Australian ODI Captaincy

[Ill Chicken]

Australian selectors have previously been good with the changing of the guard for the ODI's captaincy. Border to Taylor to Waugh to Ponting, yet now the last few years have shown that Ponting isn't the performing leader he once was and should be removed from the position. At 34, he has maintained his place in the side despite having a record in the last couple of years that have seen better performing players dropped.

There has been no real mention of his performance or lack of and then the likely person to replace him being Clarke is in the same boat. Each's player's justification in the side is that they're captain/vice captain respectively and they're inform at test level. Along with they've been overworked, which is the biggest lie you could ever hear.

If Australia are to be successful with the current side in the next ODI World Cup, then these two players have to turn it around pretty quick otherwise they should both be dropped from the side.

Haddin was refreshing when placed in the role while a long shot could be Ferguson. Voges could have been another long shot had he not decided that marriage is more important. The real problem though is that person that they've been grooming for the position (Clarke) can't be justified in taking on the position in his current ODI form but wouldn't be too happy if overlooked.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

I have said it before on these boards, and ill say it again, most people on here do not have an understanding of cricket captainicy.

A captain is only as good as his attack, and right now apart from Johnson we have no strike bowlers.

Bracken cant get a ball past a bat, Hopes is steady, and then we have a couple of rookies finding their way and a offspinner who struggles to hold his place in his respective state side.

Yet you want Ponting dropped?

Since Jan 2009 he is averaging 26.

Not great, but not bad enough to get dropped, especially when his captain.

In the South Africa ODI series at home he was our best player with the bat.

Who knows, today he may smash a hundred and win us the game.

Fact remains he is the captain of the side, and he is our best batsmen by a wide margin yet you want him dropped on the basis of 7 innings when he has got starts but not gone on with it.

You dont count form that happened back at the start of 2008.

Basically to me it seems like your frustated that your heros are struggling at the moment in SA and that in frustation you started a thread calling for Ponting to be dropped as well as Clarke?

Haddin wasnt refreshing at all when he was the captain? It was hard to judge of one game? Quite easy to be refreshing for one game.

IF you dont think Ponting and Clarke have been overworked then you really have no right to comment on cricket at all, they have been playing cricket literally non-stop since the Indian tour in October. So nearly 6 months?

This thread is shithouse, your frustated and are speaking absolute rubbish.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Just had a look at the SMH site and read Roebuck's latest article, his all but saying Ponting should be dropped from the side and the captainicy given to Clarke. Ill quote the interesting bits and you make up your mind for yourself.

Throughout, the players have looked hangdog. It is understandable for middle-aged members of struggling sides to worry about their positions but it does not help the cause. At the earliest opportunity, the selectors need to brighten the side.

Puts out the feeler indicating what is to come.

Tactically, too, the Australians have lacked invention. Ricky Ponting has tended to limit his spinners to a defensive role. On that account, it was interesting to watch Shane Warne bowling with a slip in the 20-over match staged at Newlands at the weekend.

Spinners?

You mean slow bowlers, there are no spinners out there.

I mean if your going to get stuck into Ponting tactically, at least give some specific examples to support your argument. Not just some general crap that he "lacks invention". Roebuck has a fetish with slips as well.

Not that they have much in common. Ponting's stubbornness contrasts with his deputy's livewire approach

Actually to me it is Ponting's unselfishness contrasts with Clarke's selfishness. Clarke's refusal to try and play some attacking shots at the start of his innings is hampering our batting, dragging us behind the rate to begin with.

Clarke's impatience counterpoints his senior's intransigence. Sometimes opposites attract, but not always

For those of you who don't know the term "intransigence". IT basically means a refusal to change ones views or compromise. Basically Roebuck is trying to infer that Clarke and Ponting do not agree on tactics. Once again, getting close to the punchline.

The time has come to awaken the one-day team and to divide the captaincy load. At least, Clarke can be put in charge of the 20-over outfit. An argument can be made for giving him responsibility for the one-day side as well

So basically he wants Ponting stripped of the captainicy and given to Clarke. Anyone remember the sitter of a catch Clakre dropped at point on the last day of the 2nd test. Contrast that with Ponting's catch at slip a few overs latter of Kallis. Clarke doesn't deserve to be captain to be honest. Plain and simple.

Peter Roebuck change's his views at a whim, the guy is an absolute idiot, Ian Bothams assertion that "Roebuck is just a sad, sad person" comes to light here.

[Ill Chicken]

I have said it before on these boards, and ill say it again, most people on here do not have an understanding of cricket captainicy.

Oh that right is only left for special people such as yourself, who have captained Australia mentally for the last 20 years. Take a look at yourself. How many players deserve their spot in the side because of their captaining ability? None. Not one. If you're not making runs, you shouldn't be in the side, just because Ponting is captain of the side doesn't make it any different.

