SA Footy

The average age of the squad we sent over for the ashes was 31.

I tried to google because actually working it out myself was going to be way too much work but I suspect the average age of our shield cricketers continues to increase because so does the money. Guys who used to have to move on if they didn't make it to the top echelon used to retire & "get a real job". Now those same guys make a good living at shield level & as 20/20 journeymen & now maintain their place on the lists for as long as they can.

I recognise that it's up to young guys to force their way in which made me question what is the role of the cricket centre of excellence - formerly the cricket academy. There's a new crop of young fellows going through there each year so where are they going? I can't help but think back to when the academy was based in Adelaide & we saw the Pontings, Laws, Langers, etc all emerging from it & making immediate impressions

I came across this article which whilst it's from 2013 makes some interesting points

http://mobile.news.com.au/sport/cricket ... 6749977316

It seems to me that Cricket Australia has taken their eye off the ball in regards to development & future planning in chasing the sponsorship & TV right cash.

Anyway ..... Fire away - what's working, what's not, & where to from here ???

Well it's time to turf out Dads Army for a start. Debuting guys at Voges' age is ridiculous. The only 'Dad' I'd stick with for the immediate future would be Rogers and Johnson. Clarke, been a great player but clearly shot. Marsh, thanks for coming. Ditto Voges, Watson and Haddin. I'd leave Steve Smith at 3.

On the Academy thing I'd move it back to Adelaide where it belongs. The Adelaide district scene is a joke so by having Academy players filling in temporarily for the Redbacks like Bevan, Alley and Berry did makes it harder for the locals to get into the Shield side. Let's reduce that particular revolving door and get the Academy back to what it should be doing.

The Shield is a worry as well. T20 has dead set killed it. No shield cricket during January means you stick with Dads army types during the test series as the young blokes have very little time to press their claims.

Have an age limit at the Big Bash. Make it for old bastards only. Get the young players playing Shield Cricket IN JANUARY. Space out the tests rather than having blocks. These guys are professional cricketers. Having the series over by January 3 is a joke.

Teeball is poison to Test Cricket, because of the apparent inability of some of our batsmen to develop an innings and for the carnage that it causes in the domestic programming. Remove the blocks, make Big Bash a retirement home or a showcase for more experienced cricketers and let the young players develop their games at the long level with an actual chance of forcing their way into the Australia Day test (in Adelaide).


regards,

REB

Agree with most of that REB, except I've got faith Clarke still has some good cricket in him, and I'd have Smith at 4 or 5.
Shield cricket in mid Dec-January will also help spinners with their games
I might be caught out on numbers here, but get the test and "A" squad bowlers playing more Shield games, particularly in October and November, not overseas p!ssing around with some 20-20 tournament.
And I know we've played a few four-dayers before these tests, but always play four day tour games, whether away or here, whether state or "A" sides, p!ss off the three-dayers.

You make some good points, sharksta, especially querying where all these youngsters end up. The early 90's saw a lot of young players coming through the Shield system, and then the best making their mark a few years later at test level. Is it just coincidence that all that talent came through at one time? The influence of WSC and subsequent jingoism into the '80s?

Greg Chappell was always one for getting the youngsters in there early, I wonder if Rod Marsh had a similar philosophy and influence, given he then was instrumental in turning English cricket around. Think it was Marsh who said he thought Kim Hughes and Ponting were good enough as 16 yo's to play Test cricket.

We still need the older experienced players in Shield cricket, but not the "list-cloggers" like some of those Victorians mentioned and some we've had here, only bring them in if they're outstanding leaders.

Test cricket in general will struggle to find players when T20 is the money circus it currently is.

20/20 is killing test cricket. Our bowlers bowl Heinze varieties in test cricket now.
Getting spoonfed dry lifeless wickets where there's no sideways movement has killed our batters as well.
I agree with you blokes. Make 20/20 a super top up plan for the over 35's and let young blokes concentrate on building an innings and bowlers bowl tight line and length building pressure.

