Ponting has another whinge

[eddiesmith]

Well its not really news but anyway :p

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,18876385%255E2882,00.html

Give us a break, says Ponting
Iain Payten
Chittagong
21apr06

RICKY Ponting has demanded Australian cricketers get more time off in their hectic schedule, saying the exhausting Test program was "unacceptable".

The Australian captain made the strong statement after his side wrapped up the second Test against Bangladesh in Chittagong yesterday, securing a 2-0 series win with an innings defeat of the Tigers.
The victory marked the long-awaited end of a demanding stretch of Test cricket for Australia, extending back to the Ashes, through a long domestic summer and then a tour of South Africa.

But with the Dhaka ambush of his tired players still resonating, Ponting said it was time that Australia's touring program allowed for more valuable rest..

"It has been an incredibly difficult last few months for us," Ponting said.

"The Test cricket has been quite demanding and the program has been very demanding.

"We certainly do have to have a look at the amount of time between Tests. We played five in five weeks, and in pretty extreme conditions here. That is, as far as I am concerned, not acceptable."

Ponting said turning around from one Test to the next in two days was simply not enough time to properly recover and opened up the prospect of injuries to his players.

"We would like more time between the Test matches, that's the big thing," he said.

"We just didn't have a break. A two-day break between the Test matches we just played is nowhere near enough. I think we saw the effects of that on day one in the first Test in Dhaka.

"We had guys who, if we were fair dinkum, probably shouldn't have played. Shouldn't have taken the field because they were totally exhausted and fatigued."

Ponting said while players had input in creating the future Test schedules under which they played, their requests for more down time had fallen on deaf ears; Dhaka may have finally changed that.

"For the last few years now we have been demanding that there is at least three days between Test matches," Ponting said.

"One day might not sound a lot. But coming here, if we had one more day before the first Test, I think we would have been a lot better off for it.

"Hopefully people above are going to start listening to what the players are saying. The good thing about it was we had (Cricket Australia boss) James Sutherland and a few of the board in Dhaka for the start of the game, so they would have noticed it first hand.

"They would have just made them a bit more alert to it for them to see it with their own eyes instead of hearing it second hand."

Australia's spin duo of Shane Warne (5-113) and Stuart MacGill took just two hours to roll through Bangladesh's second innings yesterday, with Mohammad Rafique's furious 65 from 51 balls -- including six sixes -- the only resistance.

Courtesy of Jason Gillespie's man-of-the-match performance, Australia won by an innings and 80 runs before lunch.

"I had a feeling that we could come here after a couple of days rest and be able to compete a lot better, and we did," Ponting said.

"We get a good break now, a good chance for the guys to freshen up and get really fit for what is a big six-seven months of international cricket for us, with the Champions Trophy, the Ashes and the World Cup."

Ponting paid credit to the Bangladesh side, which surpassed expectations by pushing Australia hard in the first Test before falling away in the second.

"Bangladesh have played well. They have improved, there is no doubt about that. What I would like to see, though, is them in our conditions," Ponting said.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Funny how he says it before they embark on a 5 month break without a days cricket to be played in that time

But really the test players have played 5 tests over 8 weeks, had a 6 week break, played another 7 tests over 3 months at home, had another 2 month break and played 5 tests over 5-6 weeks then another 5 month break. In comparison they play 5-7 home tests in the next 18 months

It may be hard for those playing ODIs, but maybe the Aussies should look at seperate sides especially with most of their older players

[Grimwood]

I hope England rotate their test team a little over the summer. Providing everything is going well it would make perfect sense for Jimmy Anderson to play all 3 tests against Sri Lanka with Jones, Harmison and Hoggard rotating around him and Ian Bell filling Vaughan's place until he comes back against Pakistan.

If we could engineer a dead rubber we could even rest Flintoff.

Then we could send an uhm.. "experimental" team to the champion's trophy as well.

[eddiesmith]

I hope England rotate their test team a little over the summer. Providing everything is going well it would make perfect sense for Jimmy Anderson to play all 3 tests against Sri Lanka with Jones, Harmison and Hoggard rotating around him and Ian Bell filling Vaughan's place until he comes back against Pakistan.

If we could engineer a dead rubber we could even rest Flintoff.

Then we could send an uhm.. "experimental" team to the champion's trophy as well.
Dont we usually end up with experimental teams in ODIs anyway? Seems all our players pick up these mysterious injuries before one day series begin and have to head home for treatment

[Grimwood]

Well yes.. but I mean one with the likes of Joyce, Shah, Plunkett, Tremlett and prehaps even Clarke mixed in with Bell and Cook if he has a good Pro40/C&G. I think the ODI team should be fairly different anyway but it's a virtual necessity for the CT squad if we want to arrive in Australia with most of our key test players fit.

[usalion]

Will give Punter something there...17 Tests over a 9 month period is a tough ask, seeing that guys like Hayden, Ponting, Gilly, Warne and Lee (from memory) played in all of them. If the ICC is going to put together a schedule like that, then the Aussie selectors will need to look to rest players at times- the most logical is in dead rubbers, but you could do it elsewhere.

Even in praccy matches like the Banga Tests, the players are putting out an effort being there. One can question their interest level, but it is a tough schedule, especially going all around the world.

With all the one day matches, which DO make money in most countries, some of the players are really pushing things...but it will have to be the selection panel which puts together a squad for both Tests and ODIs and the management team deciding on the day who gets to play.

Punter is not the only one calling for this- I've read stuff recently about players looking at strike action over the ICC schedule. Something needs to be done, or we will be losing players through injury or burnout very quickly.

