Does Cricket Australia know its Test cricket strategy?

Sure, some players will struggle with switching formats more than other. Though with Smith the suggestion seems to be that a big part of his struggles in getting his head right related to him really struggling with the long term bubble after bubble he'd been living in. Some cope with that better than others. The last Ashes in England showed how Smith can get his game right for tests straight from playing white ball cricket and with no tests for ages. So I don't think it was switching formats and not playing first class cricket that was the issue for him. But again, this season isn't a good one to go on. In a normal season the last Shield matches in the first half finish in the second week of December. And the selectors know very clearly who should come in if they need someone else for the latter part of the series. As for "giving a guy out of form in tests somewhere to try and work on whatever ails him", they get that chance, in the second half of the Shield season. Unless you really think that playing one Shield match should allow them to completely turn their form around and get straight back to the test team, there is no need for playing first class games straight away. In fact, sometimes switching formats can be the best thing to get someone out of a poor form rut. Clear the mind a bit, and then once that's over hopefully be in a better place when the Shield starts back up again. Look at the Joe Burns case. He couldn't buy a run in the Shield matches to start the season. I think the best thing for him was to play some BBL before he had to face a red-ball again. When it comes to picking the team, in general, we want the selectors to have the best chance of seeing players form before the series even starts and picking the right team from the start. And if there's an iffy incumbent who they want to give a couple of tests to, then they get dropped, other players have only just finished playing Shield cricket. So we can agree to disagree, but I think the schedule works pretty well. And I don't think any of the recent struggles of the Australian team can at all be blamed on the domestic cricket scheduling.

I think a lot of guys struggled to cope with the changes of format Chris. Steve Smith is the obvious example of a batsman who took forever to get his "Test head" on. I also think the issue is also about knowing which guys are right to go in red ball cricket AND giving a guy out of form in Tests somewhere to try and work on what ever ails him. At best, if he a player has to come into the Test side for the 4th or 5th Tests, selectors have maybe some white ball form to go by, or weeks old red ball form. In other words, they'd be guessing even more so than they do at present.

I don't necessarily get this need people see for having players playing Shield constantly during the test series. We saw this summer how a number of players from the Indian side managed to perform straight away in test cricket despite no matches of any sort of a long period of time. We saw so many players come out of the test squad, who hadn't played any cricket since the Shield matches ended, manage to switch formats and do really well straight away. These days, players are getting more and more used to switching formats, and knowing what they need to do to come in and perform when needed. In a normal Shield season, the first part of the Shield finishes around the second week of December, then a break of a bit less than 2 weeks before the BBL starts. There isn't that much time between the last Shield matches in a normal year and the Sydney test starting. I think it's more just a case of people clutching at straws when searching for reasons the Australian team isn't performing as well as they'd like. The main answer is that they maybe just aren't as good as we'd like. But I don't think you can blame the schedule for that.

Definitely, I don't think they ever needed to expand it to a full home and away season. I think the season length at the start of playing each other once, plus a second game against their one "rival" team, was a good length for it. If they are going to keep the full home and away season, they need to make a lot more double and triple headers so they can compress the season much shorter.

Agreed, but still think the BBL season is excessively long now.

Agree Micko, however they have to maximise a shrinking summer cricket calendar to generate grass roots funds. The problem is they get greedy and believe a longer tournament is a more profitable asset. As usual the broadcaster is the most important group in the discussion rather than the spectator. Fans will watch games on delay from different parts of the country, will find what channel its on, will watch games back to back.......if the teams are quality! Drag a tournament out for 2 1\2 months and you have international drawcards leaving after a few games, our International white ballers leaving to play overseas right on finals and kids back at school in some states and parents back at work, not looking to be driving home at 11pm mid week. They end up killing the golden goose, while the broadcaster does exactly what Seven is doing now; blaming the game for poor quality even though they agreed to the format when bidding for rights! Whadda they care, get out of the contract and try and convince Supercars to put on a New Year Classics to fill 3 hours on their 'main channel'! A complete rethink is needed at Jolimont. An intensive tournament with maximum star player involvement for the whole tournament, double headers and the final every year on Australia Day regardless of which venue it's at. CA needs to own summer again!

All legitimate ideas for the drawing board, but what I meant was if we're looking for long form replacement for lost form or injury, then doesn't an out of form Head (Strikers drawcard) go to those red ball games to find form? Isn't a Shield in form Riley Meredith, on the edge of selection, playing those red ball games, rather than turning up for the Hurricanes? Shouldn't the Test 12th man be immediately released to play those games, while a waiter from the Legends Bar takes out the drinks and the physio takes out dry gloves? There's already talk of 2 or 3 separate Australian teams with specific coaches. If the schedule gets any more crowded then they'll have 2 Aussie sides away and the BBL all happening at once anyway. Why not take control of that now? CA wants it's cake and eat it too, then it's about time they thought outside the square to achieve it.

