Comments on: Dump the blueprint – not the captain

By: Fred Magee

Fred Magee — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 12:00:34 +0000

Thanks for the comments Gents. Brett, you made a key point. The selection panel needs to be reviewed. Their comments, particularly of Andrew Hilditch, are bordering on insanity. If James Sutherland does anything, then the panel and it’s chairman need to be reviewed along with the Captain, Coach and players. One in; all in.

By: Dan

Dan — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 05:27:25 +0000

I totally agree that sacking Ponting is not the answer, especially as Clarke does not appear ready/willing to take over, and I still think the jury is out on whether or not he is the best person to succeed Ponting as captain. Brett, I completely agree with your comments about the selectors not making public comments about the team. It must be a huge distraction for the players, and no doubt chips away at the ability of the team to properly focus on preparing for the upcoming match. I think the only time selectors should even consider speaking to the media is when a squad for an upcoming series or tour is announced. Otherwise, they should leave the talking to captain and coach. I also wonder if the selectors’ seeming inability to keep their mouths shut is an issue behind the scenes? If they are making such comments to the media, it concerns me to think they could be saying a lot more confusing things to the players that we don’t hear. I can remember several cases in recent years of players being unaware why they weren’t selected/were dropped and also being unsure of what the selectors expect of them. I can’t imagine any half decent organisation conducting performance reviews of staff in such a vague manner. Perhaps this is something to be reviewed if cricketers want to be considered professionals. I still think it’s time for a change in the selection committee, and perhaps a few unpopular selection decisions (unpopular amongst the team at least) for the long term benefit of the Australian team.

By: Mushi

Mushi — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 01:20:05 +0000

I like the point about why rush Clarke when he’s only just matured as a batsman, I think the fact we are in a rebuilding phase is also perhaps a good reason not to rush the Ponting/Clarke change over.

If we really believe we can rebuild, and why wouldn’t we given we aren’t that far off the pace with an unsettled team, then aren’t we better served by letting Ponting take the heat during the rebuilding process and then giving Pup the reigns once the team is settled and primed for success? I think this would help create a mystique around pups captaincy which are often false but useful.

By: Brett McKay

Brett McKay — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 00:21:24 +0000

some good thoughts here Fred, it’s amazing what a week calming down does for clearing the thinking. Contrast that with the early hysteria straight after the Ashes were lost.

The only thing I’d add about creating a new blueprint, is that the process needs to include the selectors. Whether that means new selectors or not is to be decided for another day, but selectors also need a re-jig in how they formulate their XIs. There should never be a repeat of conditions being mis-read like at The Oval, and likewise, there should never be so much uncertainty in the lead-up to any Test. Selectors making public comment about Hauritz being no certainty for Cardiff, or mentioning Lee as an option for The Oval should never happen. In fact, I’d bar the selectors from speaking publically about anything relating to the very next match.