It may go against "tradition," but the schedule has changed over the last few decades...look at all the tour matches that used to be played, where the players could relax.

You can argue "well, they are about to start a 5 month break," but show me another team that has played as much test cricket in a nine month period.

I'll lay the blame at the door of the selectors for not looking at this- we knew when the team left for England that this was the schedule from the middle of July to the middle of April. There WERE options, many of which have been argued about on this board.

[eddiesmith]

Well heres a question for ya, how many players actually played the full 17 tests?

[Lidge]

17 Tests per year is not an issue.

Meaningless ODI matches clogging up the calendar are the issue (but are here to stay as they are the ICC cash cow).

Because there's so much ODI cricket played, the Tests are scheduled into small periods of time (back to back tests are bad - and this is where fast bowlers will break down) and cause burn out.

Plus by virtue of playing such tight schedules, the traditional tour games have fallen by the wayside which means the fringe players simply become net bowlers and spectators. They only get a gig when an incumbent breaks down.

This is not just an Aussie issue. Same goes with England. Sth Africa, Pakistan & India.

Eddiesmith - if there wasn't so much junk cricket scheduled on the calendar, you would probably find a core of 8-9 players, featuring in all 17 Tests (due to being fresher, and injury free).

[usalion]

Well heres a question for ya, how many players actually played the full 17 tests?

From memory, five- Hayden, Ponting, Warne, Gilly and Lee...haven't checked to be sure, but that seems right to me. Langer played in 15, I think....

Warne and Lee were both questionable for the second Test in Bangladesh...and Gilly's form has been less than sterling recently- the 144 being an exception. The three spots where you would expect excess work to show- your lead fast bowler, which Lee has been since the McGrath injury, your main spinner and your wicket keeper.

Ponting and Gilly have been playing most of the one day matches as well, as has Lee.

It would be interesting to see how many teams have played 17 Tests in a 9 month period (mid July of 2005 to mid April of 2006). Might be the Windies or somebody with a five test tour of England, followed with tours to the subcontinent and the southern hemisphere....

[Cooldude]

Okay if they wanna play less, then they're gonna get paid less then

That's the score, ain't it?

Bet ya they wouldn't be complaining about the schedule again if the ICC just say that line at them.

[Russian]

Well heres a question for ya, how many players actually played the full 17 tests?17 Hayden .................
17 Ponting .................
17 Gilchrist .................
17 Warne .................
17 Lee .................
12 Langer ......--..-....--
11 Hussey xxxxxx...........
10 Clarke ........xxxxxxx..
09 Martyn .....xxxxxxx....-
09 McGrath .-.-.......------
08 Symonds xxxxxxx........xx
07 Katich .......xxxxxxxxxx
07 MacGill xxxxx.x..x..xxx..
06 Kasprowicz x.x.xxxxxxx....--
05 Hodge xxxxxxx.....xxxxx
05 Gillespie ...xxxxxxxxxxxx..
04 Clark xxxxxxxxxxxx....x
02 Jaques xxxxxxxxxx.xxxxx.
02 Watson xxxxx..-----xxx--
02 Bracken xxxxxx.xx.xxxxxxx
02 Tait xxx..xxxxxxxxx---
01 Cullen xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

[Romeo]

17 Hayden .................
17 Ponting .................
17 Gilchrist .................
17 Warne .................
17 Lee .................
12 Langer ......xx..x....xx
11 Hussey xxxxxx...........
10 Clarke ........xxxxxxx..
10 McGrath .x.x........xxxxx
09 Martyn .....xxxxxxx....x
08 Symonds xxxxxxx........xx
07 Katich .......xxxxxxxxxx
07 MacGill xxxxx.x..x..xxx..
05 Hodge xxxxxxx.....xxxxx
05 Gillespie ...xxxxxxxxxxxx..
05 Kasprowicz x.x.xxxxxxxx...xx
04 Clark xxxxxxxxxxxx....x
02 Jaques xxxxxxxxxx.xxxxx.
02 Watson xxxxx..xxxxxxxxxx
02 Bracken xxxxxx.xx.xxxxxxx
02 Tait xxx..xxxxxxxxxxxx
01 Cullen xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

We do have a rotation policy in the one days though which eases the burden. The majority haven't played close to 17.

[Grimreepah]

Well its not really news but anyway :p

How dare Ponting stick up for his players. What a disgrace!:rolleyes:

[Renegade]

Death..........Taxes................Ponting whinging................

[stmookeyj]

Meaningless ODI matches clogging up the calendar are the issue (but are here to stay as they are the ICC cash cow).

Because there's so much ODI cricket played, the Tests are scheduled into small periods of time (back to back tests are bad - and this is where fast bowlers will break down) and cause burn out.


FWIW, The ODI games for each player from March 2005 to now ......(NZ Tour [5], Natwest Trophy [7], Natwest Challenge [3], Super Series [3], Chappell-Hadlee [3], VB Series [11], RSA Series [5], [B]TOTAL: 37, INCLUDES Super-Subs that were used)

