In last night’s T20 in NZ, the turning point was Inglis getting out when batting at a run a ball ( nowhere near enough in a 215 run chase). David replaced him and scored 31 off 10 and the game was won. Perversely, NZ would have been better off deliberately dropping Inglis to keep him batting. This is the flip side of the equation the author outlines.

I think you’ve nailed it. People will always find things to criticise, but it achieves its aim of making for an objectively fair fixture, which isn’t currently the case. A fair fixture should be the AFL’s top priority in my opinion.

I like your bottom six option.

They could still have their wildcard round (which has the one merit of replacing the vacuum created by the bye before the finals); by playing 6th and 7th against 9th and 8th – to determine positions 6-8. Winners take spots 6 and 7, and the highest placed loser takes 8th spot.

I see Tubby has come out and questioned Murphy’s spot. A bit harsh on Murphy but I agree with Tubby here; if his captain doesn’t trust him enough to bowl in a 4th innings, then they should just rely on Head and Smith as the spin option. That frees up a spot to include both Marsh and Green.

And Davey’s last innings convinced me that he’s too far gone now – we can’t afford a walking wicket at the top of the order. Just shift everyone up one spot in the order.

And please bring in Neser – he’s a wicket-taker and can score runs. I thought he should have been in from the start.

It won’t happen, but I’d replace Warner, Murphy and Boland with Green, Hazlewood and Neser.

I think the author is a little confused about the Suns’ spine; or doesn’t watch the Suns. Day has played two games this year, and is not part of the spine. And Witts and Collins aren’t included.

Having said that, I think the author is right that finals is out of their reach this year. Pies and Port in the next fortnight will likely put paid to their finals aspirations. If they drop both those games as most expect, they would need to win six of their last seven, and that is most unlikely.

The problem though Mick, is that Stokes did go “half-pregnant with Bazball”, when he set defensive fields at the end and only attacked one batsman, and when both are tail-enders. It released the pressure-valve and allowed Cummins freedom.

That strategy has very, very rarely worked, and it didn’t work today.

Good article – thanks. The Suns are coming along nicely now. I had high expectations pre-season, but was demoralised after the pathetic performance in round one against the Swans.

Perversely, the injury to Miller seems to have galvanised the younger mids into delivering at a higher level – and this should stand them in good stead going forward. I am getting bullish about the Suns again; and predict a win against the Pies on the Gold Coast in Rd 16, which would set them up for their first ever finals.

The referendum seems to have two main functions (1) recognition of indigenous people in the constitution and (2) a voice to parliament on issues affecting indigenous people. Any criticism seems to focus on the 2nd; but that just seems so unremarkable to me. If the government wants to legislate on things affecting miners, doctors, retirees, even sports etc etc, they typically consult with them first. Why shouldn’t indigenous people be consulted on issues that affect them? And why shouldn’t sporting codes express their views of support (or otherwise) – everyone else seems to.

It is not coincidental that all (bar Bevan who is a contentious selection anyway, and Macgill for obvious reasons) were not from NSW.

Excellent points George. I see only ten locks for Round 1 (Miller, Witts, Collins, Rowell. N Anderson, Ellis, Ballard, King, Ainsworth and Chol). And it is very competitive for the remaining spots with around 25 others in the mix.

I’d expect Lukosius, Holman, Swallow and Lemmens to start Rd1, and Weller and Powell as well (if fitness allows).

This leaves only seven spots – with Flanders, Hollands, Davies, Fiorini, Humphrey, Sharp, Budarick, Jeffrey, Rosas, MacPherson, Graham and Farrar all good options, competing with newcomers like Long, Stein, Berry and J Anderson for a starting spot. And this doesn’t even include Day, Sexton, Atkins, Casboult, Constable and Andrew from Rd3.

This strong competition for spots is good of course; but these ‘fringe’ guys need to lift and demand a spot through performance, to help the team progress into finals in 2023.

I like the general thrust of the article, with biannual World Cup challenges. But I’d be even more radical, and schedule a Test World Cup over a five-six week period in one place every two years. It is the home and away approach which makes the logistics so difficult, and drawing out the competition over a two-year period impacts interest. People don’t attend test matches in the Windies, SA, Pakistan or even India and SL anyway – so playing the series in one area (eg. Aust and NZ, or England, or South Asia) would work in my view.

One way to manage this would be to have twelve countries (allowing two minnows through a qualification process), in four groups of three teams. Simultaneous round robin matches within each group over three weeks would produce four semi-finalists, with semi-final winners then playing off for the Cup. Other Test tours could still proceed as per individual country prerogatives. Of course there will be cons, but my view is that the pros will outweigh them. Some extra fodder for thought anyway.

Mike, I disagree that “Langerak’s omission is Arnie’s way of showing us he’s in charge”.

