Andrew Symonds

[Stevo]

I know it sounds very minor to miss a team meeting but this guy has racked up the misdemeanours and given his age he is unlikely to changes his ways any time soon.
Is it time to pull the trigger on him as an international cricketer?

[1eyedog]

I know it sounds very minor to miss a team meeting but this guy has racked up the misdemeanours and given his age he is unlikely to changes his ways any time soon.
Is it time to pull the trigger on him as an international cricketer?

Can he still play for England? Hate to see him bludgeoning our attack in the future, like Wessels did to lesser extent though of course.

[Chops]

SS wanted to go fishing in Darwin but would have been have sent home.

OK he missed a meeting, but they were play Bangladesh!

[ledge]

By the sounds of the press release it got a lot worse when they had meeting with him, sounds like it has got personal as well, a few harsh words thrown both ways about each other in a heated arguement maybe?

He obviously planned it, which makes me wonder was the team meeting planned after he had planned fishing trip?
Every thing is very vague at the moment.

[GVGjr]

I know it sounds very minor to miss a team meeting but this guy has racked up the misdemeanours and given his age he is unlikely to changes his ways any time soon.
Is it time to pull the trigger on him as an international cricketer?

I agree, he hasn't shown the ticker required and it's time to find someone else. I'm not sure if that will be Watson but hopefully Symonds doesn't get straight back into the side.

[Happy Days]

I was presented with an interesting theory (not mine FWIW so feel free to shut it down without fear of awkwardness :)) that he did committed these fishing-related mishaps on purpose so he wouldn't have to go back to India to be called a monkey again.

[bulldogtragic]

I was presented with an interesting theory (not mine FWIW so feel free to shut it down without fear of awkwardness :)) that he did committed these fishing-related mishaps on purpose so he wouldn't have to go back to India to be called a monkey again.
A rouse ey. Interesting.

[GVGjr]

I was presented with an interesting theory (not mine FWIW so feel free to shut it down without fear of awkwardness :)) that he did committed these fishing-related mishaps on purpose so he wouldn't have to go back to India to be called a monkey again.

He doesn't like touring the sub continent unless there is a truck load of money. He will tour the West Indies and England but isn't happy at the other places.

I think he should have run his race as a test cricketer.

[bornadog]

He doesn't like touring the sub continent unless there is a truck load of money. He will tour the West Indies and England but isn't happy at the other places.

I think he should have run his race as a test cricketer.

Can't agree, he is a great player, although does have personal issues. On field, is brilliant.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Can't agree, he is a great player, although does have personal issues. On field, is brilliant.

On field, he just made a golden!

Vics smashing Qld - Nannes has 5/40 to follow his 4/45 in the first dig.

Qld 7/114 lead by 6.

[GVGjr]

Can't agree, he is a great player, although does have personal issues. On field, is brilliant.

I'm not doubting his ability, just his desire and commitment. He's been looking for ways not to tour the sub continent for a while now (he is the most vocal about not going to Pakistan) and yet has no problem playing in the IPL when the big money awaits. The days are gone when you can pick and choose which test series you will play.

[GVGjr]

On field, he just made a golden!

Vics smashing Qld - Nannes has 5/40 to follow his 4/45 in the first dig.

Qld 7/114 lead by 6.

Terrific win by the Vics. Nannes got 7 wickets and in the end it was an easy victory.

[Mantis]

Terrific win by the Vics. Nannes got 7 wickets and in the end it was an easy victory.

If he can stay on the field this year I'm sure he will take a stack of wickets, he can seriously bowl...

[KT31]

Can he still play for England? Hate to see him bludgeoning our attack in the future, like Wessels did to lesser extent though of course.

Even Sockeye could bludgeon our attack.
And he took four days to make a ton.

Players like Symons will muck up , but if they perform discipline them some other way than missing matches, you can't have totally regimented team if Punter is captain.

Lee has been overated for years and the selectors have made him our number one strike bowler.

