ODI disaster means Aussie selectors must look to next wave
Columnist By David Lord, 11 Jul 2012 David Lord is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Australia, Cricket, England, Michael Clarke, one day international, Usman Khawaja
Australian Cricket selector John Inverarity speaks with spin bowler Nathan Lyon. AAP Image/Dave Hunt
Related coverage
In the light of Australia’s disastrous ODI tour, it’s time we revisited the Australia “A” squad to tour England for four games later this month, under the captaincy of Ed Cowan.
There’s the first selection blink – Cowan as skipper, and Peter Forrest as vice-captain ahead of George Bailey, captain of Tasmania and the Australian Twenty20 side.
Cowan is a shrewd cricket thinker, but has never captained a first-class side. Forrest has led Queensland a couple of times as a fill-in skipper, but Bailey is a tried and tested leader.
The second blink is the selection of erratic paceman Mitchell Johnson, to continue the charmed life he has with the panel. It seems as though he can do no wrong, when that’s exactly what he is doing.
And the third is the omission of the two very talented, if inconsistent, left-handed batsmen Usman Khawaja, and Phil Hughes.
There seems to be no pattern to what the selector’s are thinking.
The major plus is the meteoric rise of fast bowler Jackson Bird in his debut season with Tasmania, a late bloomer at 25. Another talent to slip through the NSW selectors hands.
In eight matches he headed the Sheffield Shield wicket-takers for the season with 53 at just 16 apiece that included two 10-wicket and five 5-wicket hauls to win the Sheffield Shield Player-of-the-Year award.
Other pluses – the return of keeper Tim Paine from a severe hand injury, the comeback of paceman Ben Cutting and the recognition of Tom Cooper, Joe Burns, Liam Davis, and Michael Klinger
* South Australia’s Cooper won the Ryobi Cup Player-of-the-Year award averaging 73.20.
* Burns topped Queensland’s first-class batting averages with 41.10.
* Opening batsman Davis was named Western Australia’s Player-of-the-Year after averaging 65.78, including an unbeaten 303 against NSW, the highest score in the Sheffield Shield since Simon Katich’s 306 five years ago.
* And long overdue recognition for Klinger who debut for Victoria in 1998 before switching to South Australia a decade later where he has blossomed. His latest coup was captaining the SACA’s to Ryobi Cup honours last season. He has been knocking on the door for what seems ages, and even though he’s 32, Klinger is still a very good cricketer.
This short tour will be an ideal opportunity for all these players to make an early impression with selectors, in English conditions, for next year’s Ashes campaign.
That’s if we can ever fathom what the selectors are looking for, and if it ever stops raining in the Old Dart.
A couple of big “ifs”.
The team:
Ed Cowan (29 – captain), Peter Forrest (26 – vice-captain), George Bailey (29), Jackson Bird (25), Joe Burns (22), Tom Cooper (25), Pat Cummins (19), Ben Cutting (25), Liam Davis (27), Jon Holland (24), Mitchell Johnson (30), Michael Klinger (32), Nathan Lyon (24), Tim Paine (27), James Pattinson (22), Steve Smith (22), and Mitchell Starc (22).
The games:
- Derbyshire, a three-dayer, starting July 26.
- Durham, a three-dayer, starting August 1.
- English Lions, the equivalent of Australia “A”, a four-dayer at Old Trafford, starting August 7.
- And the English Lions for a return bout, a four-dayer at Edgbaston, starting August 14.
Sport, all day long. Does this sound too good to be true? We're searching for a Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. If you're a sales star who doesn't mind a hit, kick, throw, or cycle, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
- Explore:
- Australia, Cricket, England, Michael Clarke, one day international, Usman Khawaja
July 11th 2012 @ 8:27am
Brett McKay said | July 11th 2012 @ 8:27am | Report comment
G’day Lordy, just on Hughes and Khawaja’s non-selection for the ‘A’ tour, it was reasoned at the time that the two of them would be better left to play for their counties – Worcestershire and Derbyshire, respectively – and play the maximum amount of cricket available, rather than to come onto the tour where wouldn’t play every game (plus the travel, training, etc).
