New Australian coach Justin Langer

Scotland

Hall of Famer
Joined
May 5, 2006
Posts
45,202
Likes
46,167
AFL Club
West Coast
If and when Burns, Wade and whoever else is performing in the Shield comes in and doesn't perform - who/what will people target next?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Doss

Super Moderator
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
Posts
70,520
Likes
95,360
AFL Club
Essendon
Admin #177
If and when Burns, Wade and whoever else is performing in the Shield comes in and doesn't perform - who/what will people target next?
Well they need to be selected first before they can perform or underperform, don't they?

I don't have a target on Langer's head yet, but if people who are demonstrably showing good form at the level below keep being ignored, then my frustration with the whole regime will continue to grow. It's fiddling while Rome burns.
 

Tigerssaints

All Australian
Joined
Sep 7, 2012
Posts
781
Likes
391
Location
Hobart
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
hobart f c
greg Chapell at 70 is running over COE in qld and national selector
he is the one pushing the kiddies into tests without any nappy training
 

Phone

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Posts
26,512
Likes
8,311
Location
La Capanna Restaurant.
AFL Club
Essendon
For those that don't know, Geoff Lawson is an assistant coach for NSW. And so the most interesting part of the article is this:

He is accountable for the results of the national team, especially as he is a selector. Instead of objective assessments of performances based on runs made, we now have fake news. The ruckus earlier this week about "no one averaging above 30" is a symptom of the delusion. Maybe it’s time we went back to the tried and tested formula of coach and selectors being separate.
Which was written literally the same day that the outgoing NSW CEO has said:

If I’m brutally honest I don’t really believe in selection panels. In NSW we changed the selection structure when I started to make the coach accountable for the performance of the team and therefore the selection of the team,” Jones told SEN Test Cricket.
https://www.foxsports.com.au/cricke...k=9ac840ab97bbe3ec62f3d14747c321ad-1546758503

So you've got an absolutely massive difference of opinion when really you would have thought they would be an alignment, given Lawson is literally part of the NSW coaching stuff, and yet Lawson is saying maybe the coach shouldn't have any say in selection (the comment is aimed at international but presumably the opinion applies at domestic level). Shit like this probably sums up the current issues in Australian cricket better than anything else, there's no consistency to the things people want so things become a mess. Some people want the former methods, and don't give any consideration whatsoever as to whether they're even applicable anymore, some people want progressive solutions to problems, but struggle to get any backing from influential figures (uh, mostly past players) and you end up with a hodgepodge
 

Scotland

Hall of Famer
Joined
May 5, 2006
Posts
45,202
Likes
46,167
AFL Club
West Coast
Well they need to be selected first before they can perform or underperform, don't they?

I don't have a target on Langer's head yet, but if people who are demonstrably showing good form at the level below keep being ignored, then my frustration with the whole regime will continue to grow. It's fiddling while Rome burns.
They are wildly inconsistent but that isn't new. Harris, Renshaw and Bancroft were all picked on small sample sizes of Shield performance. They've all shown a bit, but ultimately all average in the 30s at test and Shield level. Finch doesn't even open for Victoria but we pick him as a test opener.

Wade, Burns score runs and the selectors look elsewhere. Maxwell scores runs in the Shield and performs at ODI/T20I level and the selectors look elsewhere. How we've ended up with Labuschagne as a spinning all rounder over Maxwell has me buggered, let alone how he's ended up at #3. Handscomb is dropped for having a suspect technique then recalled one test later because the wicket might turn. WTF. Mitch Marsh is badly out of form with the bat, has no opportunity to play Shield cricket because it's December and they recall him because they want an all rounder. WTF. People now want Stoinis given a go at #6. He's having a good Shield season by his standards and is averaging 42 with the bat and 25 with the ball. Career averages of 33.6 / 42.4. I like him but will he really do better than his career record from 53 matches going up a level?

It's not just the test team either. The selection criteria for the limited overs sides is a complete mystery. We have a nothing ODI series coming up and 9 of the top 10 run scorers from the JLT Cup aren't in the squad nor are 9 of the top 10 wicket takers. It begs the question why have the competition in the first place? Two bowlers took 18 wickets @ 16, 3 batsmen scored 400+ @ 70+. None made it. Instead we have Peter Siddle who not only didn't feature but hasn't played an ODI for 8 years.
 

