Bancroft overlooked

[big_e]

It's a bit of justice after Renshaw was left out of the side when he shouldn't have for Finch and Harris for goodness sakes. Least Langer isn't there this time to do that again.

Renshaw was concussed while fielding in the warm-up game in the UAE, probably would have played if not for that.

 

[brutus76]

Are CA suggesting they are "stop gap" openers

Smith isn't an opener - but if he wants that spot he and Ussie won't be around for too long everything else slots in after

I don't mind Green at 4 if he doesn't bowl unless absolutely necessary - detracts from his batting

Hardie, Ollie Davies, Fraser-Mcgurk should be inserted in the shorter forms ASAP (maybe after the T20 WC) with a view of fighting for a spot for the Indian arrival summer 2024

I hope Pucovski gets healthy and shows us all how good he is

 

[Black Diamond]

No, he wasn't a walking wicket "at that stage", you're thinking of later in his career. At the time he was dropped for the first time it was a surprise and only 3 tests after being the youngest person ever to score twin centuries in a test - doing so against the elite bowling attack of SA at the time.

His career after that initial stint, however, you're right his technical flaws were clear for every test bowler in the world. Unfortunately I think he'd worked that out around the time of the incident. Iirc he was on the verge of being re-selected, with that 50 basically locking it in and it seemed this time he was more sound and ready for tests. Alas, we'll never know.

He was a walking wicket. Take a look at his scores during the ‘09 Ashes and look at how he was being dismissed. His technical flaws you refer to were at their worst then.

 

[The 747]

Are CA suggesting they are "stop gap" openers

Smith isn't an opener - but if he wants that spot he and Ussie won't be around for too long everything else slots in after

It is kicking the can down the road, but Uzzie averages 57 as an opener and Smith averages somewhere around that, so not the worst options really. Otherwise we go with openers who average about half that. So we wait for a few years and see if someone else puts their case forward.

 

[Coops93]

He was a walking wicket. Take a look at his scores during the ‘09 Ashes and look at how he was being dismissed. His technical flaws you refer to were at their worst then.

In the 5 innings after twin tons he had 3 30s, as an opener vs Steyn, Ntini, Anderson & Broad. Hardly walking wicket. The dropping was a surprise at the time and seen as unfair.

 

[The 747]

In the 5 innings after twin tons he had 3 30s, as an opener vs Steyn, Morkel, Anderson & Broad. Hardly walking wicket. The dropping was a surprise at the time.

Hughes was a bit stiff because he was initially dropped on theory not results. The theory was that he would be easily worked out by Test class bowlers after they had a good look at him. I probably agree with the theory but don't agree with dropping people on hypotheticals (same as us dropping Head for the first India test).

 

[big_e]

In the 5 innings after twin tons he had 3 30s, as an opener vs Steyn, Ntini, Anderson & Broad. Hardly walking wicket. The dropping was a surprise at the time and seen as unfair.

Worth noting that he was replaced by Shane Watson, whose scores for the rest of the series were 62, 53, 51, 34 and 40. And in the home summer that followed, he made a hundred, 3 x 90s and an 89.

Whether it was a surprise or not, looks like the selectors got that one right.

 

[Coops93]

Worth noting that he was replaced by Shane Watson, whose scores for the rest of the series were 62, 53, 51, 34 and 40. And in the home summer that followed, he made a hundred, 3 x 90s and an 89.

Whether it was a surprise or not, looks like the selectors got that one right.

I agree they got it right, however, not with the idea he was a walking wicket. It was a surprise and something they had to defend at the time.

 

[Coops93]

Hughes was a bit stiff because he was initially dropped on theory not results. The theory was that he would be easily worked out by Test class bowlers after they had a good look at him. I probably agree with the theory but don't agree with dropping people on hypotheticals (same as us dropping Head for the first India test).

Pretty much my thoughts on it. Even though they were probably right, dropping on theory isn't something I agree with. If they did that Smith would've never got another go once he started crabbing and batting like a weirdo.

 

[BarryMorgan]

No, he wasn't a walking wicket "at that stage", you're thinking of later in his career. At the time he was dropped for the first time it was a surprise and only 3 tests after being the youngest person ever to score twin centuries in a test - doing so against the elite bowling attack of SA at the time.

His career after that initial stint, however, you're right his technical flaws were clear for every test bowler in the world. Unfortunately I think he'd worked that out around the time of the incident. Iirc he was on the verge of being re-selected, with that 50 basically locking it in and it seemed this time he was more sound and ready for tests. Alas, we'll never know.

Very different game to Test cricket, but seeing both his ODI hundreds in person in 2013, I reckon you’re right - he definitely looked a more rounded player at that stage of his career.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Renshaw was concussed while fielding in the warm-up game in the UAE, probably would have played if not for that.

That was 1 test...should have been back the following test...if he was actually liked, clear as day he wasn't for whatever reason.

 

[big_e]

That was 1 test...should have been back the following test...if he was actually liked, clear as day he wasn't for whatever reason.

Yeah, I never thought Renshaw and Langer got on, either. But if they thought of Renshaw only as an opener at that point, the first test opening partnerships were 142 and 87. They ain't changing that.

 

[eddiesmith]

Yeah, I never thought Renshaw and Langer got on, either. But if they thought of Renshaw only as an opener at that point, the first test opening partnerships were 142 and 87. They ain't changing that.

