NATAHN ADCOCK ?????????

[Mally]

I am neither prosecutor or defender
I will present some facts
Adcock has been in and out of the SA team for about a decade.
He has established his place in the Pura Cup team in 2006-2007
He is arguably the best performed batsman in the PC last year

PURA CUP 2006 -2007

30...13...OPENER
31...76...BATTED 6
02...59...BATTED 6
18...95...BATTED 6

324 RUNS
AVE : 46.29

Good numbers for a guy trying to re-establish his career
Batting 6 saw Nathan blossom, and did look a good batsman.

FRANGER CUP

90 [93] BATTING 6
32 [39] BATTING 6
41*[50] BATTING 6
00 [01] BATTING 6
00 [01] BATTING 6
00[02] OPENER
00[01] BATTING 5

163 RUNS
AVE: 27-16
STRIKE RATE 89-07

Hmn...
Had a sensational start and then ...
_____________________________________________________________

WAS DISMISSED 5 TIMES IN THE LAST 6 BALLS FACED IN THE FORD CUP

______________________________________________________________

Thats the evidence presented for the jury to adjudicate

My view
Why give a guy the burden of captaincy when he was just blossoming in his PC career ?
Why is he not batting at number 6 where he excelled late last year ?
I will make my assessments quite fairly after 6 games on his performances.
He needs to be given a few games to establish himself in the PC
His o/d form ...oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooouch !!!!!!!!!!!!!

To be criticised as vehemently as he has been is a trifle unfair so early in the season
PS : IF HE DOES GET DROPPED VERY SOON THERE IS A REASON WHY I WILL BE PISSED OFF
Meanwhile the jury is still out .....

[blink]

All good points which someone could base an argument from each sides of the debate from. I personally still think Adcock was a good choice, whether the selectors back him and their decision to appoint him, remains to be seen. Remember that Adcock has an abundance of experience around him to draw on (Lehmann, Gillespie, Elliot and past captain Manou - some of which others would think are more suited to the captaincy) which will be a massive help. It would be no good for the team and SA cricket in general to sack a captain based on what has only been 1 and a 1/2 Pura Cup games as captain...

PS : IF HE DOES GET DROPPED VERY SOON THERE IS A REASON WHY I WILL BE PISSED OFF

I am intrigued as to what this would be Mal

[heater31]

Yes blink, Nathan may have a wealth of experience around him but will he actually use it? My mail is that he keeps to himself pretty much in the dressing room and unapproachable and as a captain that's not ideal

[rod_rooster]

Firstly Mally, please revert to using Mal

Secondly, Adcock showed some good signs last year. Batting at 6 is no doubt the best position for him. These points i agree on.

He deserved a chance to play this season. He should never have been made captain.

Why give a guy who has been unable to establish a regular spot in 10 years the chance to captain the side? He had played 23 first class games in 10 seasons for 1 century and an average of 25. He was showing good signs though so why burden him with the captaincy? Adcock had the chance to consolidate on last seasons improved (yet still unspectacular) results but now he has an enormous amount of pressure heaped on him and just look at the results so far.

The inevitable question will come "well who should have been captain?" Well my response is give me good reasons why Adcock should be captain. IMO you pick your best side and then choose a captain from that. Adcock currently aint in the best side.

[Blue Boy]

Adcock number 5
Dizzy Number 6

And pick another Bowler ???

[RustyCage]

Adcock number 5
Dizzy Number 6

And pick another Bowler ???

Mark Cleary

[LBT]

Adcock number 5
Dizzy Number 6

And pick another Bowler ???

Mark Cleary

....bring back Cleary please!!

[Hondo]

The inevitable question will come "well who should have been captain?" Well my response is give me good reasons why Adcock should be captain. IMO you pick your best side and then choose a captain from that. Adcock currently aint in the best side.

But the $64,000 question still remains ..... unless you can answer it I don't thing you can ask the question can you?

Whoever was picked as captain after Lehmann was stepped down would have been in this spot with the same questions because there wasn't a natural replacement

I am not sure if supporters continually raising questions about him is helping him or the team TBH

Improvement must come from all players its dangerous to keep singling Adcock out for blame. If a poorly performing team is the sole criteria then AB would not have lasted more than 1 season as Aussie skipper ....

[Stumps]

The inevitable question will come "well who should have been captain?" Well my response is give me good reasons why Adcock should be captain. IMO you pick your best side and then choose a captain from that. Adcock currently aint in the best side.

But the $64,000 question still remains ..... unless you can answer it I don't thing you can ask the question can you?

Whoever was picked as captain after Lehmann was stepped down would have been in this spot with the same questions because there wasn't a natural replacement

I am not sure if supporters continually raising questions about him is helping him or the team TBH

Improvement must come from all players its dangerous to keep singling Adcock out for blame. If a poorly performing team is the sole criteria then AB would not have lasted more than 1 season as Aussie skipper ....

lehmann should be captain he is the only option

[rod_rooster]

If a poorly performing team is the sole criteria then AB would not have lasted more than 1 season as Aussie skipper ....

Big difference. The team performing poorly when Border took over was despite his efforts. He was a star and everyone knew it and knows it. Adcock is no good. I'm not suggesting Adcock get the sack because of a poorly performing team anyway. I suggest he gets dropped cos he is no good. He will never be a great captain cos he can't lead by example. AB could lead by example.

[jackpot jim]

If a poorly performing team is the sole criteria then AB would not have lasted more than 1 season as Aussie skipper ....

