Time for Hohns and Chappell to move one

[bird_man]

I doubt I would be on my alone with my belief that Trevor Hohns has had time and must be moved on. Along with Chappell. I do realise the cupboard is quite bare at the moment. I just can't get over the confusion about so many selections over the past 12 months, not only that, but the lack of communication and the fact that there seems to be one set of rules on selection for some and then another set for others. I'm confused as to what players have to do to get selected? We are told player X needs to make more runs and then they proceed to pick a guy averaging 28 at FC level. They overlook in form opening batsmen to play a short form specialist that hasn't opened the batting for his state in years. They have continued to play an all rounder in the side despite the country clearly not having one good enough for test cricket. They chop and change their ideas, saying they will stick with players and then dropping others after one test.

Joe Burns
Was recalled into the team after the SA debacle coming off season of averaging 55 and with 3 test centuries already to his name and then was dumped for the next series after one match. The selectors had chosen to go with Aaron Finch as an opener despite his poor record in that position and the fact that Victoria refuse to play him in that position. Selectors have now done a 360 after the Indian series.

Matt Renshaw
Much the same as Joe Burns, he was dumped just one match after returning to the side in SA. Most thought Renshaw was a shoe in to open the batting in the UAE after having a stellar 12 months of FC cricket including a county season where he had just averaged over 50. He has now been returned to the side after averaging 19 in the current Shield season

Glenn Maxwell
Whether you agree or disagree with the Maxwell non selection, I don't think anyone could argue that he was not ****ed around by the selectors. Most would know by now that Maxwell was told not to bother with Aus A tour leading up to the Pakistan tests due to the fact that they had seen enough of him. Most thought this meant he would be selected, which did not eventuate meaning he missed any chance of putting his hand up for test selection. As it turned out Labuschagne earned selection by scoring a 50 for the A side IIRC. Since being dropped from the side after averaging 37 in the India and Bangladesh tours (more than anyone could average in our home tour against India) he has missed out on being selected 13 times and has averaged 53 in FC cricket throughout that period.

Mitch Marsh
Unfortunately this guy has become the joke of Australian Cricket thanks mostly to the guys that keep selecting him. He was finally dropped after 8 scores of 16 or less but then returned two tests later after averaging 18 in his last 3 Shield games - then - dumped once again after one match. He returned for two innings to up his record to 10 innings in a row of 16 or less. He has been gifted 31 matches with an average of 25.4 (the worst of any top 6 batsmen in Australia's history to play that much test cricket). Yet, amazingly, for the first time only a couple of days ago Hohns had this to say "if the all rounder isn't performing and you don't have a good all rounder, maybe we shouldn't have one and go back to the stock-standard six batsmen and four bowlers". How it took him this long to work that out is beyond me? Marsh was also named VC less than 12 months ago, something Hohns admitted they now need to addressed.

Matt Wade
I'm not sold on whether Wade should be in the side or not, but the communication with him has clearly been poor. Had not been contacted by a selector since he had been dropped from test cricket, despite him being the most in form batsman in the country outside the Australian team. It wasn't until he spoke out about this to the media that he received an email from JL telling him he wasn't likely to get a gig anytime soon. The excuse Honhs used in his press conference is that Wade bats too low down the order at 6. Well this is fine, but why wait until now to tell him that? Unfortunately for him there is no FC cricket on for a while for him to be able change anything

Aaron Finch
Finch was in very good form when selected so I don't have an issue with that, but the fact he was picked as an opener where he hadn't played for the last 3 years and where Victoria refused to play him was laughable. Fair enough in the UAE, but it was clear to most that he wasn't suited to that position. Victorian Coach Andrew McDonald was fairly blunt about this at the time and refused to let him open in FC cricket leading up to the tests. Not surprisingly Finch was dropped after 5 tests.

Fast Bowlers
While our national bowlers continue to perform poorly, there are bowlers banging the door down at FC. Hohns and co continue to sit on their hands and not give anyone else a crack. The clear back up choice at the moment is Peter Siddle which is confusing to many. Starc has been in poor form for a decent period and continues to hold his spot.

