Let’s get it right – Mike Hussey was dumped
Columnist By David Lord, 7 Jan 2013 David Lord is a Roar Expert
104 Have your say
2,760 reads
Mike Hussey reacts after being dismissed first ball during first innings of Boxing Day Test between Australia and India at the MCG in Melbourne, Monday, Dec 26, 2011.(AAP Image/Julian Smith).
Related coverage
“I wanted to play, but you can’t have everything”.
The words of Michael Hussey to Channel Nine after being disgracefully dumped by the national selectors from the One Day International (ODI) squad for the first two games against Sri Lanka at the MCG on Friday, and Adelaide on Sunday.
“It’s futile to extend the 37-year-old’s career,” was one of selection chairman John Inverarity’s pathetic comments.
The reaction from the 10,000-plus at the SCG yesterday sounded more like 40,000 supporting Mike Hussey.
“Futile” from Inverarity’s point of view. Total support from the SCG patrons who obviously know their cricket better than the chairman and his four selection colleagues.
The Hussey charisma took a lot of the sting out of his dumping, he’s a gentleman to the marrow of his bones, while Inverarity sat in the stand with Cricket Australia chairman Wally Edwards, going through some left-arm bowling actions, totally oblivious to the fact he has become the joke of Australian cricket.
Let’s look to Friday at the MCG with Michael Clarke, David Warner, and Matthew Wade rested, and Mike Hussey dumped. What will the crowd be like with so much talent not on show?
Last night there was an Australian domestic record 46,581 crowd for the Melbourne BBL local derby between the Stars and the Renegades, which erupted into open warfare between Shane Warne and Marlon Samuels.
That warfare was a side issue, the 46,581 is the real issue.
On Friday, with Clarke, Warner, Wade, and Hussey missing, will there be less than 46,581?
Or will Melbourne fans, the best in the world, vote with their feet to watch Aaron Finch, Usman Khawaja, and Phil Hughes – selected as the future of Australian ODI cricket – strut their stuff?
It’s a big punt.
Not that Inverarity would care, his job is to select national teams in three formats, a job in which he is falling well short of the pass mark. His public explanations are even worse.
Let’s see what the backlash to Hussey’s dumping produces for the last eight ODIs of the season.
If Inverarity sticks to his guns and leaves Hussey out altogether, there will be increasing demands for the chairman to be dumped. And valid demands at that.
Inverarity is now between a rock and a hard place, with no-one to blame but himself.
The sad net result is the treatment dished out to Hussey, without peer in the respect shown to him by team-mates, opposition, and fans all round the world.
Mike Hussey didn’t deserve such shabby treatment. It leaves a bad taste.
January 7th 2013 @ 7:02am
Christo the Daddyo said | January 7th 2013 @ 7:02am | Report comment
The main problem with this rant is you haven’t given one reason to actually select Hussey. Have you stopped to think that just maybe the selectors have the best interests of Australian cricket top of mind?
And how on earth can you claim Invers is “falling well short of a pass mark” in his job? You may have missed this small detail, but Australia won the final Test in under four days and the previous one in under three! What more do you want?!?
Selections will always be argued about, but in my mind there are really only legitimate calls for a change in the selectors if a team loses regularly. This team is winning far more than losing, so I would suggest the selectors are largely doing a decent job.
January 7th 2013 @ 7:26am
Red Kev said | January 7th 2013 @ 7:26am | Report comment
Brad Haddin is the argument against the NSP all by himself.
January 7th 2013 @ 8:12am
Christo the Daddyo said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:12am | Report comment
Haddin is in pretty good form this season, so I think you’re being a bit hard on the NSP for that reason.
January 7th 2013 @ 8:24am
Red Kev said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:24am | Report comment
Not at all – if they are building for the future you select Tim Paine not Brad Haddin. Let us be 100% clear, Haddin was not selected with the next world cup in mind, he was selected because the NSP are scared of a team with so little experience in it that they recalled the dumped wicket keeper from last year.
