View Full Version : Hohns Resigns!!!!!!!
Courtesy of Baggygreen.com.au
http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/australia/content/story/243201.html
Hohns resigns as chairman of selectors
Cricinfo staff
April 4, 2006
Trevor Hohns led the panel for ten years and watched Australia go to No. 1 in Tests and ODIs © Getty Images
Trevor Hohns, Australia's selection chairman through the team's most successful period, has resigned to pursue increasing business interests. Hohns was appointed to the panel of Lawrie Sawle in 1993 and three years later was promoted to its leader as the Test and one-day teams embarked on a trip to No. 1 in the world.
The retirement of Hohns's business partner sparked the move and he said he could not combine the job with the almost-full-time selection duties. "Despite its obvious challenges, I have certainly enjoyed the role and can only hope that my contribution has in some small way assisted Australian cricket," Hohns said. "I have been fortunate to play a part in the panel for so long and am very grateful for the opportunity."
A former legspinner who appeared in seven Tests in the late 1980s, Hohns was prepared to make - and carry out - the tough decisions and was often a target from dumped players and disappointed supporters. Responsible for ending the careers of Ian Healy and Mark Waugh before the long-term representatives felt they were ready, Hohns also delivered Steve Waugh the news his one-day captaincy was over in 2001-02. Waugh beat the selectors by setting his own Test retirement date, but most of his team-mates suffered either in consultation with Hohns or by his axe.
Criticisms of Queensland bias in the selection panel, which until last year also included Allan Border, were also regular and Mark Waugh called for Hohns to walk out after the current squad to South Africa was selected. Hohns was in charge when Australia won 16 Tests in a row from 1999 to 2001 and picked the outfits that won the 1999 and 2003 World Cups. During his time on the panel Australia's record was 35 series wins, six losses and five draws.
Andrew Hilditch, David Boon and Merv Hughes are the other members on the selection panel and a Cricket Australia spokesman said a replacement was expected to be named "shortly". Creagh O'Connor, the Cricket Australia chairman, said Hohns fulfilled one of Australian cricket's most important roles.
"The chairman draws a lot of public and media scrutiny and seldom receives the recognition it deserves," he said. "In Trevor's case, he has made an outstanding contribution to the role and has played a pivotal part in helping Australia remain the No. 1 Test and one-day international team in world cricket over a sustained period."
© Cricinfo
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!:thumbsu: :D
Minotaur
4 Apr 2006, 12:51
I think the dropping of martyn from the test team whilst continuing in the ODI team and then his subsequent reinstatement into the test team without any compelling case for his re-inclusion (such as heaps of SHield runs) would indicate that the selection panel has been very divided recently. The one other selector backing Hohns has probably turned against him leaving Hohns with no other opition other than retirement.
On the whole, I think he has been an incredibly successful selector. More selections have worked than failed!
THE Johnson selection would have to play a part surely...
Cassius_Clay
4 Apr 2006, 12:58
Merv Haughes is taking over.
Bombers_Forever
4 Apr 2006, 13:07
About time........
Put BOONIE in his place!
This is good news for Australian cricket... yes he has been successful over the period but some fresh air is needed now we're falling back to the pack.
Would Darren Lehman be a chance at a position with any reshuffling? I know this is my SA bias coming through but I think his knowledge and demeanor would serve Australia well... plus I have no idea about any other candiates from either interstate or from SA.
There is no question that Hohns will be seen for having reigned over the period of Australian dominance in world cricket. Yes, he certainly had the players to pick from, but making the teams that kicked the world's butt for over ten years requires more than simply lumping guys onto a pitch. He had the vision to bring in Buck to help coach the squad- a man whose methods were battle tested with the Shield triumphs of Queensland in the mid 90s.
People may moan about selection policy, but when you have a wealth of riches, that is almost inevitable.
Well done, Trev- take a bow- and let's hope the next chairman continues the Australian period of domination.
Sticks 4
4 Apr 2006, 13:22
Would Darren Lehman be a chance at a position with any reshuffling? I know this is my SA bias coming through but I think his knowledge and demeanor would serve Australia well... plus I have no idea about any other candiates from either interstate or from SA.