M.Clarke 35 (5+5+3+3+3+11+5)
A.Gilchrist 35 (5+7+3+3+3+9+5) [Rested during VB Series]
J.Gillespie 13 (3+7+3+0+0+0+0)
M.Hayden 11 (2+7+2+0+0+0+0)
B.Hogg 25 (4+6+1+0+2+9+3) [Injured for Super Series]
M.Hussey 36 (4+7+3+3+3+11+5)
M.Kasprowicz 9 (4+3+2+0+0+0+0)
S.Katich 28 (4+1+2+3+3+10+5) [Missed 1 game in VB Series with illness]
B.Lee 34 (5+5+3+3+2+11+5)
G.McGrath 20 (4+6+3+2+0+5+0) [Missed plenty for personal reasons]
D.Martyn 34 (5+7+3+3+0+11+5) [Missed Chappell-Hadlee with injury]
R.Ponting 32 (4+7+3+3+3+9+3) [Ill in South Africa, Rested during VB Series]
A.Symonds 32 (5+5+3+3+3+11+2) [Suspended in Natwest Series, Injured in South Africa]
S.Watson 8 (0+4+1+3+0+0+0) [Injured after Super-Series]
J.Hopes 8 (1+0+0+0+0+7+0)
B.Haddin 3 (0+0+1+0+0+2+0)
N.Bracken 19 (0+0+0+3+3+8+5)
C.White 5 (0+0+0+3+2+0+0)
S.Clark 15 (0+0+0+1+3+7+4)
B.Hodge 5 (0+0+0+0+3+2+0)
M.Lewis 7 (0+0+0+0+2+2+3)
M.Johnson 2 (0+0+0+0+1+0+1)
B.Dorey 3 (0+0+0+0+0+3+0)
P.Jaques 2 (0+0+0+0+0+1+1)

[mark73]

How dare Ponting stick up for his players. What a disgrace!:rolleyes:
Stole my thunder.Wonder what eddiesmith means in Knobonese. :rolleyes:

[eddiesmith]

ICC CEO hits back critics of the FTP

Speed speaks out on scheduling and burnout
Martin Williamson

April 22, 2006



Malcolm Speed: 'There is a reliance on members to be responsible in scheduling additional commitments' © Getty Images


Malcolm Speed has hit out at critics who have accused the ICC of apparent indifference to player workloads, stating that they are "quite simply ill-informed and wrong".

Speed, the ICC chief executive, wrote in an article published on Cricinfo that the ICC was all too aware of the strain on players.

"Avoiding that cycle of problems was one reason why the ICC recently introduced its new six-year Future Tours Program (FTP) to replace the existing five year schedule," he explained. "[It] was put together following extensive consultation and has factored in guidelines, supported at the ICC Cricket Committee, by players at the captains' meeting and by player representatives, including FICA, concerning the highest volume of matches each side should be playing."

He went on to outline the demands on each country, which should mean that no teams should play more than 15 Test matches and 30 ODIs in a 12-month period, although he added that "teams rarely come close to this limit".

But he warned that some of the scheduling was outside the ICC's control and was down to the member countries themselves. "There is a reliance on members to be responsible in scheduling additional commitments above and beyond those required by the FTP - two Tests and three ODIs home and away against each other during the six-year period. The ICC recognizes the need for Members to look to maximize their revenue in order to grow the game ... but, at the same time, they have to be mindful that the players are their prime assets and overworking them would benefit no one in the long run."

[Players] are doing something that the vast majority of people that watch them in action can only dream of, and they are well-paid too
And Speed said that while the strain of travelling and playing was clear for all to see, he stated that "they are engaged in their career of choice". He continued: "They are doing something that the vast majority of people that watch them in action can only dream of, and they are well-paid too. The current crop of international stars are better rewarded for their efforts than any of their predecessors.

"Players have to realise it is a two-way street. They cannot, on the one hand, complain of playing too much and then turn round and head off for a lucrative spell of English county cricket when there is a break in the schedule." He also pointed out that not all players were unhappy, and some wanted to actually play more. Speed's comments would seem to throw the onus back on the individual boards as it is the extra matches they squeeze into gaps in the schedules - such as the DLF Cup in Abu Dhabi this week - that greatly increase the time spent travelling and playing.

What is sure is that this debate is far from over.

Martin Williamson is managing editor of Cricinfo

© Cricinfo
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well said Malcolm :thumbsu:

[Grimreepah]

This article doesn't mean Ponting was out of place to criticise the scheduling.

It's all very well saying 'won't play more than 15 Tests and 30 one dayers in a 12 month period', but Australia have played all their Test cricket in one chunk and will now have 6 months off. That defeats the purpose.

I think virtually every captain complains about over scheduling. Is this just coincidence, or do you think that maybe cricket is overscheduled (at times)?

[eddiesmith]

This article doesn't mean Ponting was out of place to criticise the scheduling.

It's all very well saying 'won't play more than 15 Tests and 30 one dayers in a 12 month period', but Australia have played all their Test cricket in one chunk and will now have 6 months off. That defeats the purpose.

I think virtually every captain complains about over scheduling. Is this just coincidence, or do you think that maybe cricket is overscheduled (at times)?
Its not the ICC, its the governing bodies fault, the ICC cant do any more but they cant help it if some countries are stubborn in when they stay at home and when they can tour and want long series

[usalion]

Its not the ICC, its the governing bodies fault, the ICC cant do any more but they cant help it if some countries are stubborn in when they stay at home and when they can tour and want long series


Huh? You need to fill in the blanks there, eddie...if you are bagging Australia for their schedule...where are the long series? 3 tests v Windies, South Africa (h), South Africa (a) and two against Bangladesh. Only change I could see which gets to your point about refusing to change schedules, would be to play South Africa at home in June and July- matches all in the north...of course, that means no Boxing Day Test in Melbourne...watch the Vics whinge....

Windies usually schedule home tests in late May or June, so a trip for them in the Aussie winter is really not on....

The ICC sets the schedule as best they can- you can;t play Test cricket in Australia south of Brisbane from April to October, because the weather and light suck....

We could have done an earlier tour to England, as we were free by early April, but the Poms wanted to get the Bangladesh tests in....

