‘High performance’ Howard drops a cricketing clanger
By David Lord, 10 Jan 2012 David Lord is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- argus review, Australian Cricket, Cricket, pat howard, wallabies
Pat Howard and James Sutherland speak at a media conference in Melbourne. AAP Image/Julian Smith
Related coverage
It’s taken only three months for Pat Howard, Cricket Australia’s inaugural general manager of high performance, to rattle the cage.
Yesterday he dropped a bombshell, or more a clanger, by suggesting future Test selections will be governed by the standard of the opposition, not by form. A highly dangerous variation of the proposed rotation policy.
The higher-rated countries like England, South Africa, and India will face the best team Australia can muster at the time.
Lower-rated opponents like New Zealand, the West Indies, Zimbabwe, and Bangladesh will do battle with a smattering of emerging Australian talent for a taste of Test cricket.
“But we will never put a ‘B’ Australian team on the paddock,” was Howard’s promise. Try selling that to first choice Australian players ‘rested’, and to New Zealand et al.
It’s a provocative view from the former 20-cap Wallaby utility-back-cum-rugby coach-cum-pharmacist who freely admitted on appointment he knows very little about cricket.
And he’s just proved it. What better way to devalue the coveted baggy green cap and deny the more talented Australian batsmen and bowlers the chance to cash in against the lower-performed countries to bolster their career stats.
He has the future of Australian cricket in his powerful hands, answerable only to Cricket Australia boss James Sutherland.
Howard is in total charge of the selection panel, where he sits in on every selection meeting. He’s also in charge of every Test and first-class player and coach in the country. Lock, stock, and barrel.
And he knows very little about cricket. Which begs the question, how did Howard get the job in the first place?
He came from an identical position in rugby, a sport he has known inside out since the moment he could walk and talk.
His grandfather is legendary inside-back Cyril Towers, who captained the Wallabies in some of his latter 19 caps between 1926 and 1937. His father Jake Howard was a seven-cap teak-tough prop from 1970 to 1973.
But even with that superb background, and his own Wallaby experience, there was no high performance from Howard as the ARU’s general manager of high performance over the last four years, with the Wallabies winning just 58.9 percent, or 33 of 56, internationals.
Since rugby turned pro in 1996, only Eddie Jones has a marginally worse Wallaby coaching record, with 57 percent. But the mark is way below Rod Macqueen’s 79 percent, John Connolly’s 64 percent, and Greg Smith’s 63 percent. Even in the amateur days leading into professionalism Alan Jones had a 76.67 percent win record, Bobby Dwyer 63.01 percent.
The only Howard highs were capturing the Tri-Nations for the first time in a decade last season, and the 59-16 flogging of Six Nations champions France in 2010.
The lows, a 10-game losing streak to the All Blacks with just three wins in 15 meetings, the loss to Samoa at the beginning of last season, a very costly loss to Ireland in the last Rugby World Cup – and the meagre 58.9 percent.
Hardly a background that justifies making radical recommendations in a sport where Pat Howard is still wet behind the ears.
We haven’t heard the last of this left-field proposal by a long shot.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- argus review, Australian Cricket, Cricket, pat howard, wallabies


January 10th 2012 @ 11:05am
jameswm said | January 10th 2012 @ 11:05am | Report comment
Geez David you’ve flown off the handle there.
Firstly, you’ve compared coaching records with Howard. Howard was not the Wallaby coach!
Secondly, in terms of fast bowlers, he is dead right. We’ve seen there’s only a certain amount of cricket a fast bowler can play, esp younger and older ones, so you rotate their rests so maybe only one of them at the most is resting at any time. Then when it comes to the Ashes, you have all your best ones (right now Pattinson, Cummins, Siddle and Harris) fit and firing at the same time, and even possibly rotate them during a 5-game series.
In the series before, say against the WIndies, you pick 5 quicks and rotate them more through the series.
As for batsmen, do you blood people in case they are needed, or just pick your best for every test? Do batsmen need rests and need to be rotated? Not as much or possibly at all.
January 10th 2012 @ 11:16am
The Bush said | January 10th 2012 @ 11:16am | Report comment
“Firstly, you’ve compared coaching records with Howard. Howard was not the Wallaby coach!”
Yeah that part of the article confused me as well.
January 10th 2012 @ 9:32pm
jeznez said | January 10th 2012 @ 9:32pm | Report comment
I’m really hoping someone pulls together the ‘stats’ to compare the HPU win/loss performance ratios between Howard and Nucifora.