I think Boof's name came up when Merv got the job. The reason given for him not getting the gig then was that he's a current player. Probably fair enough, too. He would have to be biased towards his team. Unless he retires from playing, and I certainly hope he doesn't, he still wouldn't be eligable unless they've changed their thinking.
There is no question that Hohns will be seen for having reigned over the period of Australian dominance in world cricket. Yes, he certainly had the players to pick from, but making the teams that kicked the world's butt for over ten years requires more than simply lumping guys onto a pitch. He had the vision to bring in Buck to help coach the squad- a man whose methods were battle tested with the Shield triumphs of Queensland in the mid 90s.
People may moan about selection policy, but when you have a wealth of riches, that is almost inevitable.
Well done, Trev- take a bow- and let's hope the next chairman continues the Australian period of domination.
And he played more than a useful role in Australia's regaining the Ashes in 1989 as well.
Off topic I know, but worth mentioning for those who weren't aware of the fact. :)
Grimreepah
4 Apr 2006, 13:58
The selection panel have done a great job but for a number of years, but of late there have been some perculiar decisions.
Well done Hohns for doing a great job, and for knowing when enough is enough.
andrew_embley
4 Apr 2006, 14:02
Yeah he did a good job bar toward the end there.
Time for a change.
Cooldude
4 Apr 2006, 14:06
Good to see he hasn't gone past his used by date
It's the right time to step down and he's done so, he's done a fantastic job for 10 years, but he's been going senile lately
I'd like the person who replaces him to be reasonably unbiased towards a particular State and to have no real connection with the current players. That means no Mark Waugh or Geoff Lawson and, due to his recent involvement with the current team, no Darren Lehmann. Buggered if I know who though....had no idea Merv would get the last spot.
Cooldude
4 Apr 2006, 14:18
Anyone who knows Boofa would know that he is way too kind and way too friendly to be totally impartial and unbiase, it's not dissing him, it's actually one of his real qualities, but just the thing you don't need as a selector
dan warna
4 Apr 2006, 14:38
hohns added NOTHING to the work done by lawrie Sawle.
he basically inherited Sawles work and rode the back of it.
I must say Lawrie Sawle has been one of the best things to EVER happen to Australian cricket.
:thumbsu: lawrie Sawle
bushranger
4 Apr 2006, 15:05
yess
guys like whitey hodgey denton cosgrove and cullen and bichael watson will get a better chance now
wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Minotaur
4 Apr 2006, 15:13
hohns added NOTHING to the work done by lawrie Sawle.
he basically inherited Sawles work and rode the back of it.
I must say Lawrie Sawle has been one of the best things to EVER happen to Australian cricket.
:thumbsu: lawrie Sawle
Can you explain this? Are you suggesting that Australia's success all comes down to Warne and McGrath, both of whom were picked from relative obscurity by Sawle?
It's just too good to be true...
I think Boof's name came up when Merv got the job. The reason given for him not getting the gig then was that he's a current player. Probably fair enough, too. He would have to be biased towards his team. Unless he retires from playing, and I certainly hope he doesn't, he still wouldn't be eligable unless they've changed their thinking.
The reason Merv got the gig ahead of Lehmann may have been because Hilditch is from the same state (Hohns may have picked Border becuase of the Qld relation). I'd love Lehmann to be the new selector because as someone else said, he is unbias and is very honest. He would give the selectors a great idea of who is looking the goods and so on. He might not make many runs though, every bowler in the country will try extra hard to get him out and impress him:p
Whooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!:thumbsu: :D
Sorry why was that a good thing? :rolleyes:
Good f***ing riddance
http://deephousepage.com/smilies/OLA.gif
Mr_Smooth
4 Apr 2006, 16:19
na-na-na-nah
na-na-na-nah
hey hey hey
good bye...
My North
4 Apr 2006, 16:54
anybody sorry to see him go
anybody sorry to see him go
maybe aspiring qld cricketers who thought he was their route to the aussie side:p
Grimreepah
4 Apr 2006, 18:48
So who becomes the new chairman.
I presume an incumbent.
Boon or Hilditch. I don't know much about Hilditch.
