Australia’s fall from grace at Test level was bound to happen sooner rather than later with such an aging list. With the likes of Warne, McGrath, Gilchrist, the Waugh’s, Martyn, Hayden and Langer having gone recently, Australia have dropped down the Test rankings.
What Australia need to do is look at the future to regain the number one spot in Tests. Australia needs to look how they got there in the first place, by building over several years with young talent.
Instead, the selectors are opting with quick fix players that are 29 plus, with very solid records at first class level. But then they only have career spans of around 20 to 50 tests with steady records.
However, that does not help for the long haul.
Between 1995 and 2005, when Australia was at the peak of their powers, they had the same group of core players over a long period of time. You can’t have that with these ‘quick fix’ players: the likes of Hussey, North, Clark, and now Watson opening.
How Australia became so dominant in that period was giving young kids ago at the highest level and then developing them into the best in the world.
But now they see anything under 26 as being not ready at Test level, except for Phil Hughes.
It makes no sense considering Ponting’s debut was just prior to his 21st birthday, Hayden 22, Langer 22, Martyn just turned 21, Steve Waugh 20, Warne 22, McGrath 23, Gillespie 21, Lee 23 and Michael Clarke 23 – all of whom are some of Australia’s greatest ever cricketers.
Most of them barely played much first class cricket before their test debut’s. But yet it didn’t hinder their confidence or ability at the highest level.
Why doesn’t Australia emualate that great success with the likes of Callum Ferguson, Shaun Marsh, Cameron White and even Steve Smith? And that’s just to name a few.
The clint
Guest
Wonder how many times he can use that excuse? :)
Bunratty c
Roar Rookie
sorry...Gayle
Bunratty c
Roar Rookie
agree. The return to the top (test cricket, particularly) will take some time....I'm thinking at least 5 years. The Selectors need some close examination/review and much more transparency in deciding their selections.
Bunratty c
Roar Rookie
well....a second opinion after Gale smashed Hauritz with ease in Perth. Krejza, like Hughes is on the outer circle for undefined reason(s)
M1tch
Roar Guru
Our selectors dont want our spinner to go for runs..Warne kept the runs down and took wickets, Krejza I reckon would be a good wicket taker but would probably go for 3-4 runs a over.. They rather Hauritz go for 2 runs a over and keep it quiet
M1tch
Roar Guru
his mum and missus must be fighting again ;)
Fisher Price
Guest
I see Johnson's spraying them all over the place again, letting the pressure off.
The clint
Guest
Do a agree massively!! Why isnt krezja looked at!?
Mr Sports
Roar Pro
The one current that runs through all debates about the makeup of the Australian cricket team is the idea that 'we have to do' certain things. We have to find a spinner. We have to blood young players. We have to have a pace bowler that gets reverse swing. We have to have an allrounder. My question would be - who says? Who dictates to the Australian team what our team should look like? Just pick the six best batsman in the country, the four best bowlers and the best wicket-keeper. Don't worry about trying to check things off a list. As for securing the future nothing breeds success like success. I mean for goodness sake at one point the Australian team plugged Colin Miller into a winning outfit and still prospered. Phil Hughes, Shaun Marsh and Tim Paine aren't going to be the next dynasty if they come into a team that is alwyas losing.
Sportsmouth
Roar Rookie
What you might be forgetting when looking at the teams and players that got us to the number 1 spot, was that amongst that group were; Mark Taylor - possibly the best captain we've had Warne - greatest spinner ever McGrath - one of the best fast bowlers ever Steve Waugh - one of our highest test run scorers Gilchrist - changed the idea of what your wicket keeper should do All were once in a generation players and when they all retire in a close time frame it won't be easy to fill their spots, also remember, Hayden played a couple of tests and was out for a long long time, Ponting was dropped early in his career, so too Steve Waugh, Gilchrist made his debut in his mid to late twenties, bringing them in young gave them a taste, but they all had to go back and prove themselves at state level. I think in the next 12 months the team will only have a few changes, Hussey may go, Watson is not an opener, although a good player and we still search for a spinner to give the attack a point of difference and that may take some time. Just who was the game breaking spinner we had before Warne? You would have to go back along way!
Jameswm
Guest
It's more a case of weighing up who to pick based on age, if they are otherwise close. For example, if you wanted to drop Hussey and put watson down the order, do you go for the 32yo Rogers, the 30yo Jaques or the 20yo Hughes? If you're looking at the next keeper, do you go for 30yo Manou, arguably the best gloveman, or 25yo Paine, possibly a slightly inferior keeper but better batsman? Picking Steve Smith was a joke - he would have had little chance of coping if he had to play as the frontline spinner. Those selectors - honestly. What has Krejza done to someone?
The clint
Guest
I think we are just about playing our best 11 now apart from injuries but i just think to regain number 1 in the world in tests it will take some time, so we should start looking at players that will be part of that core group in the next 10 years. Plus all our recent legends hardly played first class level before being handed a baggy green, look how good we were doing that.
The clint
Guest
I think your right, but i reckon steve is a bit more capable than cameron with the ball. Hopefully he becomes a good spinner though for Australias sake.
The clint
Guest
Mind you alot more test cricket is played now and more players will surpass 50 tests. And all im saying is look at the success we had with all the young stars in the nineties. It shows something. Everyone i named above are better than anyone i remembet making there debut 29, 30 plus for Australia.
Brett McKay
Guest
I've said before that I've no problem picking a young player if he's demanding selection at that time (such as Hughes last season, but not Smith now), but I don't ever want the Australian Cricket team to be a finishing school for promising kids. If you're wearing a Baggy Green, it's because you're one of the best eleven cricketers in the country for those five days. That all said, I think the average age of our First XI will start coming down within a few years anyway. With the old state 2nd XI comp now rebranded as an Under 23's comp, we're already seeing more fringe state players in their late 20s/early 30s retiring from First Class cricket (Greg Mail from NSW, and to a lesser extent Brad Hodge come to mind, though Hodge certainly wasn't a fringe player). And further, as these U23 players graduate into First Class ranks (most likely at the expense of those fringe players I mentioned), the Sheild team average ages will come down, and so this will ultimately flow onto the national team. So really, we don't have to jump into action here to bring through the next generation. They're already at the front gate, and will be knocking on the door before too long anyway...
M1tch
Roar Guru
If Steve Smith gets picked for Australia it surely cant be as a all-rounder. He is a good batsman but a ordinary bowler, he will end up like Cameron White as a top 6 batsman who might bowl 10 overs and go for plenty.
Mr Sports
Roar Pro
The idea that we have to pick someone now so that they're good in a few years has always seemed strange to me. Why not just pick a guy who is good now? The idea that you can't debut at 29 and have a successful career is also odd. Only 42 players in the history of Australian test cricket have played 50 or more tests. at an average of 15 tests a season (which is about right over the last 10 years) you could debut at 29 and still end up in the top 40 or so in test appearences.