HENRY: Haddin’s axing sends wrong message to teammates
Columnist By Geoff Lawson, 30 Oct 2012 Geoff Lawson is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Australian Cricket, Brad Haddin, Cricket
Indian batsman Umesh Yadav edges the last ball of the series into the gloves of Australian wicketkeeper Brad Haddin. AFP PHOTO/Tony ASHBY
Related coverage
The selectors have cast their die for the First Test and perhaps beyond. Brad Haddin is the first victim of the summer and a ball has yet to be released.
Chairman of selectors, ye venerable olde gentleman John Inverarity, was very careful with the wording of his statement regarding the man who has ‘retained’ his position (Matthew Wade), who ‘came into the team’, and that Brad had ‘presented a strong and compelling case’ and remained ‘a player of significant interest’.
Phew!
Obtuse semantics from the former headmaster. He would have had the red pen slashed through his own statements if he was marking the paper.
Why can’t he just say that Brad Haddin has been a wonderful servant for Australian cricket, and despite him not being dropped from the team in the West Indies, he now is being dropped?
At 35, he will not play for Australia in Test cricket again.
Brad has been phlegmatic enough to accept whatever comes his way. At this very moment, his memory and cares about cricket may be a tad hazy as the Sydney Sixers celebrate a significant windfall from the Champions League prize pot.
Haddin is very unlucky to be shown the door just as Mattherw Wade is lucky to ‘retain’ his position. Players in the recent past who have missed matches for ‘personal’ reasons have not been discriminated against.
Haddin has.
Wade is not lucky because he is in the XI following below par performances, that is far from the case.
He filled in for Haddin admirably, and as he was already the ODI and T20 gloveman, will do a fine job for Australia and hopefully have a long and fruitful career in Test cricket.
But Haddin was the preferred candidiate when Australia arrived in the Caribbean and did not miss the Test series for reasons of performance.
He should have been reinstated.
The incongruity that flows from John Inverarity’s mouth is the fact that Haddin is relieved of the mits to make way for a younger man and yet when the opportunity to replace the 38 and 37 year olds was obvious, he refused to make a strong and positive decision for the medium to longer term health of the Australian team.
So there is one rule for the ‘keeper, another altogether for the batsmen.
I thought Australian cricket had entered a new era where the obfuscation of the Hilditch panel would be dead, buried, incinerated, then concrete slippered to the deepest ocean floor.
Once again, the message sent to players all over Australia is a confused and contradictory one.
Geoff Lawson OAM is a former Australian cricketer and the former coach of the Pakistan cricket team. Nicknamed "Henry" after the Australian poet, Lawson was a fast bowler for New South Wales and Australia.
- Explore:
- Australian Cricket, Brad Haddin, Cricket
October 30th 2012 @ 6:59am
Martyn said | October 30th 2012 @ 6:59am | Report comment
Surely the point is that there was an obvious person challenging for Hadden’s position whereas there are no obvious batsmen knocking at the door for Hussey’s and Ponting’s position/
October 30th 2012 @ 9:20am
cruyff turn said | October 30th 2012 @ 9:20am | Report comment
Totally agree, Martyn! Geoff Lawson endorses anything that is blue!
Henry also fails to mention Haddin’s tardy glovework, as well as his batting, which at times has been irresponsible (who could forget “that” shot in the Cape Town debacle?). Whether he had been available for the West indies tests or not, his position was in doubt. Wade came in, took his chance, though I feel Tim Paine is the better keeper.
And like you say, there were no young middle-order batsmen that warranted selection. Forrest? How’s he doing now? No, wait! Henry would call for Steve Smith, wouldn’t he?
October 30th 2012 @ 5:20pm
Sandy said | October 30th 2012 @ 5:20pm | Report comment
Lawson wouldn’t miss the slightest sniff of an opportunity to knock Ponting. I hope Punter has a blinder.
As Lyon said during the WI tour “I am not interested in what Geoff Lawson has to say…”
October 30th 2012 @ 7:59am
Swampy said | October 30th 2012 @ 7:59am | Report comment
I wouldn’t suggest that Haddin was ‘in form’ last summer. Nothing wrong with someone else grasping an opportunity presented by Haddin’s misfortune. Happens in all walks of life all over the world.
If Haddin averaged 180 over the last year and never looked shaky behind the stumps it wouldn’t have mattered if Wade came in and performed as he has – Haddin, no doubt, would have been re-installed. His incumbent status was always at risk based on his past year of performance.
Isn’t this exactly what you would like to see happen in Australian cricket? When a younger guy is given the opportunity, no matter the circumstance, he (literally) grabs it with both hands.