In some ways, it’s the end justifying the means, but there is a degree of sound logic to it, too. Khawaja hasn’t quite been having the happy time during the limited over games currently, but Hughes has made a limited over hundred and three T20 50s in the last month for Worcs..
July 11th 2012 @ 9:06am
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:06am | Report comment
All things considered, Khawaja should be first batsman picked for the A side, but he now appears to be well down the pecking order.
I don’t imagine the selectors will reconsider his Test suitability even should he do exceedingly well in his half-season with Derbyshire. On the other hand, the likes of Cowan and Forrest have the chance to solidify their ongoing favour with Invers, Arthur, Clarke and Bichel.
July 11th 2012 @ 2:14pm
tonysalerno said | July 11th 2012 @ 2:14pm | Report comment
Disco mate; i’m not a fan of Khawaja in the shorter forms of the game. I think he is a similar style to the Australian captain Michael Clarke, who is the best at what he does in world cricket at the moment.
July 11th 2012 @ 9:51pm
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:51pm | Report comment
Fair enough, but I was talking about the Australia A squad.
July 11th 2012 @ 9:52am
Atawhai Drive said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:52am | Report comment
Should we throw our hands up in despair now that this poorly scheduled and irrelevant one-day series is over?
England won the 2010-11 Ashes series by three Tests to one. Their three victories were by an innings, which I think was possibly the first time any one team had achieved three innings wins in a single series. It was a crushing defeat by any measure.
Yet immediately afterwards England and Australia played a meaningless one-day series which I think ran to seven matches. I didn’t watch much of it but I think Australia won the series easily. Who remembers or cares about that now?
It would have been better for Australia to make a stronger showing in this year’s Contractual Obligation Cup. But let’s not write off our Ashes chances on the basis of what we’ve seen over the past few weeks.
July 11th 2012 @ 9:54am
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:54am | Report comment
We’ve lost the last two Ashes series but convincingly won both ODI series that immediately followed. It seems that if you win the test series you lose the ODI series so hopefully that trend continues!
July 11th 2012 @ 9:52am
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:52am | Report comment
I don’t mind that A side for the most part. It’s good to see that they’ve rewarded good domestic form in the selections (Johnson and Smith aside.) I would have liked to see Hughes and Khawaja in there but it’s hard to make a case against any of the pure batsmen that were picked. I’m assuming they’ll be calling someone up to replace Cummins though?
July 11th 2012 @ 10:35am
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:35am | Report comment
Yes, indeed, this would have been an important tour for Cummins, but Cricket Australia in its desperation, insists on picking him for international cricket when he’s not ready… and delaying his career.
July 11th 2012 @ 9:55am
mp said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:55am | Report comment
I have a question for roarers (directed at those demanding ponting & hussey be axed).
Having seen the recent performance of the top order in the one day series, do you still think our test team would be strengthened by dropping Ponting & Hussey?
I know this was a 50 over series but I would suggest the failures would be even greater in the test arena. Makes me feel sick thinking about heading to England next year with a test batting line-up that doesnt include these two greats, especially given the quality of potential replacements.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:13am
Atawhai Drive said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:13am | Report comment
Ponting and Hussey will both be 38 when the next Ashes series starts. At this stage, in the absence of younger players demanding inclusion, the veterans deserve consideration.
We’ll have a better idea after the home series against South Africa and Sri Lanka next summer.
They’ve been great players. It would be sad to see them fall prey to “one tour too far” syndrome. Remember Gooch and Gatting out here in 1994-95?
July 11th 2012 @ 10:48am
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:48am | Report comment
I certainly do remember that ‘Dad’s Army’ tour and oh, how the English were mocked for not blooding younger players.
Gooch was actually still decent in his late 30s, but that’s not the case for all. Ponting’s last outings against South Africa and England demonstrated where he sits.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:37am
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:37am | Report comment
Who is demanding that Hussey be axed? He’s performed, albeit a tad inconsistently, against quality bowling in the past few years.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:46am
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:46am | Report comment
I wouldn’t say that we missed Ponting in this ODI series. There was a very good reason why he was dropped from the ODI side after all, and we did win the tri-series after he was dropped. We clearly missed Hussey though.
