Australia news April 15, 2011

Clarke turns eyes to Argus review

47

Having seen off modest opponents in Bangladesh, new Australia captain Michael Clarke will now turn his eyes to critical planning for Australian cricket's next 12 months and the years beyond.

Clarke and a handful of team-mates returned to Australia on Friday while the majority of the squad that swept Bangladesh 3-0 remained on the subcontinent for the Indian Premier League. Questioned on arrival about the role he would play on the Don Argus-led review into the waning fortunes of the national team, Clarke agreed the next few months would be a pivotal time of consultation and discussion about new directions.

The review panel also features the former Australia captains Allan Border, Mark Taylor and Steve Waugh, while Malcolm Speed and James Sutherland, the former and current Cricket Australia chiefs, will also take part.

"This is probably the important time for me to spend as much time as I can with the people who make a lot of decisions about our game, and make sure we are on the same page, have the same goals and are heading in the same direction," Clarke told reporters at Sydney Airport. "I'm excited to be home and have a bit of time off, but I'm very keen to get to Melbourne and spend some time with Cricket Australia and the selectors as well."

Australia remain top of the ICC's limited-overs rankings despite their underwhelming World Cup result, a tag Clarke believed was deserved. "The statistics say we are number one for good reason; we've won a lot of one-day games for a long period of time. In saying that, I think there's a lot of work to be done on our game to improve and keep getting better."

As for his vice-captain Shane Watson's long-awaited rise to No.1 in the ODI allrounder rankings, Clarke could hardly act surprised. "He's a wonderful player no doubt. His form over the last 12 to 18 months has been as good as anybody in the world; he's definitely a big part of our team in all forms of the game."

Daniel Brettig is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • VivGilchrist on April 18, 2011, 21:42 GMT

    Did Ireland have better players than England in WCup because they selected a team that defeated them? Players can rise above, that's why upsets happen. Form is the issue.

  • A_Vacant_Slip on April 18, 2011, 14:40 GMT

    I'm losing the logic now @VivGilchrist. Surely you have to pick the best available; but those "best" have to be better than what the other side has got, otherwise they are quite likely to beat you - because they have the better players. This described Aus in the 90's - they just had better players, so they won, simple as that. Selectors HAVE TO pick someone better than Anderson & co! Now the question is; did they pick the wrong players - or were the "best available" just not as good as what Eng had??? I agree - there were definitely some wrong picks on the bowling, but the batting should have been good enough. Clarke/Ponting were just way out of whack and there was a big problem right there. @Meety - sweet climb down, but it doesn't explain why Edmonds/Emburey took 33 of the 79 wickets taken (@35) by England in the 86/87 series or how Emburey took a match winning 5 for @ the Gabba, or how together they took 5 2nd dig wickets at the MCG to win the ashes for england. These are the facts.

  • VivGilchrist on April 18, 2011, 10:57 GMT

    @mr vacant slip. I hear you once again but once again I don't fully agree. Selection is dependent on the things you can control. It's not for Aus selectors to pick someone better than Anderson and co, Its for them to select the best 3 Aus pacemen available. Harris is no1, but is Copeland a better pick than Siddle, Hilf, or MJ. That's the selectors job. If Aus play Ind in India, we don't have a batsman as good as Tendukar(as we are reminded over and over again by our Indian counterparts) but it's the selectors job to pick our best batsmen in those conditions. I'm not saying we would have won the Ashes, but with more intelligent selections we may have had a fighting chance.

  • Biggus on April 18, 2011, 6:53 GMT

    @Meety-I guess we have got to go with what we have. Hughes just really appeals to me as a guy to let loose on the opposition late in the day much as Doug Walters used to do. You have to love a young player who walks into test cricket and hammers it around like he's still playing for his school 1st XI. Shades of David Hookes there. I'd be sorry to see the back of Katich but if we're taking two oldies into the game in Hussey and Ponting it's hard to fit him in given our need to transition.

  • Meety on April 18, 2011, 5:34 GMT

    @Wozza-CY - I agree Warner has quite a few ahead of him at the moment. He also has a stigma that will take a bit extra to shake, (just a slogger). There were SOME very promising signs at the end of the season, & I hope he can get an opportunity next year to expand on this. I think he should move interstate though, he won't get a full season for NSW. I also agree that transisition will need to be managed very well, particularly the Test side. I'd like to see the selectors take some risks with the ODI & T20 side.

  • Meety on April 18, 2011, 5:29 GMT

    @ A_Vacant_Slip - yes, Warne played in series winning Oz sides, his performances are notable for doing so on FAST& SEAMING pitches. Which is what is NORMAL in Oz. "Nobody ever wins a series in Oz because they might have a good spinner in the side". I'll correct that to say "No TOURING side ever wins a series in Oz because they might have a good spinner in the side". The Saffas never beat us through spin, Poms didn't, the Windies didn't, NZ in the mid 80s didn't either, it was 90% pace. @Biggus - I must admit the first time I saw Hughes bat was in the 2009 Ashes. I saw one innings where I thought he looked good & against the run of play he got out for about 30. Anyways whilst I thought he looked good, I thought his technique was very odd. So I assumed that after taking the Saffas to the cleaners it may be an effective technique. He finished the domestic season well, so I'd like to see him have a go against SL & see if he can repeat in Sth Africa.