Freo Big Fella

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 30, 2003
Posts
10,571
Likes
4,820
Location
The great wide north
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
WA, Australia
I'll give Henry's analysis one thumbs up - if anyone's well placed to recognise failings of international coaches, it's him.

Not seeing any particularly compelling arguments for turfing Langer (ignoring this board's penchant for ludicrous conspiracy theories about selectors and coaches) - Hick and Chappell as the holdouts from the previous regime have more significant questions to answer.

I think the Sri Lanka squad will be fairly indicative (making wholesale changes for Sydney wouldn't have achieved all that much IMO) - pretty much everyone barring Paine, Harris, Lyon and Cummins should be in the gun IMO.
 

damochandler

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Posts
17,000
Likes
3,026
Location
brisbane
AFL Club
Essendon
Actually scored a
Renshaw was in the squad in the UAE and was not selected due suffering a head knock after having a history of concussions. Since then he hasn't passed 30 in 6 Shield innings.

I like him and reckon he has a future but FFS he has played 11 tests and averages 33 and as soon as he's not picked he's Bradman.
50 against WA
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2019
Posts
258
Likes
135
AFL Club
Melbourne
Bolded nails it for me. It's too early to draw a line through Langer, but there is something awfully concerning about our selection and lessens are not being heeded, seemingly. The messages about selections are puzzling and contradictory.

a) Renshaw's treatment in the UAE coming off great form in England was bizarre
b) what do Burns and Maxwell and Wade have to do to get a gig?
c) players being played in odd positions; Finch opening, Lab number 3; really?


I know sometimes, when the chips are down, you just have to adopt a sink or swim approach; Australia kind of had to do that between 1985 and 1988. It didn't pay dividends overnight, but it eventually did. But the moves above seem inexplicable and, as tough a job as Langer has trying to fashion a side with the universal problems afflicting domestic cricket here at the moment, it strikes me that there is a lot of shooting oneself in foot going on too.
That’s the concerning point, the slap bang communication that is really poor and leaving individuals frustrated. Ed Cowan gives it a real shake on Grandstand and Nathan Coulter-Nile was on today saying quite candidly that he was told he wasn’t picked because of a back issue when there wasn’t one. He had soreness, got checked, and report came back clear, yet the selectors still said ‘you seemingly have an injury’.

On your points;
A - Don’t get that either, should’ve been picked against Pakistan.
B - Burns has played 14 tests and has scored 50+ in 7 knocks including 3 centuries, he is currently in form and is a far better pick than Finch. Wade & Maxwell have averaged 45+ in shield cricket not just this year but last, that’s better than Head, M Marsh, Labuschagne. How is Labuschagne justified over Kurtis Patterson?
C - Since when does Finch open in Shield cricket? He doesn’t. So why open him against India? You don’t.

It’s clear our best eleven isn’t being played, we’ve fallen short in Adelaide by 30 runs and our top order has constantly been a failure. Travis Head I really don’t get. How is he averaging 36 in shield cricket over this year and last worthy of a place over so many others? It’s also clear he has failed. He should’ve been dropped for Sydney.

The telling signs will be in whether either Marsh is considered for the SL tests or the English tour, if they are, you know it’s pretty much totally agenda based rather than just incompetence.
 

Marshland

Club Legend
Joined
Nov 12, 2011
Posts
1,342
Likes
463
Location
Napier
AFL Club
Collingwood
Renshaw was in the squad in the UAE and was not selected due suffering a head knock after having a history of concussions. Since then he hasn't passed 30 in 6 Shield innings.

I like him and reckon he has a future but FFS he has played 11 tests and averages 33 and as soon as he's not picked he's Bradman.
1. Doesn't justify dropping him last summer.
2. Certainly didn't call for Aaron Finch to be his replacement.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2015
Posts
2,598
Likes
7,013
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Charlotte Hornets
I think the Sri Lanka squad will be fairly indicative (making wholesale changes for Sydney wouldn't have achieved all that much IMO) - pretty much everyone barring Paine, Harris, Lyon and Cummins should be in the gun IMO.

