Ill Chicken
Premiership Player
Ha. You're a disgrace.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Have selectors have lost us another series...
- Thread starter gbatman
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
If you want to have a sensible discussion you will be treated with respect.
I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with someone having a different opinion on the issue. I would be really interested in someone who put forward a contrary view in an intelligent way. Spacking out and blindly screaming patently ridiculous points over and over again is not an intelligent argument.
I fully agree that they make poor decisions sometimes; that sometimes they stick with some players too long and seem to cycle through some others too quickly. I also think they stick with the like-for-like thing too rigidly sometimes. There are loads of grey areas.
But if you repeatedly act silly I’ll end up thinking of you as a time waster and start making fun of you.
Or perhaps I should just card the smartarse armchair commentators.
Amused spectator is a more accurate description.
Haven't seen a more pointlessly repetitive ding dong like that since Gunnar and just_maybe used to pollute these forums.
Yeah, just yankin’ yer chain.
I do get really sick of people constantly shooting their mouths off about this stuff without backing their arguments up. Just trying in a small way to readdress the balance.
Ill Chicken
Premiership Player
If from you I want a sensible discussion? You're the supposed competent moderator that uses "kicking & screaming" as a case in point, then further says a point is invalid by saying it's not worthy of a response. You then request that for a forum member to garner respect, posts must first be approved by you.
I've stuck to what I've originally said, ignored your petty antics and that errs on being repetitive because you can't answer the question. The complete time you've used more diversion and filler tactics to subvert the original discussion and you continue to do so now. You've pin-pointed my supposed emotional state regarding this disagreement as the main topic in your last four posts.
Ridiculous.
Mate, I have comprehensively answered your basic points. I have ignored many of the others as many of them are frankly preposterous.
Sorry but if you are going to insist things like “there is nothing at all indicating that he should be dropped” about a player who takes 1 for 200 at 4.5 then how do I take you seriously?
Sure you might be able to argue that maybe the selectors could have taken other factors into account and not dropped him. No problems.
Otherwise what is the point in me bothering to make a constructive counter argument if you are just going to talk over the top of it with silliness? It does not look like you are interested in genuinely discussing the issue; it just looks like you are trying to ram your opinion down people’s throats.
I have spoken about what I see as their core principals numerous times but I still don’t think you even have a basic understanding of what I have said. How many times do I attempt to do it till I just give up and start making fun of you?
If you slow down, take a breath, and actually discuss the issue in good faith then there would not be an issue.
Sorry but if you are going to insist things like “there is nothing at all indicating that he should be dropped” about a player who takes 1 for 200 at 4.5 then how do I take you seriously?
Sure you might be able to argue that maybe the selectors could have taken other factors into account and not dropped him. No problems.
Otherwise what is the point in me bothering to make a constructive counter argument if you are just going to talk over the top of it with silliness? It does not look like you are interested in genuinely discussing the issue; it just looks like you are trying to ram your opinion down people’s throats.
I have spoken about what I see as their core principals numerous times but I still don’t think you even have a basic understanding of what I have said. How many times do I attempt to do it till I just give up and start making fun of you?
If you slow down, take a breath, and actually discuss the issue in good faith then there would not be an issue.
No, they don't.
Which part of the plan involved dropping Phil Hughes after 3 bad innings?
Which part of the plan thought that trying a different spin bowler on each Tour would be a great way to develop players?
Which part of the plan suggested that Andrew McDonald should go to England instead of a specialist batsman, and never even be considered in the mix to play a Test?
Which part of the plan demanded that Stuart Clark be withdrawn from a County stint to play one meaningless ODI?
Which part of the plan allowed Brett Lee to resume through the IPL, instead of doing it properly?
Which part of the plan thought that Mitchell & Hilfy & Siddle wouldn't need more time to acclimatise to English conditions?
Beau Casson, was the plan for him to go on Tours, be dropped from the Touring Party and apparently afforded no explanation or advice from the Selectors?
You haven't refuted any of these points, you constantly contradict yourself - and you're more guilty of the crap you accuse myself and Ill Chicken of than either of us are.
Contradiction again.
How is dropping Phil Hughes for Shane Watson anything more than a panicked, short term fix?
Same question regarding Krezja and his lack of opportunity.
Long term stability of the team is more important than winning, is it? The lack of stability in the team comes purely from the Selectors doing what I've said above; rotating spinners through the team on a tour by tour basis, and dropping a kid who just destroyed the South Africans, at home.
Standing strongly behind an established player when he's been completely and hopelessly out of form for a year, maybe more, is stupid, yes. When a player of Hussey's calibre gets repeatedly clean bowled after leaving a ball, then I'd suggest there are serious problems. How was he a key player when he'd been averaging something like 25-30 in the lead up to the Series, and continued to fail?
I'm all for backing key players - but it's not a black or white issue in the manner you frame it; you back them to a point, based on their form, based on the form of the players vying for their spot and based on the form of the rest of the side.
You don't blindly keep a guy in when he's been struggling for over 12 months because he's an established player when there are better options available, and you need the player to be performing.
