CA contract cuts

[Thommo 42]

I don't agree with that.

Ed Cowan is the incumbent test opener, he is dominating shield cricket when he plays - he should get a contract hands down.

All test players and fringe test players should be contracted, this would be 15-16 blokes.

After that, contracts are awarded when players hit selection benchmarks. Eg. 5 ODI's you get a contract. 3 Tests, you get a contract.

T20 specialists shouldn't get central contracts IMO.

 

[Bucking Beads]

I think 20 is a good number. Generally touring squads are 15-16

 

[oobee007]

Gotta remember that cricket Australia uses a point system based on the previous year, and with what occurs in the next contract period (i.e. 2020 world cup this contract year, and the next one will have more longer form players due to the ashes).

I think Smith was ranked 7th due to playing all three forms, but obviously drops to around the 20th ranking based on playing time (played alot world cup period but none in Australia). Bollinger was ranked 25th so assuming his ranking stayed the same (which it wouldn't) he would still loose his contract.

 

[Underarm]

T20 specialists shouldn't get central contracts IMO.

Bailey should get one. Is the T20 captain, and the back up batsmen for the ODI's. Selectors are making sure he sticks around the side.

None of the others in the T20 squad deserve it, Finch and Marsh are out of form, Mitch Marsh is injured and new, and Hogg is too old for it to be worth it.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

In an ideal world you would have 15 contracts pre season and another 5 or so that can be awarded throughout the year.

Then guys like Cowan, Lyon, Forrest, Bailey, Doherty etc don't necessarily get a contract to start with but if they hold their position in the respective sides for the year they can be upgraded on a performance basis.

But the problem is that everything feeds down from the top and it would cause havoc with contracts at domestic level.

They interviewed a guy on SEN today and the funding for sub district cricket in Melbourne is facing a 50% funding cut. The greedier they get at the top, both player demands with % of revenue agreements and administrators pushing T20, the less money funnels down to the bottom levels where the players are initially developed. Although I guess you could argue the Victorian system develops squat anyway.

How much money is needed at district level? I guess grounds are expensive and they need maintaining, but most sports get stuff all official money at district level. If playing and developing players in a sport was only about money, no women would ever play anything.

We already have national academies for the gifted young players and you can earn enough to play cricket 'full-time' at state level on the money players earn now.

I can't see the top players getting any less greedy about contracts, human beings don't work that way.

 

[Thommo 42]

Bailey would get one, not because he is T20 Captain.

He is also a potential player in both ODI's and the test side.

 

[Bucking Beads]

If we go with 20 that covers the 15-16 regulars plus a few gun younger players like Cummins and Starc. I think the bigger problem has been the money some of these players have been getting.

 

[The_Reaper]

Bailey would get one, not because he is T20 Captain.

He is also a potential player in both ODI's and the test side.

If we're only having 15 men squad that actual test regulars should get first dibs.

That would be

1. Clarke
2. Watson
3. M.Hussey
4. R.Ponting
5. P.Siddle
6. D.Warner
7. J.Pattinson
8. B.Hilfenhaus
9. N.Lyon
10. E.Cowan
11. B.Haddin
12. Harris

For ODI regulars we also have to include D.Hussey, Lee, McKay, Christian, Doherty and Wade- a total of 18 players.

I'd strongly consider pushing the bolded players out of the test and odi sides very soon, if not now. They won't be around for the world cup and are not really required for tests anymore.

That would give us 14 contracted players.

The 15th contact spot would be between Bailey, Cummins, Khawaja or Starc who are all on the verge of making the team.

 

[Natho]

No point giving Bailey one when he hasnt done anything really. Beats me how Doherty gets one. Cowan should get one and he deserves it too.

Steve Smith must have been robbing CA blind with the contract that spud had.

 

[Underarm]

I'd strongly consider pushing the bolded players out of the test and odi sides very soon, if not now. They won't be around for the world cup and are not really required for tests anymore.

People really need to get rid of the mindset that only the Ashes and WC count, and that everyone who is seemingly too old to make the next popular event should just leave now. THERE IS PLENTY OF TIME to blood a new guy at 6 to take DJ Hussey's spot, if he doesnt make it to the next WC. Contrary to some peoples belief, the ODI squad for the 2015 world cup does not need to be settled by the time we play England in the winter of 2012.

No point giving Bailey one when he hasnt done anything really. Beats me how Doherty gets one. Cowan should get one and he deserves it too.

Obviously didnt watch the ODI series then. clear best australian ODI spinner.
Bailey is the T20 captain, and backup batsmen for the ODI's (and maybe tests) and has been earmarked as a potential player in the formats over the years. Expect to see him make his ODI debut soon.

 

[Thommo 42]

I would give Lee a contract only when he meets selection benchmarks, and it would be a minimum deal + match payments.

The guy has retired from first class cricket and there is no benefit to having him on a fat central contract, especially when he can earn huge $ playing in T20 leagues due to no 1st class commmittments.

Same goes for D.Husseym he hasn't retired from first class - but there is no benefit having him on a big fat central contract from Day 1, again he meets selection benchmarks in ODI's he gets upgraded.