I agree, but the skeptic in me says they'll make minimal changes for that series, push through it, wait for Smith and Warner to be back, and make a couple of other changes then, and cross their fingers.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Marstermind

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 16, 2004
Posts
6,960
Likes
13,387
Location
The Gasometer
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Kangaroos
I wouldn't have the first idea about Langer's performance as coach. I don't sit in on team meetings and just fed the same press-conference fluff as the rest of us. The "elite honesty" type of psycho babble leaves me cold but that's not the worst crime.

On the flip side we all have agendas. Lawson's in the past has been to support his NSW buddies. The only players with zero international experience he pushes for in this article are Dan Hughes, Kurtis Patterson and Nick Larkin (NSW's top three run getters this season). Who else put their hand up for the job Langer occupies?

Bottom line is that I wouldn't have friggin clue if Langer deserved his job or is doing any good at it. Certainly his credentials as a selector to this point is a fail. Coaching such an inexperienced, ill-equipped, confidence stricken shambles would be tough though.
 
Last edited:

twotooto

Club Legend
Joined
Sep 26, 2015
Posts
1,036
Likes
1,994
AFL Club
West Coast
Australia is currently ranked #5 in the world in the Test team rankings. We've just lost a series against the #1 ranked Test playing nation in the world in India.

Langer was appointed head coach in May 2018 - just over 6 months ago. I think he's been at the helm for just 6 Test matches.

He inherited a team that had just been through the biggest controversy in Australian cricket history, minus its captain and one of, if not the best batsman in the world, plus both opening batsmen.

I think the calls for his head on this board are a bit premature.

Do you reckon we could maybe hold off the firing squad for at least until after the Ashes?

As for Henry Lawson; he's entitled to his opinion, sure, but I think it's pretty ordinary form from him pulling out his poison pen and writing a hyperbolic pile of shit article like that after Langer has been in charge for just over 6 months. Shows a distinct lack of class.
 

The Swans Blog

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 19, 2013
Posts
9,684
Likes
5,945
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
The Swans Blog
I don't think it does. Australia have been embarassed by the Indian's, have set new all time low records, with selections arguably worse than the form of the top-6 batters.
 

Hamingja

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 20, 2014
Posts
8,784
Likes
10,331
AFL Club
Geelong
Wade, Burns score runs and the selectors look elsewhere. Maxwell scores runs in the Shield and performs at ODI/T20I level and the selectors look elsewhere. How we've ended up with Labuschagne as a spinning all rounder over Maxwell has me buggered, let alone how he's ended up at #3. Handscomb is dropped for having a suspect technique then recalled one test later because the wicket might turn. WTF. Mitch Marsh is badly out of form with the bat, has no opportunity to play Shield cricket because it's December and they recall him because they want an all rounder. WTF. People now want Stoinis given a go at #6. He's having a good Shield season by his standards and is averaging 42 with the bat and 25 with the ball. Career averages of 33.6 / 42.4. I like him but will he really do better than his career record from 53 matches going up a level?
Handscomb was found out by the Poms so they dropped him. Then he was recalled against SA after sandpaper gate. Then they dropped him for the UAE. Then he was recalled against India. Then they dropped him for boxing day and then recalled him for Sydney. After he was dropped against the Poms he shouldn't have come back until he sorted himself out in the shield.

Mitch Marsh has basically been the guy rotating in and out with Handscomb in that mess and recalled each time off no form. After the SA tour he shouldn't have come back until he sorted himself out in the shield.

Labuschagne was picked for the UAE tour on a bit of a whim. At that stage though he did have good form in the shield, albeit only a small sample size, and the selection overall was fair enough I think with the dearth of options available. He was pretty average in the UAE and got dropped. Goes back to the shield and can't buy a run so they recall him and bat him at #3 in Sydney, it is just batshit insane, there is nothing else that can be said. He just had to put some performances back on the board in the shield before they even considered picking him again.

Honestly I think I can almost live with the other selections but the selections involving those three are just completely indefensible IMO.

I know people don't agree with the run Finch got, and while I didn't agree with his initial selection, based on the UAE I think it was fair enough he got another crack over the summer. No surprise it didn't work but it doesn't really chew me up like the others.

