I think this sort conjecture only demonstrates why it's difficult for anyone to declare themselves unwell, and why it takes courage. Pull a hammy then recover, and no one will second guess whether you're ready. I'd hate to think that this is a constant Pucovski or anyone else has to be contend with. It could be a disincentive to declare yourself mentally unfit, so as to receive any support or time away you need. This sort of conjecture can allow stigma about mental health issues to continue, which ultimately helps no one. Cricketers should judge Pucovski on his batting, and leave assessment of his mental state to him and his medical treaters. Just as they would if he pulled a hammy.
He was ready both last times too. It wasn't until after he was selected and reality or pressure hit that he pulled the pin. It's a bit easier to perform without pressure and scrutiny and he might say he's right but perhaps the selectors want a bit more evidence.
Burns 5 completed innings for 57 runs at shield level this season. No way should he be picked in first test unless there is a dramatic improvement in form. It’s a no brainer.
Insensitive would be a rare description of me. I'm being realistic and noting that he has twice pulled the pin on selection after the event. Good on him. But it behooves the selectors to be doubly sure that he is in the right frame of mind before tossing him into the cauldron. I would strongly argue that I'm being one of the more sensitive to his situation than others who are ready to throw him into the fire without a bit of caution and due process.
Apart from the odd substitution rugby coaches have about as much input during games as cricket coaches do but I don’t see anyone complaining about Craig Bellamy or Dave Rennie having direct input into selection. What’s the difference? You’re also making some pretty big assumptions about the amount of influence Langer wields. Where’s the evidence that he has carte blanche to make selection decisions? That suggests he ignores the input from the other 2 selectors. Who’s to say they don’t simply agree with him, or after a discussion it’s a 2-1 vote in favour? I’m not saying he should have the last word on everything, but he should certainly have a seat at the table. Every other major sporting organisation on the planet seems to have figured that one out, great to see CA finally catching up.
His average when including the notoriously difficult batting series in UK is 5 runs higher than Burns. and he has SS runs this summer. So no, I don't think so
Clarke's take on where Pucovski's mental state isn't really the basis of that decision though is it. He knows more than me or you but less than anybody close to him
I don't know why the coach would be commenting so publicly this far out from the first test. I don't recall this happening too often before. It's just getting bigger than Ben Hurr and it's really annoying to be honest.
You're being a touch insensitive. I dont't know what the nature of Pucovski's emotional problems were but full credit to him for telling the selectors he wouldn't be up to the challenge of international cricket - this is surely unprecedented. What if it was depression? Depression is a terrible thing and it has nothing to do with being mentally weak.
I agree with everything you say about a coach not being a selector, but Tim Zoehrer is not a good example. Apparently Zoehrer didn’t read the situation right. Simmo in his role was looking for hard working types who would leave no stone unturned in their ongoing development as players and Zoehrer was a lazy player who didn’t want to put in the hard work to match his talent. There is also a story that he had a crack at Simmo’s daughter, and it was supposedly the bragging rather than the actual deed that greatly annoyed the people that mattered.
I don’t really agree with the underlying premise that a cricket coach needs that level of involvement. Langer might aspire to being a Ferguson/Mourinho/Lombardi/Malthouse kind of managerial presence, but in cricket the coach isn’t pulling the levers once the game has started. The coach or manager really is under pressure when they’re coaching a whole strategy, making all the personnel changes mid-match and trading talent. We also know that cricket coaches do have a role in selecting teams, as Simpson obviously did. Zoehrer was very upfront about being fired by the coach, as opposed to dropped by the selectors. I don’t think Langer would be denied the ability to create an environment which fosters confidence of the playing group if he weren’t a selector. But being coach shouldn’t give him carte blanche to make it a restricted zone, for “incumbents”. He could have an impact, without being ultimately the final arbiter as he seems to be. George Bailey may be off watching Shield cricket, but if the selector/coach isn’t interested he’s probably pretty inconsequential. Bringing Warner into the conversation wasn’t great either. I don’t think independent selectors would ever threaten the career or livelihood of a coach by picking someone against the coach’s wishes, that seems a bit far-fetched. Other than Mickey Arthur, everyone’s had a good run in the job. Senior coaches are in demand, look at Arthur now. The squad may not be flushed with 25 names worth of talent, but all you need are a few good ones. Playing Pucovski or Burns is hardly going to affect Langer’s career, but it will theirs. But hey, I realize that Langer is going to be coach and selector for a good while yet. I just don’t buy that Langer needs to have the last word on everything for the whole system to work.
