Australia's leadership heading toward two big Ashes series

[Red]

Just read this article. Pretty damning on Australia's leadership within the group heading towards the Ashes..

Champions Trophy 2013 : Michael Clarke concedes captaincy damage | Cricket News | ICC Champions Trophy | ESPN Cricinfo

Clarke isn't everyone's cup of tea, and it seems that after their "indiscretions" Warner and Watson wont captain Australia anytime soon.So it's little wonder Haddin was brought in to the set up, because it seems like if Clarke's back is shagged, he's the only one who's going to lead.

But (and this is a distinct possibility) what if Clarke misses tests, and Haddin loses form with the bat and gloves (he is getting to the age where WKs start to drop catches)? Who captains Australia?

Wonder what odds you could get on Ed Cowan captaining Australia at some point in the next 12 months?

And as a side note....seems like Watson pushed for Warner to be punished when it was going to be swept under the rug. There's something not right in this squad at the moment.

 

[uvelocity]

bring back ab

 

[Spikey]

Steve Smith

 

[Spikey]

steve smith displayed his michael clarke-esue captaincy skills in the recent Australia A scratch match by deciding to bowl a local bowler when he really didn't have to and probably should not have, and then the local bowler got a wicket. The perfect replacement.

 

[ajdude]

steve rixon, he does everything else

actually mark neeld

 

[social]

I know for a fact that many in the hierarchy of CA didn't want Clarke as captain but there was basically no-one else

Since being appointed, he has scored a mountain of runs and, aside from India, his on-field captaincy has been excellent

However, there must be question marks against his man-management skills and its entirely possible that CA's initial fears are starting to materialise

Furthermore, he is "supported" by a coach who, from the outside, appears to be the wrong man for the job

In summary, my gut feel is that we have a "leadership group" in name only

 

[Jono]

No doubt Clarke has obviously had some issues with leadership, but surely the biggest issue here is he has no one else underneath him helping out? This is where Watson has been a massive failure. When those two were appointed as C and VC they were a leadership team, and Watson has failed Clarke in his capacity as vice captain. Yes ultimately the responsibility of ill discipline and poor performances falls on the captain but Australia is a really young and inexperienced side right now. The fact Warner was potentially the most senior/experienced bloke at the pub that night says it all really.

It all comes back to Twatto and the fact that Hussey/Ponting went in quick succession.

Going to be tough for Clarke to fix this. He needs support and is getting **** all.

 

[uvelocity]

boof lehmann would fix all

 

[LongHopCassidy]

But (and this is a distinct possibility) what if Clarke misses tests, and Haddin loses form with the bat and gloves (he is getting to the age where WKs start to drop catches)?.

Wade for captain; clearly wise beyond his years.

 

[social]

No doubt Clarke has obviously had some issues with leadership, but surely the biggest issue here is he has no one else underneath him helping out? This is where Watson has been a massive failure. When those two were appointed as C and VC they were a leadership team, and Watson has failed Clarke in his capacity as vice captain. Yes ultimately the responsibility of ill discipline and poor performances falls on the captain but Australia is a really young and inexperienced side right now. The fact Warner was potentially the most senior/experienced bloke at the pub that night says it all really.

It all comes back to Twatto and the fact that Hussey/Ponting went in quick succession.

Going to be tough for Clarke to fix this. He needs support and is getting **** all.

You're right

Was going to post something along the lines of "I reckon the thing Oz needs most is to have more than one of the guys with world class talent (e.g. Patto) develop into world class players so that there is a strong core commanding respect rather than just one guy trying to plug about 50 holes in the dyke."

At present, Clarke can do or say virtually anything as he is indispensible

If he's right (and tbf, he most has been) then great

If not, then it's India tour ad infinitum

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Apparently factionalism has set in between Clarke's bois and The Rest (who occupy the whole spectrum of twattishness, funnily enough).

There was a post on the Roar (I know, I know) that got me thinking and hits the nail on the head for mine: Clarke has a very Kevin Ruddish internal leadership model, pushing himself to his absolute limits and unrelentingly expecting the same standards from everyone else. Some find it inspiring, some bitterly resent it especially when it doesn't yield results for them and the response is 'train harder'. Of course, it's a lot easier to not **** around at training when you've got childhood heroes like Ponting watching on.