The problem is that we didn’t pick our ODI side on form. In last seasons Ryobi Cup, Ferguson averaged 52, Klinger 55, Nathan Reardon 57 and Tom Cooper averaged 73 yet none of them got a look in. We then go and pick Peter Forrest who averaged 29. I know that Forrest had a very good Shield season but that has very little bearing on ODI form. What’s the point of playing the Ryobi Cup if we ignore its best performers?
July 11th 2012 @ 11:02am
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:02am | Report comment
Good post. It’s pretty backward-looking to call for Ponting just because the present middle order looks weak. As you say, there are other credentialed options.
July 11th 2012 @ 11:46am
mp said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:46am | Report comment
Disco please dont misrepresent my comment. i am not calling for Pontings inclusion in the one day team. i am saying it would be disastrous to exlude him from the test team in the coming series. as for Hussey anyone that reads the articles and comments on the roar will know there have been plenty of people calling for his head. i dont feel it necessary to reference my article with specific names.
July 11th 2012 @ 11:57am
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:57am | Report comment
I disagree to a point. If Ponting is playing well and doing better then the alternatives then absolutely he should go, but he should be judged on his current output, not his deeds from 5+ years ago. If Ponting has a poor summer, and some domestic candidates actually put their hand up for a change, then we must consider our options. The big problem is that last summer there were very few batsmen who played well in the Shield.
The other problem is that, when the selectors replace players, they tend to pick based on potential and reputation rather than actual form .This is the main reason why we’ve been smashed in this ODI series. We should have picked the players who were legitimatly banging down the proverbial door in the Ryobi Cup (I mentioned a few names above) last summer rather then picking on reputations and potential. The same logic also seems to apply to the bowlers.
There certainly were some people calling for Hussey’s head, though I never understood why. It took 2 years of bad form for people to question Ponting’s spot in the side yet with Hussey it took about 2 test matches. It was far too premature.
July 11th 2012 @ 12:41pm
mp said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
of course Ponting scoring heavily in the lead up would be preferable and i do see your point. but the way i see it is that with a top 3 that looks far from solid (warner, cowan, watson), dropping our proven middle order performers for blokes that have 3 or 4 domestic scores in the lead up will lead to results seen in the one dayers just gone.
July 11th 2012 @ 1:00pm
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
You’d have to base a selection on more then just 3-4 games. They’d need to have consistently produced over a few seasons before throwing them into an Ashes series. it’s highly likely that we don’t have that kind of player right now. Then again if Ponting is struggling to average 20 do we have much to lose?
July 11th 2012 @ 1:13pm
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 1:13pm | Report comment
Ponting has proven to be a liability against strong Test opposition in recent years, so not sure why he should be considered a safe bet ahead of up-and-comers.
July 11th 2012 @ 1:10pm
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
Well, I’m not convinced Ponting remains the best option for the Test team, which if I’m not mistaken is what you did use the just-finished ODI series to try and argue.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:00am
Pope Paul VII said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:00am | Report comment
Usman gets to play against Aussie A, that should be fun.
Re the importance of this one day series, Mickey and Mikey both said they picked players with an eye to the Ashes. And though onedayers are instantly forgettable Australia certainly went hard in late 80s and early 90s ODIs seeking any avenue to learn how to beat the West Indies.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:25am
Brett McKay said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:25am | Report comment
really good article from Dan Brettig on CricInfo today might give some perpective on the direction of the Australian team: http://www.espncricinfo.com/england-v-australia-2012/content/story/571884.html
July 11th 2012 @ 10:39am
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:39am | Report comment
I can’t help but thinking “using ODIs to plan for Tests” is a convenient excuse for poor selection and form.
The Forrest over Khawaja thing baffles me completely. It’s a pure case of backing a favourite who is both older and shows less promise in both forms of the game.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:59am
Brett McKay said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:59am | Report comment
and you wouldn’t be on your own thinking that, Disco.