The more interesting scenario this summer will be the Wade versus Paine dynamic. Paine, clearly favoured by the selectors, is back and if he starts scoring heavily will he put himself into a position to challenge Wade. Paine has also done well internationally for Australia and is touted as a strong leader being captain at junior national levels.
Wade is probably in the worst position of all – he will not be given time to find his form if there is any slip in performance. I imagine Inverarity and co will happily slip Haddin back in at any given opportunity. Wade must perform. But really, isn’t this what you want to see? I, for one, am sick of seeing players be able to play out a bad run of form cause there is no pressure on their place from outside the team.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download it now [http://itunes.apple.com/au/app/the-roar/id327174726?mt=8].
October 30th 2012 @ 8:30am
jamesb said | October 30th 2012 @ 8:30am | Report comment
I think the selectors axing Haddin was the right call. Haddin struggled last summer, while Wade performed well in the Windies early this year.
I appreciate that Haddin has gone through some tough times personally, but on the field, Wade grabbed his opportunity while Haddin was out of form. If Haddin was a Gilchrist, the selectors may have persisted with, but he is not.
Now than, this Australian side with Wade coming in does have a good mix of young and old players, although it would be nice if at shield level, a few young batsmen score some runs. If they do that than you’ll see the likes of Ponting and Hussey departing the test team.
October 30th 2012 @ 9:51am
Nick Inatey said | October 30th 2012 @ 9:51am | Report comment
Haddin was out of form for clear reasons. I’d love to see any of us concentrate fully on the next ball being flung at us when our children are sick.
October 30th 2012 @ 9:51am
Nick Inatey said | October 30th 2012 @ 9:51am | Report comment
Haddin was out of form for clear reasons. I’d love to see any of us concentrate fully on the next ball being flung at us when our children are sick.
October 30th 2012 @ 10:29am
jameswm said | October 30th 2012 @ 10:29am | Report comment
Rubbish
Haddin was “out of form” for 2 years, including well before his daughter was born. I don’t think there’s a correlation between the two.
October 30th 2012 @ 9:09am
Brian said | October 30th 2012 @ 9:09am | Report comment
Haddin underperformed and is dropped for that. I sincerely hope that Haddin is fully aware he was dropped on form and that no player should ever be dropped for returning home for tragic circumstances.
Haddin is 35 and his performances last summer were below par. As others have said there are keepers knocking the door down but not batsman, that is life. Lyon too would not be playing if McGill was 10 years younger.
Finally I dare say the financial facts are such that Haddin will wait a few weeks in case Wade gets injured. If that does not occur he will dedicate himself to the IPL, BBL etc and become a T20 specialist keeping for 20 overs and get paid more then 5 days of toil, Certainly a better way to end thing than Boucher.
October 30th 2012 @ 7:06pm
Christo the Daddyo said | October 30th 2012 @ 7:06pm | Report comment
The problem is that the selectors were not clear that Haddin was dropped for poor form (at least publicly).
Unless there has been private communication between the selectors and Haddin, Henry is right insofar that the messages being sent by the selectors are not clear.
October 30th 2012 @ 9:34am
Nick Inatey said | October 30th 2012 @ 9:34am | Report comment
Hear hear Henry! Inverarity has put the XI on notice: Sick/dying children is no longer an excuse.
Brian, how can you argue that Haddin was dropped on form? He was never dropped from the test team to begin with. He correctly chose to return to Australia to care for his sick child and now he has been denied his rightful opportunity to continue in the team. Would you have dropped Ponting permanently if his child was sick and his replacement (say Khawaja for example) got a century?
October 30th 2012 @ 11:17am
Brian said | October 30th 2012 @ 11:17am | Report comment
Yes if No 3 was a specialist position then yes. However firstly there are 6 batsman and secondly you cannot compare Haddin service to the team with Ponting’s. An average test player inferior to his two predecessors compared to our second best batsman ever.
October 30th 2012 @ 12:43pm
nachos supreme said | October 30th 2012 @ 12:43pm | Report comment
Since when does anyone have a “right” to an opportunity?
It’s a representative team. If you lose your spot and the replacement makes a fist of it the onus is on you to go about performing to put a case forward for reselection.
October 30th 2012 @ 2:42pm
falcore said | October 30th 2012 @ 2:42pm | Report comment
agreed. I’m sure CA will take the right actions and offer Haddin all the support he and his family might require. But this is a rep side of very well paid professionals, anything that happens outside the cricketing sphere has no bearing on the selection of the national team, surely.