Or maybe Merv:eek:
eddiesmith
4 Apr 2006, 19:13
The former NSW captain will surely take over as chairman
As for Boof, I am pretty sure they dont like players becoming selectors even as soon as they finish playing as they still are too close to alot of players
section8
4 Apr 2006, 19:41
Notwithstanding still playing, boof would have been just as good a choice, if not better. His consistently accurate analysis of games he has commentated in are unrivalled in the media IMO.
dee_molisher
4 Apr 2006, 19:48
There is no question that Hohns will be seen for having reigned over the period of Australian dominance in world cricket. Yes, he certainly had the players to pick from, but making the teams that kicked the world's butt for over ten years requires more than simply lumping guys onto a pitch. He had the vision to bring in Buck to help coach the squad- a man whose methods were battle tested with the Shield triumphs of Queensland in the mid 90s.
People may moan about selection policy, but when you have a wealth of riches, that is almost inevitable.
Well done, Trev- take a bow- and let's hope the next chairman continues the Australian period of domination.
Trevor was not very clever, just lucky that Australia has so many great players and he didn't have to use his brain because picking a side could have been done by a five year old.
See yah Hohn, we won't miss you.
maybe aspiring qld cricketers who thought he was their route to the aussie side:p
where the hell did this idea that hohns or border favoured Qlders?
after more than a decade at the head of one of the most successful sporting teams ever assembled, all you can do is snipe at him over the few bad decisions the selectors have made in a period of utter world dominance
how could it possibly be construed that players get it easy north of the border?
(it is often joked that a baggy green in a brown paper bag is given to each NSW player on debut because it always seems top be a NSWelshman that Qlders get dropped for ;))
if hohns favoured Qlders, why did matty hayden (recently named the best batsman of past decade) spend so many years on the outer? why did jimmy maher and martin love pay there dues with thousands and thousands of runs for more than a deade each and then get jumped in the order by clarke and katich? why did kasper and bich spend so many years on the outer before they got a decent run?
the criticisms seem to be centred around the selection of the following players:
scott muller
exactly who were the fast bowlers waiting in the wings with Muller at the time? jo angel? brad williams? they chose him as a bolter on his home oval and it didn't turn out...not like he played 45 Tests before that was discovered. i mean mick lewis was hardly a success but that doesn't make Merv Hughes a cheat - simply that the selectors got it wrong and moved on
mitchell johnson
...hmmm, let me see. when we got back from the Ashes, the selectors realised we were beaten in two areas - tall, fast strike bowlers and an allrounder - so they gave a 6'4" left-arm speedster a go while Tait was still recovering from injury...sounds smart to blood a player like that...might be a heck of a bowler in 3-4 years time
shane watson
he didn't get a run with the Australian team until he moved to Tasmania...so exactly how did being a Qlder help him? rate him or not, it's not like there are 10 well-performed all-rounders out there that he's keeping out of the side
andy symonds
he is one of the most dominant one-day batsmen in the world in recent years and probably the sort of guy who could rewrite record books if he found his feet at Test level...well worth a plunge for 10-20 Tests i would have thought...he is a confidence player and will take longer to settle in...I just hope he settles in against England ;)
anyway that long rant was supposed to be a show of support for Hohns - great knock by the big guy!
About time that useless ******** resigned.
SorryIHammerChicken
4 Apr 2006, 20:45
I'd like the person who replaces him to be reasonably unbiased towards a particular State and to have no real connection with the current players. That means no Mark Waugh or Geoff Lawson and, due to his recent involvement with the current team, no Darren Lehmann. Buggered if I know who though....had no idea Merv would get the last spot.
Someone who lives overseas and wasn't born in Australia would be perfect - no bias, select a team on its merits ;)
dan warna
4 Apr 2006, 20:49
Can you explain this? Are you suggesting that Australia's success all comes down to Warne and McGrath, both of whom were picked from relative obscurity by Sawle?
steve waugh, david, boon, alan border, reiffel, hughes, slater, fleming, mark waugh, the nucleus of the team was already there.
hohns has offered nothing to the test side since his arrival.
