Development of junior batsmen

[western royboy]

That's an interesting stat. Do you have a link with the numbers?

The numbers are bullshit IMO, Vic has massive numbers but they are all kids playing Mickey Mouse junior competitions that have next to no relation to senior cricket. The drop off at 16/17 is massive and one of the major reasons is simply because the pathway to get them there does not prepare them for the next step so they bail out.

 

[QAFL_Fan]

I saw that mentioned earlier, but I don't recall guys playing for South Australia whilst at the academy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Cricket_Academy

Looking at that list Michael Bevan is the only non SA person who played for SA in 1989-90.

That was merely because none demanded selection, not because it wasn't part of the system.

Watson went to the academy with Clarke in 99 and both nearly debuted for SA that year, in fact I think one may have been 12th man a few times.

Bevan was a prodigy, so no surprise he is one of the few.

Y

I still much prefer the idea of a 12 month live in academy, then the current centre of excellence, which is also a good idea in itself. but one that would really compliment a live in academy.

In saying that I'd probably rather it up in Brisbane than Adelaide. Having them play on the Gabba is better experience than the AO IMO.

The centre of excellent is a live in Academy. In fact Davey Warner was thrown out of it for destroying his room after a night on the sauce.

they don't play at the Gabba though, all their centre wicket practice and actual matches are at AB oval, which is a road.

 

[LicoriceAllsorts]

5 years ago we were saying the same thing about bowlers, let it be

 

[western royboy]

5 years ago we were saying the same thing about bowlers, let it be

No I can't - I might not know much about a lot of things - but on this I know I'm not wrong. I have put my theory around to a lot of people in the cricket community at numerous levels and there are far too many in total agreement with me. Was chatting to a friend in the members on Sunday, debate got quite animated - gent in front of me turned round and said - "I'm from Perth - you are 100% right - I've never heard it explained like that"

 

[LicoriceAllsorts]

No I can't - I might not know much about a lot of things - but on this I know I'm not wrong. I have put my theory around to a lot of people in the cricket community at numerous levels and there are far too many in total agreement with me. Was chatting to a friend in the members on Sunday, debate got quite animated - gent in front of me turned round and said - "I'm from Perth - you are 100% right - I've never heard it explained like that"

Sorry, everything you've wrote that I've read so far I have agree, I was more replying to the OP, I think the problem with batting at the highest level for us is that we need to be giving our new guys more of an opportunity to learn how to play at the highest level, 4-5 test innings' every year or two is no where near enough to learn how to play at the highest level...

 

[The_Reaper]

5 years ago we were saying the same thing about bowlers, let it be

Maybe the spinners.

Even back then we had Johnson, Harris, Hilfenhaus, Clark etc- all fairly decent to good test bowlers.

 

[LicoriceAllsorts]

Maybe the spinners.

Even back then we had Johnson, Harris, Hilfenhaus, Clark etc- all fairly decent to good test bowlers.

People didn't rate Johnson and Harris nearly as highly as they do now though. There are batsmen we have tried, Marsh, Khawaja, Cowan, they can all be great test players, we just need to give them time, and we will get at least a few really good batsman

 

[western royboy]

Maybe the spinners.

Even back then we had Johnson, Harris, Hilfenhaus, Clark etc- all fairly decent to good test bowlers.

The issue with spinners correlates directly with the slogging nature of junior rep sides and competitions. They get belted and pull the pin before they get anywhere near being ready.

 

[The_Reaper]

People didn't rate Johnson and Harris nearly as highly as they do now though. There are batsmen we have tried, Marsh, Khawaja, Cowan, they can all be great test players, we just need to give them time, and we will get at least a few really good batsman

Cowan got 18 consecutive tests.
He was in form and he consistently made starts at test level (which suggests he was in form). He consistently failed to get on with those starts.

I'd suggest that he just reached as high a level as his talent could bring him. Like Carberry in the Ashes. Not out of form just not test level.

Marsh maybe but given his father he's an exception to normal junior development. Both the Marsh boys would have been trained the old fashioned way.

Not fully convinced by Khawaja but if he hadn't gotten injured in the Matadors I suspect he wouldn't be far off selection

 

[western royboy]

Cowan got 18 consecutive tests.
He was in form and he consistently made starts at test level (which suggests he was in form). He consistently failed to get on with those starts.

I'd suggest that he just reached as high a level as his talent could bring him. Like Carberry in the Ashes. Not out of form just not test level.