Time for Australian cricket to pull their head out of the sand and realise that there are other cricketers in the country than those that play for NSW.

[Lantern]

It's funny how these things come back to bite you -- pick all these NSW players and they get there and just go to water.

I'm not Vic-centric -- pick the best players you have -- but some of those NSW guys should never have been picked in the first place. Noffke and D. Hussey should be WAY ahead of some of those guys in the squad. If Hodgey is considered past Test cricket, then Katich should be also. If scoring a ton of runs in domestic cricket is supposed to get you back in the side, then Matthew Elliott should have been recalled a few years ago. Katich ran his race years ago.. we're looking backwards.

A fit McGain would have been handy. Well, for years the team has been relying on Glenn and Shane to pull their collective pants out of the fire, we'll see what they're really made of now.

[GVGjr]

If Hodgey is considered past Test cricket, then Katich should be also. If scoring a ton of runs in domestic cricket is supposed to get you back in the side, then Matthew Elliott should have been recalled a few years ago. Katich ran his race years ago.. we're looking backwards.



I suppose that when it came to the crunch, the selectors could only pick either Hodge or Katich and went with the latter because of the sheer weight of runs. If you had to pick one would you have chosen Hodge over Katich?

In hindsight we probably could have simply just gone with a younger player all together.

[hujsh]

I suppose that when it came to the crunch, the selectors could only pick either Hodge or Katich and went with the latter because of the sheer weight of runs. If you had to pick one would you have chosen Hodge over Katich?

In hindsight we probably could have simply just gone with a younger player all together.

Making me correct. I love hindsight

[Happy Days]

If scoring a ton of runs in domestic cricket is supposed to get you back in the side, then Matthew Elliott should have been recalled a few years ago.


He was recalled...made 1 and a duck.

[Lantern]

I suppose that when it came to the crunch, the selectors could only pick either Hodge or Katich and went with the latter because of the sheer weight of runs. If you had to pick one would you have chosen Hodge over Katich?

In hindsight we probably could have simply just gone with a younger player all together.

D. Hussey.

I know he's not that much younger, but he's surely earnt a go, and if he goes anything like his brother he'll be 'right.

[GVGjr]

I can't believe that Symonds has been added to a 13 man test squad. He seriously has done nothing to earn this recall.

[Chops]

Well he should never have been dropped.

[ledge]

We can debate on whether he should have been dropped or not, but none of us were at the meeting and know the whole story.
As for being picked now, certainly shouldnt have been if going on form, but then again when has form meant anything especially regarding playing for Victoria eg Hussey and Hodge.
Lehmann was the biggest proof of that i ever saw, played for SA and got picked, went over to Vics and got dropped then returned to SA and got picked again!
Poor old Matty Elliott should have moved to SA 12 years ago, would have partnered Hayden as Australias opener for 10 of those years.

[GVGjr]

Yes, his form and attitude are the main reason why I think he should be at the back of the queue. It wouldn't concern me if it was a limited over game even though I don't think he should be selected there either but he just doesn't have the runs on the board to deserve to be selected in the test side.

[hujsh]

The reasoning was something along the lines of he spent time against India and the West Indies solidifying his place in the team, so now he's available for selection he must be considered.


It took him that long getting comfortable in tests i wonder if he can re-adapt quickly enough.

I agree completely he doesn't deserve his spot, based on form. I would place him in the top 6 Aussie batsmen for ability though.

[dog town]

Rumour is that Michael Clarke will be out with illness/injury and Symonds is the back up for the batting spot. Hodge is extremely stiff not to be called up. He has not done a great deal wrong and it must be very frustrating for him. I would say Symonds has come in because we lacked counter attacking ability in India. We had no ability to take the opposition on and IMO that is why they have gone back to Symonds.

[GVGjr]

DT, I gather that what you say is correct but I would still be playing a couple of batsman ahead of Symonds. India in India is far tougher that NZ over here.