SorryIHammerChicken
4 Apr 2006, 20:52
(it is often joked that a baggy green in a brown paper bag is given to each NSW player on debut because it always seems top be a NSWelshman that Qlders get dropped for ;))
if hohns favoured Qlders, why did matty hayden (recently named the best batsman of past decade) spend so many years on the outer? why did jimmy maher and martin love pay there dues with thousands and thousands of runs for more than a deade each and then get jumped in the order by clarke and katich? why did kasper and bich spend so many years on the outer before they got a decent run?
Those defenses of QLD players getting a go are fair enough....Scotty Muller is unfairly maligned and despite not playing for that long, was still a damaging bowler. With Symonds though, another example of why one-day form doesn't always equate to Test form.
Watson I agree with, he hasn't been a bad selection. Johnson though, sure he might be a 6'4 paceman but with an average of 37 at the time of his selection it's a bit of a joke. (he turned in a couple of good games recently though, but only after his selection..).
Anyway beatnik can you defend Hauritz' selection for me? ;) Only kidding...Hohns has been much maligned on here and probably a good time to step down. But one thing's for sure, the next head of selectors will get a severe caning from everyone on here.
Don Draper
4 Apr 2006, 21:05
Good to see him go, some of the panels decisions lately have been questionable.
-Mav
where the hell did this idea that hohns or border favoured Qlders?
after more than a decade at the head of one of the most successful sporting teams ever assembled, all you can do is snipe at him over the few bad decisions the selectors have made in a period of utter world dominance
how could it possibly be construed that players get it easy north of the border?
(it is often joked that a baggy green in a brown paper bag is given to each NSW player on debut because it always seems top be a NSWelshman that Qlders get dropped for ;))
if hohns favoured Qlders, why did matty hayden (recently named the best batsman of past decade) spend so many years on the outer? why did jimmy maher and martin love pay there dues with thousands and thousands of runs for more than a deade each and then get jumped in the order by clarke and katich? why did kasper and bich spend so many years on the outer before they got a decent run?
the criticisms seem to be centred around the selection of the following players:
scott muller
exactly who were the fast bowlers waiting in the wings with Muller at the time? jo angel? brad williams? they chose him as a bolter on his home oval and it didn't turn out...not like he played 45 Tests before that was discovered. i mean mick lewis was hardly a success but that doesn't make Merv Hughes a cheat - simply that the selectors got it wrong and moved on
mitchell johnson
...hmmm, let me see. when we got back from the Ashes, the selectors realised we were beaten in two areas - tall, fast strike bowlers and an allrounder - so they gave a 6'4" left-arm speedster a go while Tait was still recovering from injury...sounds smart to blood a player like that...might be a heck of a bowler in 3-4 years time
shane watson
he didn't get a run with the Australian team until he moved to Tasmania...so exactly how did being a Qlder help him? rate him or not, it's not like there are 10 well-performed all-rounders out there that he's keeping out of the side
andy symonds
he is one of the most dominant one-day batsmen in the world in recent years and probably the sort of guy who could rewrite record books if he found his feet at Test level...well worth a plunge for 10-20 Tests i would have thought...he is a confidence player and will take longer to settle in...I just hope he settles in against England ;)
anyway that long rant was supposed to be a show of support for Hohns - great knock by the big guy!
Fancy trying players from the dominant State side over the last 10 years....what a disgraceful selection policy.
It seems to me that some of the more questionable selections over the last few years (in the Test team at least) are:
- dropping Martyn following the Ashes despite reasonable form and a lack of luck on that tour
- dropping Hodge and returning Martyn for the SA tour
- continuing to select Clarke despite poor first class and Test stats
- dropping Katich for Symonds on the Sri Lanka tour
- failing to play MacGill in the Ashes
Other than the 4th one, none of these involve any favouritism towards Queensland players.
Some of the things achieved during Hohns' period as chairman include:
- establishing Australia's most successful opening pairing
- trying Hussey as a middle order bat
- Gilchrist coming into the Test team
- Punter as a number 3
- revitalising Martyn's career
Say what you like about specific selections - every selection panel makes mistakes and Hohns' panel is no different. But he has assisted to create one of the most dominant teams in history. This should neither be entirely credited to him nor should his involvement be completely disregarded or worse, criticised on the basis of a couple of errors.
where the hell did this idea that hohns or border favoured Qlders?
after more than a decade at the head of one of the most successful sporting teams ever assembled, all you can do is snipe at him over the few bad decisions the selectors have made in a period of utter world dominance
how could it possibly be construed that players get it easy north of the border?
