• 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.

Channel 9 Commentators - Very Poor Form

Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Son Of Coco said:
Well, Warne's 3/12 helped Australia get up by 16 runs and is recognised as a turning point where he started to show some potential. Didn't he also dismiss Richie Richardson in spectacular fashion vs the West Indies?
Click to expand...
The 3-11 at The SSC, and also his 7-52 against West Indies at The MCG the following season, were both demonstrations of his potential. However, that's all they were. Everything else (and there was plenty of it, he took 4-636 in his other 10 innings spells :blink:) showed that he still had a lot to do. The turning-point came in New Zealand late in 1992/93 when he started to produce the figures game after game.
So you don't think selectors look at the mental capabilities of a player and whether they'll be able to step up to the next level as well as first class figures? If what you say is true about first class figures = test results then isn't it possible selectors saw something in Warne at A Grade level in Melbourne? (I don't think this is a good way of making a selection, but it fits the theme...) Let's not forget he'd also participated in some representative tours.

Given you have no idea what the selectors looked at before making the decision to play Warne and McGrath how are you qualified to comment on whether or not they were a good selection?
Click to expand...
I do have an idea of some of the things, though - the stuff which is most important and which they should be looking at in order to make selections.

BTW, I've never said, once, that First-Class figures = Test figures, not in the slightest. I have said that (in all bar a tiny number of cases) poor First-Class figures = poor Test figures, but that's not akin to good FC figures = guarantee of good Test figures. Of course the mental capabilities of a player are important to Test success - but believe it or not they're actually also important to domestic success. If you can't perform at domestic level, it doesn't say much for your physical or mental capabilities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top