 

[The Swans Blog]

I doubt I would be on my alone with my belief that Trevor Hohns has had time and must be moved on. Along with Chappell. I do realise the cupboard is quite bare at the moment. I just can't get over the confusion about so many selections over the past 12 months, not only that, but the lack of communication and the fact that there seems to be one set of rules on selection for some and then another set for others. I'm confused as to what players have to do to get selected? We are told player X needs to make more runs and then they proceed to pick a guy averaging 28 at FC level. They overlook in form opening batsmen to play a short form specialist that hasn't opened the batting for his state in years. They have continued to play an all rounder in the side despite the country clearly not having one good enough for test cricket. They chop and change their ideas, saying they will stick with players and then dropping others after one test.

Joe Burns
Was recalled into the team after the SA debacle coming off season of averaging 55 and with 3 test centuries already to his name and then was dumped for the next series after one match. The selectors had chosen to go with Aaron Finch as an opener despite his poor record in that position and the fact that Victoria refuse to play him in that position. Selectors have now done a 360 after the Indian series.

Matt Renshaw
Much the same as Joe Burns, he was dumped just one match after returning to the side in SA. Most thought Renshaw was a shoe in to open the batting in the UAE after having a stellar 12 months of FC cricket including a county season where he had just averaged over 50. He has now been returned to the side after averaging 19 in the current Shield season

Glenn Maxwell
Whether you agree or disagree with the Maxwell non selection, I don't think anyone could argue that he was not ****** around by the selectors. Most would know by now that Maxwell was told not to bother with Aus A tour leading up to the Pakistan tests due to the fact that they had seen enough of him. Most thought this meant he would be selected, which did not eventuate meaning he missed any chance of putting his hand up for test selection. As it turned out Labuschagne earned selection by scoring a 50 for the A side IIRC. Since being dropped from the side after averaging 37 in the India and Bangladesh tours (more than anyone could average in our home tour against India) he has missed out on being selected 13 times and has averaged 53 in FC cricket throughout that period.

Mitch Marsh
Unfortunately this guy has become the joke of Australian Cricket thanks mostly to the guys that keep selecting him. He was finally dropped after 8 scores of 16 or less but then returned two tests later after averaging 18 in his last 3 Shield games - then - dumped once again after one match. He returned for two innings to up his record to 10 innings in a row of 16 or less. He has been gifted 31 matches with an average of 25.4 (the worst of any top 6 batsmen in Australia's history to play that much test cricket). Yet, amazingly, for the first time only a couple of days ago Hohns had this to say "if the all rounder isn't performing and you don't have a good all rounder, maybe we shouldn't have one and go back to the stock-standard six batsmen and four bowlers". How it took him this long to work that out is beyond me? Marsh was also named VC less than 12 months ago, something Hohns admitted they now need to addressed.

Matt Wade
I'm not sold on whether Wade should be in the side or not, but the communication with him has clearly been poor. Had not been contacted by a selector since he had been dropped from test cricket, despite him being the most in form batsman in the country outside the Australian team. It wasn't until he spoke out about this to the media that he received an email from JL telling him he wasn't likely to get a gig anytime soon. The excuse Honhs used in his press conference is that Wade bats too low down the order at 6. Well this is fine, but why wait until now to tell him that? Unfortunately for him there is no FC cricket on for a while for him to be able change anything

Aaron Finch
Finch was in very good form when selected so I don't have an issue with that, but the fact he was picked as an opener where he hadn't played for the last 3 years and where Victoria refused to play him was laughable. Fair enough in the UAE, but it was clear to most that he wasn't suited to that position. Victorian Coach Andrew McDonald was fairly blunt about this at the time and refused to let him open in FC cricket leading up to the tests. Not surprisingly Finch was dropped after 5 tests.

Fast Bowlers
While our national bowlers continue to perform poorly, there are bowlers banging the door down at FC. Hohns and co continue to sit on their hands and not give anyone else a crack. The clear back up choice at the moment is Peter Siddle which is confusing to many. Starc has been in poor form for a decent period and continues to hold his spot.

It's a shame about the bowlers. Throughout the 90s and 00s, whenever a bowler failed to perform there was always someone else ready to take their spot, same with the batsman.

Mitch Marsh getting the can happened about 25 tests too late. Sure, he plundered runs against a pathetic England bowling attack last summer, but has never played well against half-way decent opposition.