January 7th 2013 @ 8:52am
Matt F said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:52am | Report comment
While I would have prefered another player to be picked as keeper as Haddin hasn’t had a great Ryobi Cup season, Paine hardly deserves a call up either. Regardless, our number 1 keeper is 25 so that’s not a position where we really need to look to the future. Replacing a 37 year old middle order regular is.
January 7th 2013 @ 8:57am
Red Kev said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:57am | Report comment
Paine’s BBL form has been good – and Invers specifically cited Khawaja’s BBL form as part of the reason for his inclusion. The reason Haddin is a mistake is if Wade gets injured – do you want Haddin in for the Ashes or Paine?
January 7th 2013 @ 9:03am
Matt F said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:03am | Report comment
Haddin. Paine’s one first-class century ever doesn’t inspire much confidence and I rate Shield form over T20 form when it comes to picking the test team. I can’t comment on their keeping form as I haven’t seen enough of them in Shield cricket. Khawaja has also done very well in the Ryobi Cup which I imagine would have carried some weight, as it should
January 7th 2013 @ 9:21am
Red Kev said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:21am | Report comment
The fact you want Haddin explains it then; it makes you crazy, but it does explain your position.
January 7th 2013 @ 9:26am
Matt F said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:26am | Report comment
Yeah only crazy people value Shield form when picking the test team (or in this case a squad.) We’d be picking a backup keeper who almost certainly wouldn’t play and Haddin has the added advantage of being able to pinch in as a batsman if needed in case we get a few injuries to our middle order. Paine is seriously overrated by some people. I’d rather pick Chris Hartley instead of Paine
January 7th 2013 @ 10:29am
Rob Barrow said | January 7th 2013 @ 10:29am | Report comment
MattF agree with you, Khawaja has scored heavily in Ryobi and got 90 and 80 in his last few games and deserves to be picked on the weight of runs regardless of whether there is a lack of shield cricket or not.
January 7th 2013 @ 9:09am
Christo the Daddyo said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:09am | Report comment
Red – Haddin wasn’t “dumped”. He left the Windies tour to be with his sick child. It just happens that his replacement (Wade) has played well enough in the selectors’ eyes to be retained.
Although after that wicketkeeping performance in the last Test, I hope Wade isn’t getting too complacent. Very average behind the stumps I thought.
January 7th 2013 @ 9:22am
Red Kev said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:22am | Report comment
He was replaced as T20 and ODI keeper by Mathew Wade prior to the WI tour. He was dumped.
January 7th 2013 @ 10:43am
Christo the Daddyo said | January 7th 2013 @ 10:43am | Report comment
Oh yes, sorry – I was thinking of the Tests.
January 7th 2013 @ 4:42pm
Disco said | January 7th 2013 @ 4:42pm | Report comment
Quite so.
January 7th 2013 @ 7:37am
David Lord said | January 7th 2013 @ 7:37am | Report comment
Christo, with captain Michael Clarke rested and vice-captain Shane Watson injured, the obvious selection was Mike Hussey to lead the side, making full use of his vast experience, owning the ninth best average in ODI history. Beating an ordinary Sri Lanka 3-zip in the Test series has nothing whatsoever to do with the ODI squad.
January 7th 2013 @ 8:18am
Christo the Daddyo said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:18am | Report comment
No, Michael Hussey was NOT the obvious selection to lead the side. He’s never been enthusiastic about captaining, and “vast experience” does not a leader make.
Besides, the reasoning behind his non-selection was made very clear – “Taking a long term view towards the ICC Cricket World Cup the NSP has decided not to include Michael Hussey in the squad”. Sounds fair enough to me.
January 7th 2013 @ 8:30am
Train Without A Station said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:30am | Report comment
Exactly fair comment. Sure David Hussey and Brad Haddin have both been picked. But neither are at the expense of Michael. Haddin is replacing a rested Matthew Wade, whilst also being the best performing keeper in domestic limited overs this summer whilst Hussey is coming in as a batsman/part time bowler who is probably one of the better performing limited overs players at the moment, with both being experienced players. I think the fact that David Hussey is used in a lot of CA marketing shows he was considered an incumbent also.