A captain is only as good as his attack, and right now apart from Johnson we have no strike bowlers.So Ponting can blame his lack of form with the bat on his bowlers. Interesting theory.

Bracken cant get a ball past a bat, Hopes is steady, and then we have a couple of rookies finding their way and a offspinner who struggles to hold his place in his respective state side.

Yet you want Ponting dropped?Again, Ponting is a batsman. I've actually made no comment on Ponting as a captain beside that it is a captain's role in the side to lead at whatever they've been selected as, ie a batsman. The finer on field details I generally have no qualms with besides Clarke being promoted to opener and Harwood getting a game.

Since Jan 2009 he is averaging 26.Since January 2008 he has been averaging 24.

Not great, but not bad enough to get dropped, especially when his captain.Not great? That is terrible, it's beyond terrible, it is unacceptable.

Why? Why should he get any leverage for his position in the side just because he is captain. That is irrational. At a pivotal position in the side, he has been coming in and having no impact.

When you start making exceptions for a player or players is when divisions begin to grow inhouse and issues start to arise.

There is no doubting Ponting's ability, but there is a doubt whether he would take it on the chin being removed of the captaincy to resurrect his batting slump. Would he able to play on like Jayasuriya and Sachin Tendulkar?

In the South Africa ODI series at home he was our best player with the bat.No he wasn't, Shaun Marsh was. Ponting, yes was second on the run making list yet that impact isn't reflected in the scoreline.

Who knows, today he may smash a hundred and win us the game.Which would be great.

Fact remains he is the captain of the side, and he is our best batsmen by a wide margin yet you want him dropped on the basis of 7 innings when he has got starts but not gone on with it.No, on the basis that he is able to hold his position in the side as a batsman.

You dont count form that happened back at the start of 2008.That's right, going on current form, that extends longer than a year, he should be dropped from the OD side.

Basically to me it seems like your frustated that your heros are struggling at the moment in SA and that in frustation you started a thread calling for Ponting to be dropped as well as Clarke?No I'm disappointed with the double standards that the Australian selectors are currently employing, which is a slap in the face to domestic cricketers who are trying to break into the side or past players who have had slumps to a degree but still performed above what the current squad is doing and have been dropped.

Haddin wasnt refreshing at all when he was the captain? It was hard to judge of one game? Quite easy to be refreshing for one game.Yes it is easy. I'm not saying Haddin is the man for the job, but could take on the role for a short period while the likes of say a Ferguson cements his position.

IF you dont think Ponting and Clarke have been overworked then you really have no right to comment on cricket at all, they have been playing cricket literally non-stop since the Indian tour in October. So nearly 6 months?Generally speaking the consensus is that you play 10 tests and 30 ODI's a year. 2008 saw 14 tests and 13 ODI's for Ponting. Which is not rough in the slightest and the amount of test matches was well known in advance due to only playing 4 tests in 2007 along with 27 ODI's.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

So you'd drop Ponting before the likes of the Hussey brothers and Clarke?

[Ill Chicken]

There is no reason to drop Michael Hussey. David Hussey has been in the side for a relatively short period and has been moved about the order a fair bit. I would give him until the end of the Pakistan series to improve, along with Clarke and Ponting. From there the selectors would seriously need to look at the direction the side is going. Ponting is resting for that series, the selectors could also be using this as chance to move Ponting on if Clarke is successful in the position.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

So you'd move Ponting on as captain if Clarke is successful or move Ponting on as number 3 if Clarke succeeds in that position?

Clarify your answer.

Im also intrigued in the fact that you think there is "no reason" to drop Michael Hussey?

Your original post and subsequent thread is titled "Australian ODI captainicy" yet you don't have a problem with Pontings captainicy but rather you think his batting form isn't good enough and as such his position is on shaky ground, conversely, you believe that Hussey has no reason to be dropped?

Can you confirm?

[Ill Chicken]

Ponting is not performing as a captain, which means leading his team whether it be on the field or with the bat. There was nothing wrong with Waugh's captaincy yet he was removed. Taylor's captaincy, again, nothing wrong with it.

Clarke is by no means the answer to captaincy but the selectors would look stupid if they bypassed him for another option.

Michael Hussey is below par in form but still at an acceptable level. Averaging 40 is hardly worthy of being dropped. Hussey could obviously be in contention for the role.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Right, this will easy.

Ponting is clearly our best batsmen, his innings today show that.

When Waugh was dropped it had nothing to do with his captainicy, he had a FULL STRENGTH side that was underperforming. He position was redundant. He batted at 5 and did nothing else. He doesnt bat at 3. In was ironic in the end that his favourite position cost him his ODI Career.

Steve Waugh wasn't performing with the bat, that was his main problem, he wasnt an explosive batsmen and being at number 5 he was seen as a expendable player.

Taylor was the same.

