Future ****Stars**** of Australian Cricket

[Neil Pickup]

Right Richie, find me any set of data that supports a statistically significant correlation between domestic FC and Test performances.

Any. Whatever stats you want, just a nice big dataset. Your shot to prove the correlation.

 

[Richard]

I'm not suggesting performance in domestic-First-Class-cricket is a gurantee or anything close to one at Test-level.
Merely that it's something that to have it not means you're basically a guranteed failure at Test-level.

 

[Neil Pickup]

I'm not suggesting performance in domestic-First-Class-cricket is a gurantee or anything close to one at Test-level.
Merely that it's something that to have it not means you're basically a guranteed failure at Test-level.

The second sentence makes no sense, even for you.

 

[Richard]

Suggest a better way of phrasing it.
You surely know what I mean?

 

[marc71178]

so the goalpost have moved yet again????

back to the drawing board again Neil

Yes, we're back into the realms of made up numbers,

 

[vic_orthdox]

here's one for you then - hamish marshall.

 

[Richard]

Yes, we're back into the realms of made up numbers,

So what else comes into the equation, then?

 

[Richard]

here's one for you then - hamish marshall.

Yep - and a truly remarkable case he appears to be forming.

 

[marc71178]

So what else comes into the equation, then?

Actual facts rather than things made up based on reading some things, and relying on other people's judgement as to whether the ball in the air was a chance or not.

 

[Richard]

And given that I've watched every single Trescothick innings in Test-cricket I don't need to either rely on others or make things up.

 

[The Argonaut]

Back to topic.

I think that Cullen is a great find and has finished the season extremely well. He would be (on current form) the 3rd best spinner in the country behind Warne and MacGill. Hauritz needs to get his groove back, White doesn't bowl enough overs to be considered a top line spinner (an allrounder maybe), Doherty has had shocking figures and looks to be in the same league as Hauritz at the moment.

On the batting front Jaques has had a great season and could leapfrog Mike Hussey as the next opening option. I think that the selectors will stick with Hussey. David Hussey has disappointed this season after a hot one last season. Callum Ferguson and Craig Philipson have shown promise and you can't knock the class of Rogers and North from WA. Thornely may also be a contender next year.

The next fringe of fast bowlers includes Tait (obviously) but there are no real other youngsters in line other than maybe Griffith from Tasmania. Mitchell Johnson needs to get a full season under his belt.

Haddin will go to England as reserve keeper. Seccombe has disappointed with the bat and Hartley may be too good to ignore next season. No other gloveman has done enough. Ronchi can't get into the FC side for WA so who knows how good he is. Crosthwaite has at least played a couple of games at the end of the season.

My top XI of guys who have not played a test yet is.

Hussey, Jaques, Rogers, Hodge, North, Thornely, Haddin, Cullen, Tait, Griffith, Harwood (struggling for last bowler, could also pick Wright, Rofe, Dawes, S Clark)

 

[Richard]

NO INNESS?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
l

 

[Mister Wright]

NO INNESS?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
l

Get your hand off it Richard. He isn't even playing for Victoria, how can he ever be considered by Australia.

 

[marc71178]

Get your hand off it Richard. He isn't even playing for Victoria, how can he ever be considered by Australia.

Because richard has decided he should be, regardless of how he actually bowls or anything!

 

[Richard]

So because he CURRENTLY isn't bowling well, that means all the years he's bowled well for are now non-existent?
And unless they are, he's exceptionally unlucky not to have played a Test - FAR more so than his opening partner Harwood.

 

[marc71178]

So because he CURRENTLY isn't bowling well, that means all the years he's bowled well for are now non-existent?

If someone is selecting a current line up then yes

 

[Swervy]

Get your hand off it Richard. He isn't even playing for Victoria, how can he ever be considered by Australia.

maybe he has fallen into the trap of thinking that because someone is good on International cricket captain, he must be good in real life..its called the Bulbeck Factor

(Only kidding Richard!!!!)

 

[age_master]

Inness hasn't played much in ages

"An outright to Essendon over South Melbourne has suddenly brought the Bombers into contention for the finals. The innings win was spearheaded by left-arm quick Mathew Inness, whose match figures of 14 for 84 were the best in District/Premier Cricket for 27 years and took his season tally to 50 wickets at the wonderful average of 10.68."

from the vic cricket page

 

[Mister Wright]

So because he CURRENTLY isn't bowling well, that means all the years he's bowled well for are now non-existent?
And unless they are, he's exceptionally unlucky not to have played a Test - FAR more so than his opening partner Harwood.

He hasn't been a regular in the side for 2 years. He has always been over-rated anyway.

 

[Ming]

And all sorts of players from all sorts of nations are predicted huge things all the time.
For every success there's probably about 29 failures.

So let's take your example and put it to NZ domestic cricket.

Say there are 12-man squads in each domestic side (there are 6), so that equates to around 72 players. So Richard is saying there are only around 2-3 players in NZ, that were touted for big things, had success.

Out of Auckland: Vincent, Horne, Nicol were touted for big things recently, and you could say Vincent none of them of achieved their potential just yet. So that's 0/3.

Take Canterbury: Fleming, Cairns, Astle, McMillan were touted for huge things when they were young, and the first three have lived up to their billing definitely, and there could be a case for Maaca as well since his Test average is still around 40. So that's 3/4.

Richard, your evaluation of 1/30 is total rubbish.