Free advice at a great price!

How often do you hear on the radio or tv a call from the commentators to "Come down to the ground after work..."?

They'll say it because the cricket is interesting or it is a beautiful day. Yesterday it was both so i thought i'd do just that. Now living 19 stops away it is a fair commitment of time and travel to get to the G for just one session but i was captivated listening to the days play and was also under directions to get the youngest out of the house as the boss had an assignment.

Due to the travel time in and out and the game time remaining i needed an 'all day' train ticket for both of us, no biggie, i'll do the right thing. So we got to the ground just after 4pm hoping, but not expecting, the gates to be open- they weren't.
I went to the ticket booth and was told that because it was family day the grommet would get in for free- great! Still with less than a session to play i was expected to cough up for a full days ticket. Realistically, with the gates opening in less than an hour i was being asked to pay $31 for less than an hour!

Now i know the Boxing day Test is CA's and the MCC's big cash cow, 40k yesterday, 50k the day before and 70k on Boxing day, but full price for less than a session is just greedy...and stupid on their behalf! If they want people to "come in after work" how hard would it be to structure the ticketing to allow for a last session reduced cost ticket?

I wouldn't have baulked if it was even half price for 1/3 of the day, but on principle i couldn't wear full price. So i politely told the ticket seller something to that effect and went for a walk around the ground to find a gate away from the direct bee-line to Richmond station open. Does any one else find that practice peculiar?

So, CA, MCC, whoever is in charge of pricing, if you want to maximise potential crowd numbers right through the day, make it reasonable and set a ticket price for the last session, I'd go every day if that was the case!

stoph verismo
down the wicket

New NEWS, Names & Nathan

I'm a bit perplexed by Nathan Bracken's actions against CA
For those not in the know, Bracken is suing CA $1m for lost earnings and medical expenses for, 'allowing him to play with a knee injury'.

Now i know places in the squad are always at a premium, but surely it was Nathan's call ultimately as to whether he felt he should play- i highly doubt he was told, "You better play no matter what!"

I for one hope that the residing judge throws this out of court and tells Bracken, "Stop wasting Cricket Australia and tax payers money, and get a bloody haircut!"

***

PCB are to get Pepsi sponsorship for Umpire DRS on the UAE tour against Eng and SLa- does anyone know how this will work, or have any more TLA's?

***

Pat Howard for the new GM of CA... i don't have an opinion on this as i didn't know who he is, nor do i know what administrative skills he brings to the position. I know he has been 'High Performance manager' for Rugby Union Australia as well as a successful coach of Leicester in Union- i didn't know he was 12th man for a county game! Is that enough for the new position?

***

Glen McGrath has come out and publicly praised new quick Pat Cummins, and with last nights T20 debut against RSA confirming his talent, Pidge seems to have called it well. Watto likes what he saw too and announced (earlier) that he thought Cummins is 'equal to any talent seen in the last decade.' Big call! Let's hope he is groomed correctly so that his T20 international debut is just a small stepping stone to the real stuff.

For what it's worth, Australia's 5 wicket win in the last over of the T20 last night (13/10/11) will probably only go further to reinforcing the "crowd pleaser" mentality of the format. Like it or not, non-traditionalists want 3 hours and a result down to the wire.

With that, i read too that White is calling for more games and better scheduling for the T20 format; well, he would given he won't be playing for his country in creams again! But i'm inclined to agree with him on one level: with the format becoming more entrenched into season fixtures and another T20 World cup looming the opportunities for teams to see themselves gel as a unit are very ad hoc. If this World cup is a success, it may be time for the ICC and all national boards to structure their fixtures better than just a game tacked on here and there before the commencement of a series.

***

stoph verismo
Down the Wicket

The BIG Fix

So Australians were the biggest match fixers! Well, according to Mazhar Majeed the agent and former journalist in the hot seat of the bribery proceedings in a London court.

Well, it wouldn't be the first time Australian players have blotted their coffee book associating with dodgy sub-continental bookies, so if these allegations prove true, when will our blokes learn?

Of course coming from a Pakistani agent it sounds a little suss to start with... not implausible, just dubious for mine. Certainly affecting a game in "brackets" is less glaringly obvious than by other means; any batsman could declare they were "taking their time to get their eye in." And any bowler could claim, "I was bowling to a plan to draw a batsman into a false shot." So as long as no wager has been placed it all sounds a bit hollow; but if one has...