Steve Waugh was dropped to refresh the team in time for the WC. He was already 35 or something a year out from the cup and struggling down the order where he was having little influence on the match. Consquently, his position was redundant and he was kicked out to allow Ponting time to get the team ready for the cup.

Would he have been dropped had the WC been 3 years away instead of 1? Probably not.

[Ill Chicken]

Right, this will easy.

Ponting is clearly our best batsmen, his innings today show that.

Clearly not, Haddin was the reason Australia had any chance, as soon he got out, where'd Australia's innings go? Down hill. You had two struggling bats together whom could both be considered as playing for survival. Then you put Ferguson in at number four, the only guy in the side that has been consistent in their position. Nice work.

When Waugh was dropped it had nothing to do with his captainicy, he had a FULL STRENGTH side that was underperforming. He position was redundant. He batted at 5 and did nothing else. He doesnt bat at 3. In was ironic in the end that his favourite position cost him his ODI Career.

Australia is hardly under strength. What is costing the side is the lack of performance from the batting line up.

Steve Waugh wasn't performing with the bat, that was his main problem, he wasnt an explosive batsmen and being at number 5 he was seen as a expendable player.

Ponting is not performing with the bat. In your theory Ponting is at a position of more importance and failing continually. This warrants his continued selection, why?

Taylor was the same.

Taylor opened the batting. Taylor was dropped because of the change in era of ODI cricket. That is not the same.

Steve Waugh was dropped to refresh the team in time for the WC. He was already 35 or something a year out from the cup and struggling down the order where he was having little influence on the match. Consquently, his position was redundant and he was kicked out to allow Ponting time to get the team ready for the cup.

And how is this any different? Waugh and Taylor were both averaging over 30, Waugh would have been closer to an average of 40 in his last 20 ODI's.

So you would rather drop a player performing 33% better than his career average in his last 20 hits than a player who is averaging almost 40% less?

Would he have been dropped had the WC been 3 years away instead of 1? Probably not.

And how is the same not appropriate now, more so? Ponting is mid 34, the World Cup is two years away, he isn't making runs consistently at the level he was two years ago. All I can see is biased towards Ponting and excuses.

[DT_fanatic]

I'm surprised as well that not many people have brought Ponting's batting into question. It's been average for a while now. Being captain of the side shouldn't give him too much leniency, he still has to perform. Also with him being in the 'most important' position in the batting order, more emphasis should be put on it and not the other way around.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Listen i don't want to keep harping on the same points but.

1) Earlier in the thread Ill Chicken said that Mike Hussey had "no reason" to be dropped yet he is advocating Ponting's departure from the side? Now is that logical?

2) Ponting is clearly our best batsmen, there is no-one in the side who is a better batsmen then him. His innings today proved it, he was on fire against Steyn yet you want him dropped?

This thread is garbage, i mean one guy in here is trying to say that Ponting should be dropped and that Michael Hussey has no reason to be dropped. I give up i really do, I was warned about calling this thread "shithouse", but quite frankly it is.

[DaveW]

Steve Waugh wasn't performing with the bat, that was his main problem, he wasnt an explosive batsmen and being at number 5 he was seen as a expendable player.

Taylor was the same.
Agreed. The two split captaincy eras were as much out of necessity as design. (Though it probably was ultimately beneficial.)

Dunno why the OP mentioned Border. I'm pretty sure he played both forms right up until his retirement.

[Ill Chicken]

Listen i don't want to keep harping on the same points but.

1) Earlier in the thread Ill Chicken said that Mike Hussey had "no reason" to be dropped yet he is advocating Ponting's departure from the side? Now is that logical?

Illogical - Michael Hussey: 14 matches for 500 runs at 41 with a strike rate of 88.
Last 32 matches 1122 runs at 49 with a strike rate of 81.

Logical - Ricky Ponting: Last 13 matches for 370 runs at 28 with a strike rate of 80. Last 26 matches 648 runs at 25 with a strike rate of 76.

2) Ponting is clearly our best batsmen, there is no-one in the side who is a better batsmen then him. His innings today proved it, he was on fire against Steyn yet you want him dropped?

When Ponting is in-form he is the best batsman in the side. When he is out of form, which is clearly the case, he is the same as everyone else. Yes he struck a fine 50 today, after meandering along for 60 balls he strikes four boundaires in five deliveries. Brilliance from Ponting, he dawdles to 37 from 61 deliveries, all this time on fire mind you (reminiscent of his knock against India in the 2003 World Cup Final). Then he unleashes well too late once the asking rate is over 10 runs an over. We lose the game and the series.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Forgive him for not unleashing when 3 wickets fell in next to no time.

Shock, horror.

[Ill Chicken]

I couldn't see a more logical response coming.

[courtjester]

My roses are looking really nice in the garden. Getting some nice late-blooming buds....

