CRICKET Australia v West Indies

[1910]

Notice how you had to go to 1993 to do that. Show me anyone at shield level that has an average greater than 40 (over a big enough period to be relevant) that isn’t in the test team. Green, Pucovski and Hardie I think are the only ones. Says it all really. It’s not the same landscape where batters were chucking out 40+ averages non stop and not getting a run. That stat is more reflective in our bowlers where we have an endless crop of great bowlers still.

I can accept your stats for how you see it, pitiful. But they aren’t pitiful on Nathans behalf they are pitiful for the state of shield cricket. 1993 respectfully is not relevant anymore. I get the point and it’s a great insight but not relevant to Nathan or now. Neither the landscape of shield cricket or test cricket is the same.

Firstly what selector on this planet is looking at what he did back at Qld and making a decision around that with very few consistent opportunities at like the age of 20 to 22. Give the bloke a break that’s not a pre-requisite for the test side. They can’t all be Cameron Green with a high average and picked by 22. He has got his average up to 34 now which isn’t that shy of some of the most successful players of the past 10 years that are still playing (which is pitiful for shield and Australia) but I don’t get the need to hate on this bloke who has scored massive runs at every level below state (Juniors, 1st grade, 2nd XI) and now it’s clicking at state level. The very fact he has played 26 games of shield cricket at 24 is usually a pretty good indication of your ability these days. Not to many batters younger than 25 getting a consistent run let alone becoming a top batsman in the comp. He took long enough to become established that his true ability is being brought down by his early career efforts where he struggled to find his feet quickly.

I can’t see how a 24 year old averaging 50 halfway through his second season of playing consistently at shield level is vice-captain of SA (will be captain soon in my eyes) has captained Aus A and is second highest run scorer in shield this season not to mention excellent fielder and handy spin bowler isn’t a top level talent because of what he did when he was 20/21. He has got it all and when he has proven that he can dominate every level before this when he finds himself in the top run scorers early in his career I think it’s a pretty safe bet to say this dude is going to be a prolific scorer in Sheffield shield and if he continues it on for a bit longer he will be in the Test side. Through no fault of his own he is already in relative contention. I can’t see a single player other than Hardie and Renshaw getting picked before him. Maybe they would reshuffle the order and chuck Bancroft or Harris in before him as well but that’s about it. 34 is a fair reflection of his career so far. 26 games in with a 34 average not undenying selection stuff but when you have consistently improved at state level to a season average of 50 over midway through and having been a mass run-scorer at lower levels you most certainly are a promising prospect whose stats aren’t as bad as they would otherwise suggest. Like I said 11 more runs in 2 innings and he would be looked upon a lot more favourably.

Under 25 these days is the new youngster category and he is coming up to 25. No more excuses from here on and from now everything he does at a high level should be what counts and looked upon favourably. He hasn’t put to many foot’s wrong in the last 18 months just has to score more big scores and more consistently. He has that aura about him and I reckon it won’t be long and it will be hard to deny him a spot in the team. If he was just averaging 34 this season fine I’d get the argument but he has improved heaps from even 18 months ago let alone when he debuted.

He’s a good egg what happened in 93’ and what happened back at QLD are irrelevant. If he drops off fair enough on the criticism but he hasn’t dropped off yet he has continually improved. He will play test cricket and relatively soon in my opinion.

I didn't have to go back to 93, I just did because it shows a lot of younger players.

You've missed the point- again.

McSweeny's 501 runs would have seen him come 30th in the 1993 Shield runs.

In 23/24 it's second. You don't see an issue there?

 

[Sproj]

I didn't have to go back to 93, I just did because it shows a lot of younger players.

You've missed the point- again.

McSweeny's 501 runs would have seen him come 30th in the 1993 Shield runs.

In 23/24 it's second. You don't see an issue there?

Did you read his post? He clearly said he did see an issue there.

Regardless, his point stands. Regardless of whether you have 80 Bradmans running around or 80 McSweeneys, at the end of the day, a test side needs to be put out and you have to choose the best available. At present, there is a dearth of actually good batting talent, McSweeney is one of the best not in the team at present...unless you want to give Wade a 120th go at almost retirement age?

 

[1910]

Did you read his post? He clearly said he did see an issue there.

Then proceeded to write 400000 words about how it's not an issue.

 

[Sproj]

Then proceeded to write 400000 words about how it's not an issue.

The point being made was pretty clear.

You'd love to 6 Bradmans in your top 6, Gilchrist at 7, Warne at 8 and Cummins, McGrath and Lillee as your bowlers forever but it simply isn't possible. There is no point comparing the best players not to the 90s, they are a totally different generation and the best FC players now aren't as good as the best then but you still have to pick from your best available.

From that 90s era, any of Bevan, Siddons, Law, Love, M.Hussey, Hodge, etc would walk into this team now and McSweeney wouldn't be spoken about whatsoever as a contender for once the current blokes retire but that isn't the era we are in.

 

[1910]

The point being made was pretty clear.

You'd love to 6