I would hope (call me naive), that in this age where the upper echelon of players CAN make a substantial living and so donn't need to 'chase the big bucks' fixing a game to earn a bit on the side with a bet. It has been touted that Pakistan players are more susceptible to this blight due to lower earnings and this is obviously an issue for the PCB, not me to sort out. More so because i don't see a lot of companies queuing up to get Pakistani cricketers endorsing their products- so there is no coin there for the players!

If this has happened, it is imperative that CA show they have ZERO tolerance and rip up players contracts and suspend them from every level of the game for LIFE!

With all and sundry speaking up about this in the media this morning- AB flatly denying its possibility, proof is now required from Majeed if he is to stand by his statement.

And THAT is what i think!

DTW Open letter to CA

Guys, we have begrudged CA's inability to hear the common man/fan/player and stated that they will do what they want regardless, as they will not be told by anyone.

I've sooked but i didn't offer an alternative... so here it is.
We at DTW TELL CA what is wrong with their system and plans and we publish it here and endeavour to get further support via a facebook page.

I propose we compose the letter by consensus. Of course with consensus comes concession, so we need to be able to work out our grievances before publishing.

Who's in for having their say?

stoph verismo

a great day for Australian cricket.

no, my title isn't sarcasm... it is hope.

i have been saying since first predictions on the Ashes results that we will be done by this confident and supremely organised England team, and while they only have one win on the board... well, you all saw what happened!

So why am i so optimistic? Well, actually at the moment i'm a little flat; maybe it is the result, or the demands i put on my liver over the last 3 days (can't be lack of sleep- sorry about being a full tummied couch kipper Lefty!), but i AM GLAD we have been comprehensively MUNTED!

Everyone can point a finger- and we all will (and should), but the reality is we can take little from the last 2 results and the last one really must force to the fore what the hell is going to change before we get change?

in simple terms it is glaringly obvious: we can't get wickets and the same "repeat offenders" keep offering too little with the bat.

for several seasons now we've asked for(and been told that we are getting) rebuilding of the side, so my positive spin on our shellacking is due to the fact that SOMETHING now must happen.

of course, with Katich's injury we will get an extra change that wasn't desired, but at least there can be no excuses as inepts squirm under the very magnified microscope.

So what would be worse: continuing shuffling around a few positions, or wholesale change as half the bums get kicked and my preferred option of blooding youth with the assurance, "we don't expect you to win, we expect you to learn, get experience and try to win. you won't be pilloried for trying, just show some grit. do you want that?"

Self belief is everything in sport, and some may say that my approach above could damage that in a young'un, maybe, maybe not, it is a bit of a blank card when told the only expectations is to develop from the experience.
And any of the "old guard" that lived through this Adelaide loss and pain will not be there to use it as fuel in the future much like Englands senior players have after Warne's mugging last time.

Roebuck made the point on the radio that he doesn't believe in the "cyclical nature" of sport, and i would partly agree with him on that; but i didn't agree on his explanation why. he said that you didn't win because it was "your turn", you won because you were organised, commit ed, believe and practice, and that part is right.

But i think he missed the point when people use the cyclical term; sides coalesce (which could be used against my performance contracts argument to a degree), as they gel their self belief grows and winning becomes easier, more so as everybody knows every other member better, and this DOES happen in cycles.

A few great players form the nucleus of a side and others find greatness in themselves while around them... but as we know, it can't last.

Obvious comparisons to the great West Indies side that held dominance for so long have been made, and now we compare the demise of the two. But i'm not so pessimistic as to believe we will be in the wilderness indefinitely as the WI side has been. The fact we are a country and they a confederated region makes ALL the difference. Despite state rivalry and state governing bodies jockeying for power/representation/whatever, we will still "Come together..." maybe not "Right now," as Australians.

Now i started this blog to rip into slack, narrow-minded, political and just plain stupid governing bodies and bureaucrats within the game, and i'm not pumping out this rosy message and letting them off the hook. CA must cop a rigorous bollocking over where our team sits (on its arse while CA sits on its hands) in world cricket at the moment, so i encourage everyone to email them and have a say.
But while it is dark days at the moment... you know the rest!

stoph verismo
down the wickt

in the wake of the Tsunami

so, when the Ashes is done and dusted and we cement our place at #5 in the test rankings with a humiliating defeat on home soil to a better organised and structured England team that has played with a sense of purpose not just survival, what will need to happen to lift cricket in Australia and what shake up of Cricket Australia must eventuate to avoid further seasons in the abyss. (how was that for a run-on sentence!?)