:thumbsu:

[Xtreme]

Should have been given the flick ages ago, in saying that he is the best of the worst candidates available. I don't want Clarke anywhere near the main role, i'd give it to Johnson instead... he's the only one who has shown the fighting spirit over the last few months.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Xtreme your just annoyed Ponting outclassed your heros during the test series, i mean the vision of Smith dropping the series on the first day of the first test sums it up doesn't it.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

The year was only a few days old in 2008 when Roebuck called for Pontings head in the most outlandish manner, it wasn't a spur of the moment decision , it was an article written two days after the completion of the Sydney test. More then enough time to consider one's thoughts and the consquences.

That's history.

Australia have played poorly in this ODI competition. The two spearheads in Bracken and Johnson look tired. Bracken has taken 2 wickets, not good enough a return for the leading ODI bowler. All the batsmen have been down, the latter stages of the tour have been dragged out painfully with 3 days between the 4th and 5th ODI's.

Roebuck however, who has a history of disliking Ricky Ponting, is trying to stir up a hornets nest.

In an article about Shane Warne and his IPL side the amount of arse licking Roebuck does is cringeworthy. At the same time he has a dig at Ponting.

Warne and his 27 charges had watched the match and the supposedly retired champion had been aghast over Australia's dull-witted tactics and doomed batting.


To watch him in this maturity, his spinners landing, his players listening, his selflessness evident, is to regret that an acute tactical brain was lost to Australian cricket. Both sides were to blame - Australia for their craven respectability, Warne for his excesses and excuses.

Still, he could have captained the side between Steve Waugh and Michael Clarke. In other circumstances, too, under more imaginative leadership, one senses he'd give the Ashes another go


This assertion that both sides to blame is absolute crap. Lets not beat around the bush here, Warne was a great cricketer but he was an absolute oath of a man. A convicted drug cheat, he has no-one to blame but himself for his failure to captain Australia. Typically though Warne would never admit that he soley is the one to blame.

Warne was aging when Waugh retired in the ODI arena, realising the writing was on the wall he got out a year after Waugh had been sacked from the ODI captainicy.

The fact Roebuck has all but airbrushed Ponting's highly successful captainicy period out of his analysis by stating that Warne could have "captained the side between Steve Waugh and Michael Clarke", the latter yet to even have been awarded the captainicy fulltime:eek: is an absolute disgrace.

Roebuck's assertion that "under more imaginative leadership, one senses he'd give the Ashes another go" is further pure speculative bullshit based on zero evidence at all.

This love in with Shane Warne is cringeworthy to be honest, the love in Shane Warne has with Ian Chappell is additionally cringeworthy.

The fact this article has shown such disrespect to Ponting is an absolute disgrace. Roebuck is the sterotypical English toff, how this guy continues to offer us analysis on the game is beyond me. I keep reading it, unable to ignore his opinions for some strange reason.

Michael Clarke seems to be the chosen one, given a gifted run into the test side he was then given a gifted return to the test team on the basis of the unlucky injury to Shane Watson on the eve of the Ashes test series. How he ever won the AB medal in 2004 over Martyn is beyond me.

Clarke can't stay out of the social pages, cant not go a year without getting a cringeworthy tat displaying such messages as to "seize the day" in latin. I dread the day this man becomes captain, because quite frankly, the media's lovein with him will be cringeworthy. Clarke has had such a facilitated run in the test side, he has never had to deal with a setback. He was dropped but then recalled almost immediately without having to post form on the board and EARN his way back.

A year or 2 ago Ian Botham, an unlikely person to agree with, summed up Roebuck the best. Simply describing him as a "sad, sad person".

[Mr_Smooth]

why give him airtime in a forum like this, that would be playing to Roebucks strengths

ignore him, he'll hoepfully go away!!

[Romeo]

Clarke being the golden child annoys me as well. His form in SA has been on the whole pretty lamentable.

[Xtreme]

Xtreme your just annoyed Ponting outclassed your heros during the test series, i mean the vision of Smith dropping the series on the first day of the first test sums it up doesn't it.

Not really, regardless of South Africa's loss i've had the 'drop Ponting' opinion since India toured here.

If Australia lose against a fumbling England with Ponting as captain it would be very amusing, but oh so satisfying.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Not really, regardless of South Africa's loss i've had the 'drop Ponting' opinion since India toured here.

If Australia lose against a fumbling England with Ponting as captain it would be very amusing, but oh so satisfying.

Not half as amusing as a smug looking Mickey Arthur in cricinfo magazine writing an article with the headline "How we beat Australia" which appeared between the Australian home series and the return series in SA. The follow up article should be interesting, "How we beat Australia but then choked and got smashed at home"

Obviously he didn't learn from the English mistake in 2005, releasing autobiography after autobiography on how each player conquered Australia.

