Wicked, the summer of cricket has just started. We’ve got one over on the Kiwis, yet the anguish of a failed Ashes campaign is still burning.
So it’s time for you to put together your XI. It’s obvious that you’re a wealth of knowledge and Mark Waugh is summoning the courage to call you up and tag you in.
If you’re new to the field of armchair selecting, here are a few key pointers on how to make your selections.
Ignore the fact the selectors watch more cricket than you
This is the first and most important aspect. Don’t let the fact that Waugh and co attend nearly every match, training session and boot camp they can cram into their schedule, you watched the first session of every Ashes Test before falling asleep on the couch.
You didn’t pay attention to the Aussies playing in county cricket or the A Series in India, but your sketchy memory of last year’s Sheffield Shield means you’re on top of all players and their current form.
Only pay attention to the stats which support your selection
Who cares that he got a bunch of bad decisions and played on some tough wickets, he didn’t average 50 over the last 12 months so you’ll be damned if you let that calibre of batsman in your side! Instead you’ll make sure you pick the player whose average is buoyed by a 200* on a dead pitch.
You’ll also lay claim to the bowler with an impressive average, and pay no attention to the fact that he hasn’t picked up the wicket of a genuine batsman since Malaysian Airlines had all their planes in the sky.
Bring your state bias into it
What did the NSW player get for Christmas? A baggy green!
Ah, fresh. You’re right though, the normal selectors are deliberately omitting your beloved players because of a deep-seeded conspiracy to have your state banished from the Commonwealth. This step is best if you tie it in with the above statistical analysis.
Throw a Hail Mary
It’s important to include a completely random selection. This way your fellow armchair Sselectors will assume that you know something they don’t, and that you’re on a high plane of cricketing knowledge.
“Yep, only played two List A games, but he’s the next big thing, mark my word.”
Pick a left-of-field spinner
Admittedly, this is similar to the Hail Mary, but no armchair side is complete without a ‘what the fudge’ selection of a tweaker. You’ll justify your selection by saying: “Well Warnie only played 10 months of first-class cricket before making the Australian side.”
They say the two most powerful positions in Australia are that of the prime minister and the captain of the Australian cricket team. If that’s the case, the two most criticised positions in Australia must be that of the treasurer and incumbent Australia Test spinner.
Reference your own cricket ‘career’
The Australian selectors don’t know what you know. That time as opener for the Lambton fourth-grade side taught you so much about the rigours of cricket. You’ve analysed the players, running your immaculate lens across them.
Don’t forget to mention how you once met an Aussie cricketer, and how that experience altered your perception of the selection process. However, when you tell the story, just make sure you just call him ‘Chappell’, and don’t clue anyone into the fact it was actually Trevor.
So there you go, follow these six steps and you’ll have crafted your Numpty XI before you know it. That way you can interject in every forum for the remainder of the Australian summer.
Just make sure you don’t actually display your full XI anywhere. That way it can remain fluid enough that you can lay claim to any other successful selections.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Certainly the WA clique of Arthur, Invers, Wally Edwards, Don Freo and anyone with Marsh as their last name seemed very influential.
Armchair Expert
Guest
Not to mention the "youth policy", which was apparently a conspiracy to get rid of Katich.
Bearfax
Guest
And rightly so.
Bearfax
Guest
Hey there Rellum. You're wrong about me not seeing Shield cricket. I was at a match in 1974...or was it '75. Rained all day unfortunately..
Bearfax
Guest
Them foibles are cunning creatures and they dont let up. They get inside us all and cause havoc. Foibles are probably causing climate change and sea level rises. Little wonder they can influence cricket selectors.
Jason Hosken
Roar Guru
'foibles' - bl00dy tops. Surely a suitable name for Lyons' next mystery ball...."straight through him, Williamson's been foibled!!!
Brett McKay
Expert
BOOM! I can see this being an oft-referenced piece during selection debate from here on. Great read, Gareth..
Bearfax
Guest
OO. That hurt Rellum. Do it again. I'm a masochist
Rellum
Roar Guru
I thought he trick was to never watch state cricket but get on cricketinfo, pull one or two stats then get back on this site and argue day after day after day the same thing with the same stats over and over again.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Something bizarre like that. The Arthur, Clarke, Invers era will take some topping No offence to Rob but the greatest 9 in test cricket history and follow up 0 and 0 were a small mercy.
The Bush
Roar Guru
Wasn't that hilarious. From memory wasn't there some conspiracy that we were protecting Hughes from South Africa so that he could have an easy reentry to the Test team via Sri Lanka?
Bearfax
Guest
Amusing as your article seems, some of your suggestions are in fact worthy of thought. Firstly as The Bush pointed out, think of the selections that have been made by this group who decides who plays tests, and who they have picked. No need to identify them again over recent years but it seems that often many on the Roar have a better idea of who should be chosen than the selectors. Sometimes being too close to the action results in the old 'not seeing the forest for the trees' adage. Too often they seem to become enamoured by the short term and the short form cricket in selections when it would, I would have thought, have been better to step back and look at the big picture. Secondly, though stats should not be the only element in selection, it surely should be the first thing you look at. Of course one has to consider age, experience, injury and recent form (over no less than 2 years though), but I think selectors tend to be enamoured by impressions and short term performances, rather than averages acquired over many years of development. Consistency, not the spectacular is surely what you should be looking at. In respect of state biases, the point is I think there is a tendency for some nepotism with selectors. Some players from some states seem to be ignored or given token support, where as others from other states get a free ride. It also seems to be more than state politics. The number of times top cricketers who have been selectors and coaches, who promote obvious favourites, who dont have the credentials they should have for test cricket, makes one wonder what biases the present selectors also have. And quite frankly the selectors have done the Hail Mary bit with some selections that you wonder where they've come from and your suspicions that they've selected a turkey is confirmed when the person selected disappears back into the ether. Selectors are not gods. They have the same foibles as we all have. Certainly they have been great players but does that make them great coaches or selectors. That's a different role requiring different skills. The assumption that because someone has been good at something must therefore be automatically good at something else related to it does not follow. I think we've all met for example people who are very good at something, but are hopeless in teaching about the skill. Unwise I think trying to put these guys on a pedestal in general terms, just because of their undoubted skill in one area
Joel
Roar Rookie
There's nothing wrong with demanding the selection of James Muirhead for the test team. Trust me, he's quality.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
I'll raise you a Quiney Bush
The Bush
Roar Guru
As funny as this is, what is truly said is when you think about how much time these selectors spend watching cricket and yet they pick players like Doolan. Makes you wonder...
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Compared to other sites we are genii comrades but I qualify on all counts.
TJ
Guest
Absolutely brilliant !