All of us here at DTW have lamented the lack of foresight from first ACB (during the 80's retirements) and CA (during the 2000's retirements), so what can we suggest as a vision for the future and to change the culture of, "we're great, and always will be....D'oh! What just happened?

suggestions:
CA bow and grovel before St D.K and beg for his return as head bowling coach.
"......................" St S.K and beg him to come and be spin bowling coach and give tactical seminars to ALL state and national captains coaches and VC's.

Revamp the academy and tour it around the country- intensively. Including smaller scale grass roots visits to clubs on training nights. Yes there are a lot of clubs in the country, but this is where young people start so it should be for CA if they want to implement long term change.

organise genuine kids clinics that double as talent scouting ops. i say genuine because the one i took my boy to that was touted as such didn't even look at the little kids- even though it was stated they would, and only concentrated on the 15 and 16 year olds.

expand the CA contract system (much like SL have) to incorporate more and younger players... and guarantee that with performance, opportunities to represent will happen.
Performance based contracts for current squad; it removes doubt and speculation- if your numbers don't hold up, one of the other contracted young 'uns is ready.

What else?
How should batting be handled in the future?

It's Northing Short of Ridiculous

I think the time has come to turn the heat up on the selectors and their constant faith in Marcus North. Surely there was no better time to blood a youngster, and there are many, in time for the real stuff in Australia this summer. The man has done very little to justify a berth in the side and continues to have dreams of adequacy.
Hussey I can understand, barely but North must go if we are to wrestle back the urn

Perth... thanks for being in another time zone!

Perth Test
as an eastern state living cricket nut, this is my favourite test outside my home.
it starts a half hour before i leave work... and goes into the evening! turn tv/dvd on for the kids, plug in receiver to mac, turn down the volume on mac/channel 9, turn on grandstand, enjoy beverage and barrage!

Siddle out... thank goodness. his tightness enforcing a rest now was such a bonus as i was ready to give it to all and sundry had he been selected. i know as a paceman he must have been looking forward to Perth, but the bigger picture has prevailed; see you on B-day Pete!

batsman told to get ruthless: reason being, no one has made a hunj this series... so what!
isn't it better all/most/many of the batsmen are averaging around their average for the series than failing?
what is better: one player gets a hundred and the next a duck, or both get 50? making 50 is being in form, a quacker isn't!

then what about S.Smith being picked with Hauritz injuring his finger!
i agree with T.Jenner, it is a bit too premature, and given his 1st class average at the moment is 75... yep, 75! he clearly hasn't learned his craft enough to ply it on the Perth track. McGain is the leading spinner in the country at present, but even as a leggie myself, the obvious choice if Ponting wants a specialist turner is Krezja. Tall, bouncy and with a proven doosra it is a dead set slap in the face for a bloke that has done all required to get back in, and is more suited to that pitch.

i hope CA doesn't crush Smiths building talent by throwing him in the deep end when his skill level isn't fully developed, on a pacemans pitch, and with a captain that doesn't know how to utilise a slower bowler!

Player mis-management

The state of Michael Clarke's back has raised an interesting point in player management. Many players are singing the praises of CA for rotating or resting players with heavy loads; most notably Ponting, Johnson, Haddin and Hussey. Interestingly only one of these guys has had any known injury issues (Haddin with a broken finger). Even more interestingly Clarke has been withdrawn from various series - but unlike Johnson, Ponting or Hussey - as a direct result of an injury.

With addition of cricket to Australia's calendar through 20/20 'cricket' players experience more pysical demands than ever before. With all and sundry in the test mix in this country declaring Test cricket as the pinnacle it is bewildering that anyone would even consider Clarke going over to India to compete in a meaningless exercise of revenue generating. Perhaps Clarke didn't read his coach's comments about the need to ensure he is right for the upcoming summer of real cricket. Then again, why would CA annoint Clarke as 20/20 captain so that he plays in all 3 formats when he has know back troubles?