Too much cricket being crammed into the time available. ICC can cut it down by stopping the foolish "everybody must play everyone else in x amount of time...." Some series are more important than others- England v Australia, India v Pakistan, to name two....

[Bennycoff]

Well its not really news but anyway :p

Funny how he says it before they embark on a 5 month break without a days cricket to be played in that time

But really the test players have played 5 tests over 8 weeks, had a 6 week break, played another 7 tests over 3 months at home, had another 2 month break and played 5 tests over 5-6 weeks then another 5 month break. In comparison they play 5-7 home tests in the next 18 months

It may be hard for those playing ODIs, but maybe the Aussies should look at seperate sides especially with most of their older players

We've won 11 tests from 12 and drawn one. And we are going to smash the overrated Pomps.

You have the worst one day side going round, if you consider Giles and Vaughan as loses to your side your kidding yourself. You were missing the soft Trescothick and Harmison, Jones is not a good one day player.

Don;t worry you guys will be doing all the whinging this summer, i'm sure your coach has something to whinge about when he comes over here. Fact is your team played there best cricket and only beat us 2-1, we played pathetic and had hardly any contributors. Aussies will kill it.

[jko'neal]

Ponts is a legend but they just showed footage of him giving the Ump advice after his decision to give him out yesterday.
Skating on thin ice having a crack at Umps continually, could backfire come ashes time.
It's not as though our blokes dont get the odd decision go our way when bowling.

[eddiesmith]

We've won 11 tests from 12 and drawn one. And we are going to smash the overrated Pomps.

You have the worst one day side going round, if you consider Giles and Vaughan as loses to your side your kidding yourself. You were missing the soft Trescothick and Harmison, Jones is not a good one day player.

Don;t worry you guys will be doing all the whinging this summer, i'm sure your coach has something to whinge about when he comes over here. Fact is your team played there best cricket and only beat us 2-1, we played pathetic and had hardly any contributors. Aussies will kill it.
Wow so our :D:D:D:D one day side has what to do with the Ashes? Funnilly enough over the last 2 years its about even in ODIs between Australia and England, count the 20/20 and we may even be ahead despite having one of the worst One day teams in the world :D

Australia has beaten the 3 worst teams in the world and that shows you are back? Riiiight, your batting has failed to fire all summer, failed to pass 400 against the Saffies except for once when Hodgey scored a double and now he is out of the side, funny stuff that whilst we drew with the then 2nd best team in the world away from home, we have gained more from the last 6 months than Australia

[Grimreepah]

Wow so our :D:D:D:D one day side has what to do with the Ashes? Funnilly enough over the last 2 years its about even in ODIs between Australia and England, count the 20/20 and we may even be ahead despite having one of the worst One day teams in the world :D

Australia has beaten the 3 worst teams in the world and that shows you are back? Riiiight, your batting has failed to fire all summer, failed to pass 400 against the Saffies except for once when Hodgey scored a double and now he is out of the side, funny stuff that whilst we drew with the then 2nd best team in the world away from home, we have gained more from the last 6 months than Australia

Beating bad sides is a better than losing to good sides.

By the way, is the World XI included as one of your worst 3 teams in the world, or did you deliberately omit that?

Also, when was the last time England won in Australia?

[eddiesmith]

Beating bad sides is a better than losing to good sides.

By the way, is the World XI included as one of your worst 3 teams in the world, or did you deliberately omit that?

Also, when was the last time England won in Australia?

Losing in the sub continent will have no affect on our ability to win Downunder

World XI? What a joke that was, maybe I should say the 4 worst teams in the world if you want to include them

Last test we played we won in Australia :p :D

[Grimreepah]

Last test we played we won in Australia :p :D

That's right, the dodgy SCG pitch.

I bet England felt like winners on the plane home after they lost the first 4 Tests.

[eddiesmith]

That's right, the dodgy SCG pitch.

I bet England felt like winners on the plane home after they lost the first 4 Tests.
Thats why most of them got the sack pretty soon after and our new team took over and havent looked back

[Grimreepah]

Thats why most of them got the sack pretty soon after and our new team took over and havent looked back

England have a bad record in Australia, though, you must admit.

Mind you they have a pretty bad record at home as well, and they overcame that. Meh, there's hope.

[bombersno1]

Thats why most of them got the sack pretty soon after and our new team took over and havent looked back

No spinner= next to no chance of beating us in Australia! You need a spinner and probally 2 in Adelaide and Sydney to win those matches!

[Bennycoff]

THE SOONER EVERYONE REALISES THAT ENGLAND ARE OVERRATED THE BETTER!!!! WE WILL WIN BACK THE ASHES THIS SUMMER. ENGLAND HAVE NO DEPTH, RELY ON TOO FEW AND THINK WE'RE ON THE DECLINE.
Can;t wait to go to the MCG and give it to all the Pomps.

[eddiesmith]

Australia have no depth, rely on too few and think we are 1 series wonders

Cant wait to go to the MCG to see us retain the Ashes

[Grimwood]

THE SOONER EVERYONE REALISES THAT ENGLAND ARE OVERRATED THE BETTER!!!! WE WILL WIN BACK THE ASHES THIS SUMMER. ENGLAND HAVE NO DEPTH, RELY ON TOO FEW AND THINK WE'RE ON THE DECLINE.
Can;t wait to go to the MCG and give it to all the Pomps.

I'd say England and Wales have the largest pool of test quality players to select from that they've had in over 20 years.

Whether they compare to the likes of Mick Lewis and Mitchell Johnson I really wouldn't like to say...

[Grimreepah]

Australia have no depth, rely on too few and think we are 1 series wonders

Don't confuse dodgy selections with a lack of depth.

