Aussie selectors have twisted, now they must stick

When a cricketing story the equivalent of an open goal or unguarded try line appears the obvious temptation is to get stuck right in.

Faf du Plessis’ ghastly crime of shining a cricket ball while enjoying a minty piece of confectionary was so heinous it’s a wonder he’s actually allowed to still play the game and it deserves to be commented on.

So here’s my take: Nonsense.

An act that has taken place for as long as sweets have been about and one that, in truth, makes little, if any, difference to how a ball behaves.

Old wives tales, by their very nature, are seldom based on truth and if any proof is out there as to the benefit of doing a du Plessis then I’m all ears.

Every senior team I’ve played competitively for, both professionally and recreationally, has partaken in a bit of sweet-based polishing and umpires at every senior level I’ve played competitively at have shown their displeasure at such behaviour by asking the chief shiner if they could have a toffee.

That’s how devilish such acts are viewed and that’s the contempt it deserves.

It must be a slow time of year for the pen pushers in Chateau ICC if they’re using their administrative muscle to seek out such flagrant abuses of the game’s code of conduct.

And if every breach of the said code is to be policed then there are a few players out there who better have a quiet word with their respective bank managers.

But enough about Faf and his mints. The main topic of conversation this week should have been, and will be again once the winds of idiocy have blown through Adelaide, the brave new world of the Australian team.

Change was needed after the Hobart debacle and very few predicted the status quo being maintained; but I think the phrase you’re looking for rhymes with ‘clucking bell’.
Hands up who foresaw such radical surgery being administered? I certainly didn’t.

Two or three changes maybe, add a bit of freshness where required and look to steer the ship back onto a more considered and less volatile path but five axed and four uncapped new boys?

For want of a better football chant: ‘Are you England in disguise?’

For years and years the selectors over here worked on the principle that the only way to build a successful side and forge a good run of results was to swap players about willy nilly and hope for the best.

Looking back, some of the decisions taken were so baffling that it’s a wonder the men in white coats weren’t sent out to round the madmen up.

And here we are, a few years down the road with the disease having travelled 12,000 miles and landed in South Australia.

This may be a touch facetious and it could well be that throwing the national team into the blender and seeing what gets spat out is the way to go but the third Test should be viewed with a slightly apprehensive mindset.

A top six including three debutants is taking a gung-ho attitude to the extreme. Add to the melting pot a wicket keeper who is far from Mr Consistent and you have the recipe for a right mess.

But, but… why shouldn’t it pay off? What was in place before wasn’t working and if you’re going to wipe the slate clean then you might as well do it with industrial strength bleach.

Two-nil down with one to play prevents a unique opportunity for gambling, and if it all works out horribly then ultimately, with the series already gone, it doesn’t really matter.

What does matter is that those who have stuck their heads above the parapet keep them there and ignore the urge to duck if the criticism starts flying.

The four Tests left in the summer should be a good sized sample for seeing whether or not Matthew Renshaw, Peter Handscomb and Nic Maddison are cut out to be international cricketers and they should be left to get on with it.

Australia are knee deep in the manure at the minute but many a flower has sprung from such inauspicious surroundings.