Marsh maybe but given his father he's an exception to normal junior development. Both the Marsh boys would have been trained the old fashioned way.

Not fully convinced by Khawaja but if he hadn't gotten injured in the Matadors I suspect he wouldn't be far off selection

Khawaja was and is a long way back in the queue - believe me - he had more chances than Cowan for far less returns

 

[The_Reaper]

Khawaja was and is a long way back in the queue - believe me - he had more chances than Cowan for far less returns

I rate your mail so I'll take your word for it.

But we're surely scrapping the barrel if Watto and Marsh fail and Clarke doesn't recover

Irrelevant now due to his injury anyway

 

[western royboy]

I rate your mail so I'll take your word for it.

But we're surely scrapping the barrel if Watto and Marsh fail and Clarke doesn't recover

Irrelevant now due to his injury anyway

He seriously dented his chances on the last Ashes tour - on and off field. People like Agar and Faulkner did the opposite. Faces have to fit.

 

[QAFL_Fan]

Khawaja was and is a long way back in the queue - believe me - he had more chances than Cowan for far less returns

More chances than Cowan? Cowan got 18 tests in a row.

Khawaja has never played more than 3 in a row. 15 of his 17 completed test innings have been batting at #3 the hardest spot in the order, usually against SA or England.

While he may have personality issues, of all the young Australian batsmen to debut in recent years, Khawaja is the most talented outside Hughes and Smith and was given the worst run of anyone.

As for the development of Australian batting, all your theories are well and good. However, you are ignoring the most obvious thing of all.

In about 2008/9, people were bored with the shield and all the 4 day draws. A directive was given the produce 'result wickets'. We then had 5 years of green tops, where guys like Butterworth, Bird, Bollinger, Cutting, Faulkner, Starc, McDermott, Copeland and so many more created these incredible statistical bowling records where we had people shouting from the rooftops about the depth of fast bowling in Australia. Then many of the above names have been tried at international level in normal conditions and haven't been anywhere near the destructive forces they appear to be when assessing their shield records.

On the other hand, it ruined a succession of young Australian batsmen who were regularly dismissed by unplayable balls on difficult wickets and suddenly every talented young shield batsman had an average in the 30's. Usman Khawaja, Alex Doolan, Joe Burns, Chris Lynn, Nic Maddinson, Michael Hill, Jordan Silk etc etc are all far better players than their records suggest.

Watch the shield averages suddenly shoot up now the wickets are all back to normal, in fact there are 12 batsmen averaging over 50 in the current shield season already.

It's not a bloody cooincidence, the bowlers haven't gotten worse all of a sudden and it sure as hell as nothing to do with MILO cricket!

 

[western royboy]

More chances than Cowan? Cowan got 18 tests in a row.

Khawaja has never played more than 3 in a row. 15 of his 17 completed test innings have been batting at #3 the hardest spot in the order, usually against SA or England.

While he may have personality issues, of all the young Australian batsmen to debut in recent years, Khawaja is the most talented outside Hughes and Smith and was given the worst run of anyone.

As for the development of Australian batting, all your theories are well and good. However, you are ignoring the most obvious thing of all.

In about 2008/9, people were bored with the shield and all the 4 day draws. A directive was given the produce 'result wickets'. We then had 5 years of green tops, where guys like Butterworth, Bird, Bollinger, Cutting, Faulkner, Starc, McDermott, Copeland and so many more created these incredible statistical bowling records where we had people shouting from the rooftops about the depth of fast bowling in Australia. Then many of the above names have been tried at international level in normal conditions and haven't been anywhere near the destructive forces they appear to be when assessing their shield records.

On the other hand, it ruined a succession of young Australian batsmen who were regularly dismissed by unplayable balls on difficult wickets and suddenly every talented young shield batsman had an average in the 30's. Usman Khawaja, Alex Doolan, Joe Burns, Chris Lynn, Nic Maddinson, Michael Hill, Jordan Silk etc etc are all far better players than their records suggest.

Watch the shield averages suddenly shoot up now the wickets are all back to normal, in fact there are 12 batsmen averaging over 50 in the current shield season already.

It's not a bloody cooincidence, the bowlers haven't gotten worse all of a sudden and it sure as hell as nothing to do with MILO cricket!

Khawaja has been recalled more than once, Cowan got the short shift once and has not been seen again near the squad. The young players you listed are all extreme talent, but they have all struggled after their initial honeymoon period as analysts work out there game and identify where to bowl. Yes wickets had something to do with it, but nowhere near what you are claiming. Without the tougher testing ground at Grade level (which has declined significantly) whilst the professional standards of domestic cricket has increased its going to take for them to get through system. If you don't understand my theory - that's fine, but don't summarise it as milo cricket, there is a bit more to it than that.