****, at least the English held the Ashes for more then a year. SA only had to wait a couple of months for the tables to be reversed. You know what the best part was, not Ponting or Siddle or Johnson. But Hughes, the best part was how the SA commentators kept harping on about how bad his technique was, now thats fine, but it was quite amusing them whining in frustation as Steyn was belted to all parts. His technique is poor, *another 4*, this guy has a bad technqiue *hits 6*. :D:D:D

To me that was the best part. SA have a great ODI team, but there test team has a bit of work to do. Especially in the bowling, Albie Morkel isn't a good enough bowler to hold down a 3rd seamers position.

The Ashes is a fair period of time away. Your heros were outclassed in the test series. Just admit it.

[Special Agent Utah]

Listen i don't want to keep harping on the same points but.

1) Earlier in the thread Ill Chicken said that Mike Hussey had "no reason" to be dropped yet he is advocating Ponting's departure from the side? Now is that logical?

2) Ponting is clearly our best batsmen, there is no-one in the side who is a better batsmen then him. His innings today proved it, he was on fire against Steyn yet you want him dropped?

This thread is garbage, i mean one guy in here is trying to say that Ponting should be dropped and that Michael Hussey has no reason to be dropped. I give up i really do, I was warned about calling this thread "shithouse", but quite frankly it is.

You asked Ill Chicken to explain his reasoning behind keeping Hussey in the side and wanting Ponting dropped.

Illogical - Michael Hussey: 14 matches for 500 runs at 41 with a strike rate of 88.
Last 32 matches 1122 runs at 49 with a strike rate of 81.

Logical - Ricky Ponting: Last 13 matches for 370 runs at 28 with a strike rate of 80. Last 26 matches 648 runs at 25 with a strike rate of 76.



When Ponting is in-form he is the best batsman in the side. When he is out of form, which is clearly the case, he is the same as everyone else. Yes he struck a fine 50 today, after meandering along for 60 balls he strikes four boundaires in five deliveries. Brilliance from Ponting, he dawdles to 37 from 61 deliveries, all this time on fire mind you (reminiscent of his knock against India in the 2003 World Cup Final). Then he unleashes well too late once the asking rate is over 10 runs an over. We lose the game and the series.

There it is, and quite a reasonable argument IMO.

Forgive him for not unleashing when 3 wickets fell in next to no time.

Shock, horror.

And this is the best you could do considering you have been harping on how Ponting is our best batsmen.

Yes he is potentially but the fact is he has not been pulling his weight. Personally i would stick with him for a bit longer but just because some posters want him dropped does not mean they are immediately wrong, a little tolerance of other people's opinions would be nice.

So why dont you give us your reasons for why Mike Hussey does not deserve his spot in the ODI side...

[Special Agent Utah]

****, at least the English held the Ashes for more then a year. SA only had to wait a couple of months for the tables to be reversed.

Well you can hardly lose the Ashes within a few months can you?

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

You asked Ill Chicken to explain his reasoning behind keeping Hussey in the side and wanting Ponting dropped.



There it is, and quite a reasonable argument IMO.



And this is the best you could do considering you have been harping on how Ponting is our best batsmen.

Yes he is potentially but the fact is he has not been pulling his weight. Personally i would stick with him for a bit longer but just because some posters want him dropped does not mean they are immediately wrong, a little tolerance of other people's opinions would be nice.

So why dont you give us your reasons for why Mike Hussey does not deserve his spot in the ODI side...


It is a quite reasonable argument on face value, but in reality it is very decieving. For what it's worth i don't think either Hussey or Ponting should be dropped anytime soon from the ODI side.

However, saying that Ponting should be dropped while Hussey has "no reason" to be dropped truly boggles the mind. That is exactly what Ill Chicken is putting forward. How far back to you want to go when deciding form? I could manipulate statistics quite easily to portray things i want to.

Ponting hasn't looked out of form at all to be honest. His been getting starts but this series most of his dismissal have been poor shots trying to increase the run-rate. It's not like his been pushing and prodding unable to get the ball off the square. Last night his innings was outstanding, that over off Steyn displayed his class, almost hitting boundaries at will.

Ponting in the ODI series against SA in Australia averaged 47 with the bat.

I mean, if you want to portray the fact that Ponting is struggling in the ODI format you could include his numbers from the WI's and to really nail the point home you could include his three scores of (1, 1, 1) against India in early 2008. But ****, how far back do you want to go?

Surely only recent form counts. Not form from 1.5 years ago. Ponting had a poor series against NZ after having a great one against SA. Then in these 4 matchs so far his averaged 30. Last innings he was on fire.

There is no need to drop him when you actually look at the statistics and couple that with observations from the game.

Conversely, Michael Hussey has been sruggling in test cricket as we are all aware however his from in the ODI's this year has been great. His last few innings however his been very poor. Hussey is struggling of late apart from a decent innings in the first ODI. But i dont think he should be dropped.

