Katich to play on after 'ridiculous' axing [VIDEO]

They may be ranked 4th, but if you're being open-minded about it no way that's an accurate assessment of their current relative ability. They're giving number 3 ranked team Sri Lanka a good kicking (albeit at home) and you'd be a brave man to bet that they wouldn't at the very least give Sth Africa or India a real run in a test series played anywhere at the moment.

The main reasons for our slide down the world test rankings is our dodgy middle order and our inability to take 20 wickets. The POMS making 1/519 at the GABBA and us losing 3 tests by an innings in a disgrace! The POMS are only the 4th best side in the world. Realistically our upcoming test series are going to be real ugly. Katich should have been are captain for the next 2/3 years. Kwadja should be at 3, pointing, Hussey and cosgrove should be the other Batsman. Clarke needs a good stint playing shield cricket so that he learns to vale his wicket and more importantly his place in the side! So does Johnson! He bowls rubbish! -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.

Lolly, plenty of players are judged on 4 games (Hughes got less than that, for one). And yes, everyone did fail over the summer, which is why most of them are lucky they weren't dropped. Katich demands to be judged on performance, then cites 3 years. It doesn't work like that, he is being judged on his performance over the summer, and against the likely output of his team-mates, all of whom he trails in career average. And yes, I found Katich's press conference distasteful and disrespectful to his team-mates and future players. He could have said "Australia hasn't been scoring enough runs to win games in the past 18 months and I have been part of that lineup. I accept the selectors decision. I don't think it was the right decision, nor the right reason to make it, and I don't intend to give up. I think I have a lot to offer, not just now but in 2013, and I intend to go out there and score runs to prove the selectors wrong." Instead he asks for selectorial consistency when if comments at the roar last year are any indication the selectors have been overly consistent with a batting lineup that has been consistently under-performing. And on that point, since when have Australian cricketers not had to worry about looking over their shoulder. Ask any batsman in the 90s and they were always looking over their shoulder, and for good reason. Back then a player was dropped for poor performance.

Why are we so obsessed with age in this country? Does ability and performances not count for anything? Look at India with Tendulkar and Laxman. And in pro sport in the USA, playing on into late 30s and even 40s is nothing - look at Brett Favre, Randy Johnson, Jason Kidd, Barry Bonds, Wayne Gretzky. If you have ability and are performing who cares how old you are!

Russ, he hasn't played since Dec 2010 and in the 12 months before that he did average 47. I don't understand this using 4 test matches as evidence against him when nearly everyone apart from Mike Hussey (and god knows he's gone enough matches without helping the cause in any way in the three years before the Ashes) failed over the summer. None of us know for sure that Hughes is the chosen one. I'm not sure you can cast that up against Katich for criticising Hughes. This sounds like devil's advocacy as much as anything.

By Katich's own admission being half-fit wasn't an excuse. He missed a test last season, and 2 this, and was playing injured in three others. He averaged 32 over that period. That is not good enough, even if it was only 6 tests. Old players get injured more often, are slower to recover, and more prone to re-injure themselves. The comments here imply Katich is some sort of superstar, he is not, he is no better than you'd expect him to be. He is a good player, no doubt, but Australia has a BIG batting problem. If you run down the list of top-5 batsmen, he is behind Watson, and probably Hussey who had a good Ashes. That leaves the captain and former captain. The current captain had a very good run until recently; the former captain should have been dropped too, in my opinion. Ryan is right, above, the selectors are being cautious. No player should be safe in a line-up putting up the results Australia has put up in the past 12 months. Clarke and Watson both need to score bigger tons. This is a major problem and has been for some time. No players get a start all the time, and starting is hard. The players who get going need to score big, and none of the Australian batsmen have been doing that . How would we know which alternatives are better? Even when players do set the Shield alight (like Klinger, for instance for 2 seasons) they don't get a look in. What we do know is that Australia hasn't performed, and Katich has been struggling badly in that period. As I said in the other thread, he is no different to Martyn in 2005. He didn't score runs when he had to score runs, and someone was sure to get dropped (after an Ashes loss). Tough, but professional sportsmen are judged harder when the stakes are highest. In short: if Katich had kept averaging 40 in the last year, he wouldn't have been dropped.

He doesn't, but he owes a certain loyalty to Phil Hughes, as NSW captain, and to his Australian team-mates. His implied criticism of being dropped is that it is "ridiculous" to prefer Hughes over himself. His implied criticism of under-performing team is that he "performed" and someone else hasn't. That's the crux of "selection" instead of contractual employment; for every person "out", someone is "in".

Brilliant post JohnB. Having read Russ comments on this story and another on the site I suspect your dealing with someone who simply doesn't like Katich for whatever reason. Any sane logical and knowledgable cricket fan knows that Kat was dudded.

He's averaging 50 for the last three years. He's part of a successful opening partnership. He played hurt in his last four tests. I think we all know who the real disloyal ones are here...