I agree we do rely on too few at the moment. The good thing is though that it's easy to know what direction to go in (ie. which players to drop) to improve the side. If you're playing bad, and everyone is contributing an equal amount, then it's a lot harder to know what to do.

Cant wait to go to the MCG to see us retain the Ashes

Yes. I agree. It seems an eternity doesn't it.

[eddiesmith]

Don't confuse dodgy selections with a lack of depth.

I agree we do rely on too few at the moment. The good thing is though that it's easy to know what direction to go in (ie. which players to drop) to improve the side. If you're playing bad, and everyone is contributing an equal amount, then it's a lot harder to know what to do.



Yes. I agree. It seems an eternity doesn't it.
What is your depth? The best batsman outside the squad is deemed to be not good enough with a batting average of 58 and atleast 2 batsman in the side are playing :D:D:D:D yet it seems they are safe as the selectors dont trust anyone else, no depth if crap players cant be forced out

The bowlers aint much either, Australia need a fit and firing McGrath and could also do with someone putting pressure on Gilly

[Grimreepah]

What is your depth? The best batsman outside the squad is deemed to be not good enough with a batting average of 58

I rest my case

The bowlers aint much either, Australia need a fit and firing McGrath

Who wouldn't miss McGrath? But we can still win without him. We've got a spinner or two that go alright.

could also do with someone putting pressure on Gilly

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/australia/content/player/5560.html

[bombersno1]

Haddin, WTF are you smoking there! Not international standard.

[Grimreepah]

Haddin, WTF are you smoking there! Not international standard.

I'm high on life.

Haddin is very good. Just you wait and see.

[Bennycoff]

Haddin is a very good keeper and batsman. Better than that English spud Jones.

[eddiesmith]

Haddin is a very good keeper and batsman. Better than that English spud Jones.
Maybe but he isnt putting any pressure on Gilly

Doesnt matter if he is better than Englands keeper, it matters if he is deemed good enough to replace yours

[bombersno1]

Haddin is a very good keeper and batsman. Better than that English spud Jones.

Mate ANYONE is better than Jones, it is not a challenge. The next best ones are Hartley and Ronchi.

[Grimreepah]

Maybe but he isnt putting any pressure on Gilly

How do you want to him to do that? Heckle him before he goes out to bat?

[eddiesmith]

How do you want to him to do that? Heckle him before he goes out to bat?
Make more big scores consistently and when Gilly is failing

Really if he wants to knock Gilly out of the spot before Gilly retires and they consider giving it to a youngster he would want to start next year with atelast 2 centuries in the first 3 games

[Grimreepah]

Make more big scores consistently and when Gilly is failing

Really if he wants to knock Gilly out of the spot before Gilly retires and they consider giving it to a youngster he would want to start next year with atelast 2 centuries in the first 3 games

In 2005/06 Brad Haddin scored 617 runs @ 51.41 from 9 matches. This is the 3rd highest average, behind Lehmann and Cosgrove, for anyone who has played more than 3 matches.

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2005-06/AUS_LOCAL/PC/STATS/PC_2005-06_BAT_HIGHEST_AVS.html

What more do you want? 2 centuries from his first 3 games. Pfffffffft. Where do you get these mysterious standards from? Is there some sort of formula or do you just make it up as you go?

[eddiesmith]

In 2005/06 Brad Haddin scored 617 runs @ 51.41 from 9 matches. This is the 3rd highest average, behind Lehmann and Cosgrove, for anyone who has played more than 3 matches.

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2005-06/AUS_LOCAL/PC/STATS/PC_2005-06_BAT_HIGHEST_AVS.html

What more do you want? 2 centuries from his first 3 games. Pfffffffft. Where do you get these mysterious standards from? Is there some sort of formula or do you just make it up as you go?
No I dont just make it up, but there are 3 games before the 1st test right? Any player looking to oust a player like Gilly would need great numbers at the time

Gilly is there purely for his batting, but if Haddin aint putting up a superb case then Gilly will hold on

[Grimreepah]

No I dont just make it up, but there are 3 games before the 1st test right? Any player looking to oust a player like Gilly would need great numbers at the time

Gilly is there purely for his batting, but if Haddin aint putting up a superb case then Gilly will hold on

Gilly will play in the Ashes, no matter how well Haddin does. I remember everyone saying that the earth was nearing an end when Healy retired. So I'm not going to panic every time we get a new keeper, especially when we have Haddin waiting in the wings.

By the way, are you implying that Gilchrist isn't good with the gloves?

[bombersno1]

In 2005/06 Brad Haddin scored 617 runs @ 51.41 from 9 matches. This is the 3rd highest average, behind Lehmann and Cosgrove, for anyone who has played more than 3 matches.

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2005-06/AUS_LOCAL/PC/STATS/PC_2005-06_BAT_HIGHEST_AVS.html

What more do you want? 2 centuries from his first 3 games. Pfffffffft. Where do you get these mysterious standards from? Is there some sort of formula or do you just make it up as you go?

Only 1 hundred though. You need better figures than that if you want to take Gilly's place. 51 avaerage is ok, but I have news for you, it is not enough!

[Grimreepah]

Only 1 hundred though. You need better figures than that if you want to take Gilly's place. 51 avaerage is ok, but I have news for you, it is not enough!

Piffel

I'm trying to have a serious conversation here.