I was under the impression that Haddin leaving the test team has been a fait acompli for the last 2 years. Then we get a spate of apoligists crying foul when it happens? the cricket old boys cluc is a well-oiled machine
October 30th 2012 @ 10:15am
Brett McKay said | October 30th 2012 @ 10:15am | Report comment
Just to play Devil’s Advocate here, aren’t the selectors sending exactly the right message in this move to retain Wade? That being that no-one should take their position for granted, especially the aging warriors, and that as soon as there are younger options presenting an ignorable case for selection, the selectors will start casting an eye for the future.
Isn’t that what we want from the selectors??
October 30th 2012 @ 10:31am
jameswm said | October 30th 2012 @ 10:31am | Report comment
Sure – but not for them to then turn around and say “he’s close and we might put him back”. Softening the blow I guess, but come on. We’ve got Paine, Nevill, Hartley and even Tom Triffitt. We don’t need Haddin any more, who never really performed at the necessary level anyway.
October 30th 2012 @ 10:41am
Brett McKay said | October 30th 2012 @ 10:41am | Report comment
agree James, and on that front, I certainly agree with Geoff’s point above, “Why can’t he just say that Brad Haddin has been a wonderful servant for Australian cricket, and despite him not being dropped from the team in the West Indies, he now is being dropped?”
October 30th 2012 @ 11:56am
Nick Inatey said | October 30th 2012 @ 11:56am | Report comment
If Haddin was the preferred wicketkeeper before he went (and returned from) the West Indies, then there is absolutely no logical reason why he shouldn’t be now. People are entitled to have personal leave, like in the everyday workforce. People in any job should be reasonably able to expect that when they leave TEMPORARILY for personal reasons they are entitled to return to their position. In fact, in certain sectors in Australia it is outright illegal to sack someone during personal leave.
The simple fact is Haddin should have been allowed to justify his continued inclusion in the team. He has been wrongly denied this. It is plain wrong, especially since Haddin is in good form at the moment.
It’s Katich all over again. Selective ageism. Again, an illegal act in Australia.
October 30th 2012 @ 12:42pm
Brett McKay said | October 30th 2012 @ 12:42pm | Report comment
Again Nick, this isn’t corporate Australia, and Haddin hasn’t been sacked nor has he lost his Cricket Australia contract. He’s simply been overlooked as one Australia’s best Test wicketkeeper, which is all the selectors are required to picked.
Nothing illegal has happened here, and Matthew Wade is not exactly in terrible form himself. Performance-based selections are perfectly legal and acceptable..
October 30th 2012 @ 3:41pm
nachos supreme said | October 30th 2012 @ 3:41pm | Report comment
Agreed.
there seems to have been a blurring of the lines when the “game” became the “job” and the rights that the worker enjoys are apparently are now expected in the “sportplace”. Seem to be a fair bit of that going on in the Wobbs set up too….I
October 30th 2012 @ 9:00pm
JohnB said | October 30th 2012 @ 9:00pm | Report comment
Haddin has a right to be considered for selection, and not to be discriminated against illegally in that process (eg not to be discriminated against on the basis of race, religion, sex, age etc). That’s the extent of his entitlements. He has no entitlement to be picked, regardless of how sad the circumstances were surrounding his return from the WI.
October 30th 2012 @ 12:47pm
Col said | October 30th 2012 @ 12:47pm | Report comment
Sport is about opportunity and taking that chance when it presents. Conversely its also about NOT giving that opportunity to a rival, something Haddin did, albeit nobody can blame him for that given the circumstances. Unfortunately for Haddin, his rival took that opportunity with both hands and forced the selectors hand. Its unlucky for Haddin, but that is sport – things happen in sport that dont happen in the everyday workforce.
October 31st 2012 @ 9:38am
jameswm said | October 31st 2012 @ 9:38am | Report comment
Agree with Col. If Haddin had been performing wonderfully and the replacement went so-so, then Haddin would stay in. However Haddin’s spot was on the line and the replacement saved a test. Never give a sucker an even break.
It’s a shame how it happened with Haddin, but you couldn’t logically bring him back in.
October 30th 2012 @ 1:57pm
damo said | October 30th 2012 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
Haddin has been allowed to justify his continued inclusion in the team, it’s just that the selectors weren’t convinced of it.
Hence they did not select him. That’s how it works, how it should always work & hopefully will happen more often in the future.
October 30th 2012 @ 2:40pm
Ryan O'Connell said | October 30th 2012 @ 2:40pm | Report comment
Jameswm, it’s a bit harsh to say Haddin never performed at the necessary level. In fact, that’s just plain wrong. By all means drop him if you think Wade should ursurp him, but don’t completely overlook the contribution Haddin made to the Australian cricket team.
