Is the Golden Era of Oz Cricket Over?

[Hords]

Just watched, well an hour ago, SAs easy win over in Adelaide. I'm sure we can account for those across the Tasman, although they're a lot better at ODIs then tests. And now I just remebered they thrashed us 3-0 prior to the World Cup. It may be a challenging 5 game series yet. Back on point, what are your views of Australia's chances in SA?

Jeez, fancy getting flogged on Australia Day...

[DoreSlamR]

The Aussies will bounce back, dunno when, but it will happen

[XR8putts]

You guys really need Clarke and Symo back in the middle order, and an in-form Lee back in the bowling attack. I was actually hopeing AB or Amla would get out so they could send A. Morkel in early with the batting powerplay and really thrash you lot :P

Cannnot wait 'till Sunday, should be a good series. :evil3:

Oh, Friday should be interesting too! SA will be regreting throwing away the 2nd ODI otherwise they'd be gunning for a 5-0 white wash!

[Windsor220]

While they're definitely not as good as that golden era a few years ago, Aus should be ok. They are missing a couple of decent players atm. I also think its a case that the other teams have stepped up in the last year or two.

[pottsy44]

omg it makes me sad :(

[deesun]

Every team goes through a rebuilding stage and this is ours. That we were able to weather so many storms previously is a testament to the Aussie team. That we can rebuild will be another triumph. AUSSIE, AUSSIE, AUSSIE.

[gtxb67]

in my opinion we do not have any bowlers. for many years, we had only been able to rely on glenn and warnie and now they are gone, there is no one who can consistently finish off an innings

i am not sure if we need to read too much into the current situation as we have only won in india once in around 30 years, and the south africans have probably been better than us a lot of times since 92, but could never get past us. over the last three test series, certainly we did not expect to win one, we won one and the other was always going to be difficult. south africa were always going to beat us one day and so it happened

it will be difficult over the next few years though, as the aura of invincibility is no longer there. the odi agains nz will probably be just as difficult as well. the kiwis are always competitive in odi's

[BZINGA]

I don't think the result will be any different when we play in SA, we've had it good for so long but it's time too rebuild again which will take time but thats the fun part, watching the next lot come through and dominate once again :

[blueoval]

i was at the game and in the second innings, it was that quiet you could hear a pin drop. The south africans played far better cricket and deserved to win. The aussies performance was pretty woeful IMHO.

[Rodp]

It's the rebuilding phase. Same thing happened when Lillee, Marsh and Chappell retired (and we didn't learn from that either). As they say, it's harder to get out of the Aussie team than it is to get into it.

It has helped a little to have new players in the ODI's so they can transition into the test squad reasonably seamlessly and have a few matches under their belt against a different class of bowler or batsmen than they're used to in the Moo Cup - but it is a different game, and as shown with Symonds, can take awhile to make that adjustment.

We seem to give our senior batsmen too much rope at the end of their careers to hang themselves with - as nostalgic as it is to watch a batsmen walking to and from the pavilion in the twilight of his career, Cricket is a team sport and your role in the team should be performance based alone.

After all the high profile losses we've had over the last few years we still seem to have an aged team, I'd say the only batsmen under 30 would be Clarke (and to be honest, I don't see him as captain material) and our current keeper is only a few years younger than Gilchrist!

Hussey has been a whirlwind since joining the Aussie side a couple of years ago, and he's a couple of months shy of 34!

We're going to get belted in SA.

[rodderz]

Up until 12-24 months ago the aussie side was virtually an all-star side, there was a mix of good batsmen all the way through the order and a bowling line up that had spin, swing and fast bowlers. Now a lot of those have retired and the new guys coming through although good now will also mature somewhat and get the experience they need to be better in the next couple of years or so.

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by Rodp

It's the rebuilding phase. Same thing happened when Lillee, Marsh and Chappell retired (and we didn't learn from that either).

i think we did learn from that. we have spent alot of years on top, many more than with lillee, marsh and chappell - we have had players retired, or forced them to as good as mark and steve waugh, mark taylor, david boon, geoff marsh, terry alderman, craig mcdermott etc.

it is only recently that we have started going down, but you need the other players to come through. in the bowling sense, we have stuck with a number of our current bowlers for years and they were not good enough then, so i cannot see how they will work now. although the batsmen have not been in form recently, i feel there is more pressure on them because everyone knows, we cannot bowl the opposition out. with pidgeon and warnie, no matter what we made, we were confident of bowling them out for less


you are correct in the sense that we have so many new faces at the moment, but i think that would have been very difficult to get around. you do need others to come through and if our best players are all around or over 30, they need to be played

i feel, a problem we have is the selectors stuck with a couple of guys who were marketable, instead of looking for guys who could dominate when the pressure is on. now all the good guys have retired, the marketable guys cannot handle the pressure and are now injured so hopefully we can get some new guys up and running in the meantime

[RG]

We do have a fair few injuries atm too remember. Stuart Clark & Michael Clarke are due to come back soon (I think S.Clark had a run on the weekend as was impressive) so that adds to our bowling and batting. Roy will come back into form sooner or later and Nathan Bracken will be back into the one dayers soon enough. That's 4 blokes who are all decent names still to come back in, sure they aren't the biggest names in cricket but they can all play and each of them on their day can win you a game.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by rodderz

Up until 12-24 months ago the aussie side was virtually an all-star side, there was a mix of good batsmen all the way through the order and a bowling line up that had spin, swing and fast bowlers. Now a lot of those have retired and the new guys coming through although good now will also mature somewhat and get the experience they need to be better in the next couple of years or so.

