Skip to main content

The right leader

Very few team sports have as much time (and media focus) devoted to picking the captain as cricket does. I've always felt that the traditional Australian view of picking the best team and then the captain is a great one because unless the captain is respected for his abilities as a player its a difficult job to direct team-mates. They seem to be violating their own principles with their T20 team though by picking Michael Clarke as the captain. He averages less than 20 after 19 matches (which is not a small number in this format) and hits less than one boundary a game. Moreover he hasn't played the IPL and nor was he a part of the Champions League winning NSW team.

And yet, he's been given the job of trying to win the Aussies the only global tournament they have not made the finals of even once. Granted that other captains (Younis Khan is a good example) have led their teams brilliantly without themselves being very suited to the format, but Pakistan had very few options. Australia on the other hand has a very credible candidate in Cameron White who is among the first names on the team-sheet these days (even for ODIs). The rest of the squad though certainly looks like it'll put up a better challenge than the previous two world cup teams come April in the West Indies. The selection of Steve Smith is particularly exciting though I'm surprised to see that Nathan Hauritz hasn't been picked especially given how successful slower bowlers have been in this format (to the extent that even South Africa regularly picks two).

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Et tu?

As a single sport website, I think Cricinfo has brought about a revolution and the fact that they were bought by ESPN is testament to how highly valued they've become. Their editing and approach to articles/opinion has been refreshing to say the least and even though they seem to have had a lot of editorial staff movement they've usually maintained very high standards. Off late though, both in their headline styles as well as in actual content, there seems to be an occasional slippage of standards and an inching towards the modern media sensationalism which is a bit of a pity. This piece  by Siddharth Monga is a classic example. Granted that the last two press conferences by Dhoni and Sehwag  indicated clearly that the captain and his deputy did not agree on this aspect of selection but "discord", "dissent", "public sniping" feels rather presumptuous and heavy handed. Yes, it is a team sport but there is no reason why everyone on the team needs ...
1 comment
Read more

Of backward selections and England's future

A couple of interesting selectorial decisions recently by England and India (and actually as its turning out Australia as well!). For once I think the England selectors didn't panic and showed the right thinking by not picking either Key or Ramprakash for the Oval Test. And luckily for them, both Bell and Trott have performed well enough to vindicate the decision. India on the other hand have actually gone the other way bringing Dravid back to the one-day squad. I'm a bit ambivalent on that one. While the decision to leave out Rohit Sharma and retain Raina was certainly the right one, bringing back Dravid is questionable. It would have been a bolder decision to pick someone like Kohli or Rahane who both played really well in the Emerging Players Trophy recently, mainly because Dravid is quite unlikely to feature in the 2011 World Cup so why bring him back now? As for the Aussies, they will certainly be regretting not picking Nathan Hauritz for the Oval. A defensive decision if...
Post a Comment
Read more

England in the 90s revisited and oh, for backup bowlers!

So its come to this finally. As the cliche goes, the wheel comes full circle. Australian selection policies these days resemble that of England from the 1990s :-) Took a quick look at the last two years and over 37 Test matches since 1 Jan 2008, Australia have used 36 different players. That's an average of roughly one additional/new player every 1.48 matches! Talk about instability. When compared to India (a new player every 1.94 matches), South Africa (2.14), England (2.24) it shows how things have changed in the last two years with regards to the power balance in Test cricket. What the overall stat also does not show directly is that most of these new players have been bowlers. With the exception of replacing Hayden and Symonds the batting line-up has been quite stable but the bowling has been the exact opposite. Indian spinners like Amit Mishra, Piyush Chawla, Ashwin, and Murali Kartik must be ruing the fact that they don't have an Australian passport! The latter in parti...
2 comments
Read more