View Full Version : Dumped from the Aussie side
The NSW bias thread talk about Moody and Waugh got me to thinking about the dumpings or non-selections that have occurred over the years, and which ones have been the worst, or maybe even the most inexplicable picks.
I'll start the ball rolling with Wayne Phillips (the Victorian one). The selectors obviously wanted Swampy out of the side, but then to pick a bloke and play him in one test was a bit stiff in my opinion - hardly let him settle into the side....
Thoughts?
Renegade
17 Jan 2003, 11:44
I always thought Stuart Law didn't get a fair go for Australia. Then when they finally gave him a shot he lasted one test.
Made an unbeaten 54 in his only innings and was gone after that.
St-KriS
17 Jan 2003, 11:50
Originally posted by Renegade
I always thought Stuart Law didn't get a fair go for Australia. Then when they finally gave him a shot he lasted one test.
Made an unbeaten 54 in his only innings and was gone after that.
I most definetely agree but, wasnt he just filling in for a injuried Steve Waugh that match? And from then on it was a long time before another spot opened up and by that time, Stewie wasnt dong to well at the time.
Wicked Lester
17 Jan 2003, 12:37
I suppose its reasonable to ask what the deal was with Scott Muller?
Brett Lee made his debut several tests later (I think) and while I'm not the biggest Lee fan going around I'm not sure Muller represented long term potential.
Siddons was stiff, maybe the victim of timing.
Jones is always talked about (his axing).
And clearly Glen Trimble deserved an extended run.
Originally posted by Wicked Lester
I suppose its reasonable to ask what the deal was with Scott Muller?
Brett Lee made his debut several tests later (I think) and while I'm not the biggest Lee fan going around I'm not sure Muller represented long term potential.
Siddons was stiff, maybe the victim of timing.
Jones is always talked about (his axing).
And clearly Glen Trimble deserved an extended run.
Murray Bennett was also desperatly unlucky that he was around when our spinning stocks were so high with Peter Taylor and Bob Holland.....
Originally posted by Wicked Lester
I suppose its reasonable to ask what the deal was with Scott Muller?
Couldn't bowl, couldn't throw.
Yeah, Muller couldn't bowl or throw, but why did he get picked if the selectors thought he wasn't the goods? And if they weren't sure, why wasn't he given a longer run? That's the ultimate question.
Now I think the selectors have actually done fairly well over the years, which is reflected in our form, but there are the cases, such as Muller, Nicholson, and my original post, Phillips (the other one), when you wonder what were they thinking?
Surely you have to give a new boy a decent run of consecutive games before you give him the chop??
The reason Muller got the chop is because the selectors realised they had made a mistake, plus Brett Lee was killing them in the Pura Cup and local one day matches. Many people thought Lee should have been selected before Muller.
The selectors usually get it right, but not always. The Muller selection was one of the few they got wrong.
McAlmanac
17 Jan 2003, 13:53
Originally posted by Becker
The reason Muller got the chop is because the selectors realised they had made a mistake, plus Brett Lee was killing them in the Pura Cup and local one day matches. Many people thought Lee should have been selected before Muller.
The selectors usually get it right, but not always. The Muller selection was one of the few they got wrong.
This would account for Wayne Phillips too.
Scott Muller, Simon Cook and Matthew Nicholson were bowling well domestically at the right time.
Australia's bowling stocks, outside of the three to four automatic selections, are pretty thin, and have been for a few years. These guys were bowling well when a spot was up for grabs (probably due to a ocuple of injuries to others).
Nicholson took four wickets at 28 in his only Test... quite good figures.
Simon Cook had the added bonus of being a left armer, took a 5-fer in his first Test.. can't complain.
Even Muller who is now a laughing stock, took 7 wickets in two Tests. His record for Queensland is very good, and consistent, so when things are put into perspective (that he was only a fill-in), he has done OK too.
Wayne Phillips was never a huge run-scorer for Victoria but at the time (1991-92 vs India, Perth Test IIRC) all the big run-scorers were middle order batsmen, and no openers were really putting their hands up. This is before Hayden & Slater has hit the scene, and Phillips probably had Watts, Veletta, Small, Barsby and the then-underachieving Cox as opposition.
All had fairly similar records so it was a bit of a lottery. Curious to know if Catman & syphon reckon there was some Victorian bias in that selection...
bluechampion
17 Jan 2003, 14:00
Yes. This is the reason Anthony Stuart has a ODI hat trick.
Muller was dropped because of the conflict between him and Warne over the "can't bowl can't throw" thing.
The selectors value team unity above any individual, a luxury they can afford with the current strength of Australian cricket.
Originally posted by McAlmanac
This would account for Wayne Phillips too.
I think to be fair with the Wayne Phillips selection it was more about dropping Geoff Marsh than it was about selecting a new player. Phillips was merely a stop gap whilst the selectors decided what to do with the opening spot. For memory, Phillips made a 200 just before the final Test so his selection made some sort of sense at the time.
When was simon cook a left hander, he was a right hand bowler
Originally posted by acuguy
When was simon cook a left hander, he was a right hand bowler
Nah he was a leftie. He just didn't know it at the time. :o