They make it a lot easier.
AB, Fleming, Mark Waugh and numerous other intelligent, experienced Cricketers were almost in a state of disbelief during the Ashes and our selections.
Again, crap, you're taking my argument, completely exaggerating it and then trying to use it to prove your point. If they're going to put a player in, back him. Like I've suggested they should've done with Phil Hughes. But again, you try and make it black/white; not acknowledging that they are different scenarios.
Or does your argument about backing players only apply to established one?
Krezja's stats prove nothing of the sort - he was playing in a country where they are brought up on spin; compare them to Hauritz's tour statistics (which I linked, but you don't mention), and apparently they were good enough to demand instant selection?
Just quietly, Hauritz's stats were against inferior opposition, and they were arguably worse.
A total passenger in first two Tests - what a shock; a guy who wont even bowl himself any more than he has to in Domestic Cricket couldn't make an impact at Test Level. White shouldn't have been on Tour, let alone playing.
Krezja started bowling dramatically better in the nets?
Again, your last little diatribe is pointless and irrelevant. If you can't argue without having to wildly exaggerate and reinterpret my statements, that's fine, but don't twist them to suit your argument and then use something I've never said to apparently contradict me.
Further, you also completely failed to address the fact that Krezja was dropped after a bad performance at the WACA (a graveyard for spinners) and has been barely mentioned since, which contradicts your suggestion that they have a long term plan that they're sticking to.
In the real world, people are accountable for their decisions.
There might not always be a 'right' answer; but that doesn't mean there isn't one that is the most right.
Good advice.
But they're happy to persist with Hussey, rush an unfit/formless Symonds into the team, and an unfit Brett Lee back into the side?
I'm pretty sure you completely failed to address the fact that Lee/Symonds were pitchforked into the side when both of them were complete liabilities, and arguably cost us a Test.
So we can lose multiple Series at the expense of the senior guys, just not the younger ones?
They might be - but they're failing miserably at it.
The bold part is a little ironic considering your first sentence. Where have I ever suggested that?
No - again, I just became sick of having an argument that was the equivalent of smashing my head into a brick wall, especially when you cherry pick things to address (Krezja's poor Tour Matches) and ignore other things which are relevant (Hauritz's poorer Tour Matches)
So if they never described him as an All-Rounder, he suddenly isn't one anymore?
I'm pretty sure I saw Ponting throw him the ball a few times, even though he struggled with it. Also seems to be doing quite a bit of bowling in the Champions Trophy - have they listed him as an All-Rounder again?
If he was on Tour as a batsman, it was a mistake, if McDonald was on Tour as the All-Rounder, it was a mistake.
The point that I've made repeatedly is that our Touring Party was unbalanced from day one. All credit to Watson, he did quite well, but if he's the only specialist batsman we take on Tour, there is something wrong.
Which is something Ricky Ponting actually said after the Saffer Series, that we went in a specialist batsman too light - I think he'd know.
Good analysis.
Again, the black or white thing - I don't dispute they'll always get some calls wrong and I accept that, my concern is that these guys don't seem to learn from their previous mistakes, and get a hell of a lot more wrong than you'd expect from people in their position.
Basically everything I've criticised the Selectors for; do the opposite.
Of course it is - but Trevor Hohns managed to make it look relatively easy.
It is a difficult job, made even more difficult by the fact that the people doing it are incompetent of doing it at the required level?
We've lost 3 Test Series in the last 12 months - I might not have all of the answers, but the current Selection Panel sure as hell don't.
Yep.
The plan is that they keep the core of the team together and develope the young players who have shown genuine potential to be long term test prospects.
Naturally they tinker at the edges of the team to suit conditions and to try new players out.
As we are clearly not tanking I don’t think a viable plan at the moment is to pick a fringe spinner and to leave him in the team no matter how poorly they perform. Our pace attack is still very raw and inconsistent. Once they get some more experience and stability we may be able to be a bit more adventurous with our spinner selections.
We have been through the players preparation tours stuff before and the selectors do not set the itinerary.
God, how many times do I have to say that I thought they dropped Hughes too quickly?
Why do you think I disrespect your argument so much when I have acknowledged this about a thousand times but you bring it up post after post, after post, after post?
What is the point if you just do not listen to anything.
I also have said that I agree that they have stuck with Hussey for too long.
But saying that I think the team has been extremely stable. We were getting smashed by the South Africans, I reckon a team with a younger less experienced core would have totally capitulated. But despite the fact that we are in a massive period of transition we still have a hard core group of seasoned professional players who are as hard as nails and who can fight back when the going gets really brutal.
I totally understand what you are saying about holding onto players too long, but I think there is another side to the story. To me it is an issue of balancing the whole picture not just looking at one aspect of it.
It's not as simple as you are trying to paint it.
And plenty were not "in a state of disbelief". Tabloid stuff.
Yeah the point I am making is that I think you are completely exaggerating the arguments. I was being facetious to point out how easy it is to paint every selection decision as being outrageous.
The other point is that that your approach to Hughes (yes Hughes again) is completely black/white. Put him in the team no matter what, there are no shades of grey in that.