October 31st 2012 @ 9:39am
jameswm said | October 31st 2012 @ 9:39am | Report comment
ROC What I expect is consistency. Consistently high level glovework, consistently batting as the circumstances require.
He never consistently did both, so I stand by what I said, harsh though it may be.
October 31st 2012 @ 9:42am
Ryan O'Connell said | October 31st 2012 @ 9:42am | Report comment
I’ll grant you that the last 24 months of Haddin’s career haven’t been great (or consistent). But he had a fairly lengthy period after he first came into the team when his keeping was flawless and his batting very solid.
October 30th 2012 @ 12:01pm
Nick Inatey said | October 30th 2012 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
So Brett, the Australian selectors are expecting that “if your daughter or any family member is gravely ill, and you dont have a concrete hold on your place, we expect you to stay and play for your country and position instead of being by their bedside. Just tell your sick kid to swallow a teaspoon of concrete and take chemo like a man.”
Delightful. Devil’s advocate indeed.
I don’t think Haddin ever took his place for granted, and I don’t think when he flew home that he was thinking about the wider implications of being a good dad.
October 30th 2012 @ 12:39pm
Brett McKay said | October 30th 2012 @ 12:39pm | Report comment
Nick, it would appear that you’re allowing emotion to have a place at the selection table. I don’t have any issue with Haddin choosing to be with his family, and I’m sure in the same situation I would’ve made the same choice.
I’m really not sure who you’re quoting there, and those words certainly aren’t mine.
The selectors are there to pick the best cricketers in Australia. This isn’t the corporate world, where wrongful dismissal laws have to be taken into account, this is professional sport. The seelctors have made the call the Brad Haddin is no longer the best wicketkeeper in the country. That call has nothing to do with Haddin’s family situation, instead it is simply based on a unanimous decision among the five selectors that Wade is now the best option.
October 30th 2012 @ 2:10pm
Nick Inatey said | October 30th 2012 @ 2:10pm | Report comment
I should point out I’m quoting no-one…just merely putting words in the mouth of the selectors. Just playing on the devil’s advocate theme
October 30th 2012 @ 2:30pm
Brett McKay said | October 30th 2012 @ 2:30pm | Report comment
I don’t think even the devil himself would use those words..
October 30th 2012 @ 5:25pm
Sandy said | October 30th 2012 @ 5:25pm | Report comment
Yes, that is what we want from the selectors Brett.
October 30th 2012 @ 10:32am
Pope Paul VII said | October 30th 2012 @ 10:32am | Report comment
You make an excellent point Geoffrey.
He’s not talking about now, he’s talking about then;
“The incongruity that flows from John Inverarity’s mouth is the fact that Haddin is relieved of the mits to make way for a younger man and yet when the opportunity to replace the 38 and 37 year olds was obvious, he refused to make a strong and positive decision for the medium to longer term health of the Australian team.”
Anyway, the best selectors may turn out to be the Sth African fast bowlers.
October 30th 2012 @ 10:35am
The Bush said | October 30th 2012 @ 10:35am | Report comment
“The incongruity that flows from John Inverarity’s mouth is the fact that Haddin is relieved of the mits to make way for a younger man and yet when the opportunity to replace the 38 and 37 year olds was obvious, he refused to make a strong and positive decision for the medium to longer term health of the Australian team.
So there is one rule for the ‘keeper, another altogether for the batsmen.”
Is this what you’re really getting at? Would Haddin’s dropping be acceptable if Ricky had been dropped before the Indian Series or if Hussey was dropped now? If so I suppose you have a point, but that doesn’t make dropping Haddin the wrong decision, it just means that your final conclusion is the correct one:
“Once again, the message sent to players all over Australia is a confused and contradictory one.”
October 30th 2012 @ 11:08am
sledgeross said | October 30th 2012 @ 11:08am | Report comment
I can see Henrys point. In a perfect world, if Haddin didnt have to come home from the Windies, would he still be the Test keeper? Probably. I completely understand the assertion that once again selection is inconsistent. Having said that, I hope Wade succeeds and thank Hads for his time in the Baggy Green. Nothing wrong with a succession plan.
October 30th 2012 @ 12:02pm
Chris said | October 30th 2012 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
Haddin dropped on form?
Rubbish, his last long-form innings was a century.
He showed with his captaincy during the T20CL that he could make a damn good Australian T20 captain. Much better than George “Who?” Bailey anyway!
October 31st 2012 @ 9:41am
jameswm said | October 31st 2012 @ 9:41am | Report comment
Fine. Pick him for the T20s.