Renshaw and Maxwell have definitely been screwed over, while Finch was set up to fail. The guy clearly didn't have the technique or temperament to open, so I really have no idea why they persisted with him. Shaun Marsh getting the can is one of the most glorious things to happen in Australian cricket since 2010.

 

[bird_man]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/cricke...p/news-story/93751ba9b5dd449fe329432f9ad72717

While Wade does come in at fourth drop, he’s actually been walking to the crease rather early in the innings more often than not.
Of his 12 Shield innings this season, eight times he’s been asked to bat with the score less than 4-137. Three of those the team’s score has been less than 50, and five times less than 100.
Of those eight innings, the average number of overs played is 35. In the context of a Test match it means he would be walking to crease not long after the lunch break, or a little more than one full session.
And when he’s started his innings with the score less than 137, Wade averages 55.5. Those knocks include a 51, 60*, 43, 63, and 40.

 

[Kram]

Wheeling out Lead Boots Pete again with his laughable technique was another crap call. Might be able to hack a few runs against second rate Shield bowlers or Pakistan that just served him up shite on freeway wickets at home but it's embarrassing v any half decent international level attacks.

 

[Len Nicodemo]

Yeah look I am not going to disagree at all with that summary. It’s pretty concise and also incredibly damning. There is obviously a clear sense of panic amongst the selectors and particularly with Hohns, who is attempting to find magic bullet solutions to issues we have. The unjustified axing of Burns bothered me, as did the selection of Labuschagne; a completely left field call. On your points re communication;

Mark Waugh is on record recently saying the best way to get picked is to plunder runs, well Mark, no, according to your selections, it isn’t. The Labuschagne call typifies that. Hohns has also grossly contradicted himself in so many ways recently, and I put it on him and JL for costing us the Adelaide test and potentially the series with their arrogant and misinformed selections.

Finch opening was as dumb a call I’ve ever seen, I mean you’ve got the coach of Victoria saying his best spot is 6, yet we’ve thrown him to the wolves as an opener when Burns could be filling that place. Mitch Marsh I won’t even get into detail about, but all I’ll say is if he didn’t have that surname, he’d be a grade cricketer.

I think going forward we need to look at the way England do it. One head selector and an assistant. I’d want to see a modern approach re age, ideally 2 ex players. I’d also have a head of each state reporting in and liasing with the senior assistant. There’s lots of ways to do it, but the current group is so far out of touch it’s costing us badly.

 

[Woody15]

Definitely agree that Hohns needs to move on. The communication, mixed messages and dubious standards for selections coming from the selectors is creating too much confusion.

Interesting tweet I read this morning regarding the mixed messages coming from the selectors regarding Wade and Maxwell.

 

[VirgilHilts]

I suppose after the players and CA lost the plot completely it's only natural that the selectors would do so too. Dropping players who haven't been given long enough and keeping other players in the side for too long is one indication that their judgement has been flawed for a while.

 

[Len Nicodemo]

Wheeling out Lead Boots Pete again with his laughable technique was another crap call. Might be able to hack a few runs against second rate Shield bowlers or Pakistan that just served him up shite on freeway wickets at home but it's embarrassing v any half decent international level attacks.

It's a shame about Handscomb because he goes back to Shield and does really well, but really good international bowling attacks identify his weakness immediately and hammer his feet and stumps. It's really only a matter of time before he misses one and he is absolutely plumb due to his poor footwork. With the speed good international bowlers produce, it's a big step up from what comes out at Shield Level, he has less reaction time and more chance of error.

 

[The Swans Blog]

Funny that Trevor Hohns was Chairman of the Selector during Australia's golden period, resigned and did some other stuff, but has come back and is still looking for the magical bullet that he had in spades during his successful tenure. Given that both are semi-permanent members, with Mark Waugh essentially punted, it does make you wonder who really has the biggest say. Chappell is known to be a bit crazy, so that doesn't help.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_cricket_selectors

This one line bugs me:

However, on the overseas tours selections would be done by a committee consisting of the captain, vice-captain and manager.