The problem being, within the next couple of years a decent slice of 'the new guys' will also be at retirement age.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

i think we did learn from that. we have spent alot of years on top, many more than with lillee, marsh and chappell - we have had players retired, or forced them to as good as mark and steve waugh, mark taylor, david boon, geoff marsh, terry alderman, craig mcdermott etc.

it is only recently that we have started going down, but you need the other players to come through. in the bowling sense, we have stuck with a number of our current bowlers for years and they were not good enough then, so i cannot see how they will work now. although the batsmen have not been in form recently, i feel there is more pressure on them because everyone knows, we cannot bowl the opposition out. with pidgeon and warnie, no matter what we made, we were confident of bowling them out for less


you are correct in the sense that we have so many new faces at the moment, but i think that would have been very difficult to get around. you do need others to come through and if our best players are all around or over 30, they need to be played

i feel, a problem we have is the selectors stuck with a couple of guys who were marketable, instead of looking for guys who could dominate when the pressure is on. now all the good guys have retired, the marketable guys cannot handle the pressure and are now injured so hopefully we can get some new guys up and running in the meantime

We learned in the sense that we know what will happen when a number of senior players retire in batches, it leaves a gaping hole and turns an invincible side into an average side. 2 easy series losses in a row, soon to be a 3rd.

I then don't see the point in filling those holes with another bunch of 30 somethings. We're not grooming new talent, we're patching holes with the encumbered who have been waiting in the wings almost up to their use-by date.

Compare us to the sub-continental teams. An under 20 that comes along and tears the strip up, it happens consistently - sometimes they fizzle out and other times they become cricketing legends - but they're not afraid to take that chance on talent. I don't think I could name an Aussie test player in the last 40 years that debuted when they were under 20 (last one I can think of is Neil Harvey).

[qwiksix]

Originally Posted by Rodp

The problem being, within the next couple of years a decent slice of 'the new guys' will also be at retirement age.

First, I should start off by saying I only really care about Test cricket...and that I think the Ashes loss in England 2005 was the sign of the start of the decline.

Rodp's is a good point. The age is increasing because guys can make a good living off it nowadays. Back in the pre-Packer days, they couldn't and so most disappeared in their early 30s. They were retiring at their peak. Now some keep going after the bucks till they are forced to retire.

I think I read somewhere that the average age of a debutant in Aussie cricket used to be 27 or 28. Nowadays, it seems rare that there's anyone introduced under 30.

But I think the issue is, as Rodp said above, that there were too many players around the same point in their career ready to retire. That comes down to balance, and it's why you need to have some younger guys, older guys and those in the middle.

BTW - if anyone's comparing this to the Chappell, Lillee, Marsh situation, you do remember that it took > 10 years to get back to a really solid team, right?

qs

PS: Oh, and I don't think Ricky Ponting is a good captain at all. He's probably the best bat in the world, but some of his captain decisions on field are impossible to justify.

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by Rodp

I then don't see the point in filling those holes with another bunch of 30 somethings. We're not grooming new talent, we're patching holes

Compare us to the sub-continental teams. An under 20 that comes along and tears the strip up, it happens consistently - sometimes they fizzle out and other times they become cricketing legends - but they're not afraid to take that chance on talent. I don't think I could name an Aussie test player in the last 40 years that debuted when they were under 20 (last one I can think of is Neil Harvey).

that is true, but i suppose the flip side is that australian cricket has been so strong we can nuture them until maturity, and then they can join the team almost ready made

i do think we should start looking at younger talent, especially in the bowling. except for stuart clark, i think the guys that have been around for years have proven to be less than what we need

i cannot understand how we lost in melbourne, and how we almost did not win in sydney. a maiden over to smith with four overs left in the game is a waste of time. it isn't that hard to put it on the stumps, and surprisingly when one was on the stumps - we won

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by qwiksix

PS: Oh, and I don't think Ricky Ponting is a good captain at all. He's probably the best bat in the world, but some of his captain decisions on field are impossible to justify.

I don't really see him as a leader of men and I see even less of that characteristic in Clarke - it's more of a case of him being our premiere batsmen, and traditionally captancies tend to go to an Aussie batsmen. Perhaps we've been spoiled by Border, Taylor then Waugh - all 3 stoic, strong leaders. Given the current side, I don't really see an alternative though.