[eddiesmith]

Piffel

I'm trying to have a serious conversation here.
These days he probably bats about 5 for NSW their batting lineup is so :D:D:D:D :p

As for Gillys keeping, no its not that great and he definately never got in the side for his keeping, was not bad for a while there but when he first came in and again the last 2 years it has been poor, drops some real sitters especially off Warney

As for who comes close to Haddin, its not a question of that, its a question of when Gilly goes they might for one of the young guns if Haddin doesnt force his way in soon

[bombersno1]

Piffel

I'm trying to have a serious conversation here.

Yes, and I am stating that one hundred in a domestic season where he has had more than enough opportunities to bat is poor! Luke Ronchi scored 1 ton as well! So in my view Ronchi is better.:thumbsu:

[Grimreepah]

These days he probably bats about 5 for NSW their batting lineup is so :D:D:D:D :p

As for Gillys keeping, no its not that great and he definately never got in the side for his keeping, was not bad for a while there but when he first came in and again the last 2 years it has been poor, drops some real sitters especially off Warney

As for who comes close to Haddin, its not a question of that, its a question of when Gilly goes they might for one of the young guns if Haddin doesnt force his way in soon

All Haddin has to do is keep doing what he is doing. Any improvement would be a bonus. Of course if Gilchrist plays for another 4 years, then that's different. But that won't happen.

[bombersno1]

All Haddin has to do is keep doing what he is doing. Any improvement would be a bonus. Of course if Gilchrist plays for another 4 years, then that's different. But that won't happen.

How do you know Gilly won't play for another 4 years? Considering the options are thin to say the least, he may well be pushed into playing for a little longer. Ronchi is the best replacement!:thumbsu:

[Grimreepah]

Yes, and I am stating that one hundred in a domestic season where he has had more than enough opportunities to bat is poor! Luke Ronchi scored 1 ton as well! So in my view Ronchi is better.:thumbsu:

Interesting logic.

Ronchi scored 238 runs at 39.66 from 4 matches

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2005-06/AUS_LOCAL/PC/STATS/PC_2005-06_BAT.html

Why is it that how many hundreds you score is more important than your average?

[Grimreepah]

How do you know Gilly won't play for another 4 years? Considering the options are thin to say the least, he may well be pushed into playing for a little longer. Ronchi is the best replacement!:thumbsu:

Gilly has indicated he won't be playing much longer. And with a ready replacement in Haddin I am fine with that. Ronchi will have to bide his time.

[eddiesmith]

Gilly has indicated he won't be playing much longer. And with a ready replacement in Haddin I am fine with that. Ronchi will have to bide his time.
I reckon Haddin is the perfect replacement, but the question must be asked whether the selectors believe the same

[Grimreepah]

I reckon Haddin is the perfect replacement, but the question must be asked whether the selectors believe the same

Why? I thought the fact that he has been the replacement keeper for the last couple of years would give you a clue.

[eddiesmith]

Why? I thought the fact that he has been the replacement keeper for the last couple of years would give you a clue.
But he has only ever replaced him for an ODI here or there, I just get the feeling if Gilly is still in the team in 18 months time then they might be looking at the younger keepers

I find it interesting that for all the changes to the Aussie test team where players miss matches for small injuries, Gilly has never missed 1 yet does miss the occassional ODI

Plus Gilly has been in a terrible form slump yet they dont see the need to rest him or even take Haddin on tour

[bombersno1]

Interesting logic.

Ronchi scored 238 runs at 39.66 from 4 matches

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2005-06/AUS_LOCAL/PC/STATS/PC_2005-06_BAT.html

Why is it that how many hundreds you score is more important than your average?

Hundreds turn matches, fifties don't as simple as that. And if you are comparing two batsmen-keepers then it is a huge factor. Haddin needs to score a few more tons!

[bombersno1]

Gilly has indicated he won't be playing much longer. And with a ready replacement in Haddin I am fine with that. Ronchi will have to bide his time.

My point is that in my opinion Haddin is a extremely short-term option. He is on the wrong side of 30 as well. So you are going to get 4 years max out of him. Hartley or Ronchi for mine, and I am more leaning towards Ronchi becuase of his batting.

[eddiesmith]

My point is that in my opinion Haddin is a extremely short-term option. He is on the wrong side of 30 as well. So you are going to get 4 years max out of him. Hartley or Ronchi for mine, and I am more leaning towards Ronchi becuase of his batting.
Full name: Bradley James Haddin
Born: 23rd October 1977, Cowra, New South Wales, Australia


DOnt worry, I was of the same opinion as well before I saw this a few weeks back

[Grimreepah]

I find it interesting that for all the changes to the Aussie test team where players miss matches for small injuries, Gilly has never missed 1 yet does miss the occassional ODI

How many games had Gilchrist played before Healy retired?

Plus Gilly has been in a terrible form slump yet they dont see the need to rest him or even take Haddin on tour

Healy was in bad form aswell. In fact Gilchrist's bad form is the same as Healy's average.

[eddiesmith]

How many games had Gilchrist played before Healy retired?



Healy was in bad form aswell. In fact Gilchrist's bad form is the same as Healy's average.
ANd Healy was dumped, they dont seem to feel the same about Gilly

[Grimreepah]

Hundreds turn matches, fifties don't as simple as that. And if you are comparing two batsmen-keepers then it is a huge factor. Haddin needs to score a few more tons!

:eek:This is too silly to respond to.

[Grimreepah]

ANd Healy was dumped, they dont seem to feel the same about Gilly

How do you know that won't happen?

[Cooldude]

How do you know that won't happen?

Selectors don't have the guts

[eddiesmith]

How do you know that won't happen?
They drop blokes for poor form then bring em back 6 games later when they havent made any runs since

They have a love affair with the team and dont want to change it, look how they drop players then bring em back for no reason

They wont drop a long term servant like Gilly, they will let him retire on his own terms, being V/C helps alot as well

[Grimreepah]

My point is that in my opinion Haddin is a extremely short-term option. He is on the wrong side of 30 as well. So you are going to get 4 years max out of him. Hartley or Ronchi for mine, and I am more leaning towards Ronchi becuase of his batting.