Whether Forrest over Khawaja is a favourites thing or not, I don’t really care, I think the most important thing is they’re finally putting some time into some players. And yes, you’ll come back with ‘they could’ve given Khawaja more time’, and you’d be right. But what’s done is done, and there’s not much point harping on it because it won’t ‘un-drop’ him. My point is just that I’d rather some longer term planning was in place than just chopping and changing evey series.
I still think Khawaja can come back, for what it’s worth. He’s too good a bat not to. I’m quite sure he can take one of the two obvious spots that will be opening in the coming future…
July 11th 2012 @ 11:13am
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:13am | Report comment
I agree that persevering with players is ideal and sensible but it’s a risk when those selected don’t clearly have more potential to those being kept on the sidelines. I mean, in the case of Steve Waugh, he was clearly the best young allrounder playing Shield in those seasons of 1985 and 1986, and, card-marked Rebel returnees aside, had few rivals for the Test No.6 position up until his brother reached maturity.
I guess the questions selectors have to answer in the case of prioritised players like Forrest, Cowan and Smith (as well as for misfiring veterans like Wade’s predecessor and the golden boy left-armer), are how long is reasonable to wait for someone to prove themselves and to what extent should adverse team results affect selection policy?
July 11th 2012 @ 11:50am
Brett McKay said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:50am | Report comment
yeah, and that’s a fair point about the ‘how long’ question. I would suggest Cowan and Warner, just as an example, need VERY good starts next summer, otherwise we’re back on the merry-go-round and that’s less than ideal six months before an Ashes tour.
I’m confortable with the bowling situation, because Johnson is a long way off being the selection certainly he once was. There’s easily seven or eight quality fast bowling options now, so Johnson simply has to perform.
The real issue for me is the batting, and particularly the top order batting, where there isn’t that same level of well-performed depth as in the fast bowling..
July 11th 2012 @ 12:26pm
Tobes said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:26pm | Report comment
How can you say that about Johnson when he was picked over Pattinson, Starc and others in the one dayers? This would suggest there isn’t seven or eight bowlers ahead of him in the selectors minds.
I would read his inclusion in the one dayers and the A team squad as the Selectors trying to get as much cricket as possible in Johnson because they still see him as an auto pick (note still has his CA contract)….i guess only time will tell….i don’t think his selection is warranted but as a previous B Grade Shires cricketer you could argue my pedigree and ability to pick talent is not comparable to our NSP!
July 11th 2012 @ 12:35pm
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:35pm | Report comment
Despite the abomination that was Mitchell johnsons Test form before he was injured, his ODI form was actually very good. Similar to how Hussey needed a Shield century to hold onto his test spot before the last Ashes series despite being our best ODI player at the time.
His bowling averages in his last 6 ODI series before his injury were 23 against England, 23 in the World Cup, 8 against NZ, 20 in Bangladesh, 16 in SL and 22 in SA. The 8 was from only one game so we can discard that but the rest make for impressive reading. Any player returning from injury would be an automatic selection with that form.
July 11th 2012 @ 12:54pm
Brett McKay said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:54pm | Report comment
Tobes, what I actually said was “There’s easily seven or eight quality fast bowling options now” of which Johnson is one, not that those seven or eight are ahead of Johnson. It’s probably more than seven or eight, if I thought about it.
And they took six quicks on a two-week ODi tour, there was always going to rotation among them. You’re reading Johnson as being selected ahead of Pattinson when it’s just as likely it was rotation thing, designed to give them all relatively equal game time..
(And many would argue B Grade Shires makes you plenty qualified to pick talent comparable to the NSP!)
July 11th 2012 @ 1:26pm
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 1:26pm | Report comment
With numerous better options available, Johnson’s Test career has already lasted too long, X-factor or otherwise.
That said, I’m not sure the selectors realise that having an ‘X-factor’ is actually a negative attribute; it’s only used to describe someone who occasionally performs well but usually struggles.
Time will tell as to whether Johnson returns to the Test match fold (my guess is he shall) but his presence in the A squad suggests the selectors wish to give him every chance at it. I’ll be interested to see how he fares at the start of the Shield season, but even a couple of WACA hauls there wouldn’t convince me he should be anywhere near the Test team.