 

[western royboy]

In an ideal world you would have 15 contracts pre season and another 5 or so that can be awarded throughout the year.

Then guys like Cowan, Lyon, Forrest, Bailey, Doherty etc don't necessarily get a contract to start with but if they hold their position in the respective sides for the year they can be upgraded on a performance basis.

But the problem is that everything feeds down from the top and it would cause havoc with contracts at domestic level.

They interviewed a guy on SEN today and the funding for sub district cricket in Melbourne is facing a 50% funding cut. The greedier they get at the top, both player demands with % of revenue agreements and administrators pushing T20, the less money funnels down to the bottom levels where the players are initially developed. Although I guess you could argue the Victorian system develops squat anyway.

As a one time Subby 1st XI player, the average payment to pro's per club has always been around the $20k mark. Plenty have left to go to other clubs for more $$$. Indeed an ex Victorian is running around allegedly for a figure double that.

If the contracts get cut at the top, and quite a few Vics would get the chop, the the Bushrangers have to take up the slack. Subbies funding is under fire because we have two Big Bash sides to prop up. I'm still waiting for the rivers of cash to come from India to support all this expansion.

It's a worrying tiome for all involved and I can't see the ACA agreeing to it.

 

[Ill Chicken]

Ideally you would have contracts for the type of player they are. Not just contract 25 blokes outright.

Out of the current list how many should actually be playing across all three formats? Considering we play only 5 or 6 T20's a year, 25 - 35 ODI's and roughly 10 tests, There should be a basic contract list for each format and the money pooled accordingly. Say if it is 25 million, 14 for tests, 8 for ODI and 3 for T20.

Out the current squad, these blokes should get contracts for the following;
DE Bollinger - Cut
MJ Clarke - Test Only
PJ Cummins - Test Only
XJ Doherty - ODI/T20 Only
CJ Ferguson - Cut
BJ Haddin - Cut
RJ Harris - Test Only
JW Hastings - Cut
NM Hauritz - Test Only
BW Hilfenhaus - Test Only
PJ Hughes - Cut
DJ Hussey - ODI/T20
MEK Hussey - Test/ODI/T20
MG Johnson - Cut
UT Khawaja - Cut
JJ Krejza - Cut
B Lee - Cut
SE Marsh - Test Only
TD Paine - Cut
JL Pattinson - Test Only
RT Ponting - Test Only
PM Siddle - Test Only
SPD Smith - T20 Only
SR Watson - Test/ODI Only
CL White - T20 Only (barely)

 

[The Speaker]

MG Johnson - ODI/T20 only

fixed.

 

[dan warna]

NM Hauritz - Cut
SPD SMith - Cut
CL white - Cut

 

[year of the roo]

Clarke only Tests?

Weird post dude. Lots of errors.

 

[Ill Chicken]

That is the current 25 contracted players. My post isn't saying they still couldn't play one format or another, it is saying they shouldn't get a contract. Clarke is an injury liability and like Shaun Marsh, can't afford to play him unless he is limited to one format.

 

[western royboy]

The real question is what is the criteria that will activate contracts, from memory last year it was 25 when Katich got cut and since that time a further 7 or 8 have been added so the list has blown out considerably under the current formula.

State contracts have been wound back because of the Big Bash, so in a state such as Victoria we will come under real pressure because I can only see Wade, J Pattinson and Siddle holding full contracts and perhaps D Hussey on a T20/ODI arrangement. Cam White and Hastings will drop out. NSW my have similar problems, its going to be interesting.

 

[adamj1300au]

if there wanting to to cull the contracts to such a small amount, form and injuries need to be taken in in to account. to drop a player who has been a long term injury, eg DE Bollinger or j Hastings, doesn't make sense and for players like smith who was contracted that didn't play all summer for aus to hold a contract was a total joke

 

[The_Reaper]

if there wanting to to cull the contracts to such a small amount, form and injuries need to be taken in in to account. to drop a player who has been a long term injury, eg DE Bollinger or j Hastings, doesn't make sense and for players like smith who was contracted that didn't play all summer for aus to hold a contract was a total joke

Dropping Bollinger and Hastings makes perfect sense because they have no future at international level.

 

[adamj1300au]

Dropping Bollinger and Hastings makes perfect sense because they have no future at international level.

bollinger maybe but hastings certainly does.

 

[The_Reaper]

bollinger maybe but hastings certainly does.

Hastings is far from international standard.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Hastings is exactly what our our ODI side needs at the moment. A guy who can bat at 8 and bowl plenty of slower balls and cutters. That said I wouldn't be giving him a contract.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Hastings is exactly what our our ODI side needs at the moment. A guy who can bat at 8 and bowl plenty of slower balls and cutters. That said I wouldn't be giving him a contract.

Neither would I. No reason why he can't play for Aus again though. I don't know how this lot of selectors feel about him as compared to the last lot.

Christian has done ok in the all-rounder spot, the problem is that neither of them have really proved to have the hitting power that you would want from them. It's early days though.

 

[Bomber Bears]

Anyone know what happened to Bollinger? Limped out of a NSW match and hasnt been seen since about November