Baggy green chauvinism?

I think Weatherald and Wes Agar would do decently in the test team. They could replace Warner and Starc and probably do a better job atm.

While I applaud you for bringing an alternative that could be viable and has been (in theory) practiced by selectors across many sports through various age groups I feel like there are a number of areas where this may prove too difficult to implement or not provide the correct outcomes. For the home test series, what you are proposing would need to find a place in the already packed schedule, something that has been discussed with great vigour around these parts. A proposed probable's v possible's match and training camp would probably take the best 24 players away from first class cricket, reducing the quality of that product. 24 players averages out to 4 players per state team. The alternative is to get these players playing first class cricket and improving the quality and significance of that tournament. I am sure everyone who has played any sport can feel the intensity difference between real games and practice/selection games. Further to this point, would you propose having a squad of 24 travel overseas to aide selection? Or would you try to ensure that you have Australia A tours operating concurrently to be able to have ready made replacements? Both of these would be of great developmental benefit to our players but I am unsure of the costs and availability of opposition for these types of tours. The second flaw is taking more stock into these selection trial matches than the larger body of work given how fickle the nature of scoring runs and taking wickets can be. Most teams have only 2-3 places up for debate at any given time, so these full trials are probably being pretty closely replicated in current training camp settings. You can easily have an 11 player fielding group and 4 batsman rotating in a match simulation to get a good idea of a batsmen's form against your best bowlers. That said, there is a time and a place for these types of camps to improve our players I just dont feel that it should be used as a main selection tool and efforts should be on improving quality and timeliness of the first class system to better augment selection of the test team prior to and during the series.

hi Lance, I think the issue is the lack of a satisfactory explanation about selections, rather than a chauvanist approach to "pick & stick". Case in point has to be Joe Burns who, before the season started, I really rated, but even a fan like me realised he should not have been chosen for the First Test based purely on form. My issue with his selection was WHY and to this day, I'm sure none of us know the truth of the matter? On the other hand, selectors have made plenty of left-field calls over the years, though not recently. The overall problem now is trying to get a form line of different types of cricket then deciding how each format should be used in a selection process. You rate T20 form as a tool for Test selection and that's fair enough, but the actual selectors don't. I think they're even struggling with Shield form to be honest.

no doubt the selectors would come up with a raft of plausible excuses for not including him, but I just don't think they rate him at all. I reckon he's got far more future than Henriques and right now, I'd have had him going to South Africa because he's the better batsman and we hard;y need Henriques bowling, assuming Green can't play.

Hi Lance. Interesting and topical article mate. It would appear that the test team has come through a transitional period and thre's a few spots being vacated while a couple of young fellas try to secure theirs. I've never been much of a knee-jerk reactionist, especially to a test team. Not through lack of depth/options but consistency. Taking Starc as an example, sure he didn't have the best summer series but you wouldn't drop him for the sake of someone who 'may' be as good but no runs on the board to prove it or based on 4-over BBL. If the replacemennt doesn't carry shield/BBL form over, do they get dropped and bring Starc back in some confusing rotation system? I think Aust have enough talent that someone should force their way in (ala Puc and Green's shield form) rather than dropping A-class talent for potential.

Take a look at some of the Indian players who ended up getting a game or two recently. I know it's different for a touring but would the Aussie equivalent of Washington Sundar( who hasn't played a red ball game in 3 years) or Natarajan have been picked? Both are white ball specialists...

It really doesnt make sense that Maddinson's long term form has been ignored... or it does, and there is some bias?

I am really not sure if I agree or disagree with what you posted just here! :stoked:

I seem some merit in what you are saying, but I fear it short term form drops would disadvantage the team. However, I've long held a belief that more games between "possibles" and "probables" to fill in 'holes' would be valuable. You would give guys a chance to compete against our 'worlds best pace' attack and allow the selectors to exam form of the person picked, like they did before with those games before the last Ashes. Acknowledged, its not perfect .... but it seems a better final shifter. It wouldnt dislodge your Steve Smiths, but it would really test your Harris/Wade/Burns/Head/Pucovski/Green etc

Why? Because he averages 60 in various conditions against different opposition, that’s why. That’s why you don’t drop proven performers based on a handful of failures. If we followed your system then he would probably have been dropped after failing to score a run in the first two tests. Remind me of what happened in the third? That’s the difference between him and Burns, and that’s where your system comes unstuck imo.

Thanks for the newsflash Lance, you must have missed the part of my comment where I acknowledged that. My point is you don’t change a system which has seen success over any extended period because of a loss. I notice you haven’t addressed the possibility of a player such as Smith being left out of the next Ashes tour due to low scores in the ‘trial’ games. Any thoughts there or you don’t see that as being as issue?