[Lantern]

The reasoning was something along the lines of he spent time against India and the West Indies solidifying his place in the team, so now he's available for selection he must be considered.


It took him that long getting comfortable in tests i wonder if he can re-adapt quickly enough.

I agree completely he doesn't deserve his spot, based on form. I would place him in the top 6 Aussie batsmen for ability though.

Definitely not amongst top 6 batsmen for ability.

Good for a lower-order pinch-hitting role, and a (potentially) brilliant and athletic all-round cricketer, but definitely not top 6 best batsmen. Can think of at least ten guys not even in the Test squad ahead of him in terms of pure batting alone.

[hujsh]

Definitely not amongst top 6 batsmen for ability.

Good for a lower-order pinch-hitting role, and a (potentially) brilliant and athletic all-round cricketer, but definitely not top 6 best batsmen. Can think of at least ten guys not even in the Test squad ahead of him in terms of pure batting alone.

Well who are yours then?

I'd have

Haydos
Katich
Ponting
M Huss
Clarke
Symonds

As the top 6.

(abiltiy=run scoring not natural talent)

Don't forget how good he was after that Boxing Day Test. Best batsman against India in the series.

[Griffen#16]

Looked ok last night. Was actually a pretty enjoyable game to watch.

[hujsh]

Looked ok last night. Was actually a pretty enjoyable game to watch.

Found it hard to get into. I'm wanting (for example) Cullen to get a wicket but want Symonds and Hussey to score quick runs too. There has to be someone to hate.

[lemmon]

Poor form from the selectors IMO, doubt Clark will miss so Watson is left out. Watson was one of our more consistent performers in India and doesnt deserve to be shafted for someone who has done nothing for the bulls. I wouldnt play Symonds again untill he makes some run or Watson fails.

[hujsh]

Poor form from the selectors IMO, doubt Clark will miss so Watson is left out. Watson was one of our more consistent performers in India and doesnt deserve to be shafted for someone who has done nothing for the bulls. I wouldnt play Symonds again untill he makes some run or Watson fails.

For the test? I think Symonds will only play if Clarke is sick still.

[Sockeye Salmon]

For the test? I think Symonds will play if Clarke is sick still.

Of course he will.

80 runs @ 13.3 should be good enough to make the test team.


It's a disgrace.

Hodge is averaging over 50 and has made 2 100's in one dayers as well.

[hujsh]

Of course he will.

80 runs @ 13.3 should be good enough to make the test team.


It's a disgrace.

Hodge is averaging over 50 and has made 2 100's in one dayers as well.

Forget Hodge. He's gone. I'm disappointed in some ways Symonds is back as well but bringing more 33 year olds is not a solution that can last much longer.

I'd also rather see D.Hussey or Cam White get a shot.

[Mantis]

Forget Hodge. He's gone. I'm disappointed in some ways Symonds is back as well but bringing more 33 year olds is not a solution that can last much longer.

I'd also rather see D.Hussey or Cam White get a shot.

Why?

He had one.

[hujsh]

Why?


They refuse to pick him and at 33 how long would he have left anyway.


He had one.
I've taken it as a formality he will be dropped for a bowler.
I believe he could fill the spot at 5-6.

[Sockeye Salmon]

They refuse to pick him and at 33 how long would he have left anyway.



We are talking about our test team, not an AFL side with limited lists and a draft process to worry about.

You pick your best team, right now. Kids can learn their craft playing shield cricket and then give them their chance when they've earnt it.

[hujsh]

We are talking about our test team, not an AFL side with limited lists and a draft process to worry about.

You pick your best team, right now. Kids can learn their craft playing shield cricket and then give them their chance when they've earnt it.

Can we continue to bring in these guys though? If we rebuild a team why not make one that won't need rebuilding in 2-3 years time? We took a chance on Krezja and found someone. Now we might have a bowler with experience in India next time we travel there. When Ponting Hussey Lee Symonds Clark Hayden and Katich are gone (all 32 or over IIRC) Would you replace them with guys who are 33 at the time? Against NZ why not give experience to someone else? Pommers for example.