Personally I believe that 20/20 is just a bit of fun and for those that disagree, you can have state players who will likely do just as well. I am not saying this in reference to the Champion's Trophy, which I realise is club based and so not representative of a nation's ability to play the game. But I believe it's likely that NSW, Vic or Cape Cobras would give more than just a shake to India or South Africa in any case. Freeing up the core test players from playing 20/20 for Aus allows more recovery time, family time - and even representation of their state if some preparation is required. The last thing CA needs is more egg on its face when Clarke or another highly valuable test player can't get himself right for 5 days of cricket because they've been playing hit and giggle.

Lazy, but i couldn't resist putting this in complete!

sorry to be so slack, but this attitude just blew me away! i don't know why, its not like we haven't seen this sort of arrogance before.

on ninemsn:

Search: The Ashes

i'll tell you where to look for them, and it aint in the CA cabinet!

Chairman of selectors Andrew Hilditch on Monday refused to blame his panel for Australia's shattering loss of the Ashes to England.

Australia's 197-run loss in the fifth Test at The Oval on Sunday, which delivered England a 2-1 series victory, led all the news bulletins in sports-obsessed Australia on Monday as the ramifications sank in.

Ricky Ponting's captaincy and the selectors' decision-making came under fire for the series loss but they appeared likely to hold on to their positions with Cricket Australia's chief executive James Sutherland fully supportive of their performances.

Hilditch admitted his panel erred by not choosing specialist spinner Nathan Hauritz for the final Test, but he refused to blame the selection of an unbalanced side on a spin-friendly pitch for Australia's humiliating defeat.

Ponting became only the second Australian skipper in more than a century to have twice lost an Ashes series in England, and Hilditch said he was gutted and in a state of disbelief over the final Test defeat inside four days.

"We would've changed the side (from the fourth Headingley Test) if we'd read the wicket right, and we would've played Nathan Hauritz," Hilditch told a news conference in Adelaide on Monday.

"But it would be an over-simplification to say that meant we lost the Test match, that'd be incorrect. We lost the Test match because we got 160 in the first innings.

"Jamie Cox was the selector on duty, but everybody misread the wicket, from our entire playing group, captain and coach included, and that just happens.

"To see the hard work that all those players put in, a very important series for everybody, to see it fall apart at The Oval was hard for everybody."

Hilditch, who has been a frequent target of critics during his controversial tenure as chairman, said he was shocked by the Ashes outcome.

"I'm feeling gutted and in some disbelief over the last couple of days," he said.

"The traditional signs of who's going to win a Test series are all there and it should have been Australia.

"We had six of the top seven batsmen, 10 centuries, eight of them Australian, the three leading bowlers in the series were all Australian.

"Everything indicates that we dominated the Test series."

But he said that "we lost the Test series through five hours of cricket. We lost the Test series in the last hour in Cardiff (first Test) when we should have won. I thought at the time it was going to hurt us, which it did.

Other key phases were "two hours of batting at Lord's in the second Test and maybe even an hour's batting at The Oval in the first innings, when we really needed to get 400-500 runs and get into a good position.

"The Test series really came down to us losing key moments and England winning key moments. It didn't come down to individuals, it came down to England winning the critical moments and (us) losing them."

Hilditch said Australian cricket was in a rebuilding phase following the keenly felt retirements of Shane Warne, Adam Gilchrist, Matthew Hayden and Glenn McGrath.

"The reality check is we're a young side, a rebuilding side, we've lost a lot of great players but had no time to reflect on that, we've got to reflect on the future," he said.

"We're going to have ups and downs in performance over the next couple of years while we continue a rebuilding process.

"The process is far from over. We've still got players we're going to lose in the next couple of years."

open letter to Cricket Australia

To whom it may concern,
as a fanatical follower of the greatest game, it has become obvious that CA is glacial in its response to dealing with players that are not carrying their weight.

I accept that the weight of a nation is a heavy burden to bear, and that past consistency deserves consideration and some leeway, but the situation over the last few years where a player (most notably a batsman) consistently fails to produce an acceptable tally has become farcical!
When the general public make jokes about it being harder to get out of the Australian side than in, questions must be asked, and answers expected!

Case to point was the dramatically obvious situation of M.Hayden last summer. He has been a great player, but "waiting" for him to find form contributed to a series loss at home to RSA.
How long, and at what cost (the Ashes?) do we have to wait for Michael Hussey to find form?
Twice bowled leaving MUST be enough! As well as his scorecard.

When the talent pool is so deep- with both up and coming players, and older cricketers that appear undesirable for whatever pathetic reason- why are you so lethargic when it comes to change?