Fortunately the selectors don't agree with you as it is obvious that Haddin is being groomed as a replacement.

You know it surprises that with someone as talented as Haddin in the wings, that people criticise him. People criticised Gilly when he was in the same position, but it wasn't personal, they just loved Healy. You seem to have something against Haddin. Are you sure you haven't had some sort of altercation with him?

[Grimreepah]

They drop blokes for poor form then bring em back 6 games later when they havent made any runs since

Once the keeper goes, they won't bring him back. Even if Haddin plays like Gerraint, they won't bring Gilchrist back, they will look at someone else. Gilchrist has stated he wants to be with his family. His desire is waning and its showing in his performance. IMO the Ashes will be his last Test series and the World Cup will be his last one day series.

[eddiesmith]

Once the keeper goes, they won't bring him back. Even if Haddin plays like Gerraint, they won't bring Gilchrist back, they will look at someone else. Gilchrist has stated he wants to be with his family. His desire is waning and its showing in his performance. IMO the Ashes will be his last Test series and the World Cup will be his last one day series.
I know he wont be brought back, thats why they wont dump him untill he retires

It seems like each of the players from the great era will be allowed to leave on their own terms

[Grimreepah]

I know he wont be brought back, thats why they wont dump him untill he retires

It seems like each of the players from the great era will be allowed to leave on their own terms

I don't know if Gilchrist is any more respected than Healy. The same rule that applied to Healy would also apply to Gilchrist. But I think Gilchrist would retire before it gets to that stage.

[eddiesmith]

I don't know if Gilchrist is any more respected than Healy. The same rule that applied to Healy would also apply to Gilchrist. But I think Gilchrist would retire before it gets to that stage.
I think because he was in such a successful era and VC he might be or the current selectors dont have the balls of those when Healy was dropped

[usalion]

Yup- selection panel in 98-9 made the tough (and correct) call in dropping Heals and bringing in Gilly...though we Queenslanders were really ticked with the situation- thought that Heals should have gotten a Gabba send off....and Gilly copped a lot when he came to Brissie...

We need a couple of tough decisions made now, but the selectors seem to be swinging in the wind. Wicketkeepers do wear down at an earlier age on average than others, and Haddin should have the gloves for a couple of years until Ronchi/Hartley/Crossy fight it out for the next long term keeper position.

[eddiesmith]

Yup- selection panel in 98-9 made the tough (and correct) call in dropping Heals and bringing in Gilly...though we Queenslanders were really ticked with the situation- thought that Heals should have gotten a Gabba send off....and Gilly copped a lot when he came to Brissie...

We need a couple of tough decisions made now, but the selectors seem to be swinging in the wind. Wicketkeepers do wear down at an earlier age on average than others, and Haddin should have the gloves for a couple of years until Ronchi/Hartley/Crossy fight it out for the next long term keeper position.
Funny thing is if they let Heals have his GABBA send off then Gilly would have debuted at the WACA as well wouldnt he? WOuld have been perfect

[Grimreepah]

Funny thing is if they let Heals have his GABBA send off then Gilly would have debuted at the WACA as well wouldnt he? WOuld have been perfect

Second Test was in Hobart. I remember because Gilly made 149* in the second innings in era defining Test Match. Still couldn't get MOTM though.

[bombersno1]

:eek:This is too silly to respond to.

Why? Those are the facts of the 2005 season, Haddin= 1 ton, Ronch=1 ton. Both tons won the match for their teams I think. As a batsman-keeper there is no use getting a fifty and then getting out. Haddin does this extremely regularly-too regularly in my opinion. Therefore, we need to look at other options. And Hartley and Ronchi are both good keepers whith just as good records as Haddin. Plus they are younger. You will barely get to the next Ashes series in England with Haddin!:thumbsd:

[Grimreepah]

Why? Those are the facts of the 2005 season, Haddin= 1 ton, Ronch=1 ton. Both tons won the match for their teams I think. As a batsman-keeper there is no use getting a fifty and then getting out. Haddin does this extremely regularly-too regularly in my opinion. Therefore, we need to look at other options. And Hartley and Ronchi are both good keepers whith just as good records as Haddin. Plus they are younger. You will barely get to the next Ashes series in England with Haddin!:thumbsd:

Please stop bringing this up. This is too silly an argument. I don't think you're a moron bombersno1, but this is a seriously whacky line of argument. The more runs you score the better. Just think about it.

[bombersno1]

Please stop bringing this up. This is too silly an argument. I don't think you're a moron bombersno1, but this is a seriously whacky line of argument. The more runs you score the better. Just think about it.

Yes the more runs you score the better BUT only tons are going to make the selectors think Brad is defiantely the answer. If it is a borderline decision, considering Brad's age, they will usually go for the younger bloke. That bloke may be Chris Hartley or Luke Ronchi if Brad does not score big hundreds. See my point?

[Grimreepah]

Yes the more runs you score the better BUT only tons are going to make the selectors think Brad is defiantely the answer. If it is a borderline decision, considering Brad's age, they will usually go for the younger bloke. That bloke may be Chris Hartley or Luke Ronchi if Brad does not score big hundreds. See my point?