:thumbup: And fair point, but in the same vein, I'd want to see more evidence of Pucovski being okay in the mind first. Some steel demonstrated by taking a disappointment in his stride and still scoring runs.
I guess we will know soon enough who is in and who is not. Maybe even sooner with the A side playing. You would have to think that the selectors will be watching with interest.
By the way did Burns only get back in after Pucovski dropped himself due to illness a season , or two , ago?
But all good.. its Australia I will be supporting
Clarke was also so.. 'worried about Will's mental state' when he read 'reports' of Warner's partner 'preference'. If Pucovski is so brittle that this worries him he shouldn't be playing test cricket in the first place. Tougher trials await than some obscure comments from a team mate.
True, no-one is above form, but hard to get in and out is exactly how it should be. You should have for force your way in and to keep it shouldn't equate to constant stress. Make exchanges easy devalues the role and position. Burn's test form is good enough to start the series, obviously he is under notice, but sack him and people are suddenly walking on eggshells, not good.
Ace
Roar Rookie
:thumbup: Stay positive.
Jero
Roar Rookie
I think this sort conjecture only demonstrates why it's difficult for anyone to declare themselves unwell, and why it takes courage. Pull a hammy then recover, and no one will second guess whether you're ready. I'd hate to think that this is a constant Pucovski or anyone else has to be contend with. It could be a disincentive to declare yourself mentally unfit, so as to receive any support or time away you need. This sort of conjecture can allow stigma about mental health issues to continue, which ultimately helps no one. Cricketers should judge Pucovski on his batting, and leave assessment of his mental state to him and his medical treaters. Just as they would if he pulled a hammy.
DP Schaefer
Roar Rookie
He was ready both last times too. It wasn't until after he was selected and reality or pressure hit that he pulled the pin. It's a bit easier to perform without pressure and scrutiny and he might say he's right but perhaps the selectors want a bit more evidence.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Fine DPS but it seems Pucovski himself feels ready this time.
PeteB
Roar Rookie
Burns 5 completed innings for 57 runs at shield level this season. No way should he be picked in first test unless there is a dramatic improvement in form. It’s a no brainer.
DP Schaefer
Roar Rookie
Insensitive would be a rare description of me. I'm being realistic and noting that he has twice pulled the pin on selection after the event. Good on him. But it behooves the selectors to be doubly sure that he is in the right frame of mind before tossing him into the cauldron. I would strongly argue that I'm being one of the more sensitive to his situation than others who are ready to throw him into the fire without a bit of caution and due process.
Marty
Roar Rookie
Apart from the odd substitution rugby coaches have about as much input during games as cricket coaches do but I don’t see anyone complaining about Craig Bellamy or Dave Rennie having direct input into selection. What’s the difference? You’re also making some pretty big assumptions about the amount of influence Langer wields. Where’s the evidence that he has carte blanche to make selection decisions? That suggests he ignores the input from the other 2 selectors. Who’s to say they don’t simply agree with him, or after a discussion it’s a 2-1 vote in favour? I’m not saying he should have the last word on everything, but he should certainly have a seat at the table. Every other major sporting organisation on the planet seems to have figured that one out, great to see CA finally catching up.
Derek Murray
Roar Rookie
In principle, I agree but I assume Langer was asked and he is a straight shooter so didn't avoid it.