However, the statement that Ponting should be dropped before Hussey is just out of order, it really is.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Well you can hardly lose the Ashes within a few months can you?

Well no i suppose your right there.

However it is still no less amusing when coaches/players start writing books/articles about how "we beat Australia" to then lose to them almost immediately after publishing the said books/articles.:D

Im sure you'll agree with that point.:thumbsu:

[Belnakor]

Punters form over the last year has been decent... i mean its been good for a normal batsman. The problem is people were expecting Ponting to bat like he did in 2005 for the rest of his career, and that kind of form doesn't happen too often. Ponting has looked mortal the last year or so, but then, most batsmen begin to look a bit shaky when they get older.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Fair point.

It could easliy be a bit different though, another run in Melbourne at the MCG and he'd have 2 tons in 2 innings. Another handful of runs in the first and 2nd test matchs in SA and he'd have another 2 tons.

So we could instead be saying, hell Punter has scored 4 tons in his last 6 test matchs instead of saying his only scored 1. There is a considerable difference in the perception of his form when in reality if he did get those runs to make those tons you would have only had to score another 40 odd in total.

[Ill Chicken]

Fair point.

It could easliy be a bit different though, another run in Melbourne at the MCG and he'd have 2 tons in 2 innings. Another handful of runs in the first and 2nd test matchs in SA and he'd have another 2 tons.

So we could instead be saying, hell Punter has scored 4 tons in his last 6 test matchs instead of saying his only scored 1. There is a considerable difference in the perception of his form when in reality if he did get those runs to make those tons you would have only had to score another 40 odd in total.

That doesn't make sense nor is it relevant. Like the majority of your posts in this thread, you are ignoring the main point. We're not talking about a test match captaincy. Your petty little grievances with Roebuck have nothing to do with the Ponting's form in ODI's. Nor does Mickey Arthurs comments, nor does the Ashes.

Recent form under the captaincy of Ponting, Australia have lost back to back ODI series against South Africa and held on for a drawn series against New Zealand. Is that not a reflection of Ponting's form?

Mitchell Johnson has looked incredibly tired you say. Hardly leading the Australian attack, I don't know how he is getting a game taking 10 wickets at 16 for the series. I must be manipulating the statistics.

You're saying that I'm taking Ponting's statistics out of context. Are you not guilty of the same thing. You're bypassing Ponting's more recent form for the ODI's against SA in Australia as justification to keep Ponting in the side. Hypocrisy?

Then you call Ponting scratching around for a 50, on fire. You know what on fire is? 78 off 61 deliveries and 84 off 74 balls, not a mediorce 53 off 67. How illogical do you want to get? On fire, a kitchen is, somewhere in the world.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

That doesn't make sense nor is it relevant. Like the majority of your posts in this thread, you are ignoring the main point. We're not talking about a test match captaincy. Your petty little grievances with Roebuck have nothing to do with the Ponting's form in ODI's. Nor does Mickey Arthurs comments, nor does the Ashes.

Recent form under the captaincy of Ponting, Australia have lost back to back ODI series against South Africa and held on for a drawn series against New Zealand. Is that not a reflection of Ponting's form?

Mitchell Johnson has looked incredibly tired you say. Hardly leading the Australian attack, I don't know how he is getting a game taking 10 wickets at 16 for the series. I must be manipulating the statistics.

You're saying that I'm taking Ponting's statistics out of context. Are you not guilty of the same thing. You're bypassing Ponting's more recent form for the ODI's against SA in Australia as justification to keep Ponting in the side. Hypocrisy?

Then you call Ponting scratching around for a 50, on fire. You know what on fire is? 78 off 61 deliveries and 84 off 74 balls, not a mediorce 53 off 67. How illogical do you want to get? On fire, a kitchen is, somewhere in the world.

Recent form under the captaincy of Ponting, Australia have lost back to back ODI series against South Africa and held on for a drawn series against New Zealand. Is that not a reflection of Ponting's form?

So what are you saying? Don't speak in riddles. Do you want Ponting stripped off the captainicy and it handed to Michael Clarke?

Alternatively, do you want him kicked out of the side entirely, ala, Waugh in 01/02 or do you want him to carry on batting at 3 and as captain. This only applies to the ODI format.

Mitchell Johnson has looked incredibly tired you say. Hardly leading the Australian attack, I don't know how he is getting a game taking 10 wickets at 16 for the series. I must be manipulating the statistics.

You are indeed. Johnson has taken 4 toporder wickets in the series. The rest have been during the latter stage hitout. It is no good picking up wickets in the 46th over when the batsmen are going the tonk and after they have already scored 80 runs? We need those wickets at the top of the innings, not the end. In that regard, yes those statistics are misleading. Johnson has bowled well but this is a perfect example of how statistics can mislead us.