I still think blokes debuting later in their careers us fine as long as they are technically sound and have the smarts for test cricket. Not just hitting plenty of fours in 20/20 cricket.
The academy should be back here.

Rik E Boy wrote:Well it's time to turf out Dads Army for a start. Debuting guys at Voges' age is ridiculous. The only 'Dad' I'd stick with for the immediate future would be Rogers and Johnson. Clarke, been a great player but clearly shot. Marsh, thanks for coming. Ditto Voges, Watson and Haddin. I'd leave Steve Smith at 3.

On the Academy thing I'd move it back to Adelaide where it belongs. The Adelaide district scene is a joke so by having Academy players filling in temporarily for the Redbacks like Bevan, Alley and Berry did makes it harder for the locals to get into the Shield side. Let's reduce that particular revolving door and get the Academy back to what it should be doing.

The Shield is a worry as well. T20 has dead set killed it. No shield cricket during January means you stick with Dads army types during the test series as the young blokes have very little time to press their claims.

Have an age limit at the Big Bash. Make it for old bastards only. Get the young players playing Shield Cricket IN JANUARY. Space out the tests rather than having blocks. These guys are professional cricketers. Having the series over by January 3 is a joke.

Teeball is poison to Test Cricket, because of the apparent inability of some of our batsmen to develop an innings and for the carnage that it causes in the domestic programming. Remove the blocks, make Big Bash a retirement home or a showcase for more experienced cricketers and let the young players develop their games at the long level with an actual chance of forcing their way into the Australia Day test (in Adelaide).


regards,

REB

At the risk of agreeing with someone who often annoys me, this is a great post.

Shield cricket needs to mean something. It may mean CA losses some revenue but more focus, promotion, marketing, access and significance needs to be given too it.

Is just a pity that the experts in here are not running CA, will probably be the only way that things will change

Any solution that involves limiting Twenty20 cricket is obviously not going to happen

The solution needs to take the existence of Twenty20 cricket into account

Tony Clifton wrote:Any solution that involves limiting Twenty20 cricket is obviously not going to happen

The solution needs to take the existence of Twenty20 cricket into account

No it doesnt. For starters anyone playing IPL should not be selected for tests. We should have completely differant squads for tests and T20's. Players can then make a choice in what form they want to play

Jim05 wrote:

Tony Clifton wrote:Any solution that involves limiting Twenty20 cricket is obviously not going to happen

The solution needs to take the existence of Twenty20 cricket into account

No it doesnt. For starters anyone playing IPL should not be selected for tests. We should have completely differant squads for tests and T20's. Players can then make a choice in what form they want to play

Any when they all choose t20...

Whilst I can't stand T20 and the effect it's had on the game, surely its not the be all of our issues? Other countries would face the same problem, hell the Poms invented the game. Would be interesting to go back and see if 50 over cricket, when first introduced, had a similar effect

JK wrote:Whilst I can't stand T20 and the effect it's had on the game, surely its not the be all of our issues? Other countries would face the same problem, hell the Poms invented the game. Would be interesting to go back and see if 50 over cricket, when first introduced, had a similar effect

Funny that just finished reading KP's book and he gives the impression that the ECB invented the format but resent the BCCI as they make all the cash..... Hence why they stress that County Championship matches take precedence.

Jim05 wrote:

Tony Clifton wrote:Any solution that involves limiting Twenty20 cricket is obviously not going to happen

The solution needs to take the existence of Twenty20 cricket into account

No it doesnt. For starters anyone playing IPL should not be selected for tests. We should have completely differant squads for tests and T20's. Players can then make a choice in what form they want to play

Go to war against the format that pays the bills?

Jim05 wrote:

Tony Clifton wrote:Any solution that involves limiting Twenty20 cricket is obviously not going to happen

The solution needs to take the existence of Twenty20 cricket into account

No it doesnt. For starters anyone playing IPL should not be selected for tests. We should have completely differant squads for tests and T20's. Players can then make a choice in what form they want to play

See what happened when Australian rugby relaxed it's hard line stance on playing in Australia comps rather than chasing the money OS?