January 10th 2012 @ 11:07am
BarnabusXI said | January 10th 2012 @ 11:07am | Report comment
What would happen if say a bowler deemed to be 5th on the rung had an oustanding series against Zimbabwe, and the next series was an Ashes series? Would the 2 or 3 bowlers rested for the Zimbo series come straight back in? Or would this bowler get to keep his spot folllowing his great form ,etc?
A lot of these new ideas in sports management are better in theory than in practicallty. I dislike that there seems to be more of an emphasis on the ‘mangement’ side rather than ‘sports’ side of things nowadays.
January 10th 2012 @ 12:08pm
Chris said | January 10th 2012 @ 12:08pm | Report comment
Tell that to: Harris, Cummins, Pattinson and Watson. I’m sure all of them would love to be able to play every game Austraila plays. But they have all been injured over the past month or two. If there was a way they could avoid injury, don’t you think it should be used?
January 10th 2012 @ 12:25pm
BarnabusXI said | January 10th 2012 @ 12:25pm | Report comment
A good bowling technique helps, I think. Ask McGrath, Pollock or Walsh who played plenty of Test matches. The old blokes in England first class cricket used to play a lot more games with out rotation. And without really knowing if its true or not I have heard as many people say that bowling more- to get ‘bowling fit’ is more appropriate than rest. (but these were ex-cricketers, not science majors).
This is all new stuff, and I’m not saying its all entirely terrible. Just remember though when we did have a great squad we won 16 on the trot straight- twice. This was without a rotation ploicy- just picking the best players available for every match (naturually over these stretches there were a few injuries and a boycott too by memory).
January 10th 2012 @ 12:43pm
The Bush said | January 10th 2012 @ 12:43pm | Report comment
“And without really knowing if its true or not I have heard as many people say that bowling more- to get ‘bowling fit’ is more appropriate than rest. (but these were ex-cricketers, not science majors).”
I”ve also heard this a lot as well. In fact, one Dennis Lillee may have made that comment at some stage – perhaps the problem is these blokes spend too much time in the gym etc and not enough time actually bowling…
January 10th 2012 @ 1:42pm
The Barry said | January 10th 2012 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
I couldn’t agree more. I don’t think there’s any gym work that you can do that can fully get the body bowling fit like actual bowling.
Goping back to my own cricket days, I’d come out of footy season fit and strong but would be haobbling after my first couple of net sessions and games bowling because you don’t use your back and shoulder muscles in that way in the gym or for any other sport. After a couple of weeks I could handle bowling no worries because I’d be conditioned to it – by bowling !
I’ve read that a lot of teams including Australia limit the number of deliveries that bowlers send down in the nets, something like 30-40 deliveries per bowler per day. That’s all well and good – you don’t want your main strike bowlers wearing themselves out in the nets, but what happens when a bowler like Cummins has to send down 20 overs in a day?
His body has never been trained to handle that sort of workload and the couple of times he has had to do it, he’s broken down…see shield final and test debut.
I have concerns about Harris for the same reasons. He has a history of injury problems but his rehab has been 30 deliveries in the nets and 4 overs per game in T20. How will that help him bowl 20 overs on Day 1 at the WACA if required ?
January 10th 2012 @ 2:53pm
Chris said | January 10th 2012 @ 2:53pm | Report comment
Apparently McDermott has been working Harris for four and eight over spells in the nets over a day to try and get as close to ‘match-fit’ as is possible when unable to actually play a game.
And he only needs to last a Test or two – then Pattinson should be right to come back anyway. And maybe Cummins will be bowling (at some level) by the end of the month perhaps?
Australia could feasibly be ready to tour the Windies in March with all the currently injured players fit. That’s when the selectors will really earn their salaries…
January 10th 2012 @ 2:29pm
Jaceman said | January 10th 2012 @ 2:29pm | Report comment
Oh Lord overreaction time again…
January 10th 2012 @ 3:09pm
Russ said | January 10th 2012 @ 3:09pm | Report comment
The trouble I have with rotation is that it won’t address the problem. Consider the abstract to this study:
The problem is that a bowler bowls too much within a single test match. Injuries are most common a couple of days after workout, which means bowlers are always playing at their most vulnerable: during the second innings. Rotation will only push them from over-work (>30 overs in a few days) to under-work (less than 20 overs a week) in the subsequent period while they rest. under-work is relatively easy to prevent by training, but then you may as well have not rotated the player.