Bombersno1. You are doing yourself a disservice.

a) you are discounting any score below 100. 100 is just some arbitrary figure we have to celebrate a certain stage of an innings. It doesn't mean anything. A 90 and an 80 is more important than a 100 and a duck. If Ronchi had scored 99 instead of 100, would you still rate it as a good innings? Yes. Big scores are important, so is consistency. That's why we compare averages.

b) you are ignoring an outstanding season by Brad Haddin, while Ronchi only played 4 games.

c) you are ignoring what Brad Haddin offers in terms of his experience in captaining NSW

d) you are ignoring the fact that Haddin has been the reserve keeper for about two years now. The selectors are obviously grooming him to take over from Gilly, and whenever he has played for Australia or Australia A he has done very well

e) you are ignoring the fact that Haddin is 28 years of age (Ronchi is 25), which is the same age as Gilchrist when he played his first Test match.

I don't know how good a keeper Ronchi is (I'm never going to hear the end of this now) but Haddin is clearly a superior batsman, and by a long way. More than one person has tried to point this out to you, which I wouldn't have thought should have been necessary

[bombersno1]

Bombersno1. You are doing yourself a disservice.

a) you are discounting any score below 100. 100 is just some arbitrary figure we have to celebrate a certain stage of an innings. It doesn't mean anything. A 90 and an 80 is more important than a 100 and a duck. If Ronchi had scored 99 instead of 100, would you still rate it as a good innings? Yes. Big scores are important, so is consistency. That's why we compare averages.

b) you are ignoring an outstanding season by Brad Haddin, while Ronchi only played 4 games.

c) you are ignoring what Brad Haddin offers in terms of his experience in captaining NSW

d) you are ignoring the fact that Haddin has been the reserve keeper for about two years now. The selectors are obviously grooming him to take over from Gilly, and whenever he has played for Australia or Australia A he has done very well

e) you are ignoring the fact that Haddin is 28 years of age (Ronchi is 25), which is the same age as Gilchrist when he played his first Test match.

I don't know how good a keeper Ronchi is (I'm never going to hear the end of this now) but Haddin is clearly a superior batsman, and by a long way. More than one person has tried to point this out to you, which I wouldn't have thought should have been necessary

My problem with Haddin is AGE. Simple as that. Yes he is 28 now, well add 2 yrs to that (when gilly will retire) and you get 30-31 yrs old. That is quite old for a keeper. Haddin is just as inconsistent as Ronchi but at the moment does make some more "middle-scores" than Ronchi does. Plus the fact that Haddin is not fantastic behind the stumps. I just think that unless a keeper is absolutely killing it at FC level at 30-31, he is too old to risk it. You will barely get 2 yrs out of him. Haddin has to almost break the door down to get in- and the only way is to score BIG HUNDREDS!

[Grimreepah]

My problem with Haddin is AGE. Simple as that. Yes he is 28 now, well add 2 yrs to that (when gilly will retire) and you get 30-31 yrs old. That is quite old for a keeper. Haddin is just as inconsistent as Ronchi but at the moment does make some more "middle-scores" than Ronchi does. Plus the fact that Haddin is not fantastic behind the stumps. I just think that unless a keeper is absolutely killing it at FC level at 30-31, he is too old to risk it. You will barely get 2 yrs out of him. Haddin has to almost break the door down to get in- and the only way is to score BIG HUNDREDS!

Pfffffffffffft. Whatever.

I don't know what Haddin has done to upset you, but you have clearly lost all reason on this subject. Can we talk about something else?

[bombersno1]

Pfffffffffffft. Whatever.

I don't know what Haddin has done to upset you, but you have clearly lost all reason on this subject. Can we talk about something else?

No problem after you answer this....can you DEFINATELY say we will get 5+ years out of Haddin? I doubt it!

[Grimreepah]

No problem after you answer this....can you DEFINATELY say we will get 5+ years out of Haddin? I doubt it!

Of course I can't. I can't say we will get 5 years out of Ronchi either.

I think the Ashes will most likely be Gilchrist's last series. If Haddin is over the hill at 28, then by your selection policy we should never have picked Gilchrist, because he would not have been able to play for long enough. We shouldn't have picked Hussey either for that matter.

I think Haddin will be able to play until he's 35 which would give him 6 or 7 years of international cricket.

Anyway, selection is based on who is your best player, not who will be your best player. If Ronchi gets good enough then I would be happy for him to replace Haddin, no matter how old they were.

And why the 5 years? Can you say we will definitely get another 5 years out of Gilchrist? No. So should we drop him then?

[bombersno1]

Of course I can't. I can't say we will get 5 years out of Ronchi either.

I think the Ashes will most likely be Gilchrist's last series. If Haddin is over the hill at 28, then by your selection policy we should never have picked Gilchrist, because he would not have been able to play for long enough. We shouldn't have picked Hussey either for that matter.

I think Haddin will be able to play until he's 35 which would give him 6 or 7 years of international cricket.

Anyway, selection is based on who is your best player, not who will be your best player. If Ronchi gets good enough then I would be happy for him to replace Haddin, no matter how old they were.

And why the 5 years? Can you say we will definitely get another 5 years out of Gilchrist? No. So should we drop him then?

The fact that you think the Ashes will be Gilly's last is where your problem is. My belief is that Gilly will play the WC and then retire from ODI cricket and still play tests for another couple of years. By that it means Haddin will be at least 30 if not 31 by the time Gilly retires. I think it is time to take a "project player" and that one may be Ronchi or Hartley who would be better long-term prospects in my view. Plus please remember that we shouldn't be comparing Gilly to Haddin as Gilly could have made the side as a BATSMAN! 5 years should be a bare minimum for a keeper in a test side (if good enough). Haddin I will say it again will be lucky to get 2 maybe 3 yrs. Not enough in my books.