Selectors Are Completely Clueless

[DeadlyAkkuret]

is it the end of hauritz? i hope so. nothing but a fill in bowler. get rid of him, put in a young bloke and leave him for the next couple series

Just like they did with Hughes. Wait...wut?

Why does a young player deserve to be left in the side without consequence when Hauritz has actually performed better than any of the other options we've brought in over the last 4 years? Why doesn't he deserve to keep his spot just because he's a whopping....wait for it....29 years old!!

The poms must be laughing their arses off at us lately and rightfully so. We don't even know what our best 11 is and we'll basically try any spinner who can roll their arm over (Well, with the exception of one of the more deserving candidates, O'Keefe).

Bollinger has done all he can since making his debut and he still can't get a game ahead of Harris or Siddle (Let's face it, Siddle didn't deserve to be in the side before his hattrick). Hauritz has been our most consistent spinner since Warne and he gets shafted for two virtual nobodies, proving that performances don't actually matter in this side.

Then, there's Hughes. Scores two tons and then gets dropped after 2-3 bad scores which no doubt has messed with his confidence. So, what do you do when a player is down on confidence? You bring him into a crucial match while he's in the worst form of his short career.

So......so much fail.

 

[Plugger35]

hauritz the new dean jones?

he may not have been great, but i think some are being very hard markers.

I've got a feeling the selectors didn't want to reinstate Hauritz as it would be an admission they stuffed up in the first place by picking Doherty ahead of him. Hauritz isn't a great spinner either but at least he has test experience and is a decent lower order batsman.

Beer has looked a decent spinner for WA but I'm not sure he will make the step up to test level given his lack of first class experience. The selectors seem to have their hearts set on picking a left arm spinner but you have to wonder why O'Keefe didn't get the nod when he was picked in the Australia A team against England and performed quite well. He is a better batsman than Beer as well. I guess the fact that Hauritz was playing ahead of him for NSW made it difficult to pick him but I reckon he would have been a better long term selection than Beer.

 

[BarneyBent]

O'Keefe's non-selection (for both NSW and Australia) is bewildering, given his performance for Australia A, his FC average and his Shield performances this year.

Also, regarding Hauritz, I am a fan of his. He's not fantastic, but he's a solid bowler, a known quantity, and he is nowhere near the spud some have made him out to be. Yes, he got mauled in India. Name a spinner that hasn't. But, that aside, watching him and Steve Smith go at it yesterday in the Shield match, Smith comprehensively outbowled him. Hauritz was dishing up short, flat half-trackers, Smith was serving leg breaks with beuatiful drift and flight that were turning past the edge, dragging the batsman forward and always looking dangerous. There was no comparison, Smith looked immeasurably better. Looked like a true breakout game for his bowling.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the selectors will play Smith as a full time spinner and number 6/7 batsman (Smith definitely has the talent to bat 6, hell, he has the talent to bat 3/4, but he's young and maturity is an issue, so perhaps 7 is the best spot for him at this point in time), go in with a four-pronged pace attack, and get Beer serving drinks for the experience (and puns).

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

O'Keefe's non-selection (for both NSW and Australia) is bewildering, given his performance for Australia A, his FC average and his Shield performances this year.

Based on ability and their statistics, it's baffling that both O'Keefe and Copeland aren't in the side.

 

[kempy]

so we have:
1. Dropping Hauritz and replacing him with Doherty. FAIL
2. Dropping Doherty and replacing with Beer. FAIL
3. Dropping Johnston and replacing with Bolinger or Harris. FAIL
4. Dropping Bolinger and replacing with Johnston. FAIL
5. Making MJ miss a game for WA and bowl in the nets. FAIL
6. Picking and playing Clarke when clearly unfit for the first test. FAIL
7. Dropping Hilfe and then picking him without playing another game. FAIL
8. Picking Hughes when he averages 13. FAIL
9. Picking Beer with limited experience and results. FAIL
10. Sticking with Hussey - CORRECT.