Big difference. The team performing poorly when Border took over was despite his efforts. He was a star and everyone knew it and knows it. Adcock is no good. I'm not suggesting Adcock get the sack because of a poorly performing team anyway. I suggest he gets dropped cos he is no good. He will never be a great captain cos he can't lead by example. AB could lead by example.

Perfectly Put r.rooster.

[am Bays]

If a poorly performing team is the sole criteria then AB would not have lasted more than 1 season as Aussie skipper ....

Big difference. The team performing poorly when Border took over was despite his efforts. He was a star and everyone knew it and knows it. Adcock is no good. I'm not suggesting Adcock get the sack because of a poorly performing team anyway. I suggest he gets dropped cos he is no good. He will never be a great captain cos he can't lead by example. AB could lead by example.

Spot on Rod (gee I hate agreeing with North supporters) even when we were shite AB still demanded a spot in the side (one could argue in 1985-86 he was only test quality player in the team (G Marsh, Reid, Hughes and Waugh were infantile in their test careers that season)). With the SA team ATM we are breaking the cardinal rule of Australian cricket - one that has made has the most successful test nation in the world - you pick the captain from your best 11 after you've picked the team.

With Adcock we are not doing that. Should be Lehman or Gillespie as capt. If that wasn't the case we should have made a play for someone like a Thornley, a Hussey, a Clingleffer (gee we could do with a good 'keeper), a Simpson, a North or a Rogers etc and offered them the captaincy

[Grahaml]

Don't assume they didn't try based on the fact nobody moved here. Big name players don't normally move states for captaincy or money (since they get paid by CA anyway), they move to get into the Australian team.

The big question is, which team do you pick first game, and out of those who is the best placed to captain? Adcock played well last season and deserved the spot. He was then the BEST choice for captain of those who wanted it IMHO. If he is now no longer in the first choice SA team (and to drop the captain you'd better be darn sure there's a better option) who do you play instead of him, and will it be worth the loss of morale that comes with dropping the captain?

[Hondo]

Spot on GrahamL, great post ....

To all, I am not comparing Nathan to AB. I just was drawing an extreme example of the dangers of blaming a captain for errors and bad form of his 10 team-mates.

I notice most of the Adcock knockers (some of who have been Manou knockers until last game) still struggle to come up with an alternative captain in the circumstances..

By 'circumstances' I mean:
- rightly or wrongly, Boof is out
- we don't know that Dizzy wanted the job (fair to assume he didn't)
- we also don't know who the SACA may have approached to come over as Captain (unsuccessfully)

So, assuming those are givens WHO else was assured of a spot in our best 11 who can replace Nathan as captain???? Pick your best 11 and then pick a captain is a system I agree with too BTW but in this case we had very limited options and so someone was going to end up in the hot seat of being captain + establishing a permenant spot.

[blink]

someone was going to end up in the hot seat of being captain + establishing a permenant spot.

Exactly right hondo. Unfortunately SACA are in a damned-if-you type situation here.

Lets face it, these losses would have occured regardless of who is the captain.

Hypothetically, if anyone of the other choices for captain were in Adcocks shoes right now:
Dizzy as captain? Detractors would say he is only a fast bowler, what does he know anyway?
Manou as captain? Detractors would say he had no idea in the first place, reappointing him has now just highlighted that.
Deitz as captain? Detractors would say he never had the application nor the nous for the job.

FWIW I think that any one of the above would have made a good captain, however for reasons known only to those in the know at SACA, none were selected.

Had the selectors gone down the path of chosing a youngster such as Cosgrove, Borgas x 2 or Ferguson they would be in the same situation as Adcock. Trying to establish themselves along with juggling the captaincy. You can almost see how the selectors must have thought - here we have these young guys or Adcock, who is older, more mature, respected and obviously a well-educated, intelligent bloke with good leadership qualities. It is a no-brainer to see who is better equipped for the job.

[mal]

Firstly Mally, please revert to using Mal

Secondly, Adcock showed some good signs last year. Batting at 6 is no doubt the best position for him. These points i agree on.

He deserved a chance to play this season. He should never have been made captain.

Why give a guy who has been unable to establish a regular spot in 10 years the chance to captain the side? He had played 23 first class games in 10 seasons for 1 century and an average of 25. He was showing good signs though so why burden him with the captaincy? Adcock had the chance to consolidate on last seasons improved (yet still unspectacular) results but now he has an enormous amount of pressure heaped on him and just look at the results so far.

The inevitable question will come "well who should have been captain?" Well my response is give me good reasons why Adcock should be captain. IMO you pick your best side and then choose a captain from that. Adcock currently aint in the best side.

Rod Rooster has made a very pertinent point
" PICK YOUR BEST SIDE AND THEN CHOOSE A CAPTAIN FROM THAT."
That is a very very good comment

In using the RODMAXIM

PURA CUP
ADCOCK at the start of the season is without doubt in the best eleven.[ave nearly 50 last season]
ADCOCK therefore qualifies to be a captain of the P/C team.

FRANGER CUP
ADCOCK at the start of the season by virtue of 4 consecutive ducks last season is not in the best eleven.
ADCOCK therefore does not qualify to be the captain of the F/R team

And most importantly RODDY Ive reverted back to MAL

[rod_rooster]

And most importantly RODDY Ive reverted back to MAL

[silicone skyline]

Can you please explain what exactly happened there with the Mally and Mal thing??

[mal]

Can you please explain what exactly happened there with the Mally and Mal thing??

An abnorMALity with my password which was not logging in.
The tecnitians have rectified the problem.
I used MALLY in the interim.

[colliver69]

Take it from me,,,,Gillespie would definitely liked to have been skipper