  • Biggus on April 18, 2011, 3:35 GMT

    @Dr.Qwert-Much as I'm not entirely happy about it Katich may have had his day. I hate to be a doubter but I still don't quite know what to make of Hughes. Sure, great eye and nice timing but the guy has a technique that would be considered a bit dodgy in a No.7 or 8. You can make small changes to technique but not your basic modus operandi at the crease, and I just wonder how forthcoming opposition bowlers will be in feeding his strengths. If it was up to me I'd never give him a thing to cut. Not now, not later, not ever. Everybody knows. To me he seems a great player of bad bowling but can he make a career as a test batsman, an opener to boot, given that everybody knows exactly how to attack him? Some of you guys will have seen far more of him than I so feel free to enlighten me. I don't get to see all that much of him over in the west. And no, I'm not spruiking Shaun Marsh, I just find Watto and Hughes worry me as test openers against class fast bowling.

  • A_Vacant_Slip on April 18, 2011, 3:30 GMT

    @VivGilchrist; sorry - let me clear that up Hauritz SHOULD have played, leaving him out was a glaring error, and agree D Hussey for North/Smith. Both errors attributable to Ponting. If you want to blame selection more widely then you have to look around and say "Ok which bowlers do we have who are better than Anderson/Tremlett/Swann/Bresnan"? O'Keefe did well in the A game and could/should have been given a go. But he's no Swann. Harris/Siddle were Aus best bowlers - but were they better than Andersn/Trem? Regarding batting; that Aus line up should have been OK. When it began to look fallible the question is again; "who do we have who is better than Cook, Pietersen, Trott, Bell"? I think the answer is no-one. None of the players touted for Aus who in the end didn't play would have out-performed their English counterpart. @Meety; "Nobody ever wins a series in Oz because they might have a good spinner in the side". You got a short memory mate - the name Warne mean anything to you?

  • Wozza-CY on April 18, 2011, 2:48 GMT

    Agreed there a few in the line ahead of Warner, just making the point it will be interesting to see him get some opportunities at State level in the four day format & how he goes about it. Maddinson is good, C.Lynn also one to look out for. The point I'm making is I hope they manage the phasing in & phasing out better than they have in recent history. The worst thing that could happen is that SK, RP & MH all do great in the next 2-3 years then all pack it in one final hoorah at the SCG! Hughes needs an extended period as opener, Kwaja will learn a lot batting at 6 between Haddin & Hussey. Then when RP goes he slots straight in at 3 & a young gun slots into 6, ready to replace Watson at the top if he slides down when MH goes. The next sheild season will be a very interesting one to see who really pushes their cause to make the team. There is glut of seamers ready for an opportunity so there needs to be serious resources put into our spinning stocks.

  • on April 18, 2011, 2:26 GMT

    Meety - My point was not on the rating system, but Michel Clarke's little analysis of the rankings. Regardless of the flaws in the system, the argument that Australia's ODI ranking is accurate but the Test ranking is not, is a little far fetched.

  • VivGilchrist on April 18, 2011, 21:42 GMT

    Did Ireland have better players than England in WCup because they selected a team that defeated them? Players can rise above, that's why upsets happen. Form is the issue.

  • A_Vacant_Slip on April 18, 2011, 14:40 GMT

    I'm losing the logic now @VivGilchrist. Surely you have to pick the best available; but those "best" have to be better than what the other side has got, otherwise they are quite likely to beat you - because they have the better players. This described Aus in the 90's - they just had better players, so they won, simple as that. Selectors HAVE TO pick someone better than Anderson & co! Now the question is; did they pick the wrong players - or were the "best available" just not as good as what Eng had??? I agree - there were definitely some wrong picks on the bowling, but the batting should have been good enough. Clarke/Ponting were just way out of whack and there was a big problem right there. @Meety - sweet climb down, but it doesn't explain why Edmonds/Emburey took 33 of the 79 wickets taken (@35) by England in the 86/87 series or how Emburey took a match winning 5 for @ the Gabba, or how together they took 5 2nd dig wickets at the MCG to win the ashes for england. These are the facts.

  • VivGilchrist on April 18, 2011, 10:57 GMT

    @mr vacant slip. I hear you once again but once again I don't fully agree. Selection is dependent on the things you can control. It's not for Aus selectors to pick someone better than Anderson and co, Its for them to select the best 3 Aus pacemen available. Harris is no1, but is Copeland a better pick than Siddle, Hilf, or MJ. That's the selectors job. If Aus play Ind in India, we don't have a batsman as good as Tendukar(as we are reminded over and over again by our Indian counterparts) but it's the selectors job to pick our best batsmen in those conditions. I'm not saying we would have won the Ashes, but with more intelligent selections we may have had a fighting chance.

