Comments on: Decline of Australian cricket due to many factors

By: luke

luke — Mon, 27 Dec 2010 01:05:04 +0000

The selectors are to blame. they should be replaced. why was symonds and hayden removed? aggressive players are necessary agaisnt cocky, aggressive and sledging sides like england,. Australia does better with some aggressive players who are important in the confidence aspect. We need some more waugn brothers(retired) players who were not afraid to dominate the pitch as batsmen, something the current batsmen seems afraid to do., The agrresive style of gilchrist(retired) is another example of the attitude necesary by aussie batsmen to win, at the moment the only player of the right stuff in the current selection is shane watson., but he is effected and declines when his team does bad ,but dominates when we are winning. Ponting has a worse team now thanks to the selectors mistakes.

By: LeftArmSpinner

LeftArmSpinner — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 22:47:32 +0000

Greg, good analysis. But, off field, I roughly calculate that the Australians and Protea’s have approx. 40 days of cricket against each other this summer. I was struggling to maintain interest after the Aussies batting collapses in Aust. Boring or what.

And the second half is not available on free to air tv so that is a problem.

Throughout this boredom, I still listened to the ABC cricket coverage, not for the cricket but for the brilliantly clever and funny carryings on of the boys, as they dealt with lines dropping out. How they make such uninteresting and frankly boring sport so entertaining for 8 hours a day for 40 days is beyond me. Well done to the ABC Boys and girls.

By: drewster

drewster — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 04:33:04 +0000

Is Marcus North the forgotten man in cricket, with Symonds unavailable and the Hussey’s not achieving much surely he would have been worth a game or two instead of sitting on his bum and doing some nets. His stats from last years “Ford Ranger” Cup are Imressive enough (7 games, 343 runs, 57.16 ave, 84.48 S rate). The opening bat position/s is a real worry, especially Clarke and with only one strike bowler playing it has exposed the weakness of bowling depth. Great article Greg and some great input from the Roar faithful. Maybe you should Email this page to the selectors!

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 01:03:25 +0000

I wouldn’t underestimate the Warne/McGrath loss. In their era tests were often won inside 4 days with only 4 bowlers. Australia would win test matches with Lee being an impact bowler who would be fresh for the ODI. Now fast forward to 2008 Australia played six tests without once claiming 20 Indian/South African wickets and Lee, Clark and Watson all broke down. Furthermore in this series Siddle & Hilfenhaus had to be sent home because of their exertions bought on by the lack of spinning firepower in the test matches. If the test attack continues to play without a spinner it is inevitible that the ODI attack will continue to suffer.

By: Jameswm

Jameswm — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 00:22:04 +0000

I’m afraid I find Ponting a very conventional and uninspiring captain. There is a distinct lack of practical thought within the team.

I said earlier Katich has to be one opener. How can a guy who was clearly our most comfortable batsman in the test series not even get a look in? You can’t throw part-timers in to open, as they’re facing top fast bowlers with a new ball. Dave Warner was the perfect example – he simply didn’t have the class to deal with that level of bowling, and it showed.

I agree Symonds could be the missing link. Whatever his form for Qld, he is an intimidating figure. He has a record of failing for Qld and then performing for Australia and if his head is right, he has to be thrown in.

I was one who was convinced David Hussey would shine for Australia and he has had his moments, but Callum Ferguson has clearly outperformed him overall.

Shane Watson’s injuries are so disruptive it’s a major disappointment. Hopes is a consummate pro and has done his best.

Spinning wise, I’m torn between Hauritz’s control and Krejza’s out and out aggression. Krejza might do better in one-dayers because he has 5 men out, and he is a wicket taker if nothing else.

Phillip Hughes was the other one. If his test form continues to flourish, you could definitely try him there. Class shines through, and he can score quickly. If you used him and Mike Hussey doesn’t get his mojo back, then you have:

Katich
Hughes
Ponting
Clarke
Symonds
Ferguson
Haddin
Hopes/Watson
Johnson
Krejza/Hauritz
Bracken
Lee/Tait

That’s 12 and the balance is not entirely easy. I guess a quick goes, but that leaves you with two front line quicks and a spinner who can be attacked, plus Symonds/Clarke as your 5th bowler. Lose a batsman and Haddin is at 6 (or Ferguson if Haddin opens), Hopes/Watson 7 and Johnson 8. Still pretty reasonable depth.