You're saying that I'm taking Ponting's statistics out of context. Are you not guilty of the same thing. You're bypassing Ponting's more recent form for the ODI's against SA in Australia as justification to keep Ponting in the side. Hypocrisy?

Not at all, i classify recent form as stuff that took place in the last few months. Not scores that happened in season 07/08. Fair enough. In that regard Pontings effort in the ODI series still classifies as recent form.

Pontings form in the home SA ODI series was great. His form since then has been poor by comparsion in the ODI series. However, his still our best batsmen. That innings last night started off slow but it was clear that he is our best batsmen by that blistering attac on Steyn. How anyone can advocate dropping him is beyond me, and hopefully the said people never select a cricket team, not even on playstation. Hetook his time at the start because we had lost 3 wickets for nothing, i spose that his fair enough to do. Take your time and all.

[Ill Chicken]

So what are you saying? Don't speak in riddles. Do you want Ponting stripped off the captainicy and it handed to Michael Clarke?

Haddin was refreshing when placed in the role while a long shot could be Ferguson. Voges could have been another long shot had he not decided that marriage is more important. The real problem though is that person that they've been grooming for the position (Clarke) can't be justified in taking on the position in his current ODI form but wouldn't be too happy if overlooked.Alternatively, do you want him kicked out of the side entirely, ala, Waugh in 01/02 or do you want him to carry on batting at 3 and as captain. This only applies to the ODI format.If Australia are to be successful with the current side in the next ODI World Cup, then these two players have to turn it around pretty quick otherwise they should both be dropped from the side.You are indeed. Johnson has taken 4 toporder wickets in the series. The rest have been during the latter stage hitout. It is no good picking up wickets in the 46th over when the batsmen are going the tonk and after they have already scored 80 runs? We need those wickets at the top of the innings, not the end. In that regard, yes those statistics are misleading. Johnson has bowled well but this is a perfect example of how statistics can mislead us.Ponting batted well last innings, but those last 16 runs came when it was during a power play and he had been out there for 20 overs and the run rate required was over ten. How many times do we need to repeat this?

Maybe Steyn picking up batsmen going the tonk and picking up late order wickets to bundle the tail out to win the match hardly counts for much either.

What you are saying is continually misleading, taken out context, without substance and mostly with nothing to back you up besides your own misbelief that your opinion is right regardless of the all the overwhelming evidence thrown at you.

Not at all, i classify recent form as stuff that took place in the last few months. Not scores that happened in season 07/08. Fair enough. In that regard Pontings effort in the ODI series still classifies as recent form.I haven't used any statistics from 2007. What I've done is highlighted that there has been drop in Ponting's form in ODI cricket which is purely evident. That he has not being scoring at a level that warrants his automatic selection without justification since the ODI series against NZ in 2007. That his drop in form is also reflected in the outcome of matches and series.

Pontings form in the home SA ODI series was great. His form since then has been poor by comparsion in the ODI series.No his form overall since February 2008 in ODI cricket has been poor. The series against SA in Australia was a slight spike in what has been a significantly downward trend.
However, his still our best batsmen.That is clearly not the case.

That innings last night started off slow but it was clear that he is our best batsmen by that blistering attac on Steyn.Again it was five balls. Not an innings. It was do or die. He died.

How anyone can advocate dropping him is beyond me,The statistics advocate that his current performances do not warrant continued selection or that there should be a time frame on how much longer he is given at the helm.

and hopefully the said people never select a cricket team, not even on playstation.You continually use these useless, pointless lines throughout your responses in an attempt to big note yourself and undermine other forum members opinions/points but in reality it is irrelevant gibberish that adds no substance to your opinion, your points or you as a forum member.

Hetook his time at the start because we had lost 3 wickets for nothing, i spose that his fair enough to do. Take your time and all.We lost four wickets in seven overs for 22 runs when all the pressure was on South Africa. Ponting came out defensive when we were 1 for 129 in the 21st over. Straight away the game changed because you have two players out of form, one which is meant to be leading the side and apparently to you, his self worth is greater than that of the team.

Here's something imaginative, we've lost two quicket wickets, lets use the power play. Here's something else, win the toss in ODI and you bat first. Regardless!

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

I have said already mate, i can't be arsed arguing in this circular fashion. Basically, i think Ponting is our best batsmen, that's not a pie in the sky thought.

Secondly, i'd prefer our strike bowlers to get wickets early in the innings, that's not happening at the moment, which is hurting us so much later in the innings. Wickets in the hand at the end equals pain for the bowling side.

[Ill Chicken]

I have said already mate, i can't be arsed arguing in this circular fashion.

No you haven't.

Basically, i think Ponting is our best batsmen, that's not a pie in the sky thought.

Basically you don't want to go round in circles but you want to again state, that you think Ponting is the best batsman in the side because in his last 20 ODI digs he averages mid to high 20's.