 

[The Swans Blog]

At least we're not insane, people are starting to take notice:
https://www.news18.com/cricketnext/...-tests-is-puzzling-and-laughable-1996899.html

Another team selection announcement, another Glenn Maxwell omission, another perplexing reason given that prompts only more questions. If it wasn’t the career of a man in the prime of his cricketing life being discussed, this would be funny. Instead, it is laughable.

 

[Admiral Byng]

The selectors are not to blame for cricketers playing too much limited overs stuff and ruining their batting skills and technique.

 

[bird_man]

Wheeling out Lead Boots Pete again with his laughable technique was another crap call. Might be able to hack a few runs against second rate Shield bowlers or Pakistan that just served him up shite on freeway wickets at home but it's embarrassing v any half decent international level attacks.

Handscomb is another one. Dropped 12 months ago for his technique and then brought back in after making no changes to it.

Was dropped and then brought in one test later. It looked as though he was trying a different approach and actually looked better, but there is only so much you can do in the space of a week or two.

Interestingly, leading up to the series Chris Rogers, who had been doing a bit of work with him, said he thought Handscomb was 12 months off being a quality international batsman.

I still wouldn't be surprised to see him again one day, but I wouldn't be picking him until he makes some big changes to that technique and shows over a period of time he can perform like that.

 

[bird_man]

The selectors are not to blame for cricketers playing too much limited overs stuff and ruining their batting skills and technique.

Every country plays limited overs cricket.

And whilst I admit this is as poor as cricket has been in a long time, it does not excuse the poor selections.

 

[Len Nicodemo]

The selectors are not to blame for cricketers playing too much limited overs stuff and ruining their batting skills and technique.

No, selectors are to blame for sending convoluted and inconsistent messages at press conferences re the selection of the national team. The way the Matthew Wade and Glenn Maxwell topics were handled smacked of gross negligence and incompetence. The way they omitted Joe Burns from the side was a disaster, especially when Aaron Finch was selected and put in as an opener. The way Labuschagne was selected with a Shield Average of sub 30, and the way Mitchell Marsh was selected after Hohns himself said we 'Don't need an all rounder unless we have a really good one'.

Other than that, yeah you're probably right.

 

[Admiral Byng]

No, selectors are to blame for sending convoluted and inconsistent messages at press conferences re the selection of the national team. The way the Matthew Wade and Glenn Maxwell topics were handled smacked of gross negligence and incompetence. The way they omitted Joe Burns from the side was a disaster, especially when Aaron Finch was selected and put in as an opener. The way Labuschagne was selected with a Shield Average of sub 30, and the way Mitchell Marsh was selected after Hohns himself said we 'Don't need an all rounder unless we have a really good one'.

Other than that, yeah you're probably right.

I get the feeling that the selectors don't think any of these blokes are up to being a test player for the long term. They all have some major weakness in technique or temperament or something else. Apart from Warner and Smith and perhaps Khawaja, they have a pool of maybe half a dozen maybe ten of the usual suspects to fill in the rest of the spots. They keep rotating through this pool of B-Graders and they keep getting disappointed.

Sure it is frustrating for the players involved, and for the fans of those particular players, but the sad fact is that these players are not good enough. Maybe it could be handled differently, but I don't think the selectors would get away with actually saying the above thing honestly.

The reason they've gone for Labuschagne is because he is an emerging player outside the "B grade pool" and they'd rather take the gamble than recycle someone else they have already tried and hope they are somehow radically improved.

 

[smasha]

Boy's club.

 

[damochandler]

I don’t know how Greg Chappell has kept his job as the pathways boss for so long. He stuffed it and it’s not going to get any better any time soon

 

[PT Bar None]

FWIW there are currently 3 people occupying the men's selection panel
https://www.cricketaustralia.com.au/cricket/national-selection-panel

• Trevor Hohns
• Greg Chappell
• Justin Langer

It's common knowledge Chappell is a proponent of the talent pathway approach. Where 'talent' is identified as early as possible and given opportunity that may not have occured based upon prior performance alone. So whenever we see a younger player parachuted in with a modest record I assume Chappell has been the driver. Same with a player who is persisted with for longer than others despite modest output. All my bias, granted, but it feels like these players are identified 'talent' whereas the others on the selection merry-go-round are not. And that's Chappell's bag.

