There's method in the selection madness

By Alec Swann / Expert

On the one hand, the Australia squad for the upcoming World T20 appears to be something of a kneejerk reaction to underwhelming recent performances.

Players who, very recently, were appearing in the T20 internationals against India have been told not to bother packing their suitcases, while others – some who haven’t got a T20 cap to their name – are preparing to have their passports stamped.

Add to the melting pot the name of Usman Khawaja – who has spent more time being overlooked than he has had time on the limited overs field – and it appears there has been no real long-term planning at all.

This is the kind of behaviour I thought the England selectors of the not too distant past had patented and one can only hope they’ve got their lawyers on the case.

A major tournament and weeks before you’ve no idea what constitutes your best squad, let alone team?

Oh yes, I almost forgot, and you demote your captain as well just for good measure. Bravo, that really is good work.

More cricket:
» Aussie rookies face litmus Tests in New Zealand
» Have the Australian selectors at last got it right for the T20 World Cup?
» Nevill the shock inclusion as Australia announce World T20 squad
» The Liebke Ratings: New Zealand vs Australia third ODI
» Watch: New Zealand retain Chappell-Hadlee Trophy amid controversy
» Scorecard: New Zealand vs Australia third ODI

But hang on. As much as the selectors have placed their heads squarely in the sights of those all too willing to offer criticism, there are mitigating factors.

First is the schedule. From Test matches to one-day internationals to T20 to one-day internationals to T20.

Half of the time I wonder if the players have time to think let alone know what format of the game they are supposed to be playing.

If succession planning is your forte then good luck working your way through that minefield, especially when a number of your best players play in all three disciplines.

Short of becoming a T20 specialist (or getting yourself sacked from the national team, as it amounts to the same thing) it is hard to see how the likes of David Warner, Khawaja, Steve Smith and Mitchell Marsh can adequately prepare for such a tournament.

That leads directly on to the second point of the number of T20 internationals that are scheduled.

I don’t know about the other nations but England played five T20 internationals in 2015. They might as well not have bothered. Against New Zealand and Australia they played one apiece in contests that amounted to nothing more than glorified exhibitions.

There’s a certain irony in the format having a global tournament, demanding that it is taken seriously, yet in between events it is given the token treatment, as though it needs to be scheduled rather than it should be.

Is it any wonder that, with workloads already excessive for the marquee players, the teams fielded have to be chopped and changed? You really can’t have your cake and eat it.

Thirdly, there is no exact science to 20-over cricket. That is the case for both Tests and ODIs as well but the shorter the game, the more of a lottery it is and therefore the desire to tinker is more pronounced, as the Australia squad suggests.

Until the day comes where each format is considered a completely separate entity and the teams picked are exempt from infiltration from the two cousins, then you have to accept a certain lack of cohesion.

Alternatively – and yes, I know this is pie in the sky – a structure could be formulated where the World T20 has a window of its own, leaving the individual nations to prepare properly.

But less about what is unlikely to ever occur and back to the present.

Of the 15 selected by Rod Marsh and his mates, they aren’t that far off the mark. Granted, you could swap one or two for a couple of different names but it’s hardly as if world-beating players have been omitted.

There looks to be a decent balance with, importantly, enough variation in the bowling, and Peter Nevill’s inclusion is a tick in the box for those who prefer to see wicketkeeping skills favoured in place of batting ability.

With a record at the tournament that is unbecoming for a powerhouse of the game, it’s hardly as if the selectors are entering from a position of strength.

So hold fire with the barbs, and wait and see what is produced on the subcontinent in March. It might not be all that bad.

The Crowd Says:

2016-02-11T11:02:52+00:00

Tom

Guest


Unless you're Michael Clarke one of the greats of Australian cricket. Once again the selectors show they make it up as they go along.

2016-02-11T06:02:22+00:00

Don Freo

Guest


...or not.

2016-02-11T05:34:04+00:00

Tom

Guest


Smith is even less proactive and a worse captain than Finch.

2016-02-11T02:58:10+00:00

NYCric

Guest


T20 is a dynamic model of cricket where captaincy doesn't mean too much. Playing skills should come first and captaincy relegated to a ceremonial position. Having said that, I'm not sure Smith is T20 material. I'd play SMarsh, Finch, Khawaja, Lynn and Head ahead of him.

2016-02-10T22:52:53+00:00

Don Freo

Guest


Many are dismissive if they have taken a set against someone. It's a bit Little Britain..."I don't like thaaat one."

2016-02-10T20:43:25+00:00

Euphonius Polemic

Guest


Many commenters here seem dismissive of batting achievements in Australian conditions of recent years, Don.

2016-02-10T13:57:30+00:00

Don Freo

Guest


Is that where he came from? I thought he might be David Lord's other name.

2016-02-10T13:55:38+00:00

Don Freo

Guest


His BBL5 average of 72 off 5 innings indicate he may not be in decline. I'd suggest his last two seasons of all cricket indicate he is on the rise.

2016-02-10T11:54:40+00:00

Matth

Guest


Yeah good point.

2016-02-10T11:53:55+00:00

Matth

Guest


Absolutely correct

2016-02-10T11:52:21+00:00

Matth

Guest


Back to cricinfo for you mate

2016-02-10T11:51:06+00:00

Matth

Guest


India are better because their best players play the IPL each year, their board has created that window. So the Australians are much less experienced. Our test and ODI play few BBL games

2016-02-10T11:48:49+00:00

Matth

Guest


Smith did captain his BBL team to a title. Finch never captained anything (I think) apart from the few T20 Internationals.

2016-02-10T11:43:56+00:00

Matth

Guest


It was the weird selection. I don't necessarily think Boyce is muc better than Zampa, if at all, but if Zampa was a serious option then why play only Boyce over the past 14 months

2016-02-10T11:41:37+00:00

Matth

Guest


I think one of the charms of the T20 World Cup is that the teams aren't experienced together. I would actually like T20 restricted to domestic leagues apart form the World Cup

2016-02-10T11:20:42+00:00

Euphonius Polemic

Guest


Of players who've played more than 100 T20's I think Chris Gayle is the only one who averages more than Shaun Marsh. Could be deceiving though as his (Marsh's) IPL figures seem to be on the decline.

2016-02-10T09:26:14+00:00

Broken-hearted Toy

Guest


I meant he's not undroppable now he's not skipper. But Smith IS undroppable now that he is skipper and his recent form in short formats isn't brilliant.

2016-02-10T05:30:57+00:00

Tana Mir

Roar Rookie


Agree as well. I was hoping against hope they would pick both, but commons sense is not that common.

2016-02-10T04:52:55+00:00

Bugs

Guest


Exactly Ronan. 4 right arm medium quicks + MMarsh and Watson, but no to 2 leggies... WTF? Boyce should have been there. Happy with Zampa getting a gig, and to be honest don't even mind Agar's selection despite his lack of compelling bowling form, but there HAD to be three spinners in the squad, plus Maxwell.

2016-02-10T04:47:37+00:00

Don Freo

Guest


Finch was rarely proactive. He doesn’t captain well.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar