an individual performance doenst change anything. we were led up to believe that he was cut out for test match cricket at the start of the ashes and yet he performed nowhere near the hype that he got. his accuracy is simply not good enough for him to succeed at the highest level, and its more likely that hes fail in ODIs than in tests.Top_Cat said:Here's your first clue;
http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2003-04/AUS_LOCAL/ING/SCORECARDS/SOA_TAS_ING_09JAN2004.html
8/43; 9 wides, 4 no-balls.
Yes there will be days where he'll be expensive but there will also be days like the above where he'll rip the heart out of an opposition batting line-up.
oh i believe in giving people extended chances too,assuming they actually look capable of succeeding at it. selecting tait in the wrong form of the game(much like the idea of bracken playing tests) is more likely to be detrimental towards his career than it is going to be a positive.howardj said:Geez, Im glad you were not a selector that sat in judgment on the formative stages of McGrath's, Warne's and SWaugh's careers. Like Tait, they didn't exactly have a great time of things in their first 5-10 Tests. However, the selectors identified them as players who could, long term, be staples of the side. I think, and it's typical of society more generally, that people want instant results, and unless they get that, then a change has to be made.
I mean, the way the great Australian side of the last decade was built, was by identifying, sticking with, and backing young guys (Slater, Warne, McGrath, Healy, Waugh) they were all given time to find their feet. I hope the same latitude is given to guys like Tait, Watson, Jacques and Cullen, or whoever it is the selectors identify as having the talent to sustain a long international career.
theres only 1 other player from england that deserves to be in that squad and he isnt even fit.Scaly piscine said:How is 2 players out of 13 in the Test squad for England 'in keeping with performance'? And I'll be surprised if Harmison actually plays.
The best side (excluding Australia) by miles, has just beaten Australia and the likes of India and Pakistan have the same number of players as England in the Test squad. England should have had a minimum of 3 players in the Test squad.
What about Duncan as coach?JASON said:Super Series Team selections - countries favoured/Over represented (out of proportion to their performances)
1 South Africa 2 possibly NZ (vettori/coach Wright- Whatmore should have been coach had it not been V Australia)
In all fairness though, who are you going to pick from that England side other than Flintoff and maybe Jones if he's fit?Scaly piscine said:How is 2 players out of 13 in the Test squad for England 'in keeping with performance'? And I'll be surprised if Harmison actually plays.
The best side (excluding Australia) by miles, has just beaten Australia and the likes of India and Pakistan have the same number of players as England in the Test squad. England should have had a minimum of 3 players in the Test squad.
1. wa so what would you call Flintoff???sqwerty said:England don't have any superstars,
they just play better than anyone as a unit and that's why they're successful.
well thankfully some sense from the World XI selectors prevailed and that didn't happen...LongHopCassidy said:I'm flabbergasted that Ashraful isn't in the ODI squad.
gee id hate to se if he was among your favorites,Cant agree about his fitness,you are obviously talking about differing kinds of fitness,sure Tendulkar is not fit to play due to elbow injuy but you are not suggesting that inzi is fitter allround than Tendulkar are you?Choora said:LOL! then clearly you haven't seen anything.
I can name ten players whose fitness is and has been far worse than that of Inzi.
Akhtar (almost always unfit) Jones,Bond ,Tendulkar (unfit , yet was selected) Zaheer Khan are some of them!!
LOL! You mean to say that the selectors didn't picked him coz they knew how Inzi is going to react
Whatever attitude you are talking baout had never been a problem with Inzi before this SS series selection, so you point that Inzi wasn't selected coz of his attitude is baseless and infact hilarious.
Sorry but you are too negative about Inzi and far less realistic, Inzi is a class act and even though he's NOT among my fav's cricket, i admire him coz i appreciate a class player.
Thanks Dasa,will you be going to any of the ODI ?Dasa said:The Telstra Dome is primarily a footy ground, but they've played cricket a few times - the first Chappell-Hadlee Trophy match last year was there...and yes, it does have a roof.
The MCG is having work done to the surface to prepare it for the Commonwealth Games (athletics track and such). Only the Boxing Day Test at the 'G this summer, all the Melbourne ODIs will be at the Telstra Dome.
They're day-night, and yes, I'm going to the first 2 games (Wed and Fri).jlo33692 said:Thanks Dasa,will you be going to any of the ODI ?
even though they are under a roof is it a day night fixture ,i mean for the start time or is it starting 10am?
I beg to differ.aussie said:well thankfully some sense from the World XI selectors prevailed and that didn't happen...
I call him included already !aussie said:1. wa so what would you call Flintoff???
and neither of them are good enough at the moment to make a ROW XI test side.Pedro Delgado said:Still a bit miffed as to why fellows are picking Tres ahead of Strauss in a world 11. Ffs Strauss scored two tons against Warne, Tres didn't.
Fitter allrounder the terms you use are absolutely hilarious.jlo33692 said:Cant agree about his fitness,you are obviously talking about differing kinds of fitness,sure Tendulkar is not fit to play due to elbow injuy but you are not suggesting that inzi is fitter allround than Tendulkar are you?
What have that to do with ongoing discussion?You cannot even put these together in the same breath as tendulkar as Sachin is in a different class to inzamin,surely you must agree with that,even though he is not one of your favs,hahahaha