 

[the big bambino]

We are just this series away from having a Simpson like cleanout of the bludgers, misfits, egotists and stirrers. That could mean a new squad but the 1st 3 who should go if we get the 5 blot belting I'm predicting, are Watson (massive sook - utter ****) Warner (drunk - reckons he's a rock star) and Usman. His is the strangest selection. Why pick a man for a squad if you haven't played him bcos of his reputedly poor work ethic? If he's lazy then why pick him at all? I mean its just weird.

Don't know who could replace them yet but would probably go with Doolan, Bailey and Moises. Ironically our batting is so bad we can send 3 of them to the abattoir and not unduly weaken the team.

 

[social]

We are just this series away from having a Simpson like cleanout of the bludgers, misfits, egotists and stirrers. That could mean a new squad but the 1st 3 who should go if we get the 5 blot belting I'm predicting, are Watson (massive sook - utter ****) Warner (drunk - reckons he's a rock star) and Usman. His is the strangest selection. Why pick a man for a squad if you haven't played him bcos of his reputedly poor work ethic? If he's lazy then why pick him at all? I mean its just weird.

Don't know who could replace them yet but would probably go with Doolan, Bailey and Moises. Ironically our batting is so bad we can send 3 of them to the abattoir and not unduly weaken the team.

What's strange about Oz cricket atm is that no-one, to the best of my knowledge, has ever accused any bowler other than Johnson of shirking the task whereas the batsmen are constantly in the firing line (even then, it's probably not fair as Mitch is a flake with technical issues not a guy lacking commitment IMO)

Tbh, aside from Warner (hey Dave, it's ok to leave more than 2 balls in a row outside off-stump), I think that for the most part, it's not lack of commitment - our batsmen simply aren't good enough

 

[Adders]

I'm glad this thread has been started as I was going to start one in a similar vein but figured coming from a POM it would be taken as a troll by too many posters.

But since this has been started I'll throw in my two cents but it seems the general consensus is in line with my opinion anyway. I've always rated Clarke, as a player and as a captain and I actually feel for him here, he must be leading the sorriest bunch of Aussie cricketers to ever leave their shores. And I'm not even talking about their ability, of course they were never going to live up to the legacy left by their predecessors but the attitude, commitment and behaviour of too many of them is just plain embarrassing now.

So the question is, is it the players or the leadership?? Would Taylor, Waugh or Ponting have been able to keep Twatto and Warner et al in line?? Dunno the answer to that but I think the management have to be held accountable for this mess. Clarke can't go clearly, there is no one to replace him and on field he's got the goods, man management can be learnt to some degree I reckon. For whatever reason Mickey Arthur has just not worked out and needs the flick, not sure what you do about the muppets further up the food chain......who sacks them??

England won't win this series 5-0 (we are not that good) but I think it needs to be a heavy loss for some Aussie heads to roll.

 

[Burgey]

I think the answer to your question, Adders. is that they would. Border, for example, was so (rightly) monumentally revered that no one would question his authority.

Taylor came to lead a side with a number of senior blokes who would have stamped out a lot of this **** from the young blokes.

S Waugh - see Border and Taylor combined.

Ponting - probably, because he was a hard little bugger.

I too admire Clarke's tactical nous, but there is plenty of evidence, albeit circumstantial, that he has problems managing a team. His issues with Katich are well known, and those with Watson too. Then there are the rumours about Hussey's retirement and the preponderance of Gen Y schtick in the side.

At best, there is a schism between Clarke and Watson. At worst there is a broad lack of respect for the team ethos and the captain's ability to engender the right kind of culture within the team.

That's not necessarily his fault - he's leading a side with few world class batsmen. But by the same token, there comes a time when the selectors may need to do what Sawle, Chappell et al did in the 80s - pick selected young blokes who aren't ready but who have the right mind set to ultimately succeed at test level. I've heard it said it takes a lot of players 25-30 tests to feel like they belong at that level.