So many people seem to be having a go at CA's scheduling based on what is a massively disrupted schedule because of COVID. Constantly pushing this rubbish about "needing to be playing Sheffield Shield while the tests are on". In a normal season we have probably 3 rounds of Shield cricket before the first test and then 2 while the first couple of tests are being played. That's actually pretty good. Going back a few more years the Shield started at a more similar time to the tests and the test players rarely played any Shield games. That was much worse. This season showed it well despite all the disruptions meaning we didn't get the normal compliment of Shield games. Green and Pucovski got to stake their claims for the test team in the Shield matches. Burns showed his horrid form but injuries to Warner and Pucovski, and everyone just loving Joe Burns meant the selectors went with him anyway. Yet there were still people suggesting that when Burns was dropped it would have been better if he could have gone back to play Shield matches. Did these people not see how badly he did in every first class game he played? If anything, getting to free up playing T20 was probably the best thing for him. And the idea that a player is going to get dropped, go back to play Shield and earn his spot back before the end of the test series is crazy. And Shield matches in March are actually really good. Most years we have test tours overseas during the winter. We haven't this year, but normally we would, and these games give a great opportunity to push for a spot in a touring squad. In years where we don't have any tours they can be a good lead in for trying to snag a county contract. And suggesting that these results are meaningless leading into next year is wrong. One thing most people want to see from a player is that good performances aren't just a bit of a form blip, but sustained good play. To be able to come back next season and keep playing well like last year, even after a break, is a good sign that you are actually good, and not just "having a one-off good season". If a player hasn't done much previously, but then scores some runs in the Shield matches to start the season, they will be someone to keep an eye on but need more time. If they piled on the runs in the second half of the Shield season, then came out playing just as well to start the next Shield season, then they become a serious prospect to play in that summers test series. This season was messed about by Covid. But overall having 5-6 Shield rounds pre-BBL and 4-5 plus final after actually works pretty well in many, many ways and has a lot going for it.

India has the WC this year from mid October to mid November. It's going to make a real mess of of cricket summer. We host in 2022.

In future the Australian selectors need to prioritise test cricket for the sake of continuity for the domestic players is a must. Priority number 1 when a touring team comes to our shores like for instance India they bring with them a 2nd Eleven to play our best young potentials throughout the test series overlapped & played in regional territories in our capital cities! Only then will our cricket nation flourish for future generations. If we go down the path of regulating domestic 4day cricket to bits & pieces then we are doomed.

CA don't prioritise Shield cricket because it can't make them as much money as the BBL. It's all about money to them! :thumbdown:

The next T20 world cup is to be hosted by Australia, no?

Is this an episode of "$chi++s Creek"?

The intention is the top players don't play shield. They are doing so now only because the SA series was cancelled

Do what I suggested and add an extra import to each BBL team I2I.

Not sure I2I. I'm happy to stand corrected, but I thought there were more than enough guys to make up a squad of 24, given more than a few blokes didn't play any BBL at all. Throw in some up & coming under 19 players and I reckon there'd be enough for a couple of teams, certainly a better standard than Club cricket. I also suspect it could be done if the number of red ball games was limited to say 3 or 4 tops, the games were 3 day affairs ( they're practice matches after all) and they were scheduled during the day when no BBL games were on. This issue is exactly the same in England. I was reading some comments from Joe Root who talked about County cricket being 14 rounds, 8 of which are squeezed into the the start of the season before the end of May, then the other 6 rounds in September, with the rest of their summer dominated by white ball games. Seems like the ECB doesn't think outside the box either.

Ahh, gotcha, complete switch off required.

I'm the bowler 's end umpire I2I.

That's dedication to the site, Bernie! No tactics discussed in the break?

CA won’t do that Paul, as it takes 36 (including the actual 12 playing Tests) of the best players from a 70 player domestic comp out of the BBL. Seven would tear up their rights agreement and CA would have to go cap in hand to another FTA broadcaster to ensure coverage and avoid fines from Federal Government. The length of the BBL has to be seriously looked at and more games played simultaneously. They aren’t all blockbusters, nor even an attractive viewing option in other states. Ten years of data has to be worth something now. The Poms have been able to play County and Sunday League, etc for decades. CA needs to give that a test run in Dec – Jan and coordinate the draw as much as possible with State players and Franchise games. Baseball in the US plays double headers from the same sides, albeit with some player changes, but with the BBL changing rules every year they could accommodate that. CA doesn’t think outside the box.