Of course, politics will have its way when dealing with a board such as yours, but in this modern era where everyone has a very public display of opinion, your response will be appreciated and action required.

sincerely
Stoph Verismo
Down the Wicket

tour match musings

What is wrong with this picture?
Obviously the first problem is Johnson, great last summer -time for a rest from the side and some work with the skills coach. Period! Don't muck around with this CA, Do it NOW!


1st innings:
Hughes 10
Watson 84

SR Clark 14 overs 2 m 2 for 45
MG Johnson 7 overs 0m 0 for 42
SR Watson 5 overs 0m 2 for 20

2nd innings:

batting good

PJ Hughes 68
AB McDonald 75
SR Watson 50
GA Manou† 59


SR Clark 9 overs 1 m 2 for 29
MG Johnson 11.1 overs 1 m 1 for 65
SR Watson 10 overs 3 m 1 for 34
AB McDonald 11 overs 5 m 4 for 15

Good to see Hughes get his head together for the 2nd knock; we know he is a real talent, but it is a worry that he has let the focus on him affect his game.

A good "shoot out" between Watson and Ronnie.
Watson: aggregate- 3 for 54, and 134 runs
Ronnie: aggregate- 4 for 38, 107 runs

While these are just the basic stats, makes for 'interesting' contemplation, don't you think? And some extra decisions for the selectors.

Funnily, i heard a rumour yesterday that there was some talk from the selectors that Siddle may be overlooked to get Clark back in, as they don't want 2 of the same.
How stupid would that be? To me they are quite different bowlers with very different roles. And if Siddle was to be dropped at the moment, i would suggest some serious email bombing of CA... i know i will be!

stoph verismo
down the wicket

got something to say?

SLEDGING
A dirty word to some, a tactical element to others; and it is back in the media.

S.Watson has come out and called for this part of Australia's game -that has fizzled out of general use almost as fast as player integrity- to come back to the fore.
http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=840865

But will it have an effect if used in the next test when it will be seen as so obviously a contrivance?
If Australia just walk out and start up being lippy, won't it just come across as a big put on to build up their own confidence?

It was one thing for CA to state (to the team) that players must be seen as role models; it is another to limit the teams ability to win. I'm not condoning a "win at all costs" attitude, i think everyone here will appreciate my sense of sportsmanship, but until talking to the opposition becomes outlawed, what is wrong with getting in to some ones head?

There are already rules to safeguard against racial vilification (although clearly only to be used against, not for Aussies!), so if a player can say something that is not vulgar, what is the problem?

The rest of the worlds whinging about Australia past use of sledging is quite frankly pathetic!
As the request was, 'make sure you know where the line is' from CA, what would be the issue in reminding Freddy that his bung knee is the result of having to carry his over sized ego? Or suggest to KP that he made a good decision moving to Blighty for a game as he would still be lucky to get a spot in RSA behind Prince and Duminy. Onions and onions make the rest of England cry... etc.

Until there are laws preventing on field verbal gamesmanship (let's hope this is NEVER the case), open slather i say!
That being said, if i was playing in the next test, i'd just ease into it just so as not to look like we needed it.

stoph verismo
down the wicket

a requiem for Roy

Did anyone see Roy on 60 min last night?

It is not a big secret that i have been a big fan of his cricket, and sympathetic to his problems, but i was scratching my head as to the purpose of the segment.
It is obvious that he was given the opportunity to tell his side- assisted somewhat feebly by his girlfriend- as well as giving the "reporter" a chance at taking Symonds on the guilt trip that he (reporter Liam Bartlett) felt Australia wanted to give him. Typical 60 minutes rubbish? Why should i be surprised?
What i was particularly surprised about was, when Roys girlfriend mentioned that his drinking accelerated during the Harby crisis, why didn't Bartlett ask about how Symonds felt about CA's support of him during that time?

For me, this was the fulcrum of Symonds demise, and was missed by Bartlett. Sure, CA gave him a lot of chances, but i feel that they let him down when all of the BS with Harby was in full swing. CA basically capitulated and lost their chance to nail Harby to the wall over his unacceptable behaviour- behaviour that the rest of the world expects Australia and Australian crowds not to perpetrate! All because CA didn't call BCCI's bluff of threatening financial recompense if India went home; If they went home, surely THEY are in breach of their tour contracts! Gutless CA!