Mind you, I suspect the likes of Hashim Amla and Jacques Kallis, who lack X-factor, would love Johnson to be there come November.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:51am
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:51am | Report comment
I understand the idea and it’s clear that this is why a player such as Forrest is in the side but surely the number of players who have become specialists ODI players or Test only players or nowdays specialist T20 players is ample evidence that good performances in one form has no bearing on ability in another form. The likes of Justin Langer (tests) and nathan Bracken (ODI) are good examples of this.
July 11th 2012 @ 11:01am
Brett McKay said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:01am | Report comment
Matt, that’s true, but England are also showing curently that good cricketers can play good cricket regardless of the format. They’ve ust won an ODI series with their Test team plus or minus three or four…
July 11th 2012 @ 11:47am
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:47am | Report comment
Don’t get me wrong. Of course there are players who can play all formats and do them well. My point was more that we shouldn’t assume that every player can do this. We should be picking the best players in the format. If they happen to be the same players across multiple formats (Gilchrist, Mcgrath, Warne, Hayden, Ponting etc) then great, if not, then so be it.
If the Ryobi Cup has no influence over selection for the ODI side then we might as well scrap it and replace it with more Shield matches.
July 11th 2012 @ 11:54am
Brett McKay said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:54am | Report comment
No, of course, you can’t make that assumption. But the opposite is also true; we also can’t assume that good Test players can’t be good ODI players, too.
I guess what I mean is that this current ODI side (minus the Husseys, probably) could look very close to the Test side by, say the 2013/14 summer..
July 11th 2012 @ 12:05pm
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:05pm | Report comment
Absolutely. They should pick the sides based on form, and more importantly, form in the relevant format. I’m not saying that a player like Forrest (sorry Pete, I’m picking on you again!) will never be a good ODI player, just that we should ask him to prove his ODI credentials in the Ryobi Cup before we pick him in the ODI side. Instead of picking on potential and assumptions let’s pick on form and results.
And let’s not use one format as a development squad for another. If we’re picking players for experience and based on what they could do in a few years then put them in the relevant “A” side.
July 11th 2012 @ 1:31pm
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 1:31pm | Report comment
Yes, well, none of Australia’s incumbent pace bowlers look especially comfortable in one-day international cricket.
July 11th 2012 @ 2:59pm
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 2:59pm | Report comment
McKay’s been pretty good. At least compared to the rest.
Again a quick look at the Ryobi Cup stats from last season show bowlers like McDermott, Starc, Haberfield (surprised me) and Jon Holland (though 6 of his 10 wickets were in the one match) all averaged under 20 with the ball, and bowled enough overs to make it a genuine statistic. Over the international summer only Starc was given a shot with the ODI side, and he was already in the national setup anyway. Krejza and Faulkner both picked up a fair few wickets as well, though their averages were closer to 30.
I’m sure Brad Hodge will be happy to tell you about how just how closely the selectors follow the Ryobi cup!
July 11th 2012 @ 3:04pm
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 3:04pm | Report comment
Sorry, I meant to type ‘incumbent Test bowlers’, referring to Siddle, Hilfenhaus and Pattinson.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:30am
Dan said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:30am | Report comment
I agree mp
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:56am
Brendon said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:56am | Report comment
The most pathetic and abysmal display by an Australian side in nearly 30 years. Losing is one thing, this abject and limp failure is disgusting. Don’t think I’ve been this disappointed in an Australian cricket team for decades.
Its one thing to lose, its another to lay down and die meekly like this mob did. If they had gone down swinging that would have been at least something.
The slow scoring and failure to build on an innings is one of the most frustrating things I’ve seen ever in cricket. 10 runs from 40 balls? Pathetic. Fine, you start slow but if you’re going to take 40 odd deliveries to get 12 runs then bloody go on with it.
Considering the monstrous failure that is Peter Forrest surely Phil Hughes couldn’t have done any worse?