Any more?

 

[benny_cousins]

I'm glad this thread is here, what a joke the selectors have become. First of all, to pick the team before the end and even the start of some first class games is an absolute joke. They obviously have their mind up on who they are going to pick, and form has nothing to do with it.

We've now got an opening batsman that is showing absolutely no form, not to mention the team we are up against are the same team that proved to us that he still has so much work to do. Usually when you go back you have to find some form and fix your weakness'. Instead we give him a game after averaging about 13? in the Sheild this year.

Steve Smith can bat a bit and bowl a bit but are either his batting or bowling up to test standard? I wouldn't think so. I think their are 3 or 4 batsman that deserve a spot before him.

They made a mistake dropping Hauritz and it's like they don't want to admit that so they'll keep scraping the barrel until something finally pops up. If only the NSW media had got behind him like they had for Hughes and Smith he'd probably still be in. He's not that great but he really wasn't that bad either.

It really pissed me off when they named the team just as David Hussey was going in to bat. The bloke has a better first class record than any other name getting thrown around. Yeah he's not young but at the moment we're trying to win the ashes. We can worry about blooding youth when we play the lesser sides. I thought it was a real kick in the guts to a good batsman that's done everything right.

 

[The Fonz]

so we have:
1. Dropping Hauritz and replacing him with Doherty. FAIL
2. Dropping Doherty and replacing with Beer. FAIL
3. Dropping Johnston and replacing with Bolinger or Harris. FAIL
4. Dropping Bolinger and replacing with Johnston. FAIL
5. Making MJ miss a game for WA and bowl in the nets. FAIL
6. Picking and playing Clarke when clearly unfit for the first test. FAIL
7. Dropping Hilfe and then picking him without playing another game. FAIL
8. Picking Hughes when he averages 13. FAIL
9. Picking Beer with limited experience and results. FAIL
10. Sticking with Hussey - CORRECT.

Any more?

I guess we're lucky they didn't pick Dave Warner to replace Katich

 

[Sman-21]

Good to see them make some tough calls
No more selecting guys coz ponting an co like him.

Now these new guys coming in need to be told.
You have until the end of the series to prove yourself.
They cant go into this test thinking its perform or else, they need to be given some confidence because otherwise they will go into game thinking if they dont perform they will be dumped straight away.
That doesnt create a good environment.

Some of the selections are abit off(beer) but the good thing is they finally had the balls to take a risk on some talented players instead of just applying a bandaid fix like doherty and north.

If they only get 1 game an then get dropped that is crazy, an will mean we will be swapping 2-3 players just about every game from now on.
They selected some promising young talent give them a fair go to prove themselves.
If they do nothing in the rest of series then drop them give someone else a go an dont give the dropped players another opportunity until they force there way in with great form.

 

[360noscope]

so we have:
1. Dropping Hauritz and replacing him with Doherty. FAIL
2. Dropping Doherty and replacing with Beer. FAIL
3. Dropping Johnston and replacing with Bolinger or Harris. FAIL
4. Dropping Bolinger and replacing with Johnston. FAIL
5. Making MJ miss a game for WA and bowl in the nets. FAIL
6. Picking and playing Clarke when clearly unfit for the first test. FAIL
7. Dropping Hilfe and then picking him without playing another game. FAIL
8. Picking Hughes when he averages 13. FAIL
9. Picking Beer with limited experience and results. FAIL
10. Sticking with Hussey - CORRECT.

Any more?

Why would picking Beer be a fail when he hasn't played yet. What if he takes 5 wickets.

Bollinger isn't omitted. He is injured.

The selectors have done OK IMO. If Australia had won any of the first two tests then I am sure that the armchair experts would be patting the selectors on the back.

 

[potatomasher]

Why would picking Beer be a fail when he hasn't played yet. What if he takes 5 wickets.