  • Biggus on April 18, 2011, 6:53 GMT

    @Meety-I guess we have got to go with what we have. Hughes just really appeals to me as a guy to let loose on the opposition late in the day much as Doug Walters used to do. You have to love a young player who walks into test cricket and hammers it around like he's still playing for his school 1st XI. Shades of David Hookes there. I'd be sorry to see the back of Katich but if we're taking two oldies into the game in Hussey and Ponting it's hard to fit him in given our need to transition.

  • Meety on April 18, 2011, 5:34 GMT

    @Wozza-CY - I agree Warner has quite a few ahead of him at the moment. He also has a stigma that will take a bit extra to shake, (just a slogger). There were SOME very promising signs at the end of the season, & I hope he can get an opportunity next year to expand on this. I think he should move interstate though, he won't get a full season for NSW. I also agree that transisition will need to be managed very well, particularly the Test side. I'd like to see the selectors take some risks with the ODI & T20 side.

  • Meety on April 18, 2011, 5:29 GMT

    @ A_Vacant_Slip - yes, Warne played in series winning Oz sides, his performances are notable for doing so on FAST& SEAMING pitches. Which is what is NORMAL in Oz. "Nobody ever wins a series in Oz because they might have a good spinner in the side". I'll correct that to say "No TOURING side ever wins a series in Oz because they might have a good spinner in the side". The Saffas never beat us through spin, Poms didn't, the Windies didn't, NZ in the mid 80s didn't either, it was 90% pace. @Biggus - I must admit the first time I saw Hughes bat was in the 2009 Ashes. I saw one innings where I thought he looked good & against the run of play he got out for about 30. Anyways whilst I thought he looked good, I thought his technique was very odd. So I assumed that after taking the Saffas to the cleaners it may be an effective technique. He finished the domestic season well, so I'd like to see him have a go against SL & see if he can repeat in Sth Africa.

  • Biggus on April 18, 2011, 3:35 GMT

    @Dr.Qwert-Much as I'm not entirely happy about it Katich may have had his day. I hate to be a doubter but I still don't quite know what to make of Hughes. Sure, great eye and nice timing but the guy has a technique that would be considered a bit dodgy in a No.7 or 8. You can make small changes to technique but not your basic modus operandi at the crease, and I just wonder how forthcoming opposition bowlers will be in feeding his strengths. If it was up to me I'd never give him a thing to cut. Not now, not later, not ever. Everybody knows. To me he seems a great player of bad bowling but can he make a career as a test batsman, an opener to boot, given that everybody knows exactly how to attack him? Some of you guys will have seen far more of him than I so feel free to enlighten me. I don't get to see all that much of him over in the west. And no, I'm not spruiking Shaun Marsh, I just find Watto and Hughes worry me as test openers against class fast bowling.

  • A_Vacant_Slip on April 18, 2011, 3:30 GMT

    @VivGilchrist; sorry - let me clear that up Hauritz SHOULD have played, leaving him out was a glaring error, and agree D Hussey for North/Smith. Both errors attributable to Ponting. If you want to blame selection more widely then you have to look around and say "Ok which bowlers do we have who are better than Anderson/Tremlett/Swann/Bresnan"? O'Keefe did well in the A game and could/should have been given a go. But he's no Swann. Harris/Siddle were Aus best bowlers - but were they better than Andersn/Trem? Regarding batting; that Aus line up should have been OK. When it began to look fallible the question is again; "who do we have who is better than Cook, Pietersen, Trott, Bell"? I think the answer is no-one. None of the players touted for Aus who in the end didn't play would have out-performed their English counterpart. @Meety; "Nobody ever wins a series in Oz because they might have a good spinner in the side". You got a short memory mate - the name Warne mean anything to you?

  • Wozza-CY on April 18, 2011, 2:48 GMT

    Agreed there a few in the line ahead of Warner, just making the point it will be interesting to see him get some opportunities at State level in the four day format & how he goes about it. Maddinson is good, C.Lynn also one to look out for. The point I'm making is I hope they manage the phasing in & phasing out better than they have in recent history. The worst thing that could happen is that SK, RP & MH all do great in the next 2-3 years then all pack it in one final hoorah at the SCG! Hughes needs an extended period as opener, Kwaja will learn a lot batting at 6 between Haddin & Hussey. Then when RP goes he slots straight in at 3 & a young gun slots into 6, ready to replace Watson at the top if he slides down when MH goes. The next sheild season will be a very interesting one to see who really pushes their cause to make the team. There is glut of seamers ready for an opportunity so there needs to be serious resources put into our spinning stocks.

  • on April 18, 2011, 2:26 GMT

    Meety - My point was not on the rating system, but Michel Clarke's little analysis of the rankings. Regardless of the flaws in the system, the argument that Australia's ODI ranking is accurate but the Test ranking is not, is a little far fetched.

