Friday, 10 June 2011

tell it like it is

well done Kat for your down to earth press con.
I for one thought you might pull the pin, but as a a true champ you are, you have decided to go on... appropriate because we know you have more!

i appreciate that CA are on a "youth mission", but YOU DO NOT DROP AN IN FORM PLAYER!!!!!!

as i've said efore, Simon, i hope you make a bog load this season, and as hard as it is for a Vic to say.... i hope you lead your side to victory. FUCK CA jamie ssiddons and andrew hilditch!


  1. If Watson could call properly Katich would have made even more since they started batting together. One journo pointed out that Aus cricket works in Ashes cycles and that's exactly the excuse given by CA for Katich's dumping. If this is the narrow-minded thought process by which decisions are made then my god we're stuffed.
    It was great to read Clark and Katich's remarks on selection and CA in general; refreshing to see player criticism generally but especially when it mirrors what many of us discuss here. Mark Waugh remarked that Katich has performed better than he did when he retired at 37 but obviously we have a very stubborn and determined selection committee. How much pressure is on the new opener now?

  2. Katich is performing better than the current skipper, and also the two captains before Clarke before they gave it up.
    Sensationalist journalism needs a victim and age it wouold seem is currently in favour. All well and good if it is applied fairly but as we can observe it is clearly not. Hussey while a loyal servant was saved the indignity of a mid series ejection by a meaningless knock in Brisbane.
    While I admit the runs were needed at the time they were proved less significant the longer the test wore on.
    The media describe the recent Ashes series as a "debacle" and the papers sell. Tell me, why is it a "debacle" when a team is simply outplayed by a superior one? A "debacle" would be if the 1999 Australian side were beaten by the English equivalent at the time, or any team for that matter.
    Katich in his younger years would be taken with open arms, unlike the reality of ten years ago when batsmen were plentiful, and more often than not, not required due to the bowling at the time.
    Unfortunately failure needs a victim. Ponting fell on his sword, a victim must be unwilling.

  3. It's such a vital point to make; the over-emphasis of losing in terms of being a 'debacle'. Look at the decline of West Indies cricket; both on the field and in the selection room. Aus can consider itself lucky it hasn't disintegrated to losing to NZ at home. India, South Africa and England have all improved to a point to where they are all at least capable of playing cricket at a level comparable to when Aus had its stars. Couple this improvement with the leaving of Aus' stars and you have hard fought series which used to be dominated by Aus. Remember that in 2005 Aus still had Warne (who took 40 wickets) and McGrath for most of the series. England simply had the answers suddenly so the pack was getting closer to the top even before Warne, Langer, Gilchrist, Martyn, Hayden and McGrath retired.
    It wouldn't surprise me if there are lower depths for Aus to sink to before a rise back toward the summit. It looks like CA are adamant they'll persist with youth; even if they haven't really earned there spot (yes you Smith). As always with youth you can expect inconsistency so don't be surprised if the series in Aus vs NZ results in a 1 all draw; or even........I can't bring myself to even say it.

  4. absolutely it (Ashes) was not a debacle- except for Aus selection process. England totally deserved the glory.

    NZ will be backing themselves this time around in the hope of getting a kick in while we are down; and why wouldn't they? They have a few genuine champs and stars in their side now so...

    i can only hope that as the new skipper, Pup will inject a fresh and aggressive style of captaincy that will eliminate stalemates and dead rubber innings; regardless of what the selection panel give him.

  5. NZ's pace lineup is their weak link; all stock bowlers but not really any strike bowlers now that Bond has retired. They'll give an honest account for themselves as always but the quicks will need a day out to roll Aus. When sides have done this in the past they've had Amir or a group like England had that kept pressure on. Of course if Aus' middle order (or top order without Katich) is brittle we could be 5/75 on day 1 with poor shot selection anyway!
    I look forward to seeing Clarke lead as I honestly believe he is a good captain; at least relative to Ponting which isn't saying much but selectors thought Ponting was the best man for the job for several years (again, that's not saying much).
    With recent history Clarke may eliminate the chance of losing before winning - remember Gayle the summer before last in Adelaide? I was so sad that he didn't risk losing to get a win for his country but it showed the mindset, position at the time and the confidence in his bowlers that he batted the game to a draw when he could have made a bold declaration and gone for the juggler. I wouldn't be surprised if Clarke does the same thing as he doesn't have the armory Waugh, Taylor and the early stint of Ponting had. The next 4 series will be very telling indeed. In a way I like seeing Aus having to think its way back from the gallows as it will test the new crop of players and the depth of the country's cricket stocks to see if it can match the best; which it used to be.

  6. Well lets just hope the sheep enjoyers don't cotton onto the fact that Australia are vulnerable. All I need is the Kiwi's giving it to us for the next few years.