I am the one who is constantly arguing that there are different scenarios. Whereas the only ‘plan’ you seem to want is one in which young spinners are kept in the team no matter how poorly they perform.
How many times have I said they back their senior players to the hilt? Young fringe players are not senior players.
Again how many times do I say it until you listen to the most basic fundamental point.
It’s not my policy, it’s theirs. You may not like it, but that is not the point. It is part of their overall strategy and plan.
...And given the current circumstances I think it is basically a sound principal. Although it is completely fair enough to disagree with a number of the decisions around the edges.
Go read some of the reports of Krezja’s tour bowling. He was going at 10 an over a number some points.
The other thing is that it is completely pointless to compare player’s performances in isolation. You hear “Player x had this average and got picked, player y had the same average but did not” all the time. Way too simplistic, there are loads more factors and most of them revolve around the team’s overall situation, just ask Stuart Law.
That is unless you just want to reduce everything down to black and white statements.
Yes started bowling dramatically better in the nets, was reported at the time.
Mate you breathlessly insist that they are terrible selectors every single opportunity you get. Every time it is attack, attack, attack black and white.
I am perfectly happy to call bad selections when I see them. Have not seen you do the opposite or acknowledge that there is another side to the coin on any of the selections.
I have never argued that all the selections are right. Just that the majority of them are understandable given the circumstances.
Again I have pointed out the basic principals they follow time and time again. Yes there are sometimes contradictions, but far and away they stick to their plan. I still have not seen anything form you that substantially contradicts this.
Make a balanced argument and you will get 1 back...Or go on, tell me all about Hughes for the millionth time.
Yeah...that's right...I have never, ever addressed the Krezja situation have I???
Come to think of it I don't think I have ever addressed the Hughes situation either.
How about no matter what I write you respond endlessly saying I have never addressed the Hughes or Krezja situations? Then every now and then you can throw in a complaint about me not taking your arguments seriously.
Seriously dude chill out.
You have completely failed to explain why Hughes was dropped; therefore everything you have ever said in your entire life is wrong.
Ill Chicken
Premiership Player
Pretty much.
courtjester
Cancelled
If I was the Australian test selector (as I bloody well should be!) you wouldn't be having this argument. Because the team would look as it should, and it would have won the Ashes:
Chris Rogers
Phil Hughes
Ricky Ponting
Michael Clarke
Simon Katich
Marcus North
Tim Paine
Mitchell Johnson
Nathan Hauritz
Peter Siddle
Ben Hilfenhaus
Stuart Clark
Shane Watson
Brad Hodge
Doug Bollinger
Graham Manou
Chris Rogers
Phil Hughes
Ricky Ponting
Michael Clarke
Simon Katich
Marcus North
Tim Paine
Mitchell Johnson
Nathan Hauritz
Peter Siddle
Ben Hilfenhaus
Stuart Clark
Shane Watson
Brad Hodge
Doug Bollinger
Graham Manou
Ill Chicken
Premiership Player
If Paine was a bit more explosive he might just be able to keep Haddin out of the side come the series in Australia.
Meh only 2 players different from the last tour. Given how amazingly bad our selectors are I would expect massive changes to this team.
So if you make even 1 change to this team in the middle of a tour (even if the team is getting thrashed) do I get to yell about what a terrible selector you are?
What about Phil Jaques aren’t you destroying his career? Same with Watto, he averaged 50, totally unfair; he will never recover from this. What do these guys have to do???
Reckon I am in for an easy job here.
Good to see you haven't resorted to posting like a petulant child.
Of course I was being completely facetious, but in reality how is it different to your approach?
When you were talking about Krejza you totally ignored every other issue. The one and only thing that mattered is that he play numerous consecutive games no matter what.
Show me where you ever acknowledged that anything else was ever an important consideration?
Why can’t I ignore every other issue and say that Watto has been put in the team and so now must be given multiple games?
His record since being recalled completely shits on Krejza’s from a massive height. How are you being at all consistent if you want him dropped?
If you put up “coz he is bullshit man” type stuff I will take the piss out of your argument.
Actually show you actually understand that there are multiple layers to each situation then I won’t take the piss out of your argument and will treat it with the respect it deserved.
Stop acting like a petulant child and I will stop treating your arguments like they are coming from one.
Ill Chicken
Premiership Player
I'd rather it stay open, the quality of the moderator is on show for all to see.
Oh please put the violins away.
You are a big boy, you happily dished out just as much as you were served. Now all of a sudden you are playing the victim.
All you wanted to do was rant and rave, you were not the slightest bit interested in a proper discussion about the issues.
You are a big boy, you happily dished out just as much as you were served. Now all of a sudden you are playing the victim.
All you wanted to do was rant and rave, you were not the slightest bit interested in a proper discussion about the issues.
Ill Chicken
Premiership Player
As you can see.
courtjester
Cancelled
Why dont the warring parties in here post the squad they think should have been taken to England....just out of interest!
Constantly repeating it doesn't make it true.
- Status
Similar threads