  • Dr.Qwert on April 18, 2011, 1:56 GMT

    not necessarily saying i agree meety that cosgrove shouldn't play, but they have said he needs to control his weight & they're not going to go back on that now. Wozza-CY: i said he calling it early after just 2 knocks, but we have some very good openners coming through with Hughes almost certainly going to cement a spot (if they don't drop him when he's doing not much wrong & selecting him when he's in horrible shield form), Nic Maddinson looks the good at 18, the 2 Marsh brothers & Watson's locked in for at least 2 years before maybe slipping down the order. He has a big task to get himself into 1 of the 2 openning slots & i can't see him forcing himself into the middle order. As for the older players you'd have to think Katich has played his last test, Hughes is as ready as he's going to be. Punter & Huss are safe for at least a the next series you'd think.

  • Meety on April 18, 2011, 1:22 GMT

    @Wozza-CY - disagree a bit about the +35yo players. I think Oz must select the best players available for any test series, in line ball selection calls - go with a younger player. I'd take Katich to SL as cover for Hughes & Khawaja. Regarding Warner - I think he needs at least one BIG domestic season to get in the Test side, but that may not be far off!

  • Wozza-CY on April 17, 2011, 23:38 GMT

    @Dr.Qwert; re Warner- his two good scores co-incided with him getting the opportunities to play shield again. He has expressed a real desire to play test cricket and management have backed him. Hopefully he gets more opportunities next season & he could be one to watch. As good as Mussey, Punter & Katich are and have been, it makes no sense to start a new WC/ test cycle after a long lay off with three +35 year olds in the top 6. It's only going to prolong a younger person/s coming in & finding their feet in international cricket. Khwaja should be allowed to bat at 6 for a season or two of test matches to find his feet & build confidence. I don't think we'll do him any favours if he is thrust into no.3 in a team that isn't performing very well. Punter wants to carry on for years so let him bat at 3, hopefully by the time he moves on Kwaja will be ready. We should be starting a new opener (or two) so when Mussey goes Watson may slip to 4 or 5. We need some 'accurate' bowlers & a spinner!

  • VivGilchrist on April 17, 2011, 23:02 GMT

    @Vacant_Slip. Going by your argument there wasn't better choices than Beer, Doherty for spin, Smith and North at no6, and an out of form Hughes opening. I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you. OKeefe, Hussey, and Marsh are just 3 I can think of in those spots.

  • Meety on April 17, 2011, 22:55 GMT

    @ Dr.Qwert As for Cosgrove, well maybe the numbers rather than the weight should do the talking. Greg Ritchie carved out a reasonable career for Oz during the 1980s. I would say that Cosgrove CANNOT play ODIs - but fielding at slip is not too physically demanding - he appears to be a good slipper (remember TUBBY Taylor?), the question is - can he "endure" 6hrs of batting? I think he can. He has a FC ave of 44 & bowls useful off spin. He has been BIG all his cricketing life - why does weight have to preclude him from selection??? He actually didn't fail Oz when he got his 3 ODIs 5yrs ago. @Jeegyar Pandya - mate are you happy that despite India winning the W/Cup - Oz is still comfortably #1 on the ODI rankings???? India's test form hasn't been brilliant, mustering drawn series v the Saffas & Sri Lanka (although the draw in SA was basically a win). A laboured Test series victory over NZ! Not very impressive. There ARE kinks in the rating system.

  • Meety on April 17, 2011, 22:43 GMT

    @A_Vacant_Slip - you doing well until the "...we'd better not give Swann anything (pitch wise), " - mate how long have you been following cricket for? Pitches in Oz ARE NATURALLY "...quick/seam.." suited. Nobody ever wins a series in Oz because they might have a good spinner in the side!!! @Wozza-CY - just bear in mind that a bowler needs to bowl to the field that is set, & often Hilfy & Siddle didn't do this, Siddle in particular got very leg stump too often. @Dr.Qwert - mate I wasn't saying pick him for tests - he has only played 7 1st class games, but he is improving & currently his stats rival Marsh. Probably won't ever play Tests for Oz - but IF he continues to improve like he did during the season - he would have to be CONSIDERED.

  • A_Vacant_Slip on April 17, 2011, 20:23 GMT

    Nice conversation! Good points @CharonTFm & @hyclass. A lot depends on how you look at this; either A) Selectors/CA/Ponting got it completely wrong and picked the wrong players (this supposes that better players were available who could have beaten England) OR B) The best players were picked for the Ashes, but they just weren't good enough. I suspect B). Ok - North was a bit of a joke, but who out there would have done any better? Hauritz is the glaring error; Ok he upset Ponting, and that was enough to get himself blackballed. Anyway - Aus strategy seemed to be "we'd better not give Swann anything (pitch wise), quick/seam will be our way" (as it was in the World Cup). This being the case Hauritz was out. Thats the glaring stuff. Meanwhile key players did not perform because they weren't good enough. This is why Argus will not make any difference; the players just are not there, and even if they were unless the old boy network/selector system is broken up - they won't get selected.

  • Dr.Qwert on April 17, 2011, 12:31 GMT

    meety: you're getting ahead of yourself with Warner, they are his only 2 scores of real note & if he's going to make it as a test openner he needs to be a lot more solid. can't see him ever being in the best 11 in australia. Cosgrove will never be selected unless he gets himself fit. Marsh was the best option in the Ashes when Katich went down, he was in form (unlike Hughes) & his stats aren't too different to Fergusons with a slightly better FC average, down a bit in ODIs but it's always a touch harder at the start of the innings. the 100 he made against england was top class.