Heading into the SL series Head is basically now in the same position Finch was after the UAE. Showed a little bit in his first series, probably won't work out long term but I think it is fair enough if they press on with him for the time being when half our batting line up is out suspended.

Both those guys were picked because they have shown they are international standard in white ball cricket. We shouldn't pick test players on white ball form but given the circumstances with Smith, Warner and Bancroft banned I personally wouldn't hang the selectors for that logic in this particular circumstance. Others no doubt would disagree.

Once the suspensions were handed down both Khawaja and S.Marsh had to be picked really. Marsh was more vulnerable but he put the runs on the board in the shield and it was fair enough he was picked for the India series. His selection for the SL series becomes more debatable now.

So eagerly awaiting whether they change tack for the SL series or repeat the same mistakes.
 

Cold Sober

Club Legend
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Posts
2,193
Likes
2,112
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Man U .White Sox;Storm,Victory
Warney seems to know the answer to all our problems, so what the ****'s the problem, 'SOLVED'
 

damochandler

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Posts
17,000
Likes
3,026
Location
brisbane
AFL Club
Essendon
1. Doesn't justify dropping him last summer.
2. Certainly didn't call for Aaron Finch to be his replacement.
He got dropped for the ashes because he was struggling to hit it off the square in shield games leading up to the series. He went on a tear after the ashes series

Usman replaced him in the UAE. Finch went in for Warner essentially
 

The Sim Dog

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 5, 2007
Posts
12,229
Likes
6,520
Location
Near Casey Fields
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Trailblazers and Storm
If and when Burns, Wade and whoever else is performing in the Shield comes in and doesn't perform - who/what will people target next?
Cross that bridge when we come to it. In the mean time just ####ing pick the players who deserve to be there and stop the random bull shit selections that make no sense and are making a bad side even worse.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

The Sim Dog

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 5, 2007
Posts
12,229
Likes
6,520
Location
Near Casey Fields
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Trailblazers and Storm
They are wildly inconsistent but that isn't new. Harris, Renshaw and Bancroft were all picked on small sample sizes of Shield performance. They've all shown a bit, but ultimately all average in the 30s at test and Shield level. Finch doesn't even open for Victoria but we pick him as a test opener.

Wade, Burns score runs and the selectors look elsewhere. Maxwell scores runs in the Shield and performs at ODI/T20I level and the selectors look elsewhere. How we've ended up with Labuschagne as a spinning all rounder over Maxwell has me buggered, let alone how he's ended up at #3. Handscomb is dropped for having a suspect technique then recalled one test later because the wicket might turn. WTF. Mitch Marsh is badly out of form with the bat, has no opportunity to play Shield cricket because it's December and they recall him because they want an all rounder. WTF. People now want Stoinis given a go at #6. He's having a good Shield season by his standards and is averaging 42 with the bat and 25 with the ball. Career averages of 33.6 / 42.4. I like him but will he really do better than his career record from 53 matches going up a level?

It's not just the test team either. The selection criteria for the limited overs sides is a complete mystery. We have a nothing ODI series coming up and 9 of the top 10 run scorers from the JLT Cup aren't in the squad nor are 9 of the top 10 wicket takers. It begs the question why have the competition in the first place? Two bowlers took 18 wickets @ 16, 3 batsmen scored 400+ @ 70+. None made it. Instead we have Peter Siddle who not only didn't feature but hasn't played an ODI for 8 years.
Holly shit. I don't care much for ODIs but it's not the point. We just pick ANYTHING but the blokes that deserve it. I hope we continue to be humiliated.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
 

JackOutback

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Posts
16,366
Likes
19,964
AFL Club
West Coast
If you want proven Shield performers to be picked, then SMarsh is in and Renshaw is out. Cricket selection has always been a mix of proven performers and potential. Shane Warne hardly knocked the door down at Shield level before his selection. I don’t recall McGrath being the premier Shield bowler prior to selection. Clarke, Smith etc. If we’re honest, it’s simply the lack of proven Shield performers that is leading to speculative picks. Guys like Maxwell and Burns have career averages of 40 odd. The problems run very deep.
 