January 7th 2013 @ 8:48am
Matt F said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:48am | Report comment
Yep. He captained an ODI series against NZ and we got belted 3-0. He then came out and said he’d be quite happy to not have to captain again, so he was far from the obvious choice as captain.
January 7th 2013 @ 2:57pm
Brendon said | January 7th 2013 @ 2:57pm | Report comment
Does form count as a reason? last time I checked he’s in great nick, how about experience in an inexperienced line up, or what about plain old let’s not treat a champ like dirt. The NSP is something else
January 7th 2013 @ 7:29am
Omega10 said | January 7th 2013 @ 7:29am | Report comment
I certainly believe Hussey should have been included in the one day squad as my own modest opinion is that the best team should be selected and Hussey is still, after Clarke, probably the best batsman in the country. But I can see where the selectors are coming from in regards to the World Cup.
I think the question is, why discard Hussey and include Haddin if current selection is based on preparing a team for the World Cup? Hardly looking to the future is it?
January 7th 2013 @ 7:33am
sheek said | January 7th 2013 @ 7:33am | Report comment
Good morning David,
“The king is dead, long live the king,” is probably the way to look at this.
Not everyone gets to plan their exit seamlessly. By all accounts, Allan Border wanted to continue playing into the 1994/95 season but didn’t want to tour Pakistan.
The selectors told him “if no Pakistan, then no home series.” So understandably, considering his enormous contribution to Australian cricket, Border retired from test cricket in a huff of indignation.
In 1975, having seen what had happened to his predecessor Bill Lawry, Ian Chappell resigned the captaincy, followed by prematurely retiring from the test team after the 1975/76 season.
“I won’t let the bastards get me like they got Bill,” was apparently Chappelli’s mantra.
Australia has always had the ability to reproduce outstanding international players. I guess the worry is that in the future our international players will be mostly T20 type…..!
January 7th 2013 @ 7:55am
David Lord said | January 7th 2013 @ 7:55am | Report comment
Morning sheek. One problem with your famous quote, the king is far from dead, even the selectors can’t kill him off – Mike Hussey will be in their craw for the rest of the summer.
January 7th 2013 @ 10:36am
sheek said | January 7th 2013 @ 10:36am | Report comment
Yeah true David,
Andrew Moore made a good point of this on 2GB this morning. The fans are being dududed from seeing the best available players. Not only Hussey, but the rotation policy as well.
If CA are saying that there’s too much cricket being played by resting key players, both batsmen (onedayers) & bowlers (tests), well then, they should know what to do about it, shouldn’t they…..?!
January 7th 2013 @ 2:02pm
Matt F said | January 7th 2013 @ 2:02pm | Report comment
The only player who is really being rested though is Warner. Hussey is dropped, not rested and Clarke is still carrying a hamstring injury. I’d rather he miss a few games now to get it 100% then carry it through to India.
It’s not as if this is the first time that we’ve rested players either. It’s been happening for quite a while
January 7th 2013 @ 2:41pm
Josh said | January 7th 2013 @ 2:41pm | Report comment
The thing about Warner being rested is that he has a particulary poor record in ODI for Australia and hasn’t for me demonstarted he should have been picked – I assumed he just wasn’t picked as opposed to rested
January 7th 2013 @ 3:03pm
Brendon said | January 7th 2013 @ 3:03pm | Report comment
Surely you’re just playing the wind up merchant here Josh, Warner shouldn’t be picked? so he can be one of the best T20 bats in the world, has just scored four consecutive half centuries in a row at a quick clip in tests, but can’t get the nod for the one day series? must be a wind up because you can’t be serious and stats aren’t everything, he’ll be back for the third game no worries.
January 7th 2013 @ 8:45pm
Behold said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:45pm | Report comment
Agree Josh, Warners selection in most formats has been unwarranted. Picked more on hope and whim than actual results. His ODI and ODD record is poor and he shouldn’t be in the team. He is still developing the in between gear needed for ODI cricket and should be developing that in domestic cricket rather than International cricket. He hasn’t been all the good in t20s recently either (from memory) but the marketers will have him there for them.
