Why Ponting should stay and we should let him

Might be the 14th player to get a SS triple but I would be amazed if it was the 14th time. Bradman and Ponsford had 6 triples between them and I can reel off Jones, Hookes, Marsh, Katich, Hill, Simpson, Love and Lehmann (and now Davis) as others who have done it.

Bayman i find you funny as always mutually and have missed you too, and very funny and like how you left the n out of Johnno mate. But on David Warner, he does have the potential to be the next Bradman but has along way to go, he has to tighten up his technique. But he sure has a good eye and great and eye co ordination, and is a real fighter type player a bit like punter a little terrier. I can't see Ponting being dropped no one else has stepped up except Dave hussy and Peter forest.

If Ponting keeps posting good scores there's no reason to drop him. There is a possible problem on the horizon though. By the end of the 13/14 season, when we host the second Ashes series in six months, Ponting will be 39, with Hussey only a few months behind. I'd bet good money that both players would see that as the ideal time to retire on their terms. The Australian middle order is then left with a gaping hole to fill. Of course this is only one permutation to consider, but the Test team has been hit hard before by multiple retirements.

Has he genuinely improved or is he just going through a "hot-streak?" It does seem a bit premature to judge a player on 6 good Shield matches. I agree that we shouldn't judge them on their career average as a players season 8 years ago isn't that relevant to now, but I also don't think that 1/2 a season is enough either. Ideally you'd look at their last 2-3 seasons and go from there.

People have to lower their expectation of state Cricketers these days imo. Years ago if you weren't averaging over 50 with 1000 Shield runs you wouldn't even get a look in. But now with the increased workload on State Cricketers the bar has to be set a little lower. A player very rarely plays all 10 Shield games in a season these days which puts him at a dissadvantage straight away, plus throw in the Ryobi Cup and endless amount of Big Bash Cricket it is hard to just knuckle down and focus on one format. Also the pitches in Domestic Cricket have been "livened up" the last few years (which imo is a good thing because it teaches guys to play in tough conditions) which makes it a little more difficult for batsmen as well. I also think people writing these guys off that average 35 should really think about the big picture. Sometimes the reason these guys average so poorly is because they have been thrown into State Cricket before they are ready. Peter Forrest is a case in point, he has played several seasons with NSW and been in and out of the team, and has admitted himself that he probably wasn't ready for State Cricket at the time. Now he has moved to Queensland and looks a more rounded complete player than he was back then. Should his average of 35 hold him back even though he has quite clearly improved?

I'm a big Khawaja fan and I disagreed with Khawaja's axing at the time. It was made to look even worse because the man he was dropped for also failed and failed miserably. However since being dropped Khawaja hasn't done much at all to warrant a recall.

I think that Khawaja is the better player, however khawaja was given a chance and didn't impress. Sure he may have been dropped a little too early, but even so he hasn't exactly piled on the first class runs since has he? Forrest is currently in the ODI team and has made two 50's in 3 innings. In other words he's taking his chance which is something that Khawaja failed to do. If we're talking about the ODI team then I'd be picking players like Cooper and Ferguson ahead of both of them anyway.

And how would you rate Forrest as compared to Khawaja? Their Shield and limited overs records in the top order suggest the latter is a far superior player and HE should be the one blooded as a player of rare potential.

One certainly gets the impression that Uncle Arthur's not a Khawaja fan. That he was dropped prematurely was a major gaffe on the part of the selectors in my view.

True enough (especially considering the two matches he missed were NSW and SA). Three of his four single figure dismissals have come against Qld which is one of the stonger bowling attacks. His last two matches are against Vic (who will probably still have Siddle) and WA (another strong bowling attack) so if he makes the 1000 runs he will certainly have earned it. But the point (way back when) was that it will no longer be a case of "Oh 1000 runs, that's a breakout season, let's see if he has any consistency and can back it up", the situation is now "Holy crap he's on track for 1000 runs, let's get him on the plane to the West Indies for his development".