July 11th 2012 @ 11:15am
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:15am | Report comment
Well, Hughes has certainly got a better List A record. He’s probably not considered to be good enough a fielder, which seems to be high-priority.
July 11th 2012 @ 4:50pm
lolly said | July 11th 2012 @ 4:50pm | Report comment
It was really bizarre to watch. The team mostly consists of players with hard hands who can’t work the ball around to save their lives. Warner at least can have a slog now and again but Wade and Forrest were just blocking the ball over after over. In a 32 over match. I couldn’t even understand why, considering the shortened state of the match, Forrest was sent out at 3. The tour went from floundering to bizarre with the final match.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:57am
onside said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:57am | Report comment
Test cricket is an anacronism.Nothing to do with whether or not we enjoy the game , but rather that Test cricket cannot financially support itself. Test cricket would die without the support of both ODI and Twenty /20 cash cows, vicariously underpinned by TV broadcasting rights . ODI and Twenty /20 are not only far more popular than Test cricket, but also Test crickets financial artery. And yet most discussions and analysis of ODI and Twenty/20 , are in reference to a players potential influence on Test cricket , a game on life support. What charmed luxury then is Test cricket. Where white knights re-enacting the memories of eras past, can strut their stuff , are financially well rewarded, honoured, and put on higher pedestals than those cricketers responsible for keeping them there, those that play ODI and Twenty /20. The magic that’s the pageantry of Test cricket has its one day in the sun, the first day of every Test match, which is sold out and ‘impossible’ to find a spare seat. For the remaining four days though, the huge concrete cricket stadium is comparatively empty ,and you can pretty much sit anywhere you like. How’s that. Not out. Last man carries his tucker. Enjoy it while you can.
July 11th 2012 @ 12:00pm
soapit said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
not sure one day cricket is a the cash cow it was
July 11th 2012 @ 12:28pm
onside said | July 11th 2012 @ 12:28pm | Report comment
True soapit,the reason being more to do with format than the actual game itself.There is (or was) simply too much of it, including meaningless dead rubbers in three way International competitions,where TV producers et al prayed the cricket Gods allowed Australia a passage through to what was always programmed to be a walk up start to the finals.And then the finals,so many,dearie me,who can remember them. The game is a good thing actually, but Cricket Australia can greedily transform what should be a small sporting feast, into gluttony. One day cricket is not an end in itself,as it deserves to be, but rather a means to an end ,financing Sheild and Test Cricket.
July 11th 2012 @ 2:25pm
Scott Adams said | July 11th 2012 @ 2:25pm | Report comment
Utter nonsense. You’ve clearly never tried to get tickets for the fourth day of a Test Match in England in the last decade. Or are you trying to say, in an extremely florid way, that because Australia aren’t much cop at Test Cricket at the moment that it’s not worth the bother any more?
July 11th 2012 @ 3:24pm
onside said | July 11th 2012 @ 3:24pm | Report comment
Scott,I was refering to Australia,so not so much utter nonsence as well ,yeah you’re right, I have little knowledge of England.However I know English cricket grounds are much smaller, more intimate, and therefore more suited to cricket.
The capacity of Australian grounds(in thousands) ;MCG 100 ,ANZ 84,Sydney 47,Gabba 42,Adelaide 37,WACA 24
The capacity of English grounds(in thousands); Lords 30,Egbaston 25,Old Trafford 22, Headingly 20.
What I was getting at is that I would rather be sharing a pint with you in a smaller English ground, than the concrete cavern that is the MCG .
Of course there is a caveat .A packed MCG is a mind blowing experience.But by and large it only happens once,and that is the first day of the boxing day Test match.Therefore on other days, a crowd of 15K at Lords is more intimate than 45K at the MCG.Imagine if you will a crowd of 15K at the MCG.
One more observation;ground capacity in Australia can be deceiving when making comparisons with English grounds .Australian grounds are built for AFL football. And so a spectator can be a long way from play.This is not the case in English grounds because they are considerably smaller in playing area.
What we are collectively saying then is, so long as we can get tickets to the game,it will be a far more pleasant experience in England,even if Australia lose.
