent and prolific runscoring beforehand. The philosophy is you back them to come good, because they are actually quite good players and have proven themselves to be so.

 

[Spark]

Ricky Ponting.

Clarke at Number 3, White/Hodge at 4

No and no (Hodge is gone, get over it)

I thought we were trying to shore up the top order against the moving ball? Clarke's not great, but White...

 

[Ruckus]

Not mid-series for that's for sure. He would have another series after this one to turn it around I reckon.

What is the next test series?

 

[Prince EWS]

Disagree, tbh. Knee jerk reactions are bad, but 2-3 tests is more than enough to see if someone's in form and/or up to the job. It's that sort of thinking that kept North in a gig for so long.

Ponting gave the selectors a "get out of jail free" card by cracking his pinky and, tbh, it was a nettle that might've been better to have been grasped. Not contributing as batsman or captain just now.

Comparing it to the North situation is ridiculous. Not only were his performances unacceptable for faaaaar longer than one series, but he never proved himself to be up to it in the first place and was given ample opportunity to do so. Two to three Tests, as a batsman, is nothing.

You can point out that Ponting and Clarke are out of form, but equally you can see the sort of benefits persisting with out of form but proven quality players like Cook, Hussey and Pietersen have provided. Cook averaged 21 in the five Tests immediately prior to the Ashes (excluding Bangladesh) and looked technically awful against Pakistan; Hussey's head had been called for by basically everyone and he'd managed an average of just 33 over the extended period of 25 Tests; and Pietersen had averaged just 17 in his last seven Tests. These players have had great series though and shown the benefits of backing quality.

I think you're personally far too quick to jump the gun and discount quality in favour of short-term form, particularly with batsmen. There's no doubt in my mind that despite how they've batted in this series, Ponting and especially Clarke are far more likely to score big runs in the fifth Test than Khawaja, Ferguson, Marsh or any other unproven over-rated hack you care to name.

 

[Uppercut]

Not mid-series for that's for sure. He would have another series after this one to turn it around I reckon.

It's kinda sick to keep him in a job after kicking 80,000 Australians in the face on Boxing Day but the timing would be horrible because he's still a good ODI captain and there's a World Cup coming up next. Firing him from the test captaincy would most definitely have a negative impact on Australia's chances in India because his replacement would be Michael "what's an ODI?" Clarke, so letting him step down at the end of that tournament has to be the option.

Funny, it's Ponting's worst hour yet and after a couple of years of saying he should go I'm calling for him to keep his job.

 

[GIMH]

Lol'n at the scoreboard. It's like a GIMH prediction, only in real life.

Haha awesome, I'm having that

 

[Spark]

Comparing it to the North situation is ridiculous. Not only were his performances unacceptable for faaaaar longer than one series, but he never proved himself to be up to it in the first place and was given ample opportunity to do so. Two to three Tests, as a batsman, is nothing.

You can point out that Ponting and Clarke are out of form, but equally you can see the sort of benefits persisting with out of form but proven quality players like Cook, Hussey and Pietersen have provided. Cook averaged 21 in the five Tests immediately prior to the Ashes (excluding Bangladesh) and looked technically awful against Pakistan; Hussey's head had been called for by basically everyone and he'd managed an average of just 33 over the extended period of 25 Tests; and Pietersen had averaged just 17 in his last seven Tests. These players have had great series though and shown the benefits of backing quality.

I think you're personally far too quick to jump the gun and discount quality in favour of short-term form, particularly with batsmen. There's no doubt in my mind that despite how they've batted in this series, Ponting and especially Clarke are far more likely to score big runs in the fifth Test than Khawaja, Ferguson, Marsh or any other unproven over-rated hack you care to name.

There's still the second innings here, and the last three days are supposed to be bright and sunny /optimist

 

[Prince EWS]

Also, association football examples in cricket threads should be barred. I have NFI what you're comparisons are trying to show half the time, Uppercut.

 

[Jono]

Haha awta

 

[BoyBrumby]

It's also the sort of thinking that's kept Michael Hussey in the side.

Apples and oranges. North kept getting picked when all he'd done is string together a large number of genuine, full-blown failures then pull out a hundred. And then he'd do it again. It's not like he was being picked out of form, he was picked based on the same cycle of inadequacy that basically defined 3/4ths of his test career. In his case "coming good" was just another hundred... and then nothing for five tests.

In other words, it's unlike Ponting/Clarke/Hussey who are/were being picked through patches of bad form but having had extended periods of consistent and prolific runscoring beforehand. The philosophy is you back them to come good, because they are actually quite good players and have proven themselves to be so.

Obviously you pays your money...

Backing the status quo has its charms but there are also loads of cases of players looking better for being dropped: Johnson the most obvious example, but Strauss and Bell also came back better for spells out of the test XIs relatively recently.

& I wouldn't want to be seen to drop Ponting either, which was what I alluded to with my get out of jail free reference. He is injured, isn't scoring and isn't a great captain. He could've been removed with no loss of face on either side.

 

[Ruckus]

It's just a pity players like Hussey and Ponting decide to have form slumps in excess of 2 ****ing years!! For Ponting, for the past 4 years has averaged 38.40, 47.28, 38.77 and 39.15...that's not a form slump, that's a career slump.

 

[kingkallis]

Of course not, but as a single day of cricket...

Warne on MacGill

What did he say?

 

[Prince EWS]

It's also the sort of thinking that's kept Michael Hussey in the side.

Apples and oranges. North kept getting picked when all he'd done is string together a large number of genuine, full-blown failures then pull out a hundred. And then he'd do it again. It's not like he was being picked out of form, he was picked based on the same cycle of inadequacy that basically defined 3/4ths of his test career. In his case "coming good" was just another hundred... and then nothing for five tests.

In other words, it's unlike Ponting/Clarke/Hussey who are/were being picked through patches of bad form but having had extended periods of consistent and prolific runscoring beforehand. The philosophy is you back them to come good, because they are actually quite good players and have proven themselves to be so.

Beaten, pretty much.

 

[Uppercut]

Also, association football examples in cricket threads should be barred. I have NFI what you're comparisons are trying to show half the time, Uppercut.

"Association football"? When was Cricket Web transported to 19th-century Eton?

 

[Burgey]

.




z

Not going to wear this **** from some **** who wasn't here to make a call and say someone has made a dud prediction at the time, then pops up 13.5 hours later to have a giggle.

Not surprising, but WAC. Buy me steak next year and I will forgive.

 

[Jono]

For Ponting, for the past 4 years has averaged 38.40, 47.28, 38.77 and 39.15...that's not a form slump, that's a career slump.

Yeah, it's ridiculous really.

 

[Prince EWS]

"Association football"? When was Cricket Web transported to 19th-century Eton?

People usually complain when I call it soccer and I refuse to give it exclusive rights to a name shared by several other sports, so I generally go with "association football" these days.

 

[Jono]

Not going to wear this **** from some **** who wasn't here to make a call and say someone has made a dud prediction At the time, then pops up 13.5 hours later to have a giggle.

Not surprising, but WAC. Buy me steak next year and I will forgive.

Will do it in the 5th test when you make a similar post.

And tbh I gave you warning via sms that I was going to look out for your posts