January 7th 2013 @ 2:59pm
Brendon said | January 7th 2013 @ 2:59pm | Report comment
Wade is being rested also, which I think is silly
January 7th 2013 @ 3:03pm
Matt F said | January 7th 2013 @ 3:03pm | Report comment
Ah I forgot about Wade. How silly of me! Make that two players being rested. Still it’s happened before
January 7th 2013 @ 7:35am
Jack said | January 7th 2013 @ 7:35am | Report comment
Agree Christo. We all know that the general public know more about who should be in the team than the selectors. That’s why we have such “massive” crowds to Shield games and alike. The problem is that people read or hear ridiculous comments like that and then start to quote them as if they are gospel. It happens in all sports and all countries, it’s just a national pastime.
January 7th 2013 @ 7:38am
Rr said | January 7th 2013 @ 7:38am | Report comment
Christo it would be futile and redundant to argue a case as to why he should stay- he’s the second best bat in the country!!
On top of everything he is one of the few from his generation that aren’t d-heads!! Haddin is the last to join a very long list of childish, unsportsmanlike spoilt brats.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download it now [http://itunes.apple.com/au/app/the-roar/id327174726?mt=8].
January 7th 2013 @ 8:20am
Christo the Daddyo said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:20am | Report comment
I would agree with you that he seems to be a very decent human being. But I’m unconvinced he’s the second best limited overs batsman in the country. I think there are plenty of options around in that regard.
January 7th 2013 @ 7:23pm
Rob said | January 7th 2013 @ 7:23pm | Report comment
Check his record. One day batsmanship is not only about putting bat on ball.
Its about running between wickets, assessing the situation, assessing overs left, assessing what bowlers have overs left, remaining batsmen, assessing the big picture. (not his average like some) etc.
Its called intelligence, and class.
And nobody does it better! (not a bad fieldsman etiher)
Who is the best ODI batsmen for Oz?
January 7th 2013 @ 7:40am
WW said | January 7th 2013 @ 7:40am | Report comment
out with the old in with the new
January 7th 2013 @ 8:29am
Red Kev said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:29am | Report comment
Does that mean you’re finally ready to admit Watson shouldn’t be in the test side?
January 7th 2013 @ 9:16am
WW said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:16am | Report comment
if Watson comes out and says he wants to retire than that would be okay to drop him
Watson averages 37 from 38 tests (we all know its mid 40′s s an opener) and you argue this is reason to drop him. Have you forgotten that one S Waugh averaged 36 after his first 46 tests….. and became a much better test batsman when he stopped bowling… ended up with an average over 50.
I’m not suggesting Watson will end up averaging in the 50′s (only about 10 players in aussie test cricket have achieved this) but i see no reason that Watson’s average of 44 runs per innings from 108 first class matches, including 17 centuries, isn’t an indicator of what his stats will be like if he plays the same number of tests, provided he gives up bowling.
Watson belongs at opener where his average is currently higher than what michael slater could manage as an opener in tests.
January 7th 2013 @ 9:23am
Red Kev said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:23am | Report comment
38 of 88 tests since his debut – he isn’t stable enough to be part of a batting order, especially not an opening partnership.
January 7th 2013 @ 9:32am
WW said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:32am | Report comment
i think you’ll find from 2009 when he became opener he has been a steady inclusion in the test side apart form injuries this past 12 or so months.
but ffs what is it with you and anger towards someone with an injury. you have issues.
and your thoughts on his record? if you’d have been a selector in the mid 90′s you’d have got rid of S waugh due to his mid 30′s average and his tendency to get injured….. that would’ve been a brilliant call RK
January 7th 2013 @ 12:43pm
sittingbison said | January 7th 2013 @ 12:43pm | Report comment
of more concern is since the boxing day test 2010 (12 tests) averaging only 23 with no hundreds, and taking only 20 wickets in 20 innings (including 5 in the infamous Cape Town match in 2011).
And of even MORE concern is his failure to concentrate for any period of time, often getting out around a break, and not being able to convert starts into scores.
And his greatest concern is technique, the number of bowled or LBW being laughable.
