Does anyone think Australia's situation is not actually that dire?

[HeathDavisSpeed]

You've had 20 odd years of relentlessly taking the piss out of English cricket, now this is all you've got left

Well, you should actually think about who I'm supporting in this series before saying that, fulla.

 

[Adders]

Well, you should actually think about who I'm supporting in this series before saying that, fulla.

Where did your post go??

And my apologies if my post was misdirected, you were getting stuck into Cookie Monster and I've got no idea if the example he was using was a poor one or not, but the crux of his point was still very valid.........Aussies are in no position to be criticising us for imported talent. Are you a Kiwi?? Cos I'm not sure why NZ have been dragged into this........

 

[the big bambino]

That was really funny: When it was done the first time.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Where did your post go??

And my apologies if my post was misdirected, you were getting stuck into Cookie Monster and I've got no idea if the example he was using was a poor one or not, but the crux of his point was still very valid.........Aussies are in no position to be criticising us for imported talent. Are you a Kiwi?? Cos I'm not sure why NZ have been dragged into this........

I'm definitely not an Australian. And I'm not entirely sure why NZ have been dragged into this, but the erstwhile Mr. Monster decided NZ was relevant somehow. I deleted my post as I didn't think there was any point trying to argue with the troll - I must have deleted it whilst you were writing your reply.

 

[social]

FMD, well that's a big LOL....you should practise what you preach fella.

I've got no idea about the background of AU's rugby players so I'm not going there but what I do know is that Australia doesn't give a second thought to importing talent and claiming them as their own in just about every facet of life. Not just sport but music, movies, commerce, **** even politics...........So to say your extremely boring fascination in our couple of South African cricketers is hypocritical in the extreme would be a massive understatement. People in glass houses indeed mate.

You've had 20 odd years of relentlessly taking the piss out of English cricket, now this is all you've got left

As of 2013, only about 3% of the total Australian population are indigenous to this country - we are virtually all imports

Bee Gees are a typically "Australian" story

Parents move family to Oz in search of a better life

Boys grow up and form a band, get signed to a label, have some success before eventually moving o/s as local market is very small at that stage

Barry Gibb has lived in Florida for years but still has a property near where I used to live in Oz and still visits regularly as far as I know

Is he English, Australian or American?

**** knows or cares and we certainly don't

Furthermore, for every Barry Gibb, you could name many, many others in a similar boat

Anyway, back to the cricket

 

[Spark]

...

Dan's said to stop with the rugby discussion twice. This makes for number three: cut it out, or it's an on-the-spot eight-pointer (minimum). It isn't hard, guys.

 

[Spikey]

Steve Cannane: Why don't Australia's private schools produce Test cricketers? | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

wherein we discover the reason for Greg Chappell's youth push desire

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Australia's next hero?

 

[Furball]

Steve Cannane: Why don't Australia's private schools produce Test cricketers? | Cricinfo Magazine | ESPN Cricinfo

wherein we discover the reason for Greg Chappell's youth push desire

Pretty interesting article that, especially as it's the exact opposite over here.

 

[Tangles]

Don't like those age restrictions in the 2nd elevens. If your good enough your old enough.

 

[Maximas]

Australia's next hero?

Spare me

 

[Tangles]

Whacky selections didn't work in India but hey why not. Uzi, Prince and Smitteh out for Warner, Maxwell and Wade. Boy wouldn't that suck balls.

 

[uvelocity]

if you had to take them as a package, for the next test i'd pick the second group as more likely tbh. smitteh drawing a dud group

 

[Tangles]

Warner I have some time for despite his personality. Wade and Maxwell are deadest duds. Passports should be stamped NTFPA for tests.

 

[Uppercut]

But if you dont recognize the underlying causes for having the worse team then you are destined to repeat and never understand why the current situation exists. My background is in failure analysis and it can be applied to cricket associations as easily as diesel engines. Im not saying Im the best or I know it all but Im OK. I find this type of article painful. I agree that there are lots of half arsed ideas floating around why sports teams fail but there is actually a lot of interesting stuff of value that can be used to help design failure out of the system.

