Australian Squad To Sri lanka

[marc71178]

From memory, I think this is a different case, since Scotland are still a Minor County for the purposes of English selection.

But this is talking about the ICC...

 

[Neil Pickup]

Because they belong to the players in question?

Already written with shocking grammar
If Symonds, Harvey and Williams have poor series'

The possessive has already been indicated with "have"...

 

[iamdavid]

As for Bevan, without a question he is the best one-day player ever IMO, but not Test class - had enough chances, and wasted most of them.

Couldnt let this pass without comment , very true on Beven , yet Ramps is EXACTLY the same.
Had a mountain of oppurtunities , wasted most of them , in fact more chances than Bevan for worse results.
Lets have some consistency here :P

 

[Craig]

Craig, surely you don't think Test selection should take any account of ODIs.
They're different forms of the game.

It's something the NZ selectors have used.

 

[Mister Wright]

From memory, I think this is a different case, since Scotland are still a Minor County for the purposes of English selection. I think there's a technicality about players who play for Scotland, Ireland or Wales.

It doesn't matter, they are both in the same situation. Both Scotland and Canada are associate members of the ICC and not test playing nation. A player has to reside in a country for four years before they are eligible to play for a test nation only if they have played for another test nation. In the case of an associate member they can play for them in the World Cup and the next week play for a test playing nation in ODIs or tests. The only thing I'm not sure on is if the play for an associate member then a test nation if they can then play for the associate member again, I don't think they can.

 

[Andre]

It's something the NZ selectors have used.

And since when were NZ doing so well that Australia had to adopt their selection policies?

 

[Andre]

It doesn't matter, they are both in the same situation. Both Scotland and Canada are associate members of the ICC and not test playing nation. A player has to reside in a country for four years before they are eligible to play for a test nation only if they have played for another test nation. In the case of an associate member they can play for them in the World Cup and the next week play for a test playing nation in ODIs or tests. The only thing I'm not sure on is if the play for an associate member then a test nation if they can then play for the associate member again, I don't think they can.

According to John, he is eligible for Australia, toherwise he would never have played in the WC.

 

[Craig]

And since when were NZ doing so well that Australia had to adopt their selection policies?

It was something that might/should be considered.

 

[Prince EWS]

The only reason Bevan has struggles in tests is becuase he hates fast bwoling on bouncy wickets, something he wont see much in Sril Lanka against Sri Lanka. He does have to have a good VB Series, just one important innings, for which he has to bat higher where he belongs. he is certainly not a number 7 in ODIs and probably hates it! But at the moment he isnt having a good series at all, and if this continues, he wont have any hope at all.

I really dont think he has a test career in front of him in Australia, but I think the slectors are smart enough to pick players for teh conditions and not to be obsessed with youth.

Australia are just losing their grip at the moment, just a little, so they have to pick teh best players for each specific game, not just pick players so they can poick up their form. This si fine when you are always winning becuase it doesnt matter, but in Sril lanka with the form of our bowlers and a few batsmen, they need to pick the best players for the situation.

 

[marc71178]

The only thing I'm not sure on is if the play for an associate member then a test nation if they can then play for the associate member again, I don't think they can.

The selection of Dougie Brown and Gavin Hamilton suggests that they can...

 

[Richard]

Couldnt let this pass without comment , very true on Beven , yet Ramps is EXACTLY the same.
Had a mountain of oppurtunities , wasted most of them , in fact more chances than Bevan for worse results.
Lets have some consistency here :P

Bevan's most recent games?
Did he average 37 in his last 4 years of Test-cricket?
Ramprakash wasted as good as ALL his early opportunities, but from just over halfway onwards, when batting in his proper position, he failed only against New Zealand.
Bevan is a Hick (and their weaknesses are the same, too), not a Ramprakash - Ramprakash has never had an obvious technical flaw, the problem was always that he had a suspect temperament.
Once he cleared that up there were no problems. Technical faults are harder to correct.

 

[Richard]

The possessive has already been indicated with "have"...

Well as far as I'm aware what I wrote was correct.
What level did you study English Language to? I'm currently doing A2.
If we can find something that is definitive I'll be willing to concede defeat.
But what a strangely strong reaction!
And hang-on; the ' on the end of series was to indicate the plural, not the posessive!

 

[Richard]

It's something the NZ selectors have used.

IMO making selections for Tests on ODIs is a very bad idea.
Especially when it's just one series.
How many decent Test players have had poor domestic First-Class records and good ODI records? And DON'T say Trescothick, true or not!

 

[Neil Pickup]

Well as far as I'm aware what I wrote was correct.
What level did you study English Language to? I'm currently doing A2.
If we can find something that is definitive I'll be willing to concede defeat.
But what a strangely strong reaction!
And hang-on; the ' on the end of series was to indicate the plural, not the posessive!

I'm aware of that. I was pointing out that it couldn't indicate possessive as "have" had already been used.

And apostrophes can only ever be used to indicate omission or possession not pluralisation.

GCSE - A*

 

[Richard]

Ditto. A* Language and A Literacy.
Apostrophies obviously cannot be used in "thing's" or "list's" for instance, but I have always used them when there is no "s", sort of to replace the "s".
And I have never been taken to task for it.

 

[Neil Pickup]

And I have never been taken to task for it.

Well you are being taken to task for it now.

Never, never, never, never, never are apostrophes ever, ever, ever, ever used in pluralisation.

 

[Richard]

OK, OK!:O
I'll check with Mr. F. tomorrow!