  • Meety on April 17, 2011, 9:27 GMT

    @hyclass - re: Sutherland, yes those comment weren't very intelligent, (although he didn't say it was terrible). I got sick of a lot of people being on the Marsh bandwagon. I don't think he heas been that good in ODIs, & his Shield stats are poor. I think D Hussey's stats are inflated at 1st class level from murdering County trundlers, but he was/is worth considering. As for Copeland, I'm a huge fan, not 100% sure he was ready during the Ashes - but I am now. @VivGilchrist - I agree re: Ferguson, I think he (like D Martyn a few years ago), can prove by ODI performance that they are worthy for a shot at Tests, his stats are improving. Just like to mention 2 players who at the start of the year I never thought I'd be saying need CONSIDERATION for Tests - D Warner & M Cosgrove. Cosgrove has always been a massive talent, Warner has shown as the season has worn on that he is not just a slogger, a century & a 99, is evidence.

  • VivGilchrist on April 17, 2011, 7:15 GMT

    @hyclass. Agree with what you say except for Marsh and Ferguson. Sure Ferg may have an average FC record but he has not been selected in Tests. His ODI record is very good. As for OKeefe, I would love to know the real reason why he wasn't selected in the Ashes. His record is streets ahead of any other spinner and he picked up 4 wkts v England in the Aus A game before the 1st Test.

  • hyclass on April 17, 2011, 5:12 GMT

    Jack Clarke insisted before the World Cup that we were all overreacting.Sutherland insisted that our 1st class cricket was terrible and that our pitches were the problem.Hilditch suggested that our state cricketers form wasnt a guide to selection.In the last 3 years,these men-dropped Hodge with an average of 58,then 21 year old Hughes with an average of 58 after 5 tests and a peerless record,refused to select D.Hussey for tests,who is averages 56,dropped Hauritz,refused to select O'Keefe for tests,refused to select Copeland for tests,picked the slow scoring Paine for1 day cricket and Clarke for 20/20,picked Doherty who averages almost 50 with the ball,picked Beer and Krezja who are just as bad,picked Ferguson who averages 34 at state level after 8 years and has only 6 hundreds,picked Marsh who averages 37 at state level after 10 years and has only 6 hundreds,kept North,Hussey and Ponting in the side for years without enough runs and kept a near wicketless Hilfenhaus.Theyre the facts.

  • on April 17, 2011, 4:32 GMT

    When Australia slipped to No 5 in tests, they claimed the ICC rankings were flawed. But when the are ranked No 1 in ODIs after flopping in the WC, the rankings suddenly become accurate. You can't have both Pup !!!

  • Wozza-CY on April 17, 2011, 3:44 GMT

    The talent pool of Australia shouldn't be in question, it's undoubtedly as good as it ever was. There have been some subtle changes since the change of captaincy. There is a willingness now to experiment & try to change things that aren't working. Ponting appeared to keep trying to put square pegs into round holes i.e. left arm spinners, Tait, North etc. How do bowlers like Hilf & Siddle perform so well domestically then go all over the place in tests? It seemed the skipper had his plans & wanted them implemented no matter what, even if it didn't suit the situation or player. Hauritz springs to mind there. Far and away our best spinner yet didn't play a test this summer due to standing his ground against Ponting in India. The young players in the team didn't object too much to Ricky out of respect. It looked the selectors & coach agreed more so out of fear. A change of captaincy won't change everything & over time Clarke may develop bad habits too, initially it will be some fresh air.

  • CharonTFm on April 17, 2011, 2:17 GMT

    Cont... To Bangladesh for tour matches to improve domestic cricket in minnows as well as keep up match fitness. 6 months break is far too long and footy players often only take 2-3 months off before they start training for preseason. Mistake 6: CA had too much power and often tries to be self serving rather than benefit the growth of the game. CA must play a better role in supporting State Sides as well as develop better coaches.

  • CharonTFm on April 17, 2011, 2:11 GMT

    Mistake 1: Fielding coach made into consultant to save costs, so only hire him when needed. Can't improve fielding overnight. Mistake 2: Keep underperforming players and chopping and changing younger players. Hughes only had one bad match and was dropped. Better to drop North and slot Hughes 6 to develop. Mistake 3: Coach is not hard and tough causing Ponting to shoulder burden of coach as well. Coach is meant to decide on strategies, training regime, examine technical problems. If they can't figure out why Johnson sprays or why Hilfy has to bowl on the same running length then they failed their jobs. Mistake 4: Kept older players in state cric far too long. Mediocre players should have been chopped for up and coming youngsters to build their experience early. So by the time they hit 23-24 they would have had a few games under their belt. Mistake 5: Long off season. During offseason unlike footy, their is no team building for future. Instead a team of players should be sent...