By bringing in players 27 or under we have a chance of some stability in the lineup not just now but in the future.

For example even as well as Katich has done he hasn't altered the course of a test match. Without him all the results would have most likely remained the same. If we'd played Marsh we may have an opener to be in charge for 5 years form permiting. Now we have two guys who in two years most likely won't be there leaving us with 2 new openers at the same time.

Just my view.

[lemmon]

For the test? I think Symonds will only play if Clarke is sick still.

Was refering to Stuart, just judging by the last test in India he seemed out of favour, cant see us going in with just the three bowlers though.

[hujsh]

Was refering to Stuart, just judging by the last test in India he seemed out of favour, cant see us going in with just the three bowlers though.

I know. I think Symonds is there as cover for Clarke and Watson will play. They've been trying to get Watson in the team for ages and doubt they'd get get rid of him now

[dog town]

If they drop Watson the whole selection panel should be dumped. They have stuck with him through all his injury woes and to jump off now would mean i was all for nothing. He is one of the only guys who showed a bit of aggression with the ball and his batting will continue to improve. His numbers might not be great but he gets better all the time. He is certainly not a natural number 6 but he is improving in that role.

I think long term he may be able to push up towards number 4 in the line up. Technically he is pretty good he just has to feel more comfortable in his technique. He can be almost too rigid and mechanical in his batting at times. A good technique is the elimination of risk in your play and there is no set way to go about it. Everybody is suited to different things and he might find once he loosens up a bit he wont find himself on the end of so many good deliveries.

Hodge, Pomersbach, Marsh and maybe David Hussey can consider themselves very unlucky if Symonds plays as a batsmen in place of Clarke. The last 3 offer the middle order aggression I thought we lacked in India and the first one is the most unlucky player since Boof was slaying attacks all over the place. Marsh and Pommers will play for Australia at some stage. Hodge has age against him now which must be all the more frustrating for him. At the top of his game now and his form was already pretty irresistable.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Can we continue to bring in these guys though? If we rebuild a team why not make one that won't need rebuilding in 2-3 years time? We took a chance on Krezja and found someone. Now we might have a bowler with experience in India next time we travel there. When Ponting Hussey Lee Symonds Clark Hayden and Katich are gone (all 32 or over IIRC) Would you replace them with guys who are 33 at the time? Against NZ why not give experience to someone else? Pommers for example.

By bringing in players 27 or under we have a chance of some stability in the lineup not just now but in the future.

For example even as well as Katich has done he hasn't altered the course of a test match. Without him all the results would have most likely remained the same. If we'd played Marsh we may have an opener to be in charge for 5 years form permiting. Now we have two guys who in two years most likely won't be there leaving us with 2 new openers at the same time.

Just my view.
You don't need to develop the test side.

You have 6 teams competing in the best domestic competition in the world that are developing your players. All you have to do is pick the best ones.

It's not like football where you have to learn where your teammate leads to or which foot they kick with - you're in the team, when that bloke bowls it, you hit it. The only other thing your teammates need to learn about you is whether you like orange or lemon cordial at drinks.

[GVGjr]

I think if the selectors were fair dinkum then they would have added Marsh to squad and if Clarke didn't make it move Katich to number 5 and open with Marsh.

If they play Watson as the 4th bowler then the have learned nothing. Symonds might very well come in and peel off a 100 but I still think he shouldn't be playing. Let him knock up a couple of scores for the Bulls first.

[hujsh]

You don't need to develop the test side.

You have 6 teams competing in the best domestic competition in the world that are developing your players. All you have to do is pick the best ones.

It's not like football where you have to learn where your teammate leads to or which foot they kick with - you're in the team, when that bloke bowls it, you hit it. The only other thing your teammates need to learn about you is whether you like orange or lemon cordial at drinks.