Just saying that the other team is better and that causes are invented to fit the effect is a recipe for continued poor results. Seemingly contradictory statements may be true. For example, a 6 team SS may be potentially both a strength or a weakness. If it is a 6 team tournament with strength vs strength and all the top players play and others have to work hard to make the team and even harder to stay in a State team then it is an obvious advantage as it closely replicates Test cricket. The disadvantage of having few players available due to the small number of teams are off set by their hardened experience at a top level of cricket. It is a small but deep pool of talent. If the comp is diluted by a number of the best players not turning out and the level below isnt of an intense competitive standard then the pool stays small but is shallower.

There isnt one cause to the failure of any team. Some are bigger than others but if 20 are suggested (including those that are seemingly contradictory) then they should all be seriously looked at before being cast aside and just fixing one doesnt mean you dont have other issues that need looking at.

His analysis doesn't have to stop with that article; he can say all that he says in that article but still think very deeply about what can be done to improve cricket in the country. Besides, he definitely has a point. Of course there are some seemingly contradictory statements that actually make sense, but there's also a lot of genuine illogical nonsense written about cricket.

More to the point, what the best way to run cricket in a country is isn't really affected by the results of test matches. Even as a feedback mechanism it's too long-term and high-variance to be of much use- you get things like Warne cropping up from nowhere and having a huge influence on 15 years of results. That's what the problem is with the lines of reasoning that he criticises: it's assumed that if your test side is winning, you're doing everything right, and if your test side is losing, you're doing everything wrong.

 

[Manee]

Have enjoyed this thread. Theo article was a good read.

 

[cameronryan123]

okay guys, i said this earlier in the thread, but I'd like to hear other's thoughts on playing 7 batsmen, keeper and 3 pace bowlers? and rely on part time spinners. The problem with Australian cricket at the moment is our bowlers are just as good as the batsmen at batting, and our spin bowlers are no better than part time spin bowlers. If it wasn't for the depth of our fast bowling stocks, our situation would be a hell of a lot more dire.

 

[NUFAN]

If our bowlers are just as good as the batsman at batting, why not just play 4 bowlers Camo? Realistically, we might as well continue to play Ashton Agar in our team as the seventh batsman and call him a part time spinner if we were to follow your suggestion.

 

[cameronryan123]

If our bowlers are just as good as the batsman at batting, why not just play 4 bowlers Camo? Realistically, we might as well continue to play Ashton Agar in our team as the seventh batsman and call him a part time spinner if we were to follow your suggestion.

Nah I'd rather use the likes of warner, katich as part time spinners. Overall our batsmen suck and our spin bowlers suck. The way I see it is why waste a whole spot to a spinner when we could actually just pick 7 batsmen. I'd rather an actual batter like warner, katich etc in the team because a) batting is better b)bowling is just as good. I know what I'm saying is sort of contradicting hahah but I can see some of our batsmen being capable of scoring tons, and with 7 there we are lifting the chances. I just can't see our spinners helping us enough with bat or ball. Its okay to say our bowlers are getting 30s with the bat, but if they aren't getting wickets they shouldn't be in the team.

 

[NUFAN]

Nah I'd rather use the likes of warner, katich as part time spinners. Overall our batsmen suck and our spin bowlers suck. The way I see it is why waste a whole spot to a spinner when we could actually just pick 7 batsmen. I'd rather an actual batter like warner, katich etc in the team because a) batting is better b)bowling is just as good. I know what I'm saying is sort of contradicting hahah but I can see some of our batsmen being capable of scoring tons, and with 7 there we are lifting the chances. I just can't see our spinners helping us enough with bat or ball. Its okay to say our bowlers are getting 30s with the bat, but if they aren't getting wickets they shouldn't be in the team.

Yeah it is a contradiction for sure. I guess you see upside in our batsman but don't see any upside in our spinners, which I guess is fair enough as we don't have a world class spinner. Someone like Katich isn't going to come into the team with Clarke still there. What would be your lineup?