Russ - I think you discount Katich considerably too heavily. Taking your implied criticisms: Ailing and regularly injured. Yes he missed the last 3 Ashes tests, and by his own admission was half fit for the first 2 and the 2 Indian tests before that (series in which he averaged in the mid 20s - the only series in which he's averaged less than 40 since coming back into the test side v WI in 2008). Since coming back into the test side, he missed a total of 2 other tests out of a possible 35. Possibly injury has stopped him bowling - but he's not there for his bowling. That is not to say that I don't agree he needs to establish that he has recovered from his injuries and hasn't lost his ability, by making runs in Shield cricket. 35 yo. Yes. As are others. Mid 40s career average. Again correct. It rises to a shade over 50 for his 33 tests as an opener since coming back into the team in 2008, perhaps a more relevant stat. An average of 50 is hardly to be sniffed at, particularly for an opener. For that matter, mid-40s is hardly disastrous. Inability to convert scores. This isn't entirely baseless. In those last 33 tests he has 8 tons and 17 fifties (though quite a number of the 50s were actually 80s and 90s). His highest score was 157, then 131, so he hasn't made big hundreds with any regularity. So 25 fifties or above, in 59 innings (if you don't count 2 short not out second innings). Frankly, that's a healthy rate of making scores. Better if it was a few more tons and a few less 50s, sure. Again, hardly a sacking offence. And a certain name Watson comes to mind in this context. Suspect against quality opposition - before his last 4 tests, he didn't have a series average (in those 33 tests as an opener) of less than 40 against anyone, including England (42.6) , India 49.9) and Sth Africa (43.3) in their home countries, and Sth Africa (49.5) in Australia. He hasn't played Sri Lanka, the only other potential "top" side, in that time. As an opener, his averages are not boosted by many not outs so none of those figures are artificially high. That doesn't suggest that he's inordinately filled his boots against the rest (though he does like those Kiwis). Hasn't scored enough to unequivocally prove his superiority over the alternatives - have any of the alternatives (other than Hughes in Sth Africa back 2008/9 - and only then) scored runs in that period so as to even suggest they might be alternatives?

He's not being disloyal at all for speaking out, something has to be done about the clowns in charge of cricket in this country. What do you have to do to play cricket for Australia? Does anyone know with any clarity? We know you can't be 35 and playing pretty well (surely much better than his peers), but you can be 35+ and playing horribly. You can be young, but you've got about 1 max 2 games to prove that you deserve a spot. Is there a person who can move his wrist in Australia who hasn't been called up by Cricket Australia only to be shelved when they realize that they are all average, pick one and wait for something head and shoulders above to emerge (mot that they will with cricket Australia sitting on their hands). They did the right thing 20 years ago and we had the best team we've ever had (maybe anyone). Instead of continuing this, they let every other country playing tests poach our coaches with a "she'll be right" attitude. They have bred mediocraty, and blame everyone but themselves.

Russ listening to the mealy mouth crap that usually comes from the current bunch of players, I find this refreshing and I don't think it is disloyal. What loyalty does he owe to the selection panel?

I think we finally agree on something today, Russ! haha If the selectors are going to claim they're building for the future, then you have to ask the question of whether they really did enough?

Good question paddy, where is the axe for the rest of them? Should we keep a losing team in place just because all of them are equally inept? If we are going to get utterly flogged, surely it is better to have players with potential for improvement learning how hard test cricket is? Players play because they want to be the best player they can be and represent their country. That is incentive enough. After all, having a press conference to bad mouth selectors, threaten legal action and sowing discord amongst the team by hinting at problems with previous decisions isn't at all disloyal to the mythical green cap. Katich, ailing and regularly injured, 35 year old Katich with the mid-40s career average, an inability to convert scores, and a suspect record against quality opposition, may well be the (second) best opener in Australia. But he hasn't scored so many runs that he can unequivocally prove his superiority over the alternatives. Nor is his case for continuing selection isn't any better than anyone else in that failing top-5.

The very fact that Katich is an up front and forthright character more than likely hints at one of the reasons why he's been shown the door by an incompetent selection panel who are acting out of nothing but a futile attempt at self preservation. Meanwhile the 'yes men' in the team will keep on being selected, regardless of merit.

They do when yhey've served their time with distinction and haven't performed that poorly to begin with. Where's the axe for the rest of them. What incentive is there to wear the Baggy Green with any sense of loyalty, when such a distimguished representative of Australian cricket gets tossed out in this fashion? That losing team line might roll if it was his fault, but it wasn't, the whole team rolled over, and while he didn't play his best he performed admirably outside the Ashes series.

True!

Players in losing teams don't get to choose their time of exit. The selectors wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't make changes to an outfit failing to perform, (hell, they haven't been doing their job letting it slip for as long as they did). Just a reminder, since 1902 Australia has had only 4 calendar years where they were bowled out for less than 100: 1956, 1978, 1984 and 2010. That is pretty poor company to be keeping (there are parallels with 1956's squad of crocks living on past glories). Up to 2009-10 Australia had never lost more than 1 match in a summer by an innings. Last summer they lost 3 by an innings. If they play as they did last summer this summer they'll double up that record, because India are a fine side, and Australia are a hubristic rabble.

Updated with complete press conference video via Youtube.

Hilditch should officially apologise for the omission, according to this website: http://thepublicapology.wordpress.com/2011/06/10/opinion-hildtich-must-apologise-for-katich-sacking/