NSW bias

[syphon]

There has been many a time where NSW bias has resulted in the baseless selection of no-name, no-talent youngsters that go on to represent their country at the expense of the other states.

steve waugh... whoa whoa whoa what is he good for... getting picked in 1985 with nothing in terms of runs for NSW, he still gets regular games and would be lucky to make a full strength Qld or WA squad. this was capped off when he was given the captaincy over shane warne, the finest leg spinner ever to grace the game.

then we have brett lee getting walk up starts for every test despite bichel cleaning up, and getting better figures than him every time.

then it was haddin in last years VB series as the 2nd keeper, and now we have some hack Nathan Bracken make the side on one criterion alone: that he is New South Welsh.



it is clear to me that this is not a coincidence. NSW have not been a force in domestic cricket for some time, and this includes when they play at full strength, yet still command 4 or 5 spots in the international squad for the last 20 years.

 

[dr nick]

oh god, how many bitter old men and NSW baggers can one forum hold?

 

[DaveW]

Does Gavin Robertson count too? He was selected out of Sydney grade rather than NSW.

 

[PrideofSA]

it's kinda liek the Vic bias that happens in footy

 

[GhostofJimJess]

It's no coincidence that Simon Katich recently moved to NSW, is it? Sniffs that No.5 or No.6 batting spot in the baggy green ....

 

[fabulousphil]

Been happening since Moses was a boy.

NSW probably has the most grade cricketers ....... hence a larger talent pool to choose from, talented footballers/cricketers in VIC and southern states most always end up playing footy....... other sports are not as strong in the northern states as footy is in the southern.... hence..... more talented athletes will take up cricket in the northern.

thats my theory anyway.

 

[grayham]

Originally posted by fabulousphil
Been happening since Moses was a boy.

NSW probably has the most grade cricketers ....... hence a larger talent pool to choose from, talented footballers/cricketers in VIC and southern states most always end up playing footy....... other sports are not as strong in the northern states as footy is in the southern.... hence..... more talented athletes will take up cricket in the northern.

thats my theory anyway.

Thats exactly right fabulous. NSW is by far the strongest cricket state, probably followed by queensland. Simply because they dont have a strong footy code taking good players.
A fair number of vic cricketers were very close to playing AFL instead. Warnie and Simon O'Donnell off the top of my head.

You never hear how Steve Waugh tried out for Canterbury before he decided on cricket. Becuase it never happened.

 

[bluechampion]

well, well.

But apparently He and Mark were top quality junior soccer players.
Good thing the round ball code is utterly rooted in this country, isn't it.

 

[grayham]

Re: well, well.

Originally posted by bluechampion
But apparently He and Mark were top quality junior soccer players.
Good thing the round ball code is utterly rooted in this country, isn't it.

Bit of leap between "top junior" and getting on the list of an AFL club.

Craig Bradley is a classic example of someone who choose the footy route. I remember going to see him playing a state game and everytime he fielded the ball we'd yell out "throw umpy!?". It was funny at the time......kinda......not really I guess.

 

[CharlieG]

It doesn't matter...

which state you come from. It's whether you are good enough.

does anyone doubt that the 4 NSW players currently hovering around the Test team aren't in the best 14-15 in Australia? Waugh, Lee, McGrath and MacGill. I'm fine with all those selections.

Hadding and Campbell have been competing for the #2 keepers position for awhile. I'm fine with that selection.

Putting Bracken in isn't any different to Hogg or Watson. They are all 2nd tier bowlers at the moment. But you complain about Bracken because he is from NSW.

NSW is the biggest cricket state in Australia. Who cares where the players come from, as long as they keep whipping the Poms?

 

[Sydneyfan]

Originally posted by syphon

steve waugh... whoa whoa whoa what is he good for... getting picked in 1985 with nothing in terms of runs for NSW, he still gets regular games and would be lucky to make a full strength Qld or WA squad. this was capped off when he was given the captaincy over shane warne, the finest leg spinner ever to grace the game.

Yeah, you're right. Steve Waugh was and still is a dud who never deserved a spot in the Australian squad, let alone captaincy.

A big

Build a bridge and get over it.

 

[scmods]

I'm not normally one for these conspiracy theories, but this comparison is interesting:

Two players who first played Tests for Australia at about the same time, in the late 80's, both batting allrounders.

After 14 Test innings, the one who was the better bowler had scored two Test 100's and was averaging about 32.

After 14 Test innings, the other had a single 50 to his name and an average around 16.

One of them never played Test cricket again.

The other went on to captain Australia and recently scored his 10,000th Test run.

Who are they, and what states are they from?

 

[P76]

I'm actually fine with it - if they keep creaming off NSW players into the test side, it means the mighty Penguins (aka Vics) have more of a chance to win the far more important Glass of State Milk

 

[Foxtrot]

Originally posted by scmods
I'm not normally one for these conspiracy theories, but this comparison is interesting:

Two players who first played Tests for Australia at about the same time, in the late 80's, both batting allrounders.

After 14 Test innings, the one who was the better bowler had scored two Test 100's and was averaging about 32.

After 14 Test innings, the other had a single 50 to his name and an average around 16.

One of them never played Test cricket again.

The other went on to captain Australia and recently scored his 10,000th Test run.

Who are they, and what states are they from?

hmmmm

Lock in Tom Moody for me.

and I think the other guy was Steve Waugh.

 

[dahdah]

Originally posted by scmods
I'm not normally one for these conspiracy theories, but this comparison is interesting:

Two players who first played Tests for Australia at about the same time, in the late 80's, both batting allrounders.

