Most people find the concept of multitasking difficult. Imagine, then, how challenging it was for some players to join their teammates for Wednesday night’s Twenty20 against South Africa.
It’s pretty hard to pad up and walk out to bat in Adelaide when you’re busy choosing a movie on the Emirates in-flight entertainment system.
Modern cricket seems to have adopted a more-is-more model, with Cricket Australia and other bodies content to pack the sporting calendar fuller than Gina Rinehart’s wallet. While fan interest is an obvious concern here, I also worry about the quality of cricket on offer if our national side is missing several key players due to scheduling conflicts.
This is not a one-off event, with a number of key players absent from the final game of the 2013-14 international season due to an overlap between that series and another one in New Zealand.
At the time, Channel Nine execs expressed their displeasure at Cricket Australia via the media, with Cricket Australia apparently unaware they were devaluing their main product.
Fortunately, George Bailey, his cousins and a few members of a local under 16s team were able to take the field on that occasion. Crisis averted, you say. Perhaps, but can Australian cricket continue to dilute its product without raising the ire of fans and television networks, who recently paid big bikkies for the broadcasting rights to our national game?
The solution is fairly straightforward, which may not appeal to Cricket Australia. Time management is not my strong suit, but I’m fairly confident the best way to field our strongest team is to avoid double booking players. If there’s a Test match at the WACA starting on Friday, don’t be tempted to try to squeeze in a quick one day series in India from Monday to the following Saturday.
Just say no, or at least be non-committal to the BCCI. You know, something like “I think South Africa are touring that week, but I’ll check with my assistant and call you back”.
Admitting you have a problem is the first step to overcoming it.
Specialist sides in each form of the game is one option here, and we have seen some moves toward this, especially in T20 cricket.
That said, I’m fairly sure most Australian fans would prefer to see David Warner in the whites and coloured pyjamas. He was certainly missed on Wednesday night.
Let’s hope Cricket Australia can see the light, not just the dollar signs, in coming years, and take steps to ensure our cricketers aren’t trying to be in three places at once. With rotation policies and the greater risk of injury that comes with the frequency of games these days, we don’t need any other factors keeping players off the field. The quality of our team, and their likelihood of success, depends on it.
Daniel Gray
Roar Guru
I'm ok with Watson at 3 and Marsh at 6 in Test team, but Clarke doesn't appear so keen, if his comments in the media earlier this week are anything to go by. I think Watson is more a batsman who bowls a bit these days, which is probably the safest role for him, given his injury history. I'm with you on Cummins and Boyce. Both need plenty of Shield games and strong performances at that level being considered for Test duties.
Daniel Gray
Roar Guru
Absolutely. Maxwell does add an intensity to the team that was missing on Wednesday night. Good turnaround. Tomorrow night's game will be interesting v
Bob Sims
Guest
Very prophetic words, Don, given the improved performance of the players,and the result, from last night's training run. Boyce and Cummins looked good, Faulkner gave a whole-hearted performance and I must say that Watson looked in touch and relaxed. Even though Maxwell didn't contribute with runs or wickets, his bowling was a good option for Finch and his fielding, as usual, excellent. Just his presence in the side seemed to lift the mood. Recognising that there is a huge gulf between performances at T20 level and four or five day level, I must say I am warming to the idea of playing Watson and Marsh in the same Test team, with Watson at #3, as long as Watson produces the goods in Shield before the Test. That would keep Smith at #5 for now, although a move to #3 in the future is inevitable. Memo to selectors - please take things with Boyce slowly and don't be tempted to rush Cummins back to Tests before he's had the benefit of re-adjusting to long form cricket.
Bob Sims
Guest
Well Daniel, looks like they did learn some lessons from Wednesday night after all, and thank goodness for that. Hard to believe just one change to the eleven produced such a different result. The presence of Maxwell, even though he didn't contribute with runs or wickets,seemed to lift the mood of the side. His bowling was reasonable and his fielding, as usual, excellent. Great performances by Boyce, Cummins and Faulkner.
Daniel Gray
Roar Guru
Not sure about that. Ideally they want both. Crowd numbers are usually up at T20 games, due to shorter duration and overall atmosphere.
Daniel Gray
Roar Guru
I wouldn't call a game against a top 3 country like South Africa meaningless, but workload management is a valid consideration. I guess one problem of Warner and co weren't in the country to play Shield or any other cricket, which is odd given we have a home Test series starting soon!
Daniel Gray
Roar Guru
Valid point, Toy. I think you've highlighted another challenge of scheduling these days in ensuring players have sufficient preparation for different forms of the game. I prefer Tests over everything else, but it does seem to have our national side playing a form of the game while regular players in that form aren't in the country, and don't have the option to participate.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
As they should be. Johnson needs to be rested before the test matches, he's not getting any younger and Warner should be given every chance to play Shield before the test series starts. Why are you all so fussed about the players picked for thiese meaningless fixtrues?
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Well, CA quite wisely are keeping test prospects playing Shield as much as possible. Why clutter their minds by putting them in T20 now?
kevin
Guest
Is it because CA cares less about ground attendance than it does about TV viewer numbers?
Daniel Gray
Roar Guru
Probably still too much chance of food poisoning for my liking :)
Don Freo
Guest
It's probably more like a Smorgasbord where you can take some good bits and leave the crap.
Daniel Gray
Roar Guru
Absolutely, Don. Then again, logic isn't CA's strong suit!
Daniel Gray
Roar Guru
Hi Don, it is fun to watch, but I would have preferred watching Warner and Maxwell to the crap platter of a top six served up by the selectors the other night.
Don Freo
Guest
The crazy thing about CA fixturing is that Tests in Australia sell out all 5 days always. Perth would easily have had more people go to 5 sold out days at the Test than a few ODIs and a token T20 or 2.
Don Freo
Guest
They are just as likely to win with this 7th tier side (Bollinger and Reardon?). T20 isn't a test of cricket skill...it is just a fun training drill. It doesn't really matter who wins, does it? It is just fun to watch. You'll still notice potential good bowlers or admire the versatility or eye of a batsman and, with the good players, good technique is always good technique, batting or bowling...but the result isn't worth 2 ounces of goats poop.
Daniel Gray
Roar Guru
I think it's a case of giving the BCCI whatever they want. If they only want four Tests, Sutherland and co are happy to oblige.
Daniel Gray
Roar Guru
Hi Egg, thanks for your comment. It appears Maxwell has been adding to the squad for tonight's game, but Warner and Johnson are still missing.
Daniel Gray
Roar Guru
Fair call. Let's hope CA don't push crowds away with their antics in the long term.
kevin
Guest
Seriously Daniel, what would it take to get a 5 test series next time instead of wall-2-wall T20? Could you and The Roar organise an online petition? How can we move them?