Arnie said he relied on Crawley, “who has a process and studies these goalkeepers and understands these goalkeepers enormously” for the goalkeeping spots. Crawley’s “long-standing relationships with Ryan, Vukovic and Redmayne” is more likely the reason for Langerak’s exclusion, than Arnie ‘showing us he’s in charge’.

I was on the SCG hill during that 84/85 final, and recall giving Clifford some lip when he was fielding at 3rd man. Told him he must have been the first NSW player picked, because no-one else in the team could possibly bat 7, not bowl and be a specialist 3rd man as well. He had the last laugh of course when he went on to win the match with his final day 83.

Nice story Stephen. My strongest memory of John Maguire is him dropping Peter Clifford (missed C&B) at the SCG in the 84/85 or 85/86 shield final. Clifford went on to a match-winning 83, when the Blues were on the ropes. If Maguire held that, Qld would have won their first shield final ten years earlier than they eventually did.

I agree with the general thrust of this article – play a 17 round-robin and then schedule the last 5 games on an objectively fair basis. This is just one way of selecting those last five games.

Another way would be to split the groups evenly based on ladder position (eg. 1, 6, 7, 12, 13 and 18 in one group; 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, 17 in another; and 3, 4, 9, 10, 15, 16 in the last.

A variation on author’s proposal of splitting the groups into top six, middle six and bottom 6 would be to have a 3-game repechage finals replacing the pre-finals bye to determine finals’ places 5, 6, 7, and 8 – played between 5th and 6th in the top group, 1st, 2nd and 3rd in the middle group and 1st in the bottom group. Winners go through to positions 5, 6 and 7 in the finals (highest placed winner gets the higher spot), and the highest placed loser takes the 8th spot.

[Remember the only reason for putting forward these suggestions is to make the fixture objectively fair, while retaining the 22-23 round season for commercial reasons.]

Good read Thom – thanks. It’s always nice to have a guy in the fwd line who can put points on the board like Secco. There are only 6 or 7 spots there though.

On Rankine, my sense is that he’s not looking to get out, or ‘go home’ as such, but that the Crows offer is very enticing. If he goes, it won’t feel like previous retention issues for the Suns; but more just a young guy making the best decision for himself.

From a Suns perspective, I think they erred in kicking with the wind (as they have shown all year that they are slow starters). And then the tag on Miller and the poor goal-kicking held them back too much.

On Stewie, I’m not convinced about him. He makes some strange team selection decisions (Eg. Wright and Brodie in the past), and on Saturday he left out any run and carry from the team (i.e. Markov, Fiorini and Atkins) on a windy Launceston day – doesn’t make sense to me. And he perseveres with Graham who provides the best avenue to goal for the opposition every week. He has the nature and personality to have the playing group on side, but has he got what it takes to be a good coach – I have serious doubts. And clearly he doesn’t have the motivational skills to have the team primed at the start of the game.

I agree with this Cameron.

Chris, you’ve included the Dogs in your analysis, but not the Suns – why? The Suns have the same number of wins as the Dogs, and have an easier draw coming home – and are currently only two wins behind the Cats in 4th spot. This week’s game against Port in Adelaide (which is a hard matchup for any team), will tell the tale of course.

Stewie too high as well IMO. I’m a Suns supporter and like Stewie, but he hasn’t achieved enough to warrant 3rd spot. There are a lot of high draft picks at the Suns, and they should be delivering. I’m yet to be convinced that they are not improving despite Stewie, rather than because of him. A bit like the Giants, who I thought made finals on the back of their talented list despite Cameron, rather than because of him.

Suns don’t warrant their normal derision so far this year. They’ve played six of the top nine, which will be seven after this weekend. Three home games have seen losses to Melb (close) and Bris, and a win against the Blues. Apart from their normal GWS debacle in Sydney, their away games have been ok as well. Saints at Marvel are always tough, and the Umps butchered them in the Pies game at the MCG. Hopefully they can compete OK with Freo this week at Metricon.

Agree completely Peter. As one commentator said on the weekend “every goal of the year, started out as an unrealistic attempt”.

OFFSIDERS is crap since Whately left. I gave it up after last year’s Shield final when they spent seven minutes on an obscure sports administrator losing her job and not one second on the Shield final.

Charlie – I’m not sure the Hawks warrant 10th spot, having only beaten 17th and 18th – and surely the Giants shouldn’t be 5 spots below the Suns after flogging them 10 days ago. Otherwise looks good.

Jake – disposal efficiency for half back flankers is typically much higher than the AFL average. Defenders nearly always lead in that category. However, I have some sympathy for your selection, as no Suns player (except maybe Casboult) improved his repuation in that match.

Love this Tom. Less rules are better – and the simpler it is is also better. Now if they could only make the HTB rule simple!