I’ve said this before, but if we were really serious about preventing injuries (and the game as a whole ought to be) then we’d introduce substitutes.
January 10th 2012 @ 3:37pm
Jeff Dowsing said | January 10th 2012 @ 3:37pm | Report comment
I don’t think there’s a major issue with taking the opportunity to rest/blood players against lesser ranked opponents – it’s happening more and more in the AFL now for example. Freo in 2010 and the Hawks this year took the big picture approach and virtually rested half their teams. And in both cases it paid dividends.
I just don’t think it was the most diplomatic thing to say at a press conference.
January 10th 2012 @ 3:51pm
jameswm said | January 10th 2012 @ 3:51pm | Report comment
well said.
January 11th 2012 @ 12:41am
Brian said | January 11th 2012 @ 12:41am | Report comment
Didn’t payoff for Hawthorn who lost to Geelong in the subsequent week.
January 10th 2012 @ 3:57pm
Brian said | January 10th 2012 @ 3:57pm | Report comment
Its a dissappointing decision as yet again CA is shirking its responsibility in developing the game. How will cricket in WI or NZ stop its decline if Australia does not bring its best team cause its players have to rest for the IPL or BBL. Its another step towards having only 4 countries play Test Cricket.
I hope the bafoons at CA remember this decision in 20 years when India bring out their B team here to let their stars rest for the iconic IPL.
January 10th 2012 @ 4:08pm
Chris said | January 10th 2012 @ 4:08pm | Report comment
Firstly, it’s the ICC’s responsibility to develop the game, not Australia.
And with the amount of cricket being played around the world these days, having a squad to choose from, rather than 12-13 players is the only way Australia will be able to honour its commitments to actually play all the required games over the next few years.
Or would you like to see James Pattinson’s career over by the time he’s 25?
January 10th 2012 @ 4:19pm
Russ said | January 10th 2012 @ 4:19pm | Report comment
Chris, the ICC is Australia and the other full members. They run the shop, and the prevalent attitude to scramble after the “good” tours and ignore the bad is why anyone with an opinion thinks cricket is poorly run with too many meaningless matches. If the recent governance review says what it ought: that the ICC administrative arm needs to be running the game, not the full members, then things might change. We’ll also have to put up with dozens of article complaining that the ICC is diminishing the iconic Australian series by forcing them to tour elsewhere in the name of development. If Cricket Australia wants to avoid that scenario they ought to put in place the structures to prevent it while they still have some influence, if it isn’t already too late.
January 10th 2012 @ 5:59pm
Brian said | January 10th 2012 @ 5:59pm | Report comment
Thats the ironic thing. By not advocating more power to the ICC CA is pandering to the BCCI and the losers are the Boards of NZ, SL, WI and Pakistan. Gayle, Bravo & Malinga no longer play test cricket yet no one at CA thinks this is a shame. Having a basic understanding of capitalism, what the CA should realise is what happens next? When the attrition continues and the IPL wants to expand – who do they think will win out?
January 10th 2012 @ 4:15pm
Tom Dimanis said | January 10th 2012 @ 4:15pm | Report comment
The Baggy Green should represent the best players in the country. Period.
How about resting fast bowlers from the pointless 20-20 games?
Pat Howard’s appointment sure was a bit left field, doesn’t really make sense but maybe CA thought they needed a fresh perspective.
January 10th 2012 @ 5:05pm
trevor said | January 10th 2012 @ 5:05pm | Report comment
What an idiot! Didn’t Australia’s finest cricketers just lose a test match to Newzealand.
January 10th 2012 @ 5:27pm
Mighty Horua said | January 10th 2012 @ 5:27pm | Report comment
But isnt Nucifora the High Perfomance Manager responsible for the recent 3Nations rugby victory?
January 10th 2012 @ 6:31pm
anopinion said | January 10th 2012 @ 6:31pm | Report comment
David is this true?
“Howard as the ARU’s general manager of high performance over the last four years, with the Wallabies winning just 58.9 percent, or 33 of 56, internationals.”
I thought Nucifora was the high performance manager for the ARU, Howard quit the position quite a while ago.
January 10th 2012 @ 8:27pm
mitchwally said | January 10th 2012 @ 8:27pm | Report comment
Ditto!!!