  • CricLook on April 16, 2011, 13:57 GMT

    I heard about toughness of aussi cricket administrators...But i m a bit surprised to see Tim Nielson still coach of australia...i didnt get any evidence that he is crucial tactician..yet he failed to deliver in key moments lyk ashes or world cup or important bilateral series..I believe australia should change there coach as well...Continuity doesnt mean live with failure...Huh! CA show your courage..

  • A_Vacant_Slip on April 16, 2011, 9:22 GMT

    People commenting are half-right. Firstly when England were getting whipped by Aus during the 90's they didn't put in some pannicky "review". It was only after the 5-0 in Aus that they "reviewed". The Schofield review did absolutely NOTHING for Eng cricket. I don't suppose Argus will make any difference. When it comes down to it it's about the players on the field - are they good enough? Have they got the 'nup? The Ashes showed that the answer to these questions is no and no. Sure - there were some crazy selections - Beer, North, but other players - mainstays who were supposed to be good enough turned out not to be - Ponting, Clarke, Johnson, Hilfenhaus. Selectors can't be blamed for their failures! Batting weaknesses were obvious; the only "correct" player was Hussey who did well. The Aus bowling was hopeless. The ploy of preparing pitches with grass on played into the England bowlers hands - who cleaned up every time. Clarke used to be a good player - Aus need him to stand up now.

  • smudgeon on April 16, 2011, 6:58 GMT

    As for the usual discussion about the semi-vacant spin position, I think the selectors have made a few errors here. Haury didn't deserve to be dropped...Doherty was only given two tests to prove himself...Krejza was dumped on the back of one bad test...Michael Beer was picked in the hope he would somehow instantly be the next Peter Taylor...the list goes on. O'Keefe has a swell domestic record, but it seems he's not even a certainty for NSW in Shield cricket (in favour of Smith?). They could do worse than give him a go, but make it at least a series or two to prove it. Or bring back Haury & accept that the best we can do right now is a defensive spinner who can tie up an end. Anyone have Peter Taylor's number...?

  • smudgeon on April 16, 2011, 6:57 GMT

    I'm looking forward to seeing the outcome of this review (happy to see Tubby on the panel, by far our best captain in recent years), although like most of these sorts of reviews, the recommendations are dependent on those with the power being willing to implement them...

  • AussieFan on April 16, 2011, 6:17 GMT

    This needs to be an INDEPENDENT review which means Clarke, Sutherland, etc are only to be interviewed by Waugh, Taylor, etc! If Clarke is involved in the review process then you may as well include Hilditch and Nielsen!! Clarke must realise that he is the captain ONLY because there is no other option! The existing 'boys club' culture, of which he is a big part, needs to removed so that perennial under-achievers like P. Hughes, M. Johnson, S. Smith etc are under more pressure to perform and improve their games! Players who do perform at State level must be given opportunities regardless of whether they fit in with he Clarke/Ponting 'clique' or not! Clarke must remember that he still has a very poor Test record over the last twelve months and most of the ODI runs he has scored has been against minnows (Bangladesh, Kenya, etc.). He did not score in the big games at the World Cup even though he was meant to be in 'good form'. Get off Twitter and hit the nets to regain your Test form.

  • Meety on April 16, 2011, 4:15 GMT

    (cont) - Most footy players would of been done for disorderly conduct the night after the event, or DUI, or worse! I do not believe that Sutherland or anyone (unless asked) who is currently involved in administration or coaching of the players be involved in the review. If asked they attend as an interviewee, & then nick off! Anyways - I say bring back Bobby Simpson!!!!! Also on Sutherland - I wonder if he advised the government on the ceiling bats fiasco? I say that because the roll out of the new franchise based Big Bash looks like a monumental FUBAR! Comp starts in about 7 mths and they haven't worked the Franchise structure out!!!!

  • Meety on April 16, 2011, 4:05 GMT

    @Something_Witty - up until recently (last 12mths), I considered Sutheralnd to be a fairly anonymous type of administrator, all in all fairly good. But, my opinion of him is nose-dived big time, as he has repeatedly made comparisons between cricket & football yet continues to play hands off in some key areas. Firstly coaching, in football terms Neilsen as nice a guy as he is supposed to be should of been sacked 2 yrs ago, instead he scored a contract renewal. In the football codes they often run a betting field on who will be the first coach sacked in a season, sometimes this happens a matter of a few weeks into the season! This year - the Broncos sacked their coach a few weeks BEFORE the season started! There is an obvious decline in fielding standards so our BASEBALL coach should od been sacked at least 3 yrs ago. Sutherland criticised Clarke for going to a CHARITY breakfast on the eve of the 5th Test in Sydney! He claimed Football players wouldn't act like that! TBC!!!

  • srivatsan on April 15, 2011, 23:34 GMT

    Tim Nielson must be sacked period. Almost all the others have faced the wrath except head of selectors and coach and why should they be any different?. Personally I would love to see Jason Gillespie and/or some spinner of at least Brad Hogg's stature for bowling coach (considering Shane Warne is busy with his personal life LoL). If Muralitharan is willing hand them spin lessons it's probably the best thing that can happen.