Still, that freak innings probably makes up for him not playing in 2 of WA's shield matches this season. Had he have played the full amount of games he would probably be on similar numbers anyway

Who's come out and said that Khawaja is crap? Certainly not any selector or cricket "expert" that I've seen. Anyone who thinks that is very misguided. Most of the players you've mentioned there were all dropped at some stage in their careers but forced their way back. Whether Khawaja was rightfully or wrongly dropped after Hobart (I believe it was premature but it happened regardless,) players need to force their way back in through runs (or wickets for bowlers obviously.) Right now Khawaja's not doing that, at least not in the Shield.

Yeah and it took a freak of an innings to get him close - only the 14th (I think that is right but I might be wrong, can't remember off the top of my head, I read it in one of the news stories) triple-hundred in more than 100 years of Shield Cricket.

Liam Davis is on track to do it this season despite missing 2 games. Quiney and Voges (who's also missed one game) are both outside chances to do it as well. It will become increasingly rare but it's not impossible. It will make looking at averages over a 2-3+ year period increasingly important. Of course we could always include the A tours when considering them. It worked for Warner

Liam Davis will get pretty close this season.

Let me ask you this instead: Why do people look at players with FC averages of 45-50 and then assume the player is crap when they don't score a century in their first 6 test matches? Plenty of players take longer to blossom than that. Chappell (Ian), Langer, Hayden, Lehmann, Martyn, Boon and Waugh (Steve) all had fewer runs and the same number of centuries as Khawaja at the same stage of their Australian test careers.

No one will score 1000 run shield seasons anymore mate. Good young batsmen in Australia do not get the chance to post those sort of numbers due to the sheer volume of internationals and the instability in the national team. The best two performed batsmen recently are Shaun Marsh (avg 59.4 over two seasons 2009/10 and 2010/11) and Usman Khawaja (avg 62.4 over two seasons 2009/10 and 2010/11). However at the end of this season Khawaja will have played only 19 of the possible 30 Shield matches over 3 years; Marsh will have played only 13 of the possible 30 for WA in those 3 years. These guys get dragged off on international tours either for Australia A or as reserve batsmen for Australia. They never get the chance to play 11 matches and score 1500 runs in a season the way Katich did. Look at Peter Forrest, 581 runs from 6 matches and a genuine chance to post a 1000 run season but he won't play anymore of the Shield games because he's been snapped up.

I agree B.A. Why do people look at a domestic Shield average in the mid-30s and expect that batsman to suddenly flourish in International Test Match cricket? If there were genuine future stars who were banging down the door, Ponting would probably have been dropped ages ago. The cold reality...is perhaps that there's not a bevy of young stars. Marsh, Khawaja, Hughes et al...they are good batsmen but they've hardly set the world on fire at Shield or Test level. I believe this is a sickness...this panicked urge to discard genuine greats like Ponting for kids that might, one day, be good...but probably not as good as Ponting (top 3 greatest Test and ODI scorer in the history of the game).

"I don’t have a problem with that – in that Ponting’s average is only going to go down, but Forrest’s (or someone else) has a reasonable chance of going up." Why would Forrest (or someone else) who is averaging 36 have a reaonsable chance of there average going up? Infact I would say it is the opposite. Most guys playing Shield cricket will only go into decline, not improve. There are plenty of batsman who get to the first class level in their mid 20's peak and fizzle out. As an example that comes to mind locally. Greg Mail was an opening bat for NSW. He came into the side, went pretty well, when he was about 25 he had a season where he scored about 800 runs, but then faded gradually after that. Several years later he broke some crazy long record at his grade club for runs in a season, but he reached his peak in his 20's and his peak was at State level. There would be dozens of players like that in just the last five years. So while Forrest as an example, may (or may not) kick on, players averaging mid30's are not any more likely to kick on than Ponting and Ponting brings with him additional factors that experience and being without doubt one of the top 5 batsman of the last 20 years, can only bring. By the way, Really good story Will.

I think you might be right on this. Of course, he probably won't play any first class cricket between now and when the WI squad is announced but that seems to be the way of things now.