(it is often joked that a baggy green in a brown paper bag is given to each NSW player on debut because it always seems top be a NSWelshman that Qlders get dropped for ;))
if hohns favoured Qlders, why did matty hayden (recently named the best batsman of past decade) spend so many years on the outer? why did jimmy maher and martin love pay there dues with thousands and thousands of runs for more than a deade each and then get jumped in the order by clarke and katich? why did kasper and bich spend so many years on the outer before they got a decent run?
the criticisms seem to be centred around the selection of the following players:
scott muller
exactly who were the fast bowlers waiting in the wings with Muller at the time? jo angel? brad williams? they chose him as a bolter on his home oval and it didn't turn out...not like he played 45 Tests before that was discovered. i mean mick lewis was hardly a success but that doesn't make Merv Hughes a cheat - simply that the selectors got it wrong and moved on
mitchell johnson
...hmmm, let me see. when we got back from the Ashes, the selectors realised we were beaten in two areas - tall, fast strike bowlers and an allrounder - so they gave a 6'4" left-arm speedster a go while Tait was still recovering from injury...sounds smart to blood a player like that...might be a heck of a bowler in 3-4 years time
shane watson
he didn't get a run with the Australian team until he moved to Tasmania...so exactly how did being a Qlder help him? rate him or not, it's not like there are 10 well-performed all-rounders out there that he's keeping out of the side
andy symonds
he is one of the most dominant one-day batsmen in the world in recent years and probably the sort of guy who could rewrite record books if he found his feet at Test level...well worth a plunge for 10-20 Tests i would have thought...he is a confidence player and will take longer to settle in...I just hope he settles in against England ;)
anyway that long rant was supposed to be a show of support for Hohns - great knock by the big guy!
Hauritz... Hopes? Muller had 2 good seasons and hes in.. Lewis has had about 4 or 5.
Tell me the last cricketer before Hauritz to get a gig in a Test and be out of the State team in the same summer? Just because he is the only off spinner doesent mean he should get a crack.
James Hopes is still a bit part player he may come good in the future but i dont think he will get there as an all-rounder, he has to be a bat or a bowler, and he could make it as either.
Hodge maybe suspect outside off stump, but hes paid his dues and gets the flick.
Hussey had to score 15,000 runs to get a gig.
It happens everywhere in terms of players paying their dues, but there is good young players from more than 1 state.
Hauritz... Hopes? Muller had 2 good seasons and hes in.. Lewis has had about 4 or 5.
Tell me the last cricketer before Hauritz to get a gig in a Test and be out of the State team in the same summer? Just because he is the only off spinner doesent mean he should get a crack.
James Hopes is still a bit part player he may come good in the future but i dont think he will get there as an all-rounder, he has to be a bat or a bowler, and he could make it as either.
Hodge maybe suspect outside off stump, but hes paid his dues and gets the flick.
Hussey had to score 15,000 runs to get a gig.
It happens everywhere in terms of players paying their dues, but there is good young players from more than 1 state.
Hauritz was a mistake, no question. Most people disagreed with he and White making the tour ahead of MacGill. One (not both) of the young guys should have toured. But selectors have a history of picking modestly performed off-spinners for sub-continental tours.
Hopes was worth the punt. He had reasonable form in domestic one-dayers and could play a role, particularly during the short-lived super-sub days.
Hodge is unlucky but the guy he was replaced with just scored a 100 to win Australia a test - time will tell on that one.
I think, on the whole, the selection panel under Hohns has had more wins than losses.
Black Thunder
5 Apr 2006, 19:13
what a thankless job.
He's been picking teams that have been just about the most succesful in test cricket history and everyone is happy to see the back off him. Admittedly he's too work with some unbeliavable talent, and he's also sent teams out against second rate opposition, but still there's a job to be done and he did it.
Very rarely would i say the selectors have done the wrong thing in the past ten or so years, only a handful of things could i suggest:
- The refusal to play MacGill last Ashes (may not have worked but couldn't have been worse than what was being sent down)
- Dropping Brad Hodge. Should've dropped Symonds.