By: Spiro Zavos

Spiro Zavos — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 23:31:08 +0000

Greg’s analysis is spot on, as usual. But I’d go a bit further and suggest that even with the retirements and so on the selectors have been making mistakes in selection. I can’t see why, for instance, Hughes and Katich aren’t used as openers.
Hughes tends to scores more quickly the higher he goes. Haynes and Greenidge showed that a conventional if forceful opening pair can lay the basis for big ODI totals.
Katich, too, could be used as a spinning option along with Clarke.
The other mistake is selecting players as all-rounders like James Hopes who are not good enough at either batting or bowling to make a regular impact in either discipline.
Pick four frontline bowlers, including hopefully a tight spinner (and there are some left-armers around, for instance). Then try a batting all-rounder who bowls (a la Symonds). A hitting wicket-keeper. And then five batsmen, with the bonus that one or two of them might be able to contribute a few overs from time to time.
Greg’s statistics on Brad Hogg are interesting. He averaged 1.3 something wickets an innings, which is very important. The best way to stop the flow of runs as every commentators tells us is to take wickets. Bowlers who average more than a wicket an innings are very valuable in ODI.
The final point is that the coaching staff and captain must come up with great fields and challenging game plans from game to game. Bobby Simpson led the way here and Australia seems to have lost the track, in my opinion, in the last year or so.

By: sheek

sheek — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 22:59:59 +0000

If Australian cricketers, & for that matter world cricketers, are becoming dysfunctional, it’s because they don’t know any longer if they’re 4/5 day industrialists, one day workers, or 3 hours hit & giggle recreationists.

Cricket bosses might think they’re very clever coming up with so many variational money spinners. But sooner or later something might have to give. Regrettably, that something might be test cricket.

That’s my pitiful input!

By: hazey.the.bear

hazey.the.bear — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 22:46:17 +0000

Gonna have to disagree with you on a few points there Greg…

You said: “One day it is the batting that is the problem, the next day it is the bowling.”

Well, that’s easy enough – It’s both. It’s just one day we see the direct result of poor bowling and one day we see the direct result of poor batting. But it’s good that you’re looking at the overall picture, and you’re probably right, it comes down to a number of things, not just one or two. Once the selectors find solutions in all the areas you’ve addressed, we’ll start to get back on track to being a winning team. I’m just not sure the solutions you’ve pegged out are the right ones…

You said: “Love him or loathe him, it stands out that the missing player here is Andrew Symonds.”

Uhhh, hold the phone there…Didn’t you once say that for someone to be selected for Australia on ANY level, they must prove themselves in the State competition on EVERY level?!? You’ve said yourself that nothing of his form for Queensland suggests he’s the player he once was – Well…Shouldn’t he prove himself first then? You also say he has a demoralising effect on the opposition – I’d say that with all his stuff-ups, he also has a demoralising effect within the team. Seriously, which Andrew Symonds is the team gonna get from one week to the next? I’m not suggesting that he never be allowed to represent Australia again, but I do think he needs to sort himself out first, both on and off the pitch.

You said: “James Hopes is admirable, but he is no Shane Watson, simple as that.”

Whoa, whoa, whoa and whoa! James Hopes has been punching well and truly above his weight, performing strongly when the rest of the team has floundered. As you say, the team seems to have lost its heart and soul – but I’d add that Hopes is one of the few players who was able to hold his head high when the rest of the team failed. He gives his all, every single time. I remember in the last final of the Commonwealth Bank series against India, when he almost (not quite) single-handedly stole the win for Australia with the bat, and I damn sure remember him bowling out of his league against South Africa, taking wickets when nobody else was. If that’s not ‘heart and soul’, I don’t know what is. He may not be as spectacular as Watson, but he doesn’t break down as easily either…

You said: “…one wonders why the selectors have not tried the most successful (by far) spinner from the last few seasons of Australian domestic one-day cricket, Bryce McGain.”

Oooh…That’s a toughie. I reckon the selectors feel a bit stung by choosing McGain in the test side, seeing as he got belted all over the ground, and failed to take a wicket. That sorta (actually, it well and truly) negates your selection criteria on spinners for a one-day side.

Anyway, that’s all I got. My kids gave me and missus a rough night last night, so I’m tired and grumpy as hell.