Tweet
Okay, so this is largely based on an interview Merv gave on SEN last night, but it merely confirmed a lot of things that we've been hearing anyway. These are some concerns:
1. Jamie Cox is the only selector (apart from Ponting) who attends nets sessions and tour matches (other than Tests). Merv is on his Ashes Drinking Tour with paying fans, and who knows where Hilditch is, but he's not over there. To finalise teams, they rely on phone hook-ups, and on the word of Cox alone on things like fitness etc. (For example, how Brett Lee is going in the nets and whether he's fit for the next Test is based PURELY on Cox's judgment). Similarly, performances in tour matches are only witnessed by Cox and reported back to Merv and Hilditch.
How can this be? How can two of the three official selectors (minus the captain) not even be present to watch tour matches or fitness tests, both of which are the only and most crucial aspects of sussing out a player's form and fitness? What are they being paid AUD60,000 a year (for a part-time job) to do apart from sup on all-expenses-paid junkets to Test venues around the world and earn a little bit more on the side like Merv, if they don't even LOOK at how the players are performing outside of Test matches?
2. Merv let slip that they don't have a doctor on tour with them, and if they did, Brad Haddin may have played in the last Test with a painkilling jab. What the?
Apparently they take a doctor with them to places like India where they don't trust the medical system, but not to England, where they do. Apart from the fact that this stinks of sheer ignorance, how unprofessional is it to not be prepared for all eventualities at the elite level? Even if the cost of taking a doctor over is prohibitive, nothing is stopping them from contracting a local doctor ahead of time to be on standby at the venue with the team on the five days of a Test. It's not that hard -- we do it all the time in my line of work, and we don't have the multi-million dollar budgets that the ACB do. I find it staggering that this happens.
3. Apparently, the selectors don't give a stuff about what the Australian public think regarding their selections. This is all well and good if we are winning regularly, but when the team has lost a Test series recently and is on the verge of losing another one, I think the message can be a bit less arrogantly phrased. It's not as if they've been doing their jobs spectacularly.
4. They didn't bring along another specialist batsmen because they believed that either of Hussey, North or Haddin could open if necessary and Watson could fit in elsewhere. Apart from the fact that Hussey hasn't scored runs in 18 months, surely an opener is a specialist position, and they didn't move North or Huss up anyway, but stuck Watson in, contrary to their original plans. They also have 'speculated' that Watson would make a very good opening batsman based on the fact that he's opened in one-dayers, which makes as much sense as asking Warney to bat at 3 because he's hit a couple of 50s in the IPL. Sure he's scored some runs, but it's only been one test.
---
All in all, it just boggles the mind that the ACB could be that lax on an Ashes tour, it almost seems like a dog-and-pony show, very different from the one most people would expect. I suppose Merv takes the brunt of that because of his larrikin nature, but it's just a joke all round.
Comments?
1. Jamie Cox is the only selector (apart from Ponting) who attends nets sessions and tour matches (other than Tests). Merv is on his Ashes Drinking Tour with paying fans, and who knows where Hilditch is, but he's not over there. To finalise teams, they rely on phone hook-ups, and on the word of Cox alone on things like fitness etc. (For example, how Brett Lee is going in the nets and whether he's fit for the next Test is based PURELY on Cox's judgment). Similarly, performances in tour matches are only witnessed by Cox and reported back to Merv and Hilditch.
How can this be? How can two of the three official selectors (minus the captain) not even be present to watch tour matches or fitness tests, both of which are the only and most crucial aspects of sussing out a player's form and fitness? What are they being paid AUD60,000 a year (for a part-time job) to do apart from sup on all-expenses-paid junkets to Test venues around the world and earn a little bit more on the side like Merv, if they don't even LOOK at how the players are performing outside of Test matches?
2. Merv let slip that they don't have a doctor on tour with them, and if they did, Brad Haddin may have played in the last Test with a painkilling jab. What the?
Apparently they take a doctor with them to places like India where they don't trust the medical system, but not to England, where they do. Apart from the fact that this stinks of sheer ignorance, how unprofessional is it to not be prepared for all eventualities at the elite level? Even if the cost of taking a doctor over is prohibitive, nothing is stopping them from contracting a local doctor ahead of time to be on standby at the venue with the team on the five days of a Test. It's not that hard -- we do it all the time in my line of work, and we don't have the multi-million dollar budgets that the ACB do. I find it staggering that this happens.
3. Apparently, the selectors don't give a stuff about what the Australian public think regarding their selections. This is all well and good if we are winning regularly, but when the team has lost a Test series recently and is on the verge of losing another one, I think the message can be a bit less arrogantly phrased. It's not as if they've been doing their jobs spectacularly.
4. They didn't bring along another specialist batsmen because they believed that either of Hussey, North or Haddin could open if necessary and Watson could fit in elsewhere. Apart from the fact that Hussey hasn't scored runs in 18 months, surely an opener is a specialist position, and they didn't move North or Huss up anyway, but stuck Watson in, contrary to their original plans. They also have 'speculated' that Watson would make a very good opening batsman based on the fact that he's opened in one-dayers, which makes as much sense as asking Warney to bat at 3 because he's hit a couple of 50s in the IPL. Sure he's scored some runs, but it's only been one test.
---
All in all, it just boggles the mind that the ACB could be that lax on an Ashes tour, it almost seems like a dog-and-pony show, very different from the one most people would expect. I suppose Merv takes the brunt of that because of his larrikin nature, but it's just a joke all round.
Comments?
Comment