Derek Murray
Roar Rookie
His average when including the notoriously difficult batting series in UK is 5 runs higher than Burns. and he has SS runs this summer. So no, I don't think so
Derek Murray
Roar Rookie
Clarke's take on where Pucovski's mental state isn't really the basis of that decision though is it. He knows more than me or you but less than anybody close to him
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
I don't know why the coach would be commenting so publicly this far out from the first test. I don't recall this happening too often before. It's just getting bigger than Ben Hurr and it's really annoying to be honest.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
You're being a touch insensitive. I dont't know what the nature of Pucovski's emotional problems were but full credit to him for telling the selectors he wouldn't be up to the challenge of international cricket - this is surely unprecedented. What if it was depression? Depression is a terrible thing and it has nothing to do with being mentally weak.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
I agree with everything you say about a coach not being a selector, but Tim Zoehrer is not a good example. Apparently Zoehrer didn’t read the situation right. Simmo in his role was looking for hard working types who would leave no stone unturned in their ongoing development as players and Zoehrer was a lazy player who didn’t want to put in the hard work to match his talent. There is also a story that he had a crack at Simmo’s daughter, and it was supposedly the bragging rather than the actual deed that greatly annoyed the people that mattered.
Jero
Roar Rookie
Wow. Just wow.
Jero
Roar Rookie
I don’t really agree with the underlying premise that a cricket coach needs that level of involvement. Langer might aspire to being a Ferguson/Mourinho/Lombardi/Malthouse kind of managerial presence, but in cricket the coach isn’t pulling the levers once the game has started. The coach or manager really is under pressure when they’re coaching a whole strategy, making all the personnel changes mid-match and trading talent. We also know that cricket coaches do have a role in selecting teams, as Simpson obviously did. Zoehrer was very upfront about being fired by the coach, as opposed to dropped by the selectors. I don’t think Langer would be denied the ability to create an environment which fosters confidence of the playing group if he weren’t a selector. But being coach shouldn’t give him carte blanche to make it a restricted zone, for “incumbents”. He could have an impact, without being ultimately the final arbiter as he seems to be. George Bailey may be off watching Shield cricket, but if the selector/coach isn’t interested he’s probably pretty inconsequential. Bringing Warner into the conversation wasn’t great either. I don’t think independent selectors would ever threaten the career or livelihood of a coach by picking someone against the coach’s wishes, that seems a bit far-fetched. Other than Mickey Arthur, everyone’s had a good run in the job. Senior coaches are in demand, look at Arthur now. The squad may not be flushed with 25 names worth of talent, but all you need are a few good ones. Playing Pucovski or Burns is hardly going to affect Langer’s career, but it will theirs. But hey, I realize that Langer is going to be coach and selector for a good while yet. I just don’t buy that Langer needs to have the last word on everything for the whole system to work.
DP Schaefer
Roar Rookie
:thumbup: And fair point, but in the same vein, I'd want to see more evidence of Pucovski being okay in the mind first. Some steel demonstrated by taking a disappointment in his stride and still scoring runs.
Ace
Roar Rookie
I guess we will know soon enough who is in and who is not. Maybe even sooner with the A side playing. You would have to think that the selectors will be watching with interest. By the way did Burns only get back in after Pucovski dropped himself due to illness a season , or two , ago? But all good.. its Australia I will be supporting
DP Schaefer
Roar Rookie
I wold have thought Wade would be under more pressure.
DP Schaefer
Roar Rookie
Clarke was also so.. 'worried about Will's mental state' when he read 'reports' of Warner's partner 'preference'. If Pucovski is so brittle that this worries him he shouldn't be playing test cricket in the first place. Tougher trials await than some obscure comments from a team mate.
DP Schaefer
Roar Rookie
True, no-one is above form, but hard to get in and out is exactly how it should be. You should have for force your way in and to keep it shouldn't equate to constant stress. Make exchanges easy devalues the role and position. Burn's test form is good enough to start the series, obviously he is under notice, but sack him and people are suddenly walking on eggshells, not good.