Friend of mine is a former state player and now a highly regarded coachThere’s just serious issues with our pathways and systems. The talent is there. We’re producing the bowlers. But no batsmen
Blaming pathways and systems is a pretty easy target but realistically what do you expect to happen when you ban the 2 players who are your best batsmen by far, half your bowlers are "injured" and you then don't even select anything close to the best team available. And you're playing Pakistan in the UAE.
If this happened against Pakistan in Brisbane, with a full-strength side, then I'd start really worrying about pathways and systems.
Having said all that I do actually think there are issues with the pathways, I just don't think it's a major contributor to Aus sucking.
I think there's also definitely an issue with selection. Favouritism is rampant and while selecting youth ahead of 30+ year olds has its merits you can't be ignoring Callum Fergusons and selecting Maddinson, Heads and Labuschagnes.I think what you are saying is that despite the pathways an systems there is no depth in the team.
Other than the top 6 players, the rest of the players are just good ordinary cricketers
Yeah I think there's slightly something to what GS said, but actually no moreso than any other country at the moment. Not producing Test batsmen who can adapt to alien conditions at all is very much a global trend. It's been exasperated here because of the own-goals from the senior management that were the suspensions of their best two batsmen (and another decent one), the appointment of a horrible coach and the subsequently awful batting selections that followed from that.Blaming pathways and systems is a pretty easy target but realistically what do you expect to happen when you ban the 2 players who are your best batsmen by far, half your bowlers are "injured" and you then don't even select anything close to the best team available. And you're playing Pakistan in the UAE.
I consider the blaming of systems and pathways as a part of the dysfunctional selection process as well, coaching etc etcBlaming pathways and systems is a pretty easy target but realistically what do you expect to happen when you ban the 2 players who are your best batsmen by far, half your bowlers are "injured" and you then don't even select anything close to the best team available. And you're playing Pakistan in the UAE.
If this happened against Pakistan in Brisbane, with a full-strength side, then I'd start really worrying about pathways and systems.
Having said all that I do actually think there are issues with the pathways, I just don't think it's a major contributor to Aus sucking.
Right but this is perfectly normal. Teams can't just banish their best five or so batsmen and expect the next lot to be better than "good, ordinary cricketers". Whenever this has even possibly been true in Test history it's been a complete aberration - a glitch, a lucky fluke - rather than something you should realistically expect from your pathways program all the time.I think what you are saying is that despite the pathways an systems there is no depth in the team.
Other than the top 6 players, the rest of the players are just good ordinary cricketers
Has it ever been true? I'm trying to think of a time where teams have missed five or six of their best players and not been poor.Right but this is perfectly normal. Teams can't just banish their best five or so batsmen and expect the next lot to be better than "good, ordinary cricketers". Whenever this has even possibly been true in Test history it's been a complete aberration - a glitch, a lucky fluke - rather than something you should realistically expect from your pathways program all the time.
I can't think of any instances where it has proven to be true, but teams don't lose their best five or six of their best batsmen (or players) very often for us to see either. There have been times where it's theoretically been true -- players absolutely bashing the door down and not getting extended runs -- and even though I'm actually sceptical of even these times, you could make a case for them. Even if you steel-man the argument and grant that it would have been true at these times (and again, I'm sceptical), it's certainly been exceedingly rare, and probably not something administrators can actively create without a lot of luck.Has it ever been true? I'm trying to think of a time where teams have missed five or six of their best players and not been poor.
Ferguson as well.Burns, Maxwell, Hughes, Patterson all have better first class records than Labaschagne. Why did none of them get picked? Why was Renshaw left out?
We're not missing our two best batsmen, we're missing possibly 4 or 5 of our best batsmen.
The last time this happened to Australia was world series cricket. We got thumped after all of the player bans.I can't think of any instances where it has proven to be true, but teams don't lose their best five or six of their best batsmen (or players) very often for us to see either. There have been times where it's theoretically been true -- players absolutely bashing the door down and not getting extended runs -- and even though I'm actually sceptical of even these times, you could make a case for them. Even if you steel-man the argument and grant that it would have been true at these times (and again, I'm sceptical), it's certainly been exceedingly rare, and probably not something administrators can actively create without a lot of luck.