Mind you, if the current selectors tried what their 80s counterparts did, there'd be merry hell to pay.

The best CA can do is have systems in place which get the best out of the talent available. You can't "make" test standard players per se. But you can engender the right mindset surrounding team culture and individual responsibility.

Winning masks most everything. No doubt the decline in the way the dressing room functions has been on the slide for quite a while. But if you win, you paper over the cracks.

It's an interesting time for CA. I don't know who has the balls to rip the joint down and rebuild an edifice in AB's likeness.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

The thing is that absolutely nothing of this kind of internal politics ever got out until we started losing as a matter of routine.

If we start winning, we'll start cohesing, simple as. Warne and Waugh never got on after Tugga got the captaincy but you didn't read about it until they'd both retired.

And let's face it, if Watson had won a Test in India with a run-a-ball 150, we'd all be glossing over the fact he's a whiny ****.

 

[Burgey]

Sure, but managing the various personalities within a team is part of what makes you win consistently to begin with.

 

[Adders]

I think the answer to your question, Adders. is that they would. Border, for example, was so (rightly) monumentally revered that no one would question his authority.

Taylor came to lead a side with a number of senior blokes who would have stamped out a lot of this **** from the young blokes.

S Waugh - see Border and Taylor combined.

Ponting - probably, because he was a hard little bugger.

I reckon my thoughts on this wont be very popular here but my theory (and it is only a theory) is the rot started under Pontings reign. He seemed to me to want to be a "mate" to the team, he led by example in terms of work ethic and performance and just expected everyone to follow suit. I can't imagine him ever ripping strips off anyone in the way I could Border or Waugh. I think after the greats retired Ponting got lost and the leadership of the team was lost too. It was in poor shape when Clarke took over but at least at the time he had Ponting and Hussey there as the elder statesmen to turn too and to show the young punks this is the way we do it. Now there is only Clarke, who they still call "Pup"......I mean what's the go with that for a start?? He copped that nickname as a kid starting out, how can a 20 year old noob be calling his captain Pup FFS??

But I agree with you that as much as Clarke impresses on the field, he hasn't got this side to gel and clearly doesn't have the respect that he deserves, but what do you do about that?? England were in very poor shape when Strauss took over after the Moores/KP debacle, they gave him the captaincy when he was barely holding onto his spot in the side.......do you have a Strauss there capable of doing what he did??

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Sure, but managing the various personalities within a team is part of what makes you win consistently to begin with.

Very true. A team that's just gotten off the high of winning is more likely to take advice and respond to their leader. Clarke's biggest problem is that he's being relentlessly portrayed - for easy copy by Murdoch and Fairfax, and tactically by Fleet Street - as a conniving dictator presiding over a team that needs a father figure or mentor. That, in itself, is making his job infinitely harder when Crash Craddock is openly trolling his team into making stupid tweets and making him upbraid them in public for reacting. That's going to breed resentment.

Since we'd beaten India in Australia, pushed the world champs to breaking point, beaten up the little Sri Lankans twice and then come apart at the seams, does that mean Clarke has suddenly forgotten how to manage his team? Either he had the skills to begin with or was skiing downhill on the influence of Ponting and Hussey and never bothered to learn. You can dodge an Argus report if you don't lose a series.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

But I agree with you that as much as Clarke impresses on the field, he hasn't got this side to gel and clearly doesn't have the respect that he deserves, but what do you do about that?? England were in very poor shape when Strauss took over after the Moores/KP debacle, they gave him the captaincy when he was barely holding onto his spot in the side.......do you have a Strauss there capable of doing what he did??

Is it a coincidence that they'd just been spanked by South Africa in their own backyard and Vaughan quite fancied sniping easy targets from Twitter instead of giving KP a permanent kick up the arse and rebuilding his side?

Strauss had respect by default, fellow seniors to lean on and the handy asset in the team mutually despising Pietersen.

Then it took another KP blowup during a home series against the yarps and Strauss chucked it in too. It's like a spin-cycle really. One outclassing and it's out the door.