  • VivGilchrist on April 15, 2011, 23:28 GMT

    We have the players. The problem is we don't select the right players. OKeefe is our best performed spinner at FC level but has been over-looked for Doherty and Beer. Harris at 31 is the best quick in the country. He has pace, control, swing,seam, a heart like a lion, and unlike the other guys used in the Ashes he can apply pressure from one end. If fit he is the no1. Smith not ready for Tests yet. North was kept too long. Copeland should be rewarded. Watson the best genuine allrounder Aus has produced in decades, should drop to 4. A high-class keeper should be selected. Neilsen and Hilditch should go, and a new selection panel - Waugh, Lehmann, McGrath, and Warne should come in.

  • xylo on April 15, 2011, 19:24 GMT

    Australia seems to have an endless supply of quality fast bowlers like Pakistan. But when it comes to spin, either Warne was an aberration, or the supply of spinners seems very thin. Australia are definitely not helping their own cause by picking a spinner and discarding him after a couple of matches either.

  • XrSxLxN on April 15, 2011, 18:57 GMT

    100% agree with howizzat. I will add 1 more thing in list. Glen McGrath as bowling coach. Australian bowling have looked very impatient. They spray the bowl in all areas of pitch, trying to get wicket every ball. They have no idea how to build pressure. McGrath can teach them the art of being simple, patient and consistency. Guys like Hazelwood, Hilfenhaus, Peter George and Copeland could do wonders for Cricket Australia under the wings of great pigeon himself.

  • Rajeev129 on April 15, 2011, 18:46 GMT

    Make sure that Ryan Harris is always fit, he is far accurate than any other seamer you guys have at the moment. Mitchell Johnson is really overburdened, use that weapon only for Tests, since you have Brett Lee to lead in other formats. DouG, Hilfi, Siddle have got enough opportunities to prove their abilities but could't. This is the time for testing Cummins, Cutting, Butterworth (i did't see his bowling but heard so much).

    All of your spinners are failed, apart from Nathan Hauritz, who have lead them for couple of years until the series against India in India. This is the right time to bring in Steve O'Keefe. Really your fans dont want to see Steve Smith, Kreja, Doherty, White any more.

    Really you have got enough talent in domestic circuit, why do you carry out of form players in national squad ? Throughout the Chappel brothers away from National Team.

    RYAN HARRIS & STEVE O KEEFE are really important in near future, they have already got enough experience in all forms of the game.

  • on April 15, 2011, 18:44 GMT

    australia wil regain dere pride as d most outstanding team of d whole decade

  • NIT2222 on April 15, 2011, 18:15 GMT

    they should go for new coaches ...i guess mickey arthur (former SA coach) or keppler wessels will be good option for australia ....regarding team high time where young guns aged 21 or 23 should be playing test cricket so even after 5 or 6 yrs they dun need to worry abt ageing and they will gain more experience as they go on.....

  • jonesy2 on April 15, 2011, 18:03 GMT

    yeah something witty i dont like tim nielson at all as the coach. my choice would be king shane but he wont do it yet. selection panel should never have been hired, they have only hurt the team.

  • howizzat on April 15, 2011, 16:57 GMT

    1.Bring in Steve Waugh as coach 2. Allan Border, the selector-in-chief. 3.Keep Chappels out of on field Cricket. Let them be in development Zone. 4. Rotate the bowlers to reduce burn outs and injuries. One of the reason for Aussie downfall is 75% of its bowling strength not match fit and injured. 5. Bring in a good physio, a good trainer and a mind-bender 6.Remove the dead wood like smith and White.These steps if taken can do wonders to Cricket Australia.

  • Dr.Qwert on April 15, 2011, 15:25 GMT

    wouldn't mind seeing Steve Waugh suggesting the appointment of himself to selection, perhaps with Warne & Mickey Arthur as well, Hilditch & Chappel out is the 1st priority. Nielson has come under a lot of stick, hard to tell what he actually does looking in.

  • on April 15, 2011, 14:53 GMT

    SOMETHING_WITTY ,,,,,,,,,,, you've hit the nail on the head ... i agree 100%

  • Victorian-Roo on April 15, 2011, 14:39 GMT

    @Something_Witty I partially agree with you. However, a captain is as good as his team. You NEED 2 have a quality spinner in ur side. Out of 8 Test playing countries (Aus/Zim excluded), 7 of them do nt have sound players of good spin bowling. So, its mandatory dat v start targeting spin bowlers who can serve d country 4 atleast 5 yrs. There is no point in choppin n changin. Also, our one day line up is gud but f same cant b said abt d Test side. V don't have a Dale Steyn or Anderson or any bowler who can lead d attack. Every bowling side in d world always has a leader of d attack, which v clearly don't have. 2 win test matches, v need a potent bowling arsenal. Pup may captain d side well but he needs to identify 1 bowler in his side who can lead his bowling attack in both Tests & ODIs. He needs 2 give him enuf confidence so dat d bowler has a clear mindset & understands his responsibilities. Also, plz find some good spinners & v don't have them then import some (e.g Imran Tahir) :-p

  • on April 15, 2011, 14:16 GMT

    I still feel the Australian domestic cricket is by far the best among any other test team, they don't need to anything drastically to change their fortune. There is enough young talent in Australia to keep me interested. Australian bowling strength: Patrick Cummins Burt Cockley Doug Bollinger Josh Hazlewood Mark Cameron Mitchell Starc Trent Copeland Nathan Hauritz Ben Cutting Ryan Harris Peter George James Faulkner Luke Butterworth Ben Hilfenhaus James Pattinson Peter Siddle Mitchell Marsh Nathan Coulter Nile Michael Hogan Mitchell Johnson John Hastings Clint Mckay

    The above list doesn't include the players who play T20 and ODIs only.