But to constantly pick players who are so old is extremely short sighted. Not every mature player will be like Stuart Clark and take 5 in his first innings. Many players take time (like Roy).

Then when we travel we have a squad of players who haven't played a test in that country before, which Shield cricket most likely won't prepare you for.

[Mantis]

I think if the selectors were fair dinkum then they would have added Marsh to squad and if Clarke didn't make it move Katich to number 5 and open with Marsh.



What has Marsh done at SS level to deserve this promotion?

[GVGjr]

What has Marsh done at SS level to deserve this promotion?

He is regarded as a specialist opener and given the selectors picked him to back up the openers spot after Jacques got injured he should already be in the mix.
Katich was originally supposed to play in the middle order but when the selectors decided they wanted batting depth, they moved him to the top of the order ahead of Jacques and added two batting all-rounders in Watson and White.

[Mantis]

He is regarded as a specialist opener and given the selectors picked him to back up the openers spot after Jacques got injured he should already be in the mix.
Katich was originally supposed to play in the middle order but when the selectors decided they wanted batting depth, they moved him to the top of the order ahead of Jacques and added two batting all-rounders in Watson and White.

So why doesn't he open for WA?

[GVGjr]

So why doesn't he open for WA?

He does.

[Dog Pound]

We are in trouble if SYmonds is going to save us. He isnt up to test standard. U could drive a truck through his defence, very suspect against quality bowling. Part time bowler at best. Brilliant fielder granted.

[hujsh]

He did in this match

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/361258.html

and this one

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/australiandomestic/engine/match/361250.html

Hasn't played any other this year.

[Happy Days]

We are in trouble if SYmonds is going to save us. He isnt up to test standard. U could drive a truck through his defence, very suspect against quality bowling. Part time bowler at best. Brilliant fielder granted.

Good to know your negativity isn't restricted to one sport.

Pull your head in. In case an average of over 40 doesn't translate it clearly enough, he is more than up to test standard. The argument against is not one of form, but one of commitment. His performance in the twenty20 shows that he can make runs when he wants to.

[lemmon]

He does.

Was mostly a middle order batsmen but has turned himself into an opener in the last 12 months, still i would like to see him do more in the longer form of the game averages 35 i think.

[hujsh]

Was mostly a middle order batsmen but has turned himself into an opener in the last 12 months, still i would like to see him do more in the longer form of the game averages 35 i think.

Average doesn't mean everything. Clarke and Krezja didn't have great records but did great on debut.

[bornadog]

Good to know your negativity isn't restricted to one sport.

Pull your head in. In case an average of over 40 doesn't translate it clearly enough, he is more than up to test standard. The argument against is not one of form, but one of commitment. His performance in the twenty20 shows that he can make runs when he wants to.

He is a great player but I don't believe a great all rounder. His bowling has been below average in the past couple of seasons at test level. However, batting wise he can really take a game on.

I think he should alomst be reagrded as a batsman these days and let Watson take the all round mantle.

[bornadog]

Symonds a definate starter. Siddle out.

[Dog Pound]

Symonds a definate starter. Siddle out.

Siddle didnt play in the last test

[hujsh]

Symonds a definate starter. Siddle out.

Are you talking 12 man squad?

[GVGjr]

Siddle didnt play in the last test


He's been dropped from the 13 man squad he was selected in. They haven't finalised the 11 yet.

[bornadog]

He's been dropped from the 13 man squad he was selected in. They haven't finalised the 11 yet.

At least someone is on the ball:D

[hujsh]

I don't think that makes Symo a certain starter. They'd have to drop Watson or Krezja IMO.

[Lantern]

Well who are yours then?

I'd have

Haydos
Katich
Ponting
M Huss
Clarke
Symonds

As the top 6.

(abiltiy=run scoring not natural talent)

Don't forget how good he was after that Boxing Day Test. Best batsman against India in the series.

You mean the Boxing Day Test the year after Hodgey got a double century?