Bollinger isn't omitted. He is injured.

The selectors have done OK IMO. If Australia had won any of the first two tests then I am sure that the armchair experts would be patting the selectors on the back.

Funny you should say that, after Siddle's hattrick, the selectors were getting talked up to be the second, third, fourth and fifth comings of Jesus. Incredible how quickly the tables turned there. Just goes to show, no matter how hard the selectors try, the players will always play a much bigger role in whether or not they're perceived to be doing well.

 

[wilsonstheman]

bring back the governor please. He has the best cricket brain on here by a mile. I saw nothing racist in his comments.
A touch of jealousy i imagine from the mods

 

[PAFC_1870]

Just when you think the selectors couldn't be more stupid...

 

[Jimthegreat]

so we have:
1. Dropping Hauritz and replacing him with Doherty. FAIL
2. Dropping Doherty and replacing with Beer. FAIL
3. Dropping Johnston and replacing with Bolinger or Harris. FAIL
4. Dropping Bolinger and replacing with Johnston. FAIL
5. Making MJ miss a game for WA and bowl in the nets. FAIL
6. Picking and playing Clarke when clearly unfit for the first test. FAIL
7. Dropping Hilfe and then picking him without playing another game. FAIL
8. Picking Hughes when he averages 13. FAIL
9. Picking Beer with limited experience and results. FAIL
10. Sticking with Hussey - CORRECT.

Any more?

Alot of 'fails" and quite correct.

Disagree with Harris, he went well.

As for Hilfenhaus, he was dropped from the "eleven" but not the "twelve". Not as if we dropped him completely. Here we have picked 12 again so it's possible the same thing could happen. Hopefully not as I prefer him to Siddle and Johnson.. Someone has to be the 12th man though from the team.

Suppose we best give a Beer a run before judging him but it makes me wonder. surely O'Keefe is better.

Going in circles with Johnson and Bollinger. Better to head to the direction of a player in-form. There's a few around if the selectors decided to look. Surely Copeland is better.

 

[kingbet22]

i am just happy they dumped north...hopefully for good...i couldn't care less about the other selections i find it pretty funny...but just so happy north is not in the team

 

[360noscope]

Funny you should say that, after Siddle's hattrick, the selectors were getting talked up to be the second, third, fourth and fifth comings of Jesus. Incredible how quickly the tables turned there. Just goes to show, no matter how hard the selectors try, the players will always play a much bigger role in whether or not they're perceived to be doing well.

True, after the first test they were rated highly.

But now I think the criticism of the selectors is unwarranted. They have done the best they could and when a side loses by more than an innings questions must be asked of the players, NOT the selectors.

It is also unfair to criticise the selectors for the third test when it hasn't even began. Some people are too quick to react.

 

[Flameboy]

I'm glad this thread is here, what a joke the selectors have become. First of all, to pick the team before the end and even the start of some first class games is an absolute joke. They obviously have their mind up on who they are going to pick, and form has nothing to do with it.

We've now got an opening batsman that is showing absolutely no form, not to mention the team we are up against are the same team that proved to us that he still has so much work to do. Usually when you go back you have to find some form and fix your weakness'. Instead we give him a game after averaging about 13? in the Sheild this year.

Steve Smith can bat a bit and bowl a bit but are either his batting or bowling up to test standard? I wouldn't think so. I think their are 3 or 4 batsman that deserve a spot before him.

They made a mistake dropping Hauritz and it's like they don't want to admit that so they'll keep scraping the barrel until something finally pops up. If only the NSW media had got behind him like they had for Hughes and Smith he'd probably still be in. He's not that great but he really wasn't that bad either.

It really pissed me off when they named the team just as David Hussey was going in to bat. The bloke has a better first class record than any other name getting thrown around. Yeah he's not young but at the moment we're trying to win the ashes. We can worry about blooding youth when we play the lesser sides. I thought it was a real kick in the guts to a good batsman that's done everything right.

