Memo to Michael Clarke: tell Haddin where he stands

Of course, there is another side to this communication coin - why does Haddin need to say anything at all? Unless it's just to stir the pot. I don't know if the selectors - one or all - have told Haddin he's been dropped or rested. From their comments I guess we should assume the latter. It may well be, however, that Haddin wants to continue playing and feels like he's been dropped. Who knows and, really, who cares? All Haddin had to do was say nothing or simply redirect any enquiries back to the selectors original comment. It is certainly possible that Haddin is no longer feeling the love and he is simply trying to force the selectors hand to make himself feel better and more certain about his future. He must be sick to death of hearing and reading about Tim Paine's natural right to succession and now Matthew Wade has been given a shot and done well enough to be thrown into the mix should Paine not "come up" after his injury. Of course, some common sense batting through the Test summer may have strengthened Haddin's position - if only he had provided it. On top of that he probably did himself no great favours by spectacularly diving for catches when he may have had more success by using some basic, but apparently unfashionable and eminently unspectacular, footwork to make the catches look easier. On any level Haddin has been a reasonably successful Test player and he can be proud of that. He does not, however, have a divine right to the job and he keeps it only as long as he remains the best option - which, right now, he is not. For that situation he has nobody to blame but himself. Communication is very much a modern feel good buzzword. Yes, it probably would be nice for Haddin to be told exactly what's going on with his cricket, especially since his lifestyle depends on which team he is playing for. But a lack of communication is nothing new. Bill Lawry is still waiting to be told by the selectors that he had been dropped. And there is a vast difference between a lack of communication and simply not liking the message.

From SMH: ''We're not comfortable with the level of uncertainty and public discussion on this particular matter,'' Sutherland said. ''If there are things that need to be made clearer in the public place and they're not then they're things we need to improve,'' he said. ''We owe that to cricket fans and the country. Looking back on it, something clearly has gone awry.'' The lack of access to former selection chairman Hilditch frustrated journalists, particularly towards the end of his tenure, and it's understood Inverarity does not consider speaking to the media as a part of his brief. Makes a mockery of all this "Inverarity the great communicator" bollocks that the media have been putting out there - nothing more than pro-CA puff pieces.

They don't have to tell us anything but they could start with straight an honest answers to questions. If they don't want to give reasons then say "it is a matter between the NSP and the player" or "that is the decision and I'm not going to elaborate on reasoning". Much better than "he's rested". Of course if the selection panel were honest Ponting would be a commentator by now, so I don't know why I'm surprised.

Possibly but the articles I have read have made a point about him not bowling. He is picked for Aus as an all-rounder, he'd never make it as a batsman alone so state and aus cricket may be viewed in different lights. We'll just have to wait and see.

The WACA might want it, but I'd be surprised if CA didn't push hard for an enforced lay-off. If he's deemed unfit to play for Australia, I can't see his playing for WA (even as a batsman) being approved of by the powers that be.

Mitchell Marsh can't bowl for the rest of the season, he might still be picked for Shield though just as a batsman. He hasn't earnt it as a batsman this season but the WACA want to get games under his belt.

Why should the selectors be telling the press and public everything that goes on? The main people they have to communicate with are the players. Quite frankly, there is too much chatter in the press already. Look at the players, some of them never STFU.

Well Marsh out for 14, but not before WA get first innings points.

WA are one down and about to overtake NSW first inning totals on first day.... Khawaja got dropped as well however it did send North to hospital for hand surgery. Marsh still in as I type. Maybe some fatherly advice helped him. Bad news for his little bro.

Provided the communication with the players is good (and it seems that it is) I guess the NSP is performing their function. One wonders however if the NSP and CA listen to the players, because clearly they (a) hate the rotation policy; and (b) want clearer communication with the media/public (otherwise they wouldn't be in the press everyday saying things like "I'm not injured" and "I'm dropped not rested"). However the public are Cricket Australia's constituents and their communication with us should be a priority.

Yeah all the stories about a "star-studded" NSW lineup and they got rolled all out for 91. Watson - 21 - His batting has never been good enough for him to be picked as a specialist batsman; and at the moment Australia do not need an all-rounder in test matches. He should not have a free-pass back into the test side. Khawaja - 15 - Looked good in the Ryobi against Tasmania but has played poorly in the Shield since it restarted. He'll need to have 5 good innings for the rest of the Shield to convince even me (who is an admitted Khawaja fanboi) that he deserves to be recalled. Special mention to the absurd shot he got out to on the last ball before lunch, that's just poor batting. Hughes - 28 - Off 106 balls! Yeah he's nowhere close to coming back into the national team. Haddin - 0 - Well it's hardly a surprise is it. He's done. Maybe he'll play in the tests in the West Indies but unless he scores 3 centuries it'll be his last appearance for Australia. Looks like it'll be down to Shaun Marsh to fly the flag for Australian representative players.

Haddin just got a 'quack'! NSW in deep trouble 7/85 against WA.

I'll grant you the communication could be better James, but the selectors' job is to select, not talk. I think on the whole, their selections have been pretty good. There's two separate issues at play here: First, the selectors needed to be clear with Haddin, and if that's happened now, and he's happy with the explanation, as its now being reported, then that's it. Secondly, the selectors don't actually need to say anything publically, in all honesty. Cricket Australia is not a public company, and therefore doesn't have to speak publically about anything. However, they are the custodians of the game in Australia, and therefore speak publically in the game's best interests. Whether that extends to team selections is debateable. The NSP's job is to pick teams, not answer every little question from the man on the street. Sure, in picking those teams, there needs to be communication with incoming and outgoing players. See point above. But really, that's about their only obligation, and that, perhaps, hasn't been handled as well as it could've been lately. That's not to say that public opinion should be ignored, either. But just to say that selectors really only have to answer to Pat Howard as general overlord of cricket performance..

All part of the same poor form from the selectors Brett. Poor selecting combined with poor communicating. No one's complaining that he's not playing - only that the selectors still aren't doing their job well.

Can't help but love the irony in all this. During and after the Test series, all the public wanted was for Haddin to be dropped. He's not in the team now, but they're still not happy?!? Why does it matter WHY he's not in the team when all they/we/you wanted was for him to be dumped in the first place?!?

I think the ACB needs an internal communications specialist. I am available at a reasonable day rate.

Given the amount of international cricket being played now, across 3 forms of the game, some sort of rotation or planned resting of players makes sense. I believe they do this in professional soccer, where a team like Man U can play 50+ games a year. The selectors could avoid a lot of this fuss by being more open about their policies and plans.

The game doesn't owe him anything, per say. But you'd have to think he had least deserves to know if he's been dropped or not?

No doubt he has. But this is about transparency in process.

Another article on this? "Clarke should talk to Haddin" leads inevitably into "I hate rotation" Seriously - if you're relying on Tony Greig's opinion to support your argument, you're really clutching at straws. Nice bloke, but outdated opinions. We've already argued against your line enough, Spiro.