That’s because they’ve built this narrative that Finch was a walking wicket and a complete failure opening. But he was fine in the UAE averaging about 45 and earned his spot for the Indian series.

As a test player he had 3 good tests and 2 failures and was then stamped never play again.

 

[western royboy]

To be fair Cummins isn't exactly going to say "Sorry Cam the fast bowling cartel are still salty you said we knew ball tampering was happening so you probably won't get selected while I'm skipper"

Sadly closer to the truth than many are ever like to know

 

[Black Diamond]

If anyone is doubting what a moron Langer can be, take a look at this article from 2017:

Justin Langer: Matt Renshaw under pressure heading into first Test

‘Superman’ putting Renshaw under pressure

www.foxsports.com.au

Wildly inappropriate comments from Langer, who was already within the Australian coaching set up at that stage (he had filled for Lehman during some IT20s).

And that is to say nothing of his hot take that Bancroft could be the next wicketkeeper-batsman.

Or that Marsh was the Superman.

Gives credence to the view that Langer was not a big fan of Renshaw.

 

[dogs105]

If anyone is doubting what a moron Langer can be, take a look at this article from 2017:

Justin Langer: Matt Renshaw under pressure heading into first Test

‘Superman’ putting Renshaw under pressure

www.foxsports.com.au

Wildly inappropriate comments from Langer, who was already within the Australian coaching set up at that stage (he had filled for Lehman during some IT20s).

And that is to say nothing if his hot take that Bancroft could be the next wicketkeeper-batsman.

Gives credence to the view that Langer was not a big fan of Renshaw.

He was coach of WA and Perth at that time, so just pushing his players' cases. That's not unexpected or bad. Bit weird ro name one of the incumbents though

 

[LukeParkerno1]

If anyone is doubting what a moron Langer can be, take a look at this article from 2017:

Justin Langer: Matt Renshaw under pressure heading into first Test

‘Superman’ putting Renshaw under pressure

www.foxsports.com.au

Wildly inappropriate comments from Langer, who was already within the Australian coaching set up at that stage (he had filled for Lehman during some IT20s).

And that is to say nothing of his hot take that Bancroft could be the next wicketkeeper-batsman.

Or that Marsh was the Superman.

Gives credence to the view that Langer was not a big fan of Renshaw.

Even the article a few days ago you could tell with the words he used he wasn't a fan. Glad he's gone and him being turfed was the best thing for Australian cricket

 

[Black Diamond]

He was coach of WA and Perth at that time, so just pushing his players' cases. That's not unexpected or bad. Bit weird ro name one of the incumbents though

It is unexpected and bad given he was part of the Australian set up.

Even putting that aside, the comments on his WA players are so stupid that they should have disqualified him from ever coaching Australia.

This gem as well about Marcus Harris being his “little brother”:

‘Like my little brother’: Justin Langer slams Marcus Harris ‘myth’

‘Like my little brother’: Langer slams Marcus Harris ‘myth’

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[NoWuckingFurries]

To be fair to Bancroft, the fast bowlers did know. The whole team knew. While I don’t think he should be picked, he was put up to it and was made to take the fall with the other two. He was a junior squad member and should not have been put in that position.

Thank you!!!!
Everyone was complicit.

What, you think that the fast bowlers would have looked at the ball and thought "that looks normal! No sign of tampering here at all".

He was a junior member who copped it and now they're discriminating against him. It's such boys club CA arrogance.

If you're okay with it then

 

[dogs105]

It is unexpected and bad given he was part of the Australian set up.

Even putting that aside, the comments on his WA players are so stupid that they should have disqualified him from ever coaching Australia.

This gem as well about Marcus Harris being his “little brother”:

‘Like my little brother’: Justin Langer slams Marcus Harris ‘myth’

‘Like my little brother’: Langer slams Marcus Harris ‘myth’

www.foxsports.com.au

It's been known his whole career that he's incredibly dumb. Perhaps someone should have told him to be quiet more often.

 

[Black Diamond]

If you're okay with it then

If that is directed at me, I have made it clear I don’t think he should be picked because he isn’t good enough.

The ball tampering has not bothered me for a long time, and I want the truth to come out.

 

[NoWuckingFurries]

If that is directed at me, I have made it clear I don’t think he should be picked because he isn’t good enough.

The ball tampering has not bothered me for a long time, and I want the truth to come out.

Not at all directed at you, I appreciate your view.
I disagree and think he deserves it but that something else entirely

 

[The 747]

Thank you!!!!
Everyone was complicit.

What, you think that the fast bowlers would have looked at the ball and thought "that looks normal! No sign of tampering here at all".

He was a junior member who copped it and now they're discriminating against him. It's such boys club CA arrogance.

If you're okay with it then

Hate to burst your bubble (actually that's not true). The umpires report said they saw no sign of tampering with the ball. So the umpires are in on this grand conspiracy as well?

 

[The 747]

It's been known his whole career that he's incredibly dumb. Perhaps someone should have told him to be quiet more often.

Devasting indictment on CA that they gave a narcissistic moron so much power and authority. And he repaid them with the most epic of dummy spits when he was finally moved on anyway.

 

[frankrizzo]

Hate to burst your bubble (actually that's not true). The umpires report said they saw no sign of tampering with the ball. So the umpires are in on this grand conspiracy as well?

No mater how many times that fact is pointed out some people just continue to ignore it, the ball wasnt damaged the ball wasnt reversing and the ball wasnt changed.