January 7th 2013 @ 8:00am
David Lord said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:00am | Report comment
WW, would you being saying that if your job was on the line to a younger man? Like hell you would.
January 7th 2013 @ 8:39am
Nick said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:39am | Report comment
That’ll be why we have selectors picking squads rather than the players themselves. Sometimes tough decisions have to be made. It appears this is one of those times
January 7th 2013 @ 8:47am
Cameron Rose said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:47am | Report comment
Well said Nick, was about to make that exact point.
January 7th 2013 @ 9:19am
WW said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:19am | Report comment
if i made an announcement i was retiring i would expect my employers to make efforts to have me replaced
this is sport btw and i believe hussey may have made enough money out of it to be quite comfortable with opportunity to commentate or coach.
get a grip mate!
david when will you retire? i hope soon.
January 7th 2013 @ 9:32am
Christo the Daddyo said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:32am | Report comment
Now now…
Every commentary team needs a doddery old father figure with antiquated views. David Lord plays that role for The Roar very well!
January 7th 2013 @ 9:35am
WW said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:35am | Report comment
do i want to read the simplistic ramblings of an old fuddy duddy with no grip on the modern game both cricket and rugby….. no the less of them the better!
January 7th 2013 @ 9:39am
Red Kev said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:39am | Report comment
I’d rather read Lord’s pieces than your drivel
January 7th 2013 @ 3:05pm
Brendon said | January 7th 2013 @ 3:05pm | Report comment
WW, you go to far, you called Matt F a Goose yesterday and your arguments are often poorly constructed rants, if you can’t play without chucking your toys out of the pram every time someone has a different point of view, then you shouldn’t play at all. Long live the Roar and everyone’s right to an opinion, regardless if it’s the same as my own.
January 7th 2013 @ 9:50am
Atawhai Drive said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:50am | Report comment
People, don’t make it personal.
Play the ball, not the man.
A question: does anyone still care about ODIs? Should we care?
January 7th 2013 @ 10:02am
Matt F said | January 7th 2013 @ 10:02am | Report comment
I’ll watch them, and probably go to the Sydney game/s but the result doesn’t mean too much to me. Obviously I want Australia to win but the World Cup is the only tournament that has real meaning. I’ll probably struggle to recall the results by this time next year but I’ll still remember the results of the tests from this summer
January 7th 2013 @ 3:08pm
Brendon said | January 7th 2013 @ 3:08pm | Report comment
I love the one dayers, what’s not to love? all day cricket and we get a result more often than not. Maybe we could cut them to 40 overs and reduce the amount of games per year, tests are still the premium form of the game.
This team is actually pretty good, bar a few selections I don’t agree with, still if Warner isn’t opening….I ain’t paying.
January 7th 2013 @ 8:40am
langou said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:40am | Report comment
Pick the best 11 players for all international games.
A clear lesson for future players. Don’t announce your retirement until right before your very last game.
January 7th 2013 @ 9:24am
eagleJack said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:24am | Report comment
Ummm isn’t that what Mike Hussey did?
January 7th 2013 @ 9:34am
Matt F said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:34am | Report comment
He did it before his last test match but he still hoped to play another 10 ODI’s which now won’t happen
January 7th 2013 @ 8:42am
pj said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:42am | Report comment
looks like payback to hussey for retiring without giving due notice. seems these big headed selectors want your absolute loyalty though are not prepared to return it. surely clarke couldnt have voted huss out of the odi’s? it had to be 4 against 1. surely not if clarkes opinion of huss as his ‘rock’ is believed? please clarkey, tell us if you also vetoed huss. your public approval has really surged of late and if you did vote him out, may well nose dive again.please dont give any more of the teams best interest line because, if that was true huss is 2nd man picked after captain.
getting real sick of the ‘preparing the team for the future campaigns’ line also because, you cannot truly determine that. ‘now’ is the only thing which needs to be taken care of. the best side can only be chosen ‘now’
January 7th 2013 @ 1:39pm
matt h said | January 7th 2013 @ 1:39pm | Report comment
If we are forever preparing teams for future campaigns, do we ever pick the best team to win now, or are we forever mediocre?