 

[t_94]

western royboy really enjoying your insights in to this issue. What would be the concrete changes that you would make to the system if you were in the relevant position ?

 

[QAFL_Fan]

Some of them never even had a honeymoon period. Michael Hill has barely been sighted, despite his exceptional gifts.

Bellerive, Junction Oval, Gabba, WACA were all absolutely a seamers paradise. As a result, the development of spin bowling and top order batting has hit a roadblock. Even the SCG was a green wicket for 3 seasons!

The only shield wicket that has always remained true to character was the Adelaide Oval. It's no cooincidence that Klinger left Victoria without a shield hundred to his name and an average of 28, then ended up playing for SA at the Adelaide oval and going on a run scoring spree!

This is why Cowan and Bailey in particular were given test starts despite perhaps not having the numbers to justify it compared to some others, as the general view was that averaging 35+ at Bellerive in that era was as good as 40+ anywhere else

 

[western royboy]

Some of them never even had a honeymoon period. Michael Hill has barely been sighted, despite his exceptional gifts.

Bellerive, Junction Oval, Gabba, WACA were all absolutely a seamers paradise. As a result, the development of spin bowling and top order batting has hit a roadblock. Even the SCG was a green wicket for 3 seasons!

The only shield wicket that has always remained true to character was the Adelaide Oval. It's no cooincidence that Klinger left Victoria without a shield hundred to his name and an average of 28, then ended up playing for SA at the Adelaide oval and going on a run scoring spree!

This is why Cowan and Bailey in particular were given test starts despite perhaps not having the numbers to justify it compared to some others, as the general view was that averaging 35+ at Bellerive in that era was as good as 40+ anywhere else

Victoria has produced more wonderkind young talented batsman and a lot of Australian U/19 captains than anyone - yet they never get to the next step - why?

Clinton Peake / Michael Hill / Liam Buchanan and now possibly Aaron Finch - dominant junior batsman who murdered under age attacks for years, but by staying in that environment, they were never continually tested at a higher level, the slight flaws in ther game stayed there too long - and were ignored because they just dominated. At higher levels talent evens out what separates the wheat from the chaff is technique and mental skills.

If your testing ground (Grade Cricket) drops away then and you go to junior pathways to fill your gaps more and more get through to the domestic level without having been through the ringer so to speak and thoroughly tested and had technicals flaws exposed or mental flaws worked through.

Talent is overrated in cricket - you don't need to identify it so early, it will reveal itself in time. I played against some very talented juniors when I was a kid, but through natural selection not all made it to the end. We are asking for trouble if we keep going own the pure athlete road and place the dominant bigger kids on a pedestal We will miss the diamonds and potentially put time into the wrong kids.

As for Mick Klinger I know him well, similar story but like Mike Hussey he struggled to believe he was good enough for a long time despite killing it in district cricket, eventually it clicked but like I say it took time and he made it happen.

 

[western royboy]

western royboy really enjoying your insights in to this issue. What would be the concrete changes that you would make to the system if you were in the relevant position ?

Put a minimum age on starting Milo In 2 Cricket at 7-8 anything younger is a waste. Focus has to be on getting the basics right - grip, stance, backlift - throwing - bowling overarm.

Youngest age group for organised game U/12, keep scores - no ladders or finals or association awards. Everyone bats, everyone bowls. Double runs for shots past the stumps at the bowlers end.

Highest age group Under 16 for competition, no restrictions. In between work out based upon numbers.

No T20 involved in junior representative cricket below under 16.

Integrate talented kids into senior competitions as appropriate.

That's just the start, cricket isn't for everyone, putting a few handbrakes on will actually help the game not hinder it, but I feel I am in the minority on this as it doesn't meet the KPI's of CA.

 

[t_94]

Put a minimum age on starting Milo In 2 Cricket at 7-8 anything younger is a waste. Focus has to be on getting the basics right - grip, stance, backlift - throwing - bowling overarm.

Youngest age group for organised game U/12, keep scores - no ladders or finals or association awards. Everyone bats, everyone bowls. Double runs for shots past the stumps at the bowlers end.

Highest age group Under 16 for competition, no restrictions. In between work out based upon numbers.

No T20 involved in junior representative cricket below under 16.

