• 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*** New Zealand in Australia 2011

Burgey

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Last edited:
Noble One

Noble One

International Vice-Captain
The body language from the batsman and Rod Marsh at approx 2.15 in the above clip really highlights how fast Thompson was sending them down. Not easy in the fading light either.

You don't see vision like that in the modern game from any bowler.
 
NUFAN

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
Sylvester said:
What reason was there for dropping McDonald at the time? Lack of pace.
Whether George deserved selection is not the question, Lyon didn't deserve his but he's still in the team. How has George gone from his Test debut to completely off the radar? Lack of pace.
How did Copeland who was part of the successful series in SL suddenly get overtaken by Cummins and then Starc? Lack of pace.
How did Butterworth go from the Aus A squad to missing out completely despite having another good start to the season? Lack of pace.
Why was McKay dropped after making his test debut and after investing time in him through the ODI side? Lack of pace.

Let's face it, pace is what the selectors look for, whether it be the old ones or the new ones. Each of the players mentioned were given one test or one series and then discarded. You don't discard a player after one test for no reason. If they were seriously in the frame they would have been back in the side by now or at least in the squad.

As for Copeland that is a BS excuse given by the selectors. He has only had one FC game and SA A since his last Test. Now I've never heard of some guy being dropped from a squad/side because he didn't perform in the matches between the Test matches. The guy has obviously proven he deserved selection through his performances before and with a couple of matches all that goes out the window? Every player will have a bad match here and there. You have already mentioned you don't think Copeland is threatening enough, that is what the new selectors think as well, despite whatever BS excuse that CA media rep has said for them.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with your reasoning at all.

In relation to the bolded part, are you seriously suggesting that the new selectors should be consistent with the previous selectors, who were widely criticized?

Copeland could have been picked, but it's illogical to think that the new group should bring in someone like Andrew McDonald because he had a reasonable time with the ball in a Test Series 2 1/2 years ago. Have you noticed how few overs he's bowling lately?

The new selectors have made a classic move that many corporate people do when new to the job and trying to improve on things. They've gone for the aggressive, strategy in the hope that they unearth something special. It doesn't mean that they've completely blacklisted a certain type of cricketer.

It's unlikely that all 3 new quicks succeed, but they probably have more potential to be a star of the game compared to any of the medium-fast/medium pace bowlers that you mentioned earlier. Perhaps that's what they are searching for, instead of wanting honest, serviceable Cricketers.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Sylvester said:
Where did I mention McDonald should be picked? I mentioned he had been blacklisted by the previous selectors and going by the trends set by the current ones I highly doubt he or any of the guys mentioned will be picked should they perform. If they weren't concerned about pace then where is Butterworth the form seamer over the past 2 seasons? Are you seriously telling me Starc or even Pattinson deserved selection of him?
Click to expand...
Butterworth is actually injured.
 
Sylvester

Sylvester

State Captain
NUFAN said:
I don't agree with your reasoning at all.

In relation to the bolded part, are you seriously suggesting that the new selectors should be consistent with the previous selectors, who were widely criticized?

Copeland could have been picked, but it's illogical to think that the new group should bring in someone like Andrew McDonald because he had a reasonable time with the ball in a Test Series 2 1/2 years ago. Have you noticed how few overs he's bowling lately?

The new selectors have made a classic move that many corporate people do when new to the job and trying to improve on things. They've gone for the aggressive, strategy in the hope that they unearth something special. It doesn't mean that they've completely blacklisted a certain type of cricketer.

It's unlikely that all 3 new quicks succeed, but they probably have more potential to be a star of the game compared to any of the medium-fast/medium pace bowlers that you mentioned earlier. Perhaps that's what they are searching for, instead of wanting honest, serviceable Cricketers.
Click to expand...
Where have I said anything about wanting some of those guys picked? And where did I mention anything about suggesting anything to the new selectors? This is what I feel they are basing their selections on given who they have picked so far. And let's face it the new selectors whether they intend to or not will more than likely be consistent with the old selection panel regarding those guys mentioned. They have seen what these guys have to offer and none of them have shown much to suggest they will be on the scene long term. There will always be the question marks on them even if they somehow manage to get picked, just like Copeland.

One guy in the list I mentioned is performing in Butterworth yet he's managed to be overtaken by Starc and a guy that has 9 FC matches under his belt. Which brings me to your next point. Starc and Pattinson are potential based players. You say the new selectors have made this classic move of taking risks. Ummm the old selectors have been doing the exact same thing for the past 2 seasons and been widely criticized for it. Now it's been praised as an aggressive strategy and a way to improve? Pattinson, Starc and Cutting are all players embarked as potential stars by the previous selectors which has been carried on by the new ones. So once again whether they intended to or not, they have carried over something from the much criticized previous selectors.

And your last paragraph just supports what I mentioned. The selectors are looking at potential and pace rather than the medium fast bowlers who have dominated shield comp. That is as good as blacklisting them in my book.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top