The lost aura of the baggy green

When will anybody just congratulate India. All I see are excuses why Australia lost the series. A congratulations to Kohli and his team would be a good starting point. On another note, I think New Zealand would also beat Australia on current form.

There have been some woeful selections for too long now. Why aren't the selectors held accountable?

There is too much pressure to win and find a way to do that, so in turn there are more knee jerk selections. I'll put it out there that Harris was a a great selection and he will be there for many years if given the chance. The team also needs less Marsh's in it.

The difference was that Hayden had made a strong case for selection through his prolific run making in the Shield. He averaged 54.85 in the Shield over his career. He was given chances in the test team as early as 1994, but wasn't until the late 90s that he secured a regular spot. After being dropped he'd had back to the Shield and knock over a few more centuries. These days the Shield is just a nuisance to CA who would rather have four months of BBL. Is it any wonder out batsmen can barely last 50 balls. No chance of us having someone of Hayden's quality while BBL owns cricket in this country.

It's only a match and 3/4 since they had a great win at Perth. These things are cyclical.

Yes, bowling too short.. when they have been full and wide (aka loose ball) they have been driven. Are you really saying Pat Cummins has been bowling too full?

This is a pretty shallow piece of writing; lack of Shield and longer game cricket generally is the problem here, as has now been pointed out by innumerable pundits and other writers. CA is failing for falling into the money driven scheduling trap and not balancing it with proper investment in grass roots through to having a lively and sought after Sheffield Shield competition which attracts foreign players in their off season, like we used to, and like County Cricket still does.

The heart of your argument in this piece is summed up by this paragraph, "This also indicated the decrease of value that Australian cricket places in our special cap, instead of giving it to only the best cricketers in the country, they hand them to those that had the potential to be great and inevitably or even those who were undeserving of receiving the Baggy Green. You also mention Australia selectors "panicking", all of which makes no sense when you consider who has played for Australia for extended periods and what our track record has been like over this period. For a start, there is NOT ONE player to have been given a Baggy Green based on the sure & certain knowledge they will becme a great Test player. ALL players start off equal, being chosen exclusively on potential. Even Bradman was chosen on his big scores but thousands felt he shouldn't have been given a Test till he sorted out his technique. You've also decided some guys who were chosen were "undeserving of wearing a Baggy Green". How can you or anyone else know that unless they get Test time? You can think they're not good enough but then how could anyone get a Test if SOMEONE thought they weren't good enough. I for one thought the selectors were crazy to pick Shane Warne and after the Sydney Test, I thought he'd never be seen again. The only reason he stayed was the selectors (then) love affair with leg spin. Cricket now has exactly the same problems it has had since 1877; if guys don't perform within a Test or two, there are public calls for someone else to replace them. That only stops when you get an exceptional team, as we did 20 years ago. You want selectors to stick with players - how do they know who to stick with unless they give guys a chance but if they do that and the guys fail, where do they go from there? You also mentioned Langer & Hayden but failed to mention both guys going back to domestic cricket and dominating by weight of runs. Name one one bloke who's done that in recent years, apart from Phil Hughes? Finally, what difference does it make when Australia is winning series? Since 2008 which is when, according to you selectors started to panic, have been rated the best Test side in the world on numerous occasions and as recently as two years ago, were top of the pile in all 3 formats, having just won the World Cup. The aura if the Baggy Green is just fine thanks, we simply need to develop players with the right temperament and skill level to wear it.

Leading up to the Centenary Test in 1977, David Hookes made five centuries in the last three shield games - 5 tons in 6 hits, can you imagine it ? All we needed this year was a couple of players to make a single bloody shield ton and command selection. We got what we deserved !

Agreed - illogical selections are hurting results. Add to that fewer boys playing cricket over last 20 years. CA glosses over the figures by saying female participation is up but they don't feed into the male national team. Fewer players equals lower standards across grade and Shield cricket, hence averaging 35 is considered for test selections.