Symonds certainly struggled to come up with plausible responses for his final demise, and was told as much by Bartlett:

ANDREW SYMONDS: Yeah. I mean like, don't get me wrong, I had the form to prove that, and that's exactly how they probably would have been thinking.

LIAM BARTLETT: And they were right. On tour in London four weeks ago, he went to a pub to watch the first rugby league State of Origin match of the season with half a dozen team-mates.

ANDREW SYMONDS: I love Origin football and for me, with Origin football comes a few beers.

LIAM BARTLETT: He knew a single drink could sink his career. But that didn't seem to matter. The agreement says you're not allowed to drink in public.

ANDREW SYMONDS: Yes.

LIAM BARTLETT: I take it you read it before you signed it?

ANDREW SYMONDS: I did, yep.

LIAM BARTLETT: And you agreed to it?

ANDREW SYMONDS: Yep.

LIAM BARTLETT: But you had a few anyway?

ANDREW SYMONDS: Yes.

LIAM BARTLETT: Six, seven, eight - at what stage do you think to yourself, "That's it - this could get me thrown off the Australian team?"

ANDREW SYMONDS: I was wrapped up in watching the football and then when I got back, yep, I knew then.

LIAM BARTLETT: You really expect me to believe that?

ANDREW SYMONDS: It's not about convincing you. Not at all. It's not what I'm here to do.

LIAM BARTLETT: That's all they were asking you to do?

ANDREW SYMONDS: And I broke that, I broke that with them.

LIAM BARTLETT: You couldn't do it?

ANDREW SYMONDS: I didn't do it.

I must admit, that i am no fan of Liam Bartlett and the ethos of 60 minutes "journalism", so the fact that Roy didn't offer an 'excuse', just a statement of acceptance of his failure and was blunt (as in his 3rd last remark) with Bartlett made for more uncomfortable yet rewarding viewing on my part.

The questioning was at least more in line with the AJCE- Australian journalistic code of ethics- and far more removed from the typical sycophantic/sacrificial style normally on the show; what i wonder is, will Symonds himself see how much he appeared to be resolved without a fight to his demise, or at the end of the day the IPL paycheck IS better than a baggy green. I can only imagine how i would look at myself if that was the way i came across at the end of the piece.

stoph verismo

down the wicket

60 minutes interview

12 sentences, 7 questions!

I had previously asked if Aus were still No 1 in ODI cricket; it seems that answer too has been given by this SA side.

I know i really should have posted in regard to the match and then series loses last week, but really, what was the point!
Given that the initial 3 ODI games were interesting and came down to the final overs, the massive capitulation in the last 2 games by Australia spoke for its self and needed no comment by me! So now, what is left to make and do with the summer?

NZ are a far more competitive side in this format than test, so what should the brains trusts of CA/selectors and Ponting be focusing on to get the most out of this series?

Should they attempt to stabilise the team?
Should they try new combinations?
Should they try new players?
Should they play for a demolition job to try and rebuild moral?

I called for a true rebuilding of the side after the Indian result, citing that a 2 test series was nothing more than a warm up for SA and held no value within its self. As we know, that didn't happen and the selectors chose the "steady as she goes, get yourself back into form" approach for many of the team, and when that clearly didn't work had to scramble for some wholesale change when it was too late.

What should be done now?



stoph verismo
downthewicket

Selectors lose the test series!

And there it is: a series loss at home- first since WI in 92-93, the first series loss at home ever to SA.

I post this before the result, but with Australia's ineffective bowling, capitulation at the batting crease and overall lesser performance, it is easy (and obvious) to make this call.

Why have we fell so hard? Well, surely the attitude that we are so the number one side in the world has grown stale; we kept saying it, and believing it so much so, that we didn't bother dealing with aspects that were going to disprove it.

First and foremost, dead-wood! It has been interesting to read forums and postings on other sites about M.Hayden. Obviously many people think it was time for him to go after Perth (many before that too!) but so many idiots -and that is the best i can call them- have said that he deserves to stay til whenever or whatever date due to his past record- absolute BULLSHIT! Only a complete halfwit thinks that you can play on indefinitely or until some arbitrary day because X-amount of months ago you did something good! As a representative of OUR country you MUST be at the top of your game...PERIOD! Sure there must be some allowance for concentration lapses, minor form slumps and bad decisions but until CA implement something- be it a 3 strikes you're out, mutual agreement between player and CA on a minimum performance level or who knows whatever, something has to be done. I can't help but think that the absolute bleeding hearts that have called for Hayden to stay on will be the first to bitch about Australia losing the series- LOSERS!
Of note was that the TV commentators said that part of the reason that Hayden has been kept on is that his fielding (at 1st slip) has been good enough according to Hilditch... what the hell is that got to do with being an opener

Then there is Hussey; it is blatantly clear he is completely out of form, so why has HE been kept too?
Same goes for Lee, and given he is carrying an injured foot, now is the time to give him time off. There must be a similar consideration with Symonds, although with Watsons back buggered again who looks likely?