Integrate talented kids into senior competitions as appropriate.

That's just the start, cricket isn't for everyone, putting a few handbrakes on will actually help the game not hinder it, but I feel I am in the minority on this as it doesn't meet the KPI's of CA.

They definitely seem intent on getting as many kids as possible playing cricket so they can put the figures in performance reports and such showing an increase in overall participation.

 

[copthat]

Due to time constraints all junior rep cricket is short form. The need to win means the sluggers are selected over the kids who might actually make it.

I take zero notice of kids cricket, other than to identify kids who might make it. I take notice of kids who perform well in senior cricket.

Without reading the rest of the thread, this is also exactly why spinners, especially wrist spinners, are dropping off at a young age. All representative cricket is played in the short forms, so coaches (who are normally clueless to be honest) would prefer to pick a dart thrower who goes for 0/18 off 8 rather than a wrist spinner who goes for 3/30 off 5.

 

[The Passenger]

Talent is overrated in cricket - you don't need to identify it so early, it will reveal itself in time. I played against some very talented juniors when I was a kid, but through natural selection not all made it to the end. We are asking for trouble if we keep going own the pure athlete road and place the dominant bigger kids on a pedestal We will miss the diamonds and potentially put time into the wrong kids.

I don't agree that talent is overrated. But I do think it's important not to make your mind up early. You're line about it revealing itself in time is true. Some kids come on early, others very late. Cricket has got one of the biggest disparities in terms of development rate of any sport I can think of. These aren't even extreme examples, these are real life examples. There are 16 and 17 year olds playing first grade. Trent Copeland didn't even become a bowler till he was 20 then went onto get a baggy green. A lot of state cricketers didn't cement their first grade spots till they were 22-24.

Integrate talented kids into senior competitions as appropriate.

In 30 minutes research here is 3 great examples from this season Under 17's championships. Patrick Page Jnr (SA), Brendan Smith (NSW) and David Lozinksi (NSW). Page Jnr topped the run scoring for the champs, and was playing SA u/17's when he was u/15's. Obviously very very talented. Smith is the NSW and Aus u/17's captain and performed well at the champs. Lozinski - like Smith - plays for Bankstown so I thought he was an easy third example.

Senior cricket played by these three guys:

Page: 2012/13 (Glenelg) 4 x B grade matches, 2013/14 2 x B Grade, 1 x A Grade, 2014/15 (Tea Tree Gully) 4 x A Grade (His my cricket says 4 A Grade and 2 A Grade One Dayers, but the one dayers are integrated into the A Grade so they are the same game)

Total 11 senior matches

Smith: 2012/13 (Bankstown) 8 x 5th Grade, 1 x 4th Grade. 2013/14 7 x 3rd Grade, 8 x 4th Grade, 1 x PG. 2014/15 5 x 2nd Grade, 3 x 3rd Grade, 1 x PG

Total 34 senior matches

Lozinski: 2012/13 (Bankstown) 12 x 5th Grade. 2013/14 10 x 3rd Grade 5 x 4th Grade, 5 x PG's. 2014/15 7 x 2nd Grade, 2 x PG's

Total 41 Senior matches

Now it's quite possible Page has school cricket blocking his Saturday's to play grade cricket (and it's possible I missed a bunch of senior cricket he is playing elsewhere but don't think so), but regardless that is a huge disparity in the amount of senior cricket these three guys are playing, all whom are the same age and each state (and by extension CA) would be putting a large chunk of development into.

I wonder how often this is repeated across the country.

 

[western royboy]

I don't agree that talent is overrated. But I do think it's important not to make your mind up early. You're line about it revealing itself in time is true. Some kids come on early, others very late. Cricket has got one of the biggest disparities in terms of development rate of any sport I can think of. These aren't even extreme examples, these are real life examples. There are 16 and 17 year olds playing first grade. Trent Copeland didn't even become a bowler till he was 20 then went onto get a baggy green. A lot of state cricketers didn't cement their first grade spots till they were 22-24.

In 30 minutes research here is 3 great examples from this season Under 17's championships. Patrick Page Jnr (SA), Brendan Smith (NSW) and David Lozinksi (NSW). Page Jnr topped the run scoring for the champs, and was playing SA u/17's when he was u/15's. Obviously very very talented. Smith is the NSW and Aus u/17's captain and performed well at the champs. Lozinski - like Smith - plays for Bankstown so I thought he was an easy third example.