Exactly. Hayden was scoring truckloads of runs in Shield and County cricket. There's no-one really doing that now. I reckon selecting or re-selecting some players in their late 20s early 30s who have been through ups and downs and who are scoring decent runs is a good way to go, like Hayden and Martyn. Hussey was 30 when he debuted. So yeah, Joe Burns.

The selection policy has veen woeful the last 5 years or so. Some guys like Mitch Marsh keep getting picked even after they continually fail. Other players get a couple of tests then are banished for life. How on earth has Joe Burns not opened this series against India. He is statistically the current best opener in Australia and he has scored hundreds previously for Australia.

Way off the Mark. Matt Hayden got dropped and went back to shield rocket and made a stack of runs . So did Damien Martyn The players do not possess a FC record good enough to pick and stick

Bowling too short ? They’ve been too full and getting driven. No good bowling full when there’s no swing and movement in the pitch

Since the time Matt Hayden hung up his boots in the SCG Test of 2008-09 against South Africa, how many settled opening pairs did Australia have since then? Just two right, Katich-Watson for a year and a half and then Warner-Rogers for about 2 years and rest is all about innumerable, at times illogical rotations at the top. Apart from that, after Gilchrist’s retirement, only Brad Haddin was little stable in the team, otherwise it’s again rotation between Wade, P Nevill and T Paine. At times, I just wonder is this issue just limited to this or Australia indeed lack supply and monitoring of talent to replicate what their predecessors did? Or simply, are we just unfair to them by comparing them to their previous generations of cricketers who were kind of a once in lifetime bunch of players playing the game for extended length of time?

Another point is the the world teams are for the most also getting better. Long gone are the days of Australians smashing everyone. This isn't just a Cricket thing but in may sports. So Australlians will have to get used to it. Australia has had a good run in global sports but the times up. But the days of not only punching above their weight but dominating the Swimming, Rubgy, Golf, Tennis, Cricket and so on is gone. Countries have developed economically and structurally. But also their mindset. We;re seeing that clearly as India has come back hard at the Aussies and now prizes foreign wins. This is going to be the new normal. Even if Australia had Smith and Warner I dont think they would have won, I think it would have been a tied test. Australian sports people and fans should just accept the new normal and learn humility and enjoyment of the game not the mindset of "c'mon carnts lets smash em"

In the late 90s and early 00s Australia liked to back themselves to bat first and get 100 runs in the first session for less than 3 down. That simply may not be an option now. But these players need to have some confidence they will not be replaced after one game (Callum Fergusen anyone?). How many times has Kawaja been out and back into this side. How much more worse off would the team have been if he had just been left in the squad for the last two years without risk of being dropped? I’m guessing not much and possibly he would have gained some confidence knowing he was a part of the team. Maybe that is a strategy. For the life of me I don’t see what the Marsh borthers have really done to deserve the opportunities they have but if the selectors did decide to go with them, stick with them or whoever for an extended time. The batting isn’t great., granted. But the bowlers are just bowling too short. There was a time earlier this was case when the same issue was happening. Craig McDermott came in to assist and the fast bowlers started to pitch the ball up and inline or just outside off stump again. This allowed for the opportunity of the ball to swing more, enticing batsmen onto the drive and bringing the slip cordon into the game. It allowed the short ball at either the ribs or the shoulder height to be a weapon and not just a stock ball. They set fields to encourage the drive and if there were a few boundaries, so be it. Back the bowlers and the fields and build pressure to allow Lyon to attack from the other end after 25 overs. A team of batsmen, already low on confidence and having been in the field for 6 or more sessions, walking out with 450+ on the board are already defeated. Australia are just playing dumb. If Saker is responsible for the bowler’s game plan, needs to change strategy or be replaced as bowling coach. The batsmen have issues but they need help from the very commitment bowling squad to give them achievable targets until they find their feet. On a side note, I’ve been watching the live broadcast in India and Sunny Gavaskar and Michael Clarke have been at the helm with a rotated English ex player as the chair. Clarke has no time for a lot of current players and is not afraid to say it. There is not a coating of sugar in sight. He has also had a few choice words for a few selectors and strategies adopted by the team during the panel shows at intervals. I wonder if he would be as outspoken if he was on Australian Domestic TV?