July 11th 2012 @ 1:58pm
Tobes said | July 11th 2012 @ 1:58pm | Report comment
Apologies i couldn’t continue on the thread above but wanted to make the following post in regards to Johnsons recent stats.
Not sure the stats are telling the full story. If we include from the start of last summer which MattF conveniently didn’t you then need to include the Sri Lanka series in which he averaged 128. He did well against England but if you take out his 4 for 19 against Zimbabwe his World Cup stats are not so impressive.
I know you can twist stats to tell a story so we shouldn’t place too much emphasis on them.
And these one dayers are apparently building for the Ashes so shouldn’t test match form the formline to follow? It is a concern Johnson is in the mix….how big are the Ashes squads theses days if they take 6 fast bowlers would there be a spot for Johnson???
Siddle
Hilfenhaus
Harris
Pattinson
Cummins
Starc
July 11th 2012 @ 2:06pm
Disco said | July 11th 2012 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
I’d also prefer George, Cutting, McKay, Bollinger and Copeland to Johnson. Maybe Bird will progress and perhaps Hazlewood will, um, actually play at some point.
July 11th 2012 @ 5:05pm
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 5:05pm | Report comment
That’s not the start of last summer that’s the 2010/11 season. He was injured last summer. I’ve pointed out that his 5 most recent ODI series have been very good and you respond with “oh but one time he averaged 128.” Picking his last 5 series isn’t “twisting stats,” it’s showing his most recent form in the format. Picking one really bad series out of numerous good ones around it is twisting stats. Maybe we should include the one before that SL series when he averaged 18? Or we could go with his career average of 25.47? If you don’t want to place emphasis on stats what do you judge someone on? Gut feel? The vibe? I know they don’t always tell the full story but taken together they do show that he has been a pretty good ODI bowler for Australia and was doing well in the format before his injury.
His Test record over that same period of time has been awful, there’s been no question about that, and I wouldn’t have him anywhere near the test side at the moment. You could probably throw a few more bowlers on that list before Johnson. Cutting for example. I wouldn’t have picked Johnson in the “A” squad.
July 11th 2012 @ 6:22pm
Tobes said | July 11th 2012 @ 6:22pm | Report comment
MattF playing devils advocate a little regarding the one day stats as i don’t believe he should have been picked for the UK tour. i didn’t pick one random series i picked the one you chose to stop at as it suited your stats just like i wanted to add it as it suited my argument.
I think the selectors look at the roles required, how they will get through the 80 overs, who will bowl into the wind, etc, etc. I don’t think they do it purely on stats, but it is not gut feel although that must come into aswell (the call to pick Slater over Hayden way back then must have had some gut feel as Hayden had all the stats and Slats had put in a couple of good digs on tour that hayden hadn’t and it must have been gut feel that Slats was in better nick and would get the job done when begfore the tour i bet all thought hayden would be opening up with Tubby….but that is digressing)
I remember Steve Waugh used to always say he loved having Brett Lee in his team as although the stats weren’t always there he had Mcgrath, Gillespie, Kasper, Bichel who could all bowl long economical spells in all conditions but Lee offered raw pace and strike power and he loved having that option in his bowling line up.
July 11th 2012 @ 6:49pm
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 6:49pm | Report comment
Include that series if you want to. All that does is take his average from just under 20 for his last 5 series to just over 22 from his last 6 series before his injury. It doesn’t hurt my argument at all. It would drop lower if I included the series before that where he averaged 18 as well but I have to stop somewhere.
Of course they use things other then stats to pick players but it’s a pretty important factor. Stats demonstrate performance. Ricky Ponting has had a magnificent career and this is reflected in his batting stats. His poor run of form over the last few years is also reflected by the stats. Brett Lee may have been selected partly because he offered raw pace but he has a very good statistical record as well. His raw pace would mean nothing if his average was 40.
Besides, the reason Johnson has been criticised has been because his performances at Test level have been woeful of late which, surprise surprise, is backed up by the stats.
I think we can safely say that if they picked the team for the England ODI series on Ryobi Cup form we at the very least couldn’t have done any worse