Senior cricket played by these three guys:

Page: 2012/13 (Glenelg) 4 x B grade matches, 2013/14 2 x B Grade, 1 x A Grade, 2014/15 (Tea Tree Gully) 4 x A Grade (His my cricket says 4 A Grade and 2 A Grade One Dayers, but the one dayers are integrated into the A Grade so they are the same game)

Total 11 senior matches

Smith: 2012/13 (Bankstown) 8 x 5th Grade, 1 x 4th Grade. 2013/14 7 x 3rd Grade, 8 x 4th Grade, 1 x PG. 2014/15 5 x 2nd Grade, 3 x 3rd Grade, 1 x PG

Total 34 senior matches

Lozinski: 2012/13 (Bankstown) 12 x 5th Grade. 2013/14 10 x 3rd Grade 5 x 4th Grade, 5 x PG's. 2014/15 7 x 2nd Grade, 2 x PG's

Total 41 Senior matches

Now it's quite possible Page has school cricket blocking his Saturday's to play grade cricket (and it's possible I missed a bunch of senior cricket he is playing elsewhere but don't think so), but regardless that is a huge disparity in the amount of senior cricket these three guys are playing, all whom are the same age and each state (and by extension CA) would be putting a large chunk of development into.

I wonder how often this is repeated across the country.

Everywhere except NSW I would suggest.

 

[western royboy]

Without reading the rest of the thread, this is also exactly why spinners, especially wrist spinners, are dropping off at a young age. All representative cricket is played in the short forms, so coaches (who are normally clueless to be honest) would prefer to pick a dart thrower who goes for 0/18 off 8 rather than a wrist spinner who goes for 3/30 off 5.

Bingo spinners correlates directly with that of Batsmen, sorry Batters!

 

[western royboy]

They definitely seem intent on getting as many kids as possible playing cricket so they can put the figures in performance reports and such showing an increase in overall participation.

It is the biggest bullshit stat - it means nothing - the standard of organised cricket in this country - Community and Grade/District has fallen that far in 20 years it's not funny, the two levels above are in fantasy land if they think that they won't fall as well.

 

[t_94]

I don't agree that talent is overrated. But I do think it's important not to make your mind up early. You're line about it revealing itself in time is true. Some kids come on early, others very late. Cricket has got one of the biggest disparities in terms of development rate of any sport I can think of. These aren't even extreme examples, these are real life examples. There are 16 and 17 year olds playing first grade. Trent Copeland didn't even become a bowler till he was 20 then went onto get a baggy green. A lot of state cricketers didn't cement their first grade spots till they were 22-24.

In 30 minutes research here is 3 great examples from this season Under 17's championships. Patrick Page Jnr (SA), Brendan Smith (NSW) and David Lozinksi (NSW). Page Jnr topped the run scoring for the champs, and was playing SA u/17's when he was u/15's. Obviously very very talented. Smith is the NSW and Aus u/17's captain and performed well at the champs. Lozinski - like Smith - plays for Bankstown so I thought he was an easy third example.

Senior cricket played by these three guys:

Page: 2012/13 (Glenelg) 4 x B grade matches, 2013/14 2 x B Grade, 1 x A Grade, 2014/15 (Tea Tree Gully) 4 x A Grade (His my cricket says 4 A Grade and 2 A Grade One Dayers, but the one dayers are integrated into the A Grade so they are the same game)

Total 11 senior matches

Smith: 2012/13 (Bankstown) 8 x 5th Grade, 1 x 4th Grade. 2013/14 7 x 3rd Grade, 8 x 4th Grade, 1 x PG. 2014/15 5 x 2nd Grade, 3 x 3rd Grade, 1 x PG

Total 34 senior matches

Page is a very talented young player. He has previously had to play for his school (Rostrevor) on Saturdays during the term. The issue of schools not letting their best players play high level grade cricket is a big one here with the school standard being low but schools refusing to budge, particularly for those on scholarships (not sure if page is on a scholarship)

Lozinski: 2012/13 (Bankstown) 12 x 5th Grade. 2013/14 10 x 3rd Grade 5 x 4th Grade, 5 x PG's. 2014/15 7 x 2nd Grade, 2 x PG's

Total 41 Senior matches

Now it's quite possible Page has school cricket blocking his Saturday's to play grade cricket (and it's possible I missed a bunch of senior cricket he is playing elsewhere but don't think so), but regardless that is a huge disparity in the amount of senior cricket these three guys are playing, all whom are the same age and each state (and by extension CA) would be putting a large chunk of development into.

I wonder how often this is repeated across the country.