January 7th 2013 @ 8:50am
Cameron Rose said | January 7th 2013 @ 8:50am | Report comment
There are many legitimate arguments to be made both for and against the retention of Michael Hussey in the one-day team, but in the selection of any side, crowds and ratings can never be one of them.
The national team is the national team, we don’t follow them as a collection of individuals. Do I stop following Richmond because my favourite player gets dropped? No.
January 7th 2013 @ 9:09am
Jason said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:09am | Report comment
But you might decide not to go to or watch a game.
January 7th 2013 @ 9:12am
Matt F said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:12am | Report comment
Perhaps, but the people picking the team shouldn’t be doing so because of popularity, but on what they feel is best for the team both now and in the future. If the selectors start picking players based on how many people will pay to watch them then we have serious problems
January 7th 2013 @ 1:42pm
matt h said | January 7th 2013 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
Well for the good of Aaron Finch, Usman and Phil Hughes, I would have thought a successful old head like Hussey would have been a definite plus, rather than two older players with rather mediocre national careers like D Hussey and Haddin. I agreed with the dropping of Ponting last year as he was in terrible form, but Hussey is actually in the form of his life! Don’t we pick teams to win anymore? Leaving our Hussey and Warner shows lack of respect for the opposition and the punters paying their hard earned to see the national team maybe once a year. Is it still the national team when its getting closer to a second 11?
January 7th 2013 @ 2:06pm
Matt F said | January 7th 2013 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
I feel you’ve missed the main point of my above comment. My point wasn’t nescessarily that the selectors have made the right call. I’m saying that any argument for supporting Hussey should not be based on commercial factors but should be based on the suces of the team. people saying that we should pick Hussey because the crowds will be bigger are picking him for the wrong reason. The selectors have decided that dropping him is best for the team. Whether you agree or disagree with that is a fair debate to have, but not really relevant to the point I was making.
January 7th 2013 @ 9:24am
Cameron Rose said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:24am | Report comment
Jason, If that was the case I wouldn’t consider myself, or anyone who takes that line, a proper supporter.
Matt F, Well said. Nice to see we’re on the same page for once!!
January 7th 2013 @ 9:35am
Matt F said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:35am | Report comment
It had to happen one day Cam!
January 7th 2013 @ 9:48am
Jason said | January 7th 2013 @ 9:48am | Report comment
I disagree with that. You still want the Australian side to win but given that you have choices (and budgets) about how to spend your time, you could quite reasonably, as a supporter, decide not to spend money going to a particular game because of the team put on the park.
It happens all the time in NRL around State of Origin time. TV audiences and crowds are down for teams who can’t start their best players because of SOO selection.
January 7th 2013 @ 10:40am
Cameron Rose said | January 7th 2013 @ 10:40am | Report comment
Jason, That says more about the shallowness of ‘fair-weather’ supporters that it does about anything else. Not once have I ever not gone to a team sporting event that I otherwise would have because certain players weren’t playing.
January 7th 2013 @ 11:14am
Red Kev said | January 7th 2013 @ 11:14am | Report comment
Nor have I, but I have specifically gone TO a match because of someone that was playing – and surely that is the point. Huseey means bums on seats and TVs on channel nine.
January 7th 2013 @ 12:25pm
Matt F said | January 7th 2013 @ 12:25pm | Report comment
Kev, you’re not wrong that some people would have gone to see Hussey, especially given it’s the last time they’ll see him (unless he plays BBL next year) but that shouldn’t be a relevant factor for the selectors, which is the main issue here. Their job is to do what is best for the team. They don’t always get it right but the sport will have some serious issues if we’re picking the team based on who will draw a crowd
January 7th 2013 @ 3:10pm
Brendon said | January 7th 2013 @ 3:10pm | Report comment
How’s that Richmond thing going for you Cam? Booked your holidays for September yet….said with a cheeky smile.
I say you stop supporting Richmond because at some stage you’d like to see your team win a GF and that ain’t the Tigers MO.