We picked our best playyrs and beat the All Balcks. Kepu, Horwill, Ashley-Cooper, Mitchell and Giteau all wouldn't have played under the old rules but were in the run on team on Saturday night.

Ban players for playing T20 and we'll be shittier than what we are now.

am Bays wrote:

Jim05 wrote:

Tony Clifton wrote:Any solution that involves limiting Twenty20 cricket is obviously not going to happen

The solution needs to take the existence of Twenty20 cricket into account

No it doesnt. For starters anyone playing IPL should not be selected for tests. We should have completely differant squads for tests and T20's. Players can then make a choice in what form they want to play

See what happened when Australian rugby relaxed it's hard line stance on playing in Australia comps rather than chasing the money OS?

We picked our best playyrs and beat the All Balcks. Kepu, Horwill, Ashley-Cooper, Mitchell and Giteau all wouldn't have played under the old rules but were in the run on team on Saturday night.

Ban players for playing T20 and we'll be shittier than what we are now.

You only have to look at WSC to see how banning players works for the Test side.

Where to from here? Do we develop a youth policy or do we pick the 11 best in-form cricketers available? I'd love to throw Maxy in there but has the horse bolted?

OPENERS
Warner
Klinger/Bancroft/Khawaja
MIDDLE ORDER
Smith
Burns/Ferguson/Head/Handscomb/Stoinis/Khawaja
KEEPER
Nevill
FRONTLINE
Johnson/Starc/Bird/Cummins/Hazelwood/Fekete
SPINNER
Sandhu/Agar/Lyon/Ahmed

We have the options although we lack a genuine allrounder, the way I see it, if you don't have one with world class abilities, don't play one.

Lightning McQueen wrote:Where to from here? Do we develop a youth policy or do we pick the 11 best in-form cricketers available? I'd love to throw Maxy in there but has the horse bolted?

OPENERS
Warner
Klinger/Bancroft/Khawaja
MIDDLE ORDER
Smith
Burns/Ferguson/Head/Handscomb/Stoinis/Khawaja
KEEPER
Nevill
FRONTLINE
Johnson/Starc/Bird/Cummins/Hazelwood/Fekete
SPINNER
Sandhu/Agar/Lyon/Ahmed

We have the options although we lack a genuine allrounder, the way I see it, if you don't have one with world class abilities, don't play one.

Warner
Klinger
Khawaja
Smith
Ferguson
Burns
Nevill
Johnson
Starc
Lyon
Bird

Lightning McQueen wrote:Where to from here? Do we develop a youth policy or do we pick the 11 best in-form cricketers available? I'd love to throw Maxy in there but has the horse bolted?

OPENERS
Warner
Klinger/Bancroft/Khawaja
MIDDLE ORDER
Smith
Burns/Ferguson/Head/Handscomb/Stoinis/Khawaja
KEEPER
Nevill
FRONTLINE
Johnson/Starc/Bird/Cummins/Hazelwood/Fekete
SPINNER
Sandhu/Agar/Lyon/Ahmed

We have the options although we lack a genuine allrounder, the way I see it, if you don't have one with world class abilities, don't play one.

Sandhu isnt a spinner, though he did bowl some in India

bennymacca wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:Where to from here? Do we develop a youth policy or do we pick the 11 best in-form cricketers available? I'd love to throw Maxy in there but has the horse bolted?

OPENERS
Warner
Klinger/Bancroft/Khawaja
MIDDLE ORDER
Smith
Burns/Ferguson/Head/Handscomb/Stoinis/Khawaja
KEEPER
Nevill
FRONTLINE
Johnson/Starc/Bird/Cummins/Hazelwood/Fekete
SPINNER
Sandhu/Agar/Lyon/Ahmed

We have the options although we lack a genuine allrounder, the way I see it, if you don't have one with world class abilities, don't play one.

Sandhu isnt a spinner, though he did bowl some in India

Yeah saw he bowled a bit of spin. O'Keeffe by all reports was superb over there aswell