Secondly, i'd prefer our strike bowlers to get wickets early in the innings, that's not happening at the moment, which is hurting us so much later in the innings. Wickets in the hand at the end equals pain for the bowling side.

Secondly to what? This isn't about bowlers. This about a captain not leading his side through his own performances which when batting first (70% of the time in his last 26 matches), is about putting a defendable total on the board.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Mate, really i don't want to keep discussing it. Me and you obviously have totally different criteria on discussing the composition and performance of cricket teams.

Agree to disagree? Gunnar Longshanks copped a card for persistent arguing, lets just leave it.

[Ill Chicken]

I agree that you are blinded by your faith towards the Australian cricket team and that your judgment is never neutral and never abstract and that you attempt to use personal opinion as fact/reason. It is truly reflected by your inability to see any questions raised and directed at the current team/squad in light that is not negative and which you deem to be an attack on a player/team and any forum member that suggests otherwise, their opinions are deemed inferior.

Not only did you hijack this thread with your personal propaganda, Roebuck comments and completely irrelevant paragraphs about test matches and other assortments that any legitimate criticisms of the current Australian ODI Captaincy and whether there are alternatives is now seemingly impossible to discuss in this topic because of amount fecal verbatim that you have posted previously.

I agree that I presented reason and you presented absurd horror.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Mate, your yet to state whether you think Ponting should be dropped? Or removed from the captainicy, your worse then ****ing Gunnar Longshanks!!!

Ponting came in and within 2 overs another wicket had fallen, and a few more fell almost immediately. I cannot understand or fathom the critisicm being levelled at him for being defensive during this period. As such it is hard not to conclude that those making this comment don't fully understand the dynamics of basic ODI cricket tactics and fundamentals that have been in the game since its inception.

Ponting was pacing his innings and let's be honest, if he was there at the end of the game we would have won. His burst against Steyn proved that, he was doing it with ease.

Instead of posting like Gunnar, saying this and then that, why dont you say what you'd do with Ponting. I wouldn't drop him because I believe he is our best batsmen, form might not show that but sometimes you have to go on more then just statistics. I also can't see any alternatives that will be a better option.

Overall, I wouldn't make drastic changes to the side. Symonds coming back in IMO will be a massive bonus, as with Watson. Lee's return has been postponed but Clark should offer some experience.

The players are struggling there is no doubt. But I can't see many alternatives beating down the door. At this Stage my main concern is Nathan Bracken to be honest, we need more out of him with the new ball and by that i mean wickets. We aren't getting enough wickets at the top of the innings, consquently SA may start off relatively slowly but having wickets in hand allows them to storm home at the end.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Additionally, how shithouse is the fixturing for this series. The amount of time between the last 3 ODI's is too extensive, almost tedious. As such the tour is dragged out for no logical reason which isn't going to help tired players.

Additionally, how smart is it to go from South Africa with its bouncy wickets and then go to the UAE with its low and slow wickets?

This fixturing has been an absolute disgrace since the India test series. The amount of cricket played is ridicilous.

[Special Agent Utah]

Ponting was pacing his innings and let's be honest, if he was there at the end of the game we would have won. His burst against Steyn proved that, he was doing it with ease.


If, Buts and Maybes.

If Clarke and Haddin were in at the end we would have won, If Johnson had taken 6/12 or If Gibbs and AB both made ducks we would have won. You just cant use that as an argument.

The fact is he was not there at the end and we did not win.

[pluga_4]

Additionally, how shithouse is the fixturing for this series. The amount of time between the last 3 ODI's is too extensive, almost tedious. As such the tour is dragged out for no logical reason which isn't going to help tired players.

Additionally, how smart is it to go from South Africa with its bouncy wickets and then go to the UAE with its low and slow wickets?

This fixturing has been an absolute disgrace since the India test series. The amount of cricket played is ridicilous.

yeah, agree about the last few odi's being dragged out over theat length of time. not sure of the reasons or travelling logisitics.

on your point from going from south africa to uae....what..you want us to postpone another series ? it had to be squeezed in somewhere.

not sure on your reasoning how the fixturing has been a disgrace since india. our home summer only contained 5 tests (not 6) and 10 odi's & 3 20/20's.
that seems stock standard to me. we normally have an away tour directly after our summer on most occasions, so nothing new there either.

its the postponement of tours that crams things up. we still have the away tests v pak to make up as well as home tests v bangladesh. looks like 2010 where the aussies had a bit of time on their hands, it'll be used for those series then.

in regards to punter's captaincy. his record speaks for itself. the last 12 months we've been hit with injuries following several retirements. it was never going to be easy playing india in india or playing south africa both home and away. the aussies will hopefully get a full squad to pick from come england and then prosper back home next summer against the paki's and windies. the exposure some of these new players have had against india & south africa hopefully holds them in good stead.