Excellent post.

 

[Tom12]

Nothing they do seems to make sense.

Is this the end of Nathan Hauritz? If they didn't pick him now, when would they pick him? On what basis do they pick Beer? Is it because he is a left-armer?

If they were going to go left-field and pick Beer, why not Copeland or Cameron?

How would you feel if you are Khawaja or Ferguson or David Hussey or Cameron White and North is dropped but they don't replace him with anyone?

Neither Haddin or Smith is strong enough to bat at 6.

I wonder which person in the 12 man squad won't play because none of them seem to work. I guess ultimately it will be one of the quicks and that will leave 3 quicks, Beer, Smith and Watson to bowl.

They need 6 bowlers in order to bowl out England but it leaves the batting very short-handed. The irony of dropping Hauritz was that the Gabba and Adelaide pitches would have been good for him.

The irony of dropping North was that he was the best spinner. They could have picked him as a specialist bowler and batted him at 8. Would have given the team a lot more balance and strengthened up the tail considerably.

Rather Hauritz anyday over Beer, doesn't make sense at all. Hauritz is the proven player and although I'm not a huge fan of him he's the best spinner we have and if your going to play one of them it'd be him.
Saying that, North is definitley the best spinner in the side, though his batting wasn't holding up. All logic points to giving the younger, fresher Smith a go in the same role to change things up.
Beer bowls okay from what I've seen of him, but it seems crazy to bring someone who's played 5 FC matches and barely any cricket at the WACA in for such a huge test.

 

[amer]

Batting form can turn on a 20c piece at that age. Hughes is a good inclusion by virtue of his ability and class.

 

[Heisenberg_]

Excellent post.

Except the part about David Hussey. He is 33 years old and wouldn't have been in consideration, his time has come and gone.

 

[Phone]

hussey would have been a good pick if everyone agreed that no matter what happened the 5th test would be his last test. but that would have never happened so.

 

[Sman-21]

Age does not matter
This is not football where u need to develop young players, that is the job of state cricket.
It shouldnt matter if a guy is 40 if hes currntly the best performing player he should be picked.
Age should only come into it when 2 players are fairly evenly matched then u should pick the sub 30yr old player ahead of the over30 player.

Think of state cricket as AFL
Aussie test team like the AFL's All Aust Team.
You pick best performing players u dont say nah we cant pick Hall hes too old

 

[Public Enemy No1]

Funny how Hughes selection has slipped under the radar...

My expectation of him is the same as a player who bats at number 8 or 9. Dont expect him to make runs but if he does its a bonus..
Hope im wrong and he is better than i think he is.

 

[skipper kelly]

Everyone was calling for North to be dropped. He is, but people are still not happy.

Everyone was calling for Doherty to be dropped. He is, but people are still not happy.

People have been calling for Smith to be picked. He is, but people are still not happy.

People have been querying for 12 months why Hughes isn't playing. He is, but people are still not happy.

That leaves the fast bowlers and the spinner. Bollinger did nothing to suggest he should be playing. Siddle and Harris are obvious. Its a judgment call on who the other 2 are. Johnson and Hilfenhaus are the next best.

Beer won't play.

Unless D. Hussey and C. White are picked then I doubt 90% on this board will ever be happy.

 

[Phone]

beer's playing

 

[RooBoyz24]

We need 20 wickets to win the Test thats all folks.I am not sure we can do that and if we lose and again lose the Ashes which is a good bet now wait for it to hit the fan.1st get rid of the Coach has to go and be replaced by Shippard.We need a total over haul and get Warney involved full time and get the ex aussie Greats Waugh Brothers and keep them around the team.We need to stop all the crap of resting players and pick the best team every time.The selection panel has to go there is no way they can stay after the way we have fallen to No 5 in the rankings.Time for back to basics and pick the best from the States i dont care where they come from as long as they can play.Common Aussies we need some ANZAC spirit.