And now for Ponting: it is fantastic that he has found some form with the bat at the G, 200 is a fine aggregate; it is just a pity he has no real attacking nous when it comes to setting fields. Graeme Smith has scored freely with beautiful late cuts all series... no time more easily than on the final day. Why hasn't Ponting tried something new, different, novel and placed a helmeted player more forward than 2nd slip or backwards of silly mid off? ANYTHING! And what about moving the slips forward to eliminate the many nicks not carrying through.
I have no problem keeping Ponting as a number 3 batsman- who in the world would drop such a run maker after a 101 and 99? But his tactical deficiencies have been shown up AGAIN!

Now with a dead rubber imminent for the SCG, will the team of Hilditch, Hughes and crew be ruthless and get some experience under the belts of the younger players? Those players that were always on the fringe during the past glory days must be kicking themselves, as must those that are blitzing in Sheffield Shield- i.e Klinger, Hilf etc!
If they don't, then they (the selectors) must wear the shame of this defeat, and for the further imminent defeats in SA and England... may god have mercy on their souls!

stoph verismo
downthewicket

Hilditch handball!

Firstly I'd like to start with an apology to our readers for not posting in a few days; given how entertaining the 1st test against South Africa was- with quality cricket and few controversies- it is no wonder i was AWOL! Secondly, congratulations to South Africa for a wonderful win of an intriguing test.

With the NZ minnow bashing series well and truly a thing of the past- and the opportunity to try out new player and combinations at this time also lost- Australia have to deal with their imminent dethroning from the coveted top-side position. More importantly, Ricky Ponting and the chairman of selectors Andrew Hilditch are scrambling for a bowling combination that can bowl out a quality batting line up twice in a test.

Now two summers after their retirement, it has become boring that the media add to this problem with the repetition of remarks about Australia missing the legendary Warne/McGrath combination. These comments are self evident and do nothing to address the fact we have not really had a policy of re-building -as is stated time and again- but as I've said in previous posts, it has purely been a program of filling in the gaps and hoping that players not performing will lift.

Obviously it is impractical and ridiculous to just scrap the current line up and replace the entire team with new players; a core of performing experienced players is needed to carry on the traditions and pass on their experience to the new players. With that said, it doesn't take an expert to see who needs to have their position assessed. So who do i think is secure? Simon Katich is clearly solid as an opener. Brad Haddin has answered my concerns about settling into the side. Mitch Johnson is having a blinder of a year. Surely Andrew Symonds has answered his critics. Michael Clarke has performed well and is showing good leadership on the field and with his media statements. That's it... I'm finished!

I'm the first to admit that R.Ponting, M.Hussey, M.Hayden and B.Lee are champion players that have served their country well... but they also must be answerable when their form is off.
Firstly, why do we have an attitude now that once a player becomes test captain, they have that position until they retire? While it would be a massive concession to make, why can't Ponting step down (or be nudged!) from the stresses of captaincy for a test or two to concentrate on his batting? For the first few years of Pontings leadership he bucked a trend for batting captains to have their average suffer. But now with good knocks the exception not the norm i think he needs to step back and correct his form problems; Clarke is more than capable of holding the reins.

Lee is obviously in a slump; even though he bowled a great spell late on day 4 against SA. He needs a spell for the Blues to correct a few things like his front foot/run-up.
Huss is a bit of a mystery. He looks "heavy" at the crease and appears to be lacking his amazing shot selection and confidence. Haddos, for all of his wonderful service to the team is now past his used by date, and while luck goes against you when you are down, it is time -unfortunately- to go even though he won't be going out on top.

Who then is accountable for these problems? Typically Hilditch has claimed the onus is on the senior players to lift their game and has held them culpable for the SA loss. This is clearly dodging his own responsibility as a selector. Is it too much work for the selectors to actually select players? When players aren't performing, the selectors must take the time to personally warn the player and ensure that failure to achieve will result in new players filling their position!

