- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Much has been made of the performance of the national selection panel (NSP) in recent times. And rightly so.
They are responsible for selecting the right players at the right times to give the team the best chance of success.
Many have suggested that the NSP is not doing its job. But is that really true?
There have been many criticisms of the selectors this summer. Some relate directly to selections, while others relate to policies set down by Cricket Australia following the Argus review.
First of all is the make-up of the NSP, with the captain and coach also being selectors. While I do not favour the captain and coach being on the selection panel, they rightly should have significant input.
Cricket Australia has made the decision to include them on the selection panel, so the panel itself cannot be held to account there.
The rotation policy for fast bowlers has also come under fire, but again this is a Cricket Australia policy. The NSP are simply following orders.
Comments made by John Inverarity explaining or justifying selections have come under fire, but once again the NSP is following the orders of Cricket Australia. The Argus review identified communication as a big issue and Inverarity is delivering on that.
His explanations of Brad Haddin’s replacement with Matthew Wade, the selection of Rob Quiney, the choice between Phil Hughes and Usman Khawaja and, most recently, the omission of Mike Hussey from the one day international team are his attempts to again follow the direction of Cricket Australia in regards to communication.
Now let’s look at the actual selections.
The first big selection was that of Wade ahead of Haddin. This was a calculated move made with an eye to the future. Sure Wade has a lot of work to do but so did Ian Healy and Adam Gilchrist when they were given their chance.
Interestingly the door was left firmly open for Haddin right from the start of the summer, so his selection in the ODI squad and his likely selection as back-up for the Ashes tour should not be considered an about-face at all.
There has been criticism of the succession planning for the retirements of Ricky Ponting and Hussey. But the NSP did have two candidates in mind to replace Ponting in Hughes and Khawaja. Both were considered with a decision going Hughes’s way.
Hussey’s retirement was unexpected but, again, the NSP had Khawaja ready to go and leaving Hussey out of the ODI team is another example of decisive planning for the future. Seems like pretty good succession planning to me.
Now let’s examine the rotation policy. While most of us are not fans (me included), the rotation has given us a good look at a few bowlers.
We saw John Hastings, Mitchell Starc, and Jackson Bird given their chances and we have a clearer picture of who stepped up and who didn’t. We also had another look at Mitchell Johnson to see whether he has improved.
So as a result we now have a few more options on the bowling table. There will always be debate about who is best but at least the debate is more informed now.
I don’t mind keeping a player waiting just a little bit. It often has the effect of making them hungrier for success when the opportunity does come. Bird is probably the best example of this and Hughes has made the most of his chance when it came. Hopefully Khawaja will do exactly the same.
All things considered, I think the NSP is actually doing a pretty good job.
Build your own fantasy cricket team and put it to the test with Draftstars daily fantasy competitions. Pick your match, pick your team and watch the points roll in to take out cash prizes on each match. What are you really gambling with? Set a deposit limit.