- Finding a way to keep Lehmann out of the team for so long.
- Hauritz getting a game.
And that's really about it. Even brining back Damian Martyn recently, he went out and got a match winning ton
what a thankless job.
I thought the same thing when reading all the "tributes".
Not only do they have to select for the here & now , they also have to have an eye to the future.
Thanks to Trev for all his hard work.
Hauritz was a mistake, no question. Most people disagreed with he and White making the tour ahead of MacGill. One (not both) of the young guys should have toured. But selectors have a history of picking modestly performed off-spinners for sub-continental tours.
Hopes was worth the punt. He had reasonable form in domestic one-dayers and could play a role, particularly during the short-lived super-sub days.
Hodge is unlucky but the guy he was replaced with just scored a 100 to win Australia a test - time will tell on that one.
I think, on the whole, the selection panel under Hohns has had more wins than losses.
You cant use the point he just scored 100. Whos to say Hodge wouldnt have scored 3 100s in the series? On paper Hodge had a poor Pura Cup average of around 26.. but Martyn's was worse. For some reason I wouldnt have dropped Symonds. However if i was Hohns and wanted Martyn, i would have dropped him ahead of Hodge. Bearing in mind that Symonds is being picked as a batsman in this series, not an allrounder.
ALwaysNorth
5 Apr 2006, 23:19
steve waugh, david, boon, alan border, reiffel, hughes, slater, fleming, mark waugh, the nucleus of the team was already there.
hohns has offered nothing to the test side since his arrival.
Geez that's some list , unfortunately Border and Hughes both played their last tests in 1994 , David Boon played his last in 1996 and Slater played his first test in 1993 (was Hohns a test selector in 1993 ?) .
I also see you've rated by his absence Glenn McGrath who played his first test in 1993 below Paul Reiffel and Damien Fleming who debuted in 1994 , is that a Victorian thing ?? Because I don't remember either of them being dominant Test bowlers .
what a thankless job.
He's been picking teams that have been just about the most succesful in test cricket history and everyone is happy to see the back off him.
i dont get it either
some people just love bitching for the sake of bitching
You cant use the point he just scored 100. Whos to say Hodge wouldnt have scored 3 100s in the series? On paper Hodge had a poor Pura Cup average of around 26.. but Martyn's was worse. For some reason I wouldnt have dropped Symonds. However if i was Hohns and wanted Martyn, i would have dropped him ahead of Hodge. Bearing in mind that Symonds is being picked as a batsman in this series, not an allrounder.
This issue has been done to death and there's no question that Hodge was desperately unlucky...as was Martyn to be dropped in the first place. Both selection decisions were mistakes in that they are hard to justify.
But the fact remains, if Martyn scores well over the next 18 months, then you have to assume the selectors got it right. Of course you can argue that Hodge might have made 3 tons...but I could argue that Shane Watson would have scored double hundreds if he was given the spot and it would have just as much clout as your argument that Hodge might have scored 3 centuries. In this case, the end may justify the means - I still can't understand why Hodge was dropped but if Martyn returns to his pre-Ashes form, then I can't see that anyone can criticise the selectors.
I still maintain the Hohns' panel has made more right calls than wrong.
This issue has been done to death and there's no question that Hodge was desperately unlucky...as was Martyn to be dropped in the first place. Both selection decisions were mistakes in that they are hard to justify.
But the fact remains, if Martyn scores well over the next 18 months, then you have to assume the selectors got it right. Of course you can argue that Hodge might have made 3 tons...but I could argue that Shane Watson would have scored double hundreds if he was given the spot and it would have just as much clout as your argument that Hodge might have scored 3 centuries. In this case, the end may justify the means - I still can't understand why Hodge was dropped but if Martyn returns to his pre-Ashes form, then I can't see that anyone can criticise the selectors.
I still maintain the Hohns' panel has made more right calls than wrong.
Ok. But that was originally the side argument. End it there shall we?
I think Boof's name came up when Merv got the job.
If Lehmann got the job Michael Clarke would be back in the Australia first XI before you can say 'boof'.
Would be a bad idea to pick someone still attached to team mates of their state, as has been said on numerous occasions on this thread. It would lead to biased selection.