  • on April 15, 2011, 14:10 GMT

    Of course WATTO is the great player but you cant ask him perform always the middle order seem's to be very fragile...Clarke didnt get runs against good teams...that the big worry.....Only Watto,Ponting and Hussey are performing...serious issue with the spin department our spinner didnt done any good against Bangladesh that the concern.........

  • Something_Witty on April 15, 2011, 12:53 GMT

    Aus cricket is in good hands with Michael Clarke and Shane Watson. Not so sure about our selection panel and coaching staff though. I think that's where we need some major changes ASAP.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Something_Witty on April 15, 2011, 12:53 GMT

    Aus cricket is in good hands with Michael Clarke and Shane Watson. Not so sure about our selection panel and coaching staff though. I think that's where we need some major changes ASAP.

  • on April 15, 2011, 14:10 GMT

    Of course WATTO is the great player but you cant ask him perform always the middle order seem's to be very fragile...Clarke didnt get runs against good teams...that the big worry.....Only Watto,Ponting and Hussey are performing...serious issue with the spin department our spinner didnt done any good against Bangladesh that the concern.........

  • on April 15, 2011, 14:16 GMT

    I still feel the Australian domestic cricket is by far the best among any other test team, they don't need to anything drastically to change their fortune. There is enough young talent in Australia to keep me interested. Australian bowling strength: Patrick Cummins Burt Cockley Doug Bollinger Josh Hazlewood Mark Cameron Mitchell Starc Trent Copeland Nathan Hauritz Ben Cutting Ryan Harris Peter George James Faulkner Luke Butterworth Ben Hilfenhaus James Pattinson Peter Siddle Mitchell Marsh Nathan Coulter Nile Michael Hogan Mitchell Johnson John Hastings Clint Mckay

    The above list doesn't include the players who play T20 and ODIs only.

  • Victorian-Roo on April 15, 2011, 14:39 GMT

    @Something_Witty I partially agree with you. However, a captain is as good as his team. You NEED 2 have a quality spinner in ur side. Out of 8 Test playing countries (Aus/Zim excluded), 7 of them do nt have sound players of good spin bowling. So, its mandatory dat v start targeting spin bowlers who can serve d country 4 atleast 5 yrs. There is no point in choppin n changin. Also, our one day line up is gud but f same cant b said abt d Test side. V don't have a Dale Steyn or Anderson or any bowler who can lead d attack. Every bowling side in d world always has a leader of d attack, which v clearly don't have. 2 win test matches, v need a potent bowling arsenal. Pup may captain d side well but he needs to identify 1 bowler in his side who can lead his bowling attack in both Tests & ODIs. He needs 2 give him enuf confidence so dat d bowler has a clear mindset & understands his responsibilities. Also, plz find some good spinners & v don't have them then import some (e.g Imran Tahir) :-p

  • on April 15, 2011, 14:53 GMT

    SOMETHING_WITTY ,,,,,,,,,,, you've hit the nail on the head ... i agree 100%

  • Dr.Qwert on April 15, 2011, 15:25 GMT

    wouldn't mind seeing Steve Waugh suggesting the appointment of himself to selection, perhaps with Warne & Mickey Arthur as well, Hilditch & Chappel out is the 1st priority. Nielson has come under a lot of stick, hard to tell what he actually does looking in.

  • howizzat on April 15, 2011, 16:57 GMT

    1.Bring in Steve Waugh as coach 2. Allan Border, the selector-in-chief. 3.Keep Chappels out of on field Cricket. Let them be in development Zone. 4. Rotate the bowlers to reduce burn outs and injuries. One of the reason for Aussie downfall is 75% of its bowling strength not match fit and injured. 5. Bring in a good physio, a good trainer and a mind-bender 6.Remove the dead wood like smith and White.These steps if taken can do wonders to Cricket Australia.

  • jonesy2 on April 15, 2011, 18:03 GMT

    yeah something witty i dont like tim nielson at all as the coach. my choice would be king shane but he wont do it yet. selection panel should never have been hired, they have only hurt the team.

  • NIT2222 on April 15, 2011, 18:15 GMT

    they should go for new coaches ...i guess mickey arthur (former SA coach) or keppler wessels will be good option for australia ....regarding team high time where young guns aged 21 or 23 should be playing test cricket so even after 5 or 6 yrs they dun need to worry abt ageing and they will gain more experience as they go on.....

  • on April 15, 2011, 18:44 GMT

    australia wil regain dere pride as d most outstanding team of d whole decade