Better batsmen (by far):

Jacques
Hodge
D. Huss
Klinger
Marsh
Rogers

At least as good, if not better:

Pomersbach
Quiney
Jewell
Bailey
Hughes
Broad
Voges

[EJ Smith]

You mean the Boxing Day Test the year after Hodgey got a double century?

Better batsmen (by far):

Jacques
Hodge
D. Huss
Klinger
Marsh
Rogers

At least as good, if not better:

Pomersbach
Quiney
Jewell
Bailey
Hughes
Broad
Voges

None of your "better by far" get close and your "as good if not better" list is laughble by comparison to a man whose last 11 Tests (since the Boxing Day Test) and 17 innings with 5 Not Outs averaged 81.1

[Sockeye Salmon]

None of your "better by far" get close and your "as good if not better" list is laughble by comparison to a man whose last 11 Tests (since the Boxing Day Test) and 17 innings with 5 Not Outs averaged 81.1

You mean the bloke with a first class average this season of 13?

[Lantern]

Exactly.

Boonie's last 11 Test innings were pretty good too. Why don't we recall him?

You can't go past form players to pick 'protected species' types. It's inconsistent and sends a lousy message to the rest of the playing stock.

If we're talking form players in local cricket, any one of the six players from my 'better by far' list would do well in the Test arena if they were given as many chances as Symo.

I'm not saying he is not a brilliant cricketer, but he does not get in the team as a batsman. He fights out the all-rounder spot with Watson.

[hujsh]

You mean the Boxing Day Test the year after Hodgey got a double century?

No. The one against England that sparked his good form.

I can perhaps consider Hussey on you list as comparable.

The idea though was run scoring ability and Symonds has one thing none of the above batsmen (even Hodge) doesn't have. That's proof that he can dominate at test level.

[Dog Pound]

Symonds will never dominate at test level. His technique is too flawed. Like a lot of the Aussie bats, he is ok when the going is easy. We have seen what happens when they face good quick swing bowling or quality spin.

[Sockeye Salmon]

No. The one against England that sparked his good form.

I can perhaps consider Hussey on you list as comparable.

The idea though was run scoring ability and Symonds has one thing none of the above batsmen (even Hodge) doesn't have. That's proof that he can dominate at test level.

If that was the dominate factor in selecting the test team how could a new player ever get selected?

Neil Harvey would still be in the side (and if you ask him he thinks he still should be).

[hujsh]

If that was the dominate factor in selecting the test team how could a new player ever get selected?

Neil Harvey would still be in the side (and if you ask him he thinks he still should be).

I didn't say it was the dominant factor just that it is his advantage. And going by your policy of picking the best team for each match i would say it's a major advantage to him.

[hujsh]

Symonds will never dominate at test level. His technique is too flawed. Like a lot of the Aussie bats, he is ok when the going is easy. We have seen what happens when they face good quick swing bowling or quality spin.

He already has dominated tests. That average of 80 after Boxing Day, which included India, is hard to beat.

Find a team that that won't struggle against quality swing and spin.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I didn't say it was the dominant factor just that it is his advantage. And going by your policy of picking the best team for each match i would say it's a major advantage to him.

I would say that if a bloke hasn't played a test in 6 months then he should have to make at least a few before he gets back in.

[hujsh]

I would say that if a bloke hasn't played a test in 6 months then he should have to make at least a few before he gets back in.

I agree.

[hujsh]

Well he's in anyway. Watson or Krezja

[EJ Smith]

You mean the bloke with a first class average this season of 13?

Whether he should be picked in this Test is another argument. I am reponding to Lantern's outrageous assertion that those on his list are superior batsmen.

With respect to his selection for this Test, no mention has been made of the fact he is probably the world's formost out-fielder. He brings to the table the ability to bowl mediums and spin and to fill a gap.

When batting he has a presence few of his peers can match. Like Gilchrist he can change a game in a session which is enormously important now that the going rate for a day in a Test match appears to have reverted to 260 - 280.

