We need 7 selectors picking the side not 3 ..it's 2015 not 1970

[The Passenger]

My point is this

Let's get it right ....money is not an issue. The game is wealthy

Afl teams have committees ......we need this approach where we get the right people in

I'm staggered Watson was picked and when he fails on 20 with the bat after being plumb lbw and uses one of our reviews we then pick him again

When we are 3-0 null down marsh will get picked ......

It's a joke and cricket Australia needs to change the system how players are picked

Frankly I don't fee Watson is even in our neat 20 test players let alone 11. I would rather Faulkner or coulter Nile as an all rounder than him .....

He brings 20 runs to the table right now and that's it .......

Ok why the panel .....do it properly and three blokes sitting in pub sinking beers is not the way to select our side

Lest get this right and change is needed. This is multi million dollar sport and we are playing for keeps .....

Yet the side is picked like its being like it is at Dimboola c grade ..........

So how why do afl teams have a bigger panel

I can't think of another sport that would only have three for our national team selection panel

It's just never been questioned ....no one has sat back in gone hey is this right, is this modern .....is this best practice ...

Also to not have the captain and coach on the panel is stupid also ....they are around the players 24 hours a day .they see the work ethic, commitment and training

I'm sorry the way our team is picked is so out of bloody date is beggars belief it's lasted this long

When the selectors are not picking the side they could be watching games where up and coming Aussies are playing

I also think our players in the squad who do t get picked for the 11 should be playing in county games somewhere else keeping in form .......

Again like in footy .........

I can't be bothered quoting individual points

1 - what makes you think having more selectors will see Watson get dropped? in a majority voting system it doesn't matter if there are 3 voters or 101 voters or 1,000,001 voters... Your logic that more selectors will see Watson get dropped is completely flawed. It is just as likely more selectors will further cement Watson's spot in the team. You could be adding an additional 6 selectors into the mix who are all pro-Watson.

2 - We've tried having Clarke on the selection panel before and it didn't work. Captains and coaches have an inherent bias to the players they are closest to. The selectors job is to try to be impartial and the best way to do that is to be at a bit of an arm's length to the players.

3 - "The game is wealthy" - Not as wealthy as some would believe and CA is still very reliant on the BCCI, successful Ashes tours and a few individual personalities such as Dave Warner.

4 - Do we know no one in CA has sat back and proposed an extended selection panel? I'm sure plenty have thought maybe we should have 9 selectors but have thought better of it.

5 - Players not in the XI should be playing county cricket? So we just ring up all the county boards and tell them we want our players to have a run.... Please, come on. I don't even know where to start on that point. From county teams honouring existing contracts, international players rules in the county competition, their own balances and team spirit or the fact they are hardly going to go jumping up to help the Aussies win an Ashes series... Would you be happy for a young batsmen like Jordan Silk to miss out on a couple of shield games so Johnny Bairstow can get some time in the middle during the 17/18 Ashes series? Didn't think so.

 

[Hellgood]

I've always thought that the /end thread reply is a lazy one, but really that post should comprehensively end the 'debate'.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Taking the captain and coach out of the selection process was among the better things CA has done.
Having more selectors might be good at home, some Shield games don't have a selector in attendance if one is at a Test and a full round is on at the same time.

 

[The_Reaper]

Taking the captain and coach out of the selection process was among the better things CA has done.
Having more selectors might be good at home, some Shield games don't have a selector in attendance if one is at a Test and a full round is on at the same time.

Boof is still a selector isn't he?

 

[Mancey]

I must admit I embellished that AB point for effect. He had some players that were talented tryers but he certainly got the best out of them.

He also had wayne phillips opening the batting

 

[Freo Big Fella]

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

There should be a three man selection committee whose job it is to pick a seven man selection panel. Then this panel picks the team but it needs to be ratified by an independent commission with representatives from each state.

 

[sherb]

There should be a three man selection committee whose job it is to pick a seven man selection panel. Then this panel picks the team but it needs to be ratified by an independent commission with representatives from each state.

We need a process to select the state representatives though.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

We need a process to select the state representatives though.

Run that idea through a focus group.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

I should sent that to my manager at work. I am renowned for wriggling out of meetings.

 

[ManWithNoName]

We all know the larger the committee the better the decision. It's a proven theory.

 

[bombersfan4000]

Questions of the selection process certainly need to be asked when you have players like Watson and Haddin who seemingly have guaranteed positions in the test side.

its not what you know, its who you know!

 

[Damon_3388]

There should be a three man selection committee whose job it is to pick a seven man selection panel. Then this panel picks the team but it needs to be ratified by an independent commission with representatives from each state.

With Don Argus running an enquiry and writing a report over the top of all of that.

 

[SwampCreature]

I didn't even know you were black.

Actual lol

 

[peternorth]

need leading teams

 

[Beutbrute]

1. What do you mean "people like" me? Is it because I am black? Racists like you make me sick.

Boooooo

 

[The_Reaper]

We all know the larger the committee the better the decision. It's a proven theory.

We also do know why they picked Watson and it won't change.

 

[SwampCreature]

Actual lol

*** me your ugly
[/QUO

YOUR MUM SAID I WAS GOOD LOOKING

 

[Doodlesweaver]

I didn't even know you were black.

He's not, he's green and scaly.

 

[SwampCreature]

He's not, he's green and scaly.

Only on my balls.

 

[Hardhat11]

I would also like selectors to be held accountable

Like I said have a committee like very other sport does

I also believe the media should be putting the heat on selectors more ....

 

[The Passenger]

So now Watson had been dropped can I assume a 3-man selection panel is fine?

 

[Zach Package]

Hardhat's son

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Hardhat's son

More magnets would make everywhere better.

 

[gandaal]

I agree. We should have an 11 man committee with each selector paid $1 million a year. Each selector should be responsible for a spot on the batting order.

I'll put my hand up for selecting the player that goes in at 3 using my extensive cricketing experience. It'll be a tough job over the next 7 years but I'm happy to give it my all.