Trevor Hohns is a weird one. Long term Chairman of Selectors (2 lengthy terms), who's got a whiff of long term public servant about him and his utterances. Yet he's not a traditional sports administrator nor high performance background. Is the Chairman a volunteer or full time paid position? I 'member talk back when Mark Waugh was a selector about having one full time selector and how this was a departure of the current none. Obviously there would be a stipend, but the suggestion of part time infers selection duties incringe upon your day job. Chappell is also the National Talent Manager and Langer the coach - so does that mean that Hohns is full time or is no one currently full time?

The the new coach is also the new selector. Given the elder statesmen status of his colleagues, I wonder how much Langer is treated as "the new boy"? Seen and not heard. Boomers used to be pretty big on that sort of stuff as anyone who has spent time in institutions would know.

* This is all wild supposition based upon bias and utter fantasy, meaning it can safely be ignored.

 

[Tigerssaints]

G Chappell is 70 and rumour is he wants to stay another 5 years
time for another Pat Howard "burned old player" to take over his job at centre of excellence ( 29 mill )
Michael di venuto replace him, and find 2 new full time selectors

 

[bird_man]

I'd like to see Ricky Ponting involved in either selection or pathways program. I know they apparently could not afford him in a full time role against his channel 7 salary, but this would allow him to do both.

Just a thought.

 

[Gough]

Sack them both and give the job to Trevor Chappell.

 

[The Swans Blog]

Sack them both and give the job to Trevor Chappell.

I'll do it full time, I don't mind a cushy job where I can criticise others

 

[archibald]

We should go the England approach, select a bunch of recently retired scouts who report to a chairman, preferably one who hasn't been an utter failure in all his administrative roles for the past 30 years.

At least Mark Waugh is gone. In his autobiography he paints himself as a victim from the press and selectors when he couldn't buy a run in the last 3 years of his career. Now he is walking blindspot who refuses to accept criticism of the same structure that he was apparently a victim of in his playing days.

 

[Tigerssaints]

just received this froom cricket tas


Cricket Australia XI v Sri Lanka Tour Match


When: Thursday 17 - Saturday 19 January 2019.
Where: Blundstone Arena

Guests: Guest will be admitted into the Member's area at Blundstone Arena as per the process for Sheffield Shield Matches at no extra charge. Members are asked to sign in a maximum of two guests when entering the ground.

Daily Match Schedule
Start Time: 2.00pm
Tea Break: 4.00pm - 4.20pm
Dinner: 6.20pm - 7.00pm
Scheduled Conclusion: 9.00pm

Speaking on the CA XI, National Selector Trevor Hohns said:

“The CA XI squad is critical to our pathway system and continuing to harness identified talent at the highest possible level. The players in this squad are of interest to the National Selection Panel, as we look ahead to the World Cup and Ashes campaigns in 2019.”

Australia XI Squad
Joe Burns (c) - Queensland
Kurtis Patterson (vc) – New South Wales
Scott Boland – Victoria
Jake Doran (wk) - Tasmania
Jon Holland – Victoria
Marnus Labuschagne - Queensland
Michael Neser - Queensland
Will Pucovski - Victoria
Jason Sangha – New South Wales
Matt Renshaw - Queensland
Chris Tremain - Victoria
Charlie Wakim - Tasmania
TBA

Sri Lanka Squad
Dinesh Chandimal
Dimuth Karunarathn
Kusal Janith Perera
Dananjaya De Silva
Dushmantha Chameera
Kusal Mendis
Suranga Lakmal
Lahiru Kumara
Kasun Rajitha
Lakshan Sandaken
Dilruwan Perera
Niroshan Dickwella
Roshane Silva
Lahiru Thirimanna
Nuwan Pradeep
Sadeera Samarawickrama​

 

[to1994]

Don't get your hopes up. They've pulled the "Given our batten weaknesses it might be that 6 batsman and four bowlers is the way go" before. Then after a few games or if a wicket looks slightly flat they revert back too "a fifth bowler is a really enticing option, Mitch Marsh is the whole package etc."

They're saying all this now but i have no doubt Mitch Marsh will be on the plane to England, they'll assume his bowling will be an advantage there and because of a couple of flat wickets there last time he'll be at worst the second all-rounder option.