Scotland

Hall of Famer
Joined
May 5, 2006
Posts
45,202
Likes
46,167
AFL Club
West Coast
Cross that bridge when we come to it. In the mean time just ####ing pick the players who deserve to be there and stop the random bail shit selections that make no sense and are making a bad side even worse.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Fans and media only respond to results.

Chris Rogers played one test in 2008 as a fill in. Did nothing and went back to FC cricket. Was recalled in 2013 at age 35 and ended up playing 24 more tests scoring 5 100s and 14 50s. Adam Voges averaged 100 in the Shield and was given a test debut at 35. Played 20 tests for 5 100s and 4 50s and was dropped averaging 62. One is considered a success, the other a failure.

Mitchell Johnson played one test in India in 2013, didn't feature in the Ashes tour and was recalled for the 2013/14 Ashes having played one Shield game. He then proceeded to take 37 wickets @ 14 and then go to South Africa and take 22 @ 18. 59 wickets in 8 tests from a bloke most people didn't think should be in the side. Ryan Harris played test cricket from age 30-34 for 113 wickets @ 23. Gun. And then we've had McKay, Copeland, Hastings, George, Mennie, Sayers all come in based on Shield form as one test wonders (Copeland played 3).

If it works, you're a hero. If it doesn't work, then you should've done whatever Captain Hindsight says.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2019
Posts
258
Likes
135
AFL Club
Melbourne
Australia is currently ranked #5 in the world in the Test team rankings. We've just lost a series against the #1 ranked Test playing nation in the world in India.

Langer was appointed head coach in May 2018 - just over 6 months ago. I think he's been at the helm for just 6 Test matches.

He inherited a team that had just been through the biggest controversy in Australian cricket history, minus its captain and one of, if not the best batsman in the world, plus both opening batsmen.

I think the calls for his head on this board are a bit premature.

Do you reckon we could maybe hold off the firing squad for at least until after the Ashes?

As for Henry Lawson; he's entitled to his opinion, sure, but I think it's pretty ordinary form from him pulling out his poison pen and writing a hyperbolic pile of shit article like that after Langer has been in charge for just over 6 months. Shows a distinct lack of class.
I get your points, and don’t think he needs to be sacked yet, but you’ve got to seriously question his ability at the selection table when he is excluding some serious run scorers at shield level and persisting with the Marsh brothers and promoting Head & Finch.

It’s either he is over complicating the selection process or is getting pushed around at the table by Hohns. If a bunch of punters can realise that the national team isn’t a development squad and you just pick your best team, surely Justin Langer can see it.

Yes we need Smith, but there are so many other changes required as well.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2019
Posts
258
Likes
135
AFL Club
Melbourne
Fans and media only respond to results.

Chris Rogers played one test in 2008 as a fill in. Did nothing and went back to FC cricket. Was recalled in 2013 at age 35 and ended up playing 24 more tests scoring 5 100s and 14 50s. Adam Voges averaged 100 in the Shield and was given a test debut at 35. Played 20 tests for 5 100s and 4 50s and was dropped averaging 62. One is considered a success, the other a failure.

Mitchell Johnson played one test in India in 2013, didn't feature in the Ashes tour and was recalled for the 2013/14 Ashes having played one Shield game. He then proceeded to take 37 wickets @ 14 and then go to South Africa and take 22 @ 18. 59 wickets in 8 tests from a bloke most people didn't think should be in the side. Ryan Harris played test cricket from age 30-34 for 113 wickets @ 23. Gun. And then we've had McKay, Copeland, Hastings, George, Mennie, Sayers all come in based on Shield form as one test wonders (Copeland played 3).

If it works, you're a hero. If it doesn't work, then you should've done whatever Captain Hindsight says.
Rogers & Voges are exceptions, they were hardened shield players who had patience and great techniques for long form cricket. I am not so focused on our bowling stocks as we are failing to post respectable totals.

The pressing issue is we appear to have minimal depth yet promote players with awful shield averages in front of players that are a lot better in the long form.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2019
Posts
258
Likes
135
AFL Club
Melbourne
No I'm not, he's the most overrated Cricketer in Australia.
You’ve got to come back with a better response than a popular social in comment that is fashionable right now. Saying ‘no, just no’ is not really responding to the argument in a mature way. Talk us through why he is overrated based on his shield results this year and last.
 
Top Bottom