There have been injuries but every team has to weather through those. They seem to hit us harder due to the fact that we don't rotate players as often as other squads do - unless we want to play a 2nd spinner at Sydney (and we rarely do that anymore)

We're in for lean times ahead which is difficult to stomach since we've been the pinnacle of World Cricket for such a long time. Hopefully we can climb our way out of the slump as we have done in the past. It will be another interesting Ashes series, that's for sure.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

that is true, but i suppose the flip side is that australian cricket has been so strong we can nuture them until maturity, and then they can join the team almost ready made

i do think we should start looking at younger talent, especially in the bowling. except for stuart clark, i think the guys that have been around for years have proven to be less than what we need

I'll concede that batting stocks may benefit from a few more k's on the clock and I completely agree with you on bowlers. Particularly quicks are prone to injury in their late 20's that just gets progressively worse into their 30's.

The problem with nurturing players in the Moo Cup is that they're often playing against other players that weren't good enough to be considered for the Australian side. Bevan, IMO overrated in ODI cricket and completely ineffectual in Test cricket absolutely tore through domestic bowlers with an axe. One glimmer of the batsmen he could have been if exposed to better bowling much earlier was his momumental ODI innings vs the Asia XI (?) for the ROW. Had he been exposed to Test class bowling earlier I believe he would have been a Test great - as it was, he just couldn't handle the short ball from a world class quick.

[Gambit]

Originally Posted by Rodp

Compare us to the sub-continental teams. An under 20 that comes along and tears the strip up, it happens consistently - sometimes they fizzle out and other times they become cricketing legends - but they're not afraid to take that chance on talent. I don't think I could name an Aussie test player in the last 40 years that debuted when they were under 20 (last one I can think of is Neil Harvey).

Didn't Ponting debut when he was 19?

[DoreSlamR]

Ponting wasn't under fire when they were winning was he?

Now that they're losing matches of course the captain is going to be criticised more, it comes with the job.

As for Haddin, as good as he is he probably should have been overlooked in favour of a younger keeper

[Polyal]

Yeah we are struggling big time. They just dont seem to have either the heart or the discipline of the past players.

Bloody Bracken and his p00fy hair band is a prime example.

[XR8putts]

I have to disagree with the criticism of Ponting. I'm a Kiwi and like the rest of the non-Australian Cricketing world; I hate him. But I hate him becuase he is so bloody good at the game. Ponting is as good as he has always been, but the players around him are not good enough to replace to greats the team has lost over the last two years.

[Hords]

Originally Posted by Polyal

Bloody Bracken and his p00fy hair band is a prime example.

I can't repeat what we comment on this if we're at work with an ODI on.

[Munch]

Munchy says batsmen have to harden up!!!

Ok warner is young, but chill a bit, a flamboyant leg side shot when the balls on off stump is just dumb...

Mike Hussey... play 1 day cricket or get lost!

I would use Hodge instead of Hussey (hussey's 34, Hodge is 31 yet Hodge isn't considered for selection, yet he's the no.1 20/20 and domestic 50 over rated batsman)

If Symmo can keep his mouth shut, he'll be good..

Bowlers are ok, if we set a decent score last night >300 like the pitch suggested, the bolwers would've had something to defend...

$600k salary to bat and you consistantly fail... forget the reputation of the player, go with FORM!

munchy out!

[phoenix99]

the next match will be very interesting...South Africa have won the series and I have a feeling a few players will be rested to make way for the others who haven't had much match time...If the Aussies don't win, there will be a lot of very concerned people!!

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by Gambit

Didn't Ponting debut when he was 19?

20. Though he is still the exception in the Australian team over the last 40 years.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by DoreSlamR

Ponting wasn't under fire when they were winning was he?

His decisions on the field had always been scruitinised closely because they didn't seem to make much sense to those on the other side of the rope.

I wouldn't call for his head as a captain or as a batsmen as I haven't a clue who would be a suitable replacement. I just don't think his captaining style, presence or decision making ability on the field is particularly inspiring - but as I said, could be a drawback from having men like Border, Taylor and Waugh precede him.

[phoenix99]

Remember Ponting has always had a brains trust (McGrath, Warnie, Gilly) but now he is on his own and his captaining decisions come into the limelight

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by Munch

Mike Hussey... play 1 day cricket or get lost!

I would use Hodge instead of Hussey (hussey's 34, Hodge is 31 yet Hodge isn't considered for selection, yet he's the no.1 20/20 and domestic 50 over rated batsman)

Are you kidding?!

Do you realise that Hussey is averaging ~60 for the time he's been in the team? His average was hovering around 80 at one stage, 2 years in. He's 1 run less in average than Ponting over the same period.

It's such a shame that it took this long for Hussey to get a run because he's an absolute class batsmen. I'd prefer to see him out of the 1 day side and saved solely for test matches. He deserves his place, such a shame it came when he was 31.

Katich, now there's a pick that still baffles me.