For so many years now we have had MANY very talented cricketers unable to get into the national side due to every position well and truly secured by a top play... why aren't they getting their turns now? M.Klinger has over 900 runs for the season... and it isn't even the new year yet!

The announcement that B.Hilfenhaus is likely to get a cap for the Boxing Day test is a welcome change of selector form; but i can't help think that CA are scrambling to save the series instead of securing the future.


stoph verismo
downthewicket

It's elementary dear Watson

How many chances does Andrew Symonds get, or warrant?
After not setting the world on fire playing for Queensland he was brought straight back into the bosom of the 1st 11. The reason given? He was in good form last time he played for Australia...
Never mind that he was averaging in the mid teens with the bat and had only taken 1 wicket in several games.
His batting in the 2 tests against New Zulland were no improvement, neither was his bowling.
Bottom line: He took a couple of nice catches, thats about it.

What was Watson doing during this time?
Other than gnashing his teeth and trying to grow dredlocks?
Most recently he was quietly taking 7/69 against a South Australian side including Younis Khan, (match figures 8/120) and scoring 81 in the 2nd innings.
Nuff said.

It may seem that I am "Symonds bashing" again but I do love to see him play... and reckon that he is one of the top 2 or 3 all-rounders in the world when he is in top form.
Rather, if anything, I am "CA bashing" why?
The Australian side would be a better, more polished, in form, resourceful side with Shane Watson as the All Rounder.

Ponsford.

Pay to Stay and Play

More money for Australian contracted players; plus less commitments. Is the national side getting a bit full of themselves, or are they worth it? What do you think?
Let's look at the pros and cons:

1) The 11 players on the field represent our entire country; so therefore they are our elite. This should entitle them to remuneration that acknowledges them as such.
1a) Many players that pursue cricket show enough talent in other sports to put them in a position of having to choose ultimately which sport will serve them best, (or which one they have the most skill at).

2) Money is now flooding into the game via India, if CA are not prepared to ensure a player can effectively secure his financial future, why wouldn't players choose a career playing hit and giggle for the duration of their playing career?

3) With tour and sponsorship commitments (22 appearances a year- no more than 4 in any given month) on top of away time -up to 10 months a year, players need to capitalise on their money earning years to partially negate the lost time with families.

4) Players already earn incredible sums of money, (M.Clarke was 7 figures last year!). If you are in the national side, and are getting $5100-$12750 (plus OS loadings) in match fees, or nearly $700 a run, be grateful you represent your country and are raking it in... other representative sports-people pay their own way!

5) Cricketers are housed, fed, transported and catered for medically as soon as they are in the national side... no additional expenses.

6) On top of their CA money, cricketers receive huge amounts from sponsorships and endorsements- how dare they request less time doing such work.



I for one think that if they can get more from CA, why not! For top ranked players the draw of a few seasons of T20 in India must always be in the back of their minds; if you could earn a yearly income with only three months away, why wouldn't you? The privaledge of having played for your country won't pay the bills when you are too old to earn money from cricket!


stoph verismo
downthewicket

as per... day one, NZ

i won't lie to you... i loved the rapid fire nature of the GABBA test. until day 3 there were heaps of wickets and no way of really predicting the result.
But to be fair, i love the grind of an Adelaide test more- especially since the wonderful win in the 05/06 Ashes-(thanks again Shane for being the greatest cricketer of the modern age).

With the most batsman friendly pitch in the land- but not 'over-cooked' like many a foreign pitch- Adelaide offers the chance at real cricket competition, and more importantly- a result!
And so, once again, captain 'snake-eyes' has lost the toss- 5 in a row- and watched the opposition have the first go at an absolute belter. But that's ok.. as a steady head for the environment has prevailed- without spoiling the enjoyment with a guaranteed result. Getting off to a fine start, NZ had given away their lot straight after lunch until steadying for a slow, yet respectable
total 6/262... slow, but that is ok at Adelaide.. when we all want to see a test match.


A few good innings: Redman: 83 of 125 s/r 66.4
Taylor 44 of 88 s/r 50

but on a wicket for batting, a good spread across the bowling styles of :
Lee, Clarke and of course, the wonder kind/newby, M.Johnson, N.Hauritz has given away how wickets will fall: a bowler just needs confidence, and support, when being belted around

stoph verismo
downthewicket