After 14 Test innings, the one who was the better bowler had scored two Test 100's and was averaging about 32.

After 14 Test innings, the other had a single 50 to his name and an average around 16.

One of them never played Test cricket again.

The other went on to captain Australia and recently scored his 10,000th Test run.

Who are they, and what states are they from?

Would have to be Simon O'Donnell??? and of course Steve Waugh

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by syphon
steve waugh... whoa whoa whoa what is he good for... getting picked in 1985 with nothing in terms of runs for NSW, he still gets regular games and would be lucky to make a full strength Qld or WA squad. this was capped off when he was given the captaincy over shane warne, the finest leg spinner ever to grace the game.

Get your hand off your python syphon, you're making a fool of yourself.

Do you really think they made the wrong decision for the captaincy?

 

[Wicked Lester]

Originally posted by scmods
I'm not normally one for these conspiracy theories, but this comparison is interesting:

Two players who first played Tests for Australia at about the same time, in the late 80's, both batting allrounders.

After 14 Test innings, the one who was the better bowler had scored two Test 100's and was averaging about 32.

After 14 Test innings, the other had a single 50 to his name and an average around 16.

One of them never played Test cricket again.

The other went on to captain Australia and recently scored his 10,000th Test run.

Who are they, and what states are they from?

I suspect you refer to Tom Moody and of course Stephen Rodger Waugh.

Even worse for big Tom was the shuffling of him around the order - I think he was tried at 3 and even opened in at least one test. No such trials for Tugga early on allowed to slot in at between 6 and 8 in his formative years.

I wouldn't think Australian cricket lost too much through this one as I don't rate Moody in the same league as Tugga (of course I could be wrong) but it certainly demonstrates a curious treatment of players deemed to worth the long term investment over others who are required to perform almost immediately to hold their spot.

 

[P76]

Originally posted by Wicked Lester
....but it certainly demonstrates a curious treatment of players deemed to worth the long term investment over others who are required to perform almost immediately to hold their spot.

Yes, it does - my theory - players worth the long term investment = NSW players

Players required to perform = other players.

Of course it has turned out that McGrath, Waugh, Gilchrist amongst the NSWers have been worth the effort over the years, Brett Lee is still a question mark at the moment.

However NSW I think will not be such a presence in the side in the next few years once Waugh and McGrath go - I doubt Bracken will make it to test level, and Clarke has to wait in line behind Lehmann, Love, and possibly some others before he gets a guernsey.

 

[TheMase]

Originally posted by P76
Yes, it does - my theory - players worth the long term investment = NSW players

Players required to perform = other players.

Of course it has turned out that McGrath, Waugh, Gilchrist amongst the NSWers have been worth the effort over the years, Brett Lee is still a question mark at the moment.

However NSW I think will not be such a presence in the side in the next few years once Waugh and McGrath go - I doubt Bracken will make it to test level, and Clarke has to wait in line behind Lehmann, Love, and possibly some others before he gets a guernsey.

I don't think Clarke will wait that long in line. Simple because of his age.
In a couple of years he could well be a much better cricketer than Love, Lehmann etc (most likely he will be at least level, and at his age, he will get picked first).


How do you guys explain Watson then?
Maybe they see a young Steven Waugh in him

 

[P76]

Originally posted by TheMase


How do you guys explain Watson then?
Maybe they see a young Steven Waugh in him

Heck, do you think he might be a.........F.A.C.????

 

[scmods]

Originally posted by Wicked Lester
I wouldn't think Australian cricket lost too much through this one as I don't rate Moody in the same league as Tugga (of course I could be wrong) but it certainly demonstrates a curious treatment of players deemed to worth the long term investment over others who are required to perform almost immediately to hold their spot.

That's true - as it turned out, Waugh obviously was worth the faith put in him.

But who knows what Moody might have been if he'd been allowed to settle at 5 or 6? After all, his record in england was fantastic, and it was by belting England all over the place that players like Waugh and Taylor made their names. Moody never got to play them.

 

[Catman]

Originally posted by TheMase
How do you guys explain Watson then?
Maybe they see a young Steven Waugh in him

Could explain why he has been given an eternity in the side without doing anything, much like Steve Waugh's start to his Test career.

 

[Darky]

Originally posted by Catman
Could explain why he has been given an eternity in the side without doing anything, much like Steve Waugh's start to his Test career.

S.Watson
21 matches, batting av. 34.37, bowling av. 37.31, econ 4.74

I.Harvey
43 matches, batting av. 17.87, bowling av. 34.59, econ 4.70


By the looks of it, Ian Harvey has had more time and achieved less. Pro-Victorian bias?

 

[dr nick]

Originally posted by Darky
S.Watson
21 matches, batting av. 34.37, bowling av. 37.31, econ 4.74

I.Harvey
43 matches, batting av. 17.87, bowling av. 34.59, econ 4.70


By the looks of it, Ian Harvey has had more time and achieved less. Pro-Victorian bias?

interesting comparison, though i could not believe how harvey maintained a spot in the side for so long, i thought he was at least on a par with watson. those are terrible figures over an extended period.

 

[P76]

Yeah, as a card carrying Victorian who pops his head into most milk games, I know why Harvs is called the freak - it's because he always finds freakily stupid ways to go out just when he's done the hard work (i.e. got to 20-odd).

A bloody frustrating player to watch, and I too can't understand why Aus persisted so long - possibly because there was no-one else around, although Symonds surely is no worse.