Yes he has been out of form in various domestic matches but they have been versions of the short game in the main. His position in the side was without question before he got on the piss. How long does he pay the price? Given our performances in India, we are not overburdened with batsmen who are making a lot of runs.

He has shown an ability in the past to rise to the occasion when selected at international level. Like one SK Warne his Test performances are likely to remain superior to those in the domestic arena.

[bornadog]

Whether he should be picked in this Test is another argument. I am reponding to Lantern's outrageous assertion that those on his list are superior batsmen.

With respect to his selection for this Test, no mention has been made of the fact he is probably the world's formost out-fielder. He brings to the table the ability to bowl mediums and spin and to fill a gap.

When batting he has a presence few of his peers can match. Like Gilchrist he can change a game in a session which is enormously important now that the going rate for a day in a Test match appears to have reverted to 260 - 280.

Yes he has been out of form in various domestic matches but they have been versions of the short game in the main. His position in the side was without question before he got on the piss. How long does he pay the price? Given our performances in India, we are not overburdened with batsmen who are making a lot of runs.

He has shown an ability in the past to rise to the occasion when selected at international level. Like one SK Warne his Test performances are likely to remain superior to those in the domestic arena.

Completely agree, its all well and good for some batsman to make runs in the shield competition, but at test level its a different ball game. As Hujsh has indicated, Symonds at test level has proven he is a match winner and his average since the boxing day test against England proves it.

[Charmdog]

News reports say he has been in some scuffle in a Brisbane pub.

[GVGjr]

Symonds keeps racking up the misdemeanor points but more importantly he should have known that going on the radio and being interviewed after drinking was a bad move. He is what 33 but is acting like an immature 19yo (apologies to any 19yo but you know what I mean)

He's become a liability and despite our lack of an all-rounder of his ilk surely he can't keep playing test matches for Australia?

[ledge]

ACB or CA or whoever it is are looking more stupid by the minute the way they are handling this, they have dug a hole that they cannot get out of, if other players do something wrong, then they now must get 2-4 chances or they could take the cricket board to court for discrimination.
I wouldnt be surprised if a few Australian team members who were against him getting a game would also be saying I told you so.
On another note, how good has it been seeing new faces in the team, Warner etc, we arent winning games but the new blood is definitely exciting to watch and the future looks great, should have been done a year or 2 ago.

[hujsh]

On another note, how good has it been seeing new faces in the team, Warner etc, we arent winning games but the new blood is definitely exciting to watch and the future looks great, should have been done a year or 2 ago.

That's been my opinion for a while.

Looking forward to Hughes. Batted somewhat like Oram in the 20/20 the way he removed his front foot to allow him to slog.

[ledge]

Well another failure just 5 today 30/1/09, why do they keep him in mind and why do they babysit him.
$4000 fine , thats a joke.

[mighty_west]

Well another failure just 5 today 30/1/09, why do they keep him in mind and why do they babysit him.
$4000 fine , thats a joke.

What got me was that this was his first "official" warning, so when he went fishing, and couldn't be bothered joining the rest of the team, as a senior player, that must have been "ok"...

Ever since he has started appearing on just about every second commercial, his dimena & game has gone down hill fast, was just over a year ago and he was flying, he couldn't do wrong.

He came out yesterday and said, it was a tongue in cheek statement, or something to those lines, about the comments he made on McCullum...yeah, right!!! Nice backflip.

It's a shame, because i thought he was awesome, his no BS attitude, his mongrel on the field etc, now he just looks stupid, it's like he can't handle it, and the first thing he should be doing is stop making commercials, and concentrate on playing great cricket, some players can handle the limelight, Roy clearly cannot!!!

[hujsh]

Well another failure just 5 today 30/1/09, why do they keep him in mind and why do they babysit him.
$4000 fine , thats a joke.

You do know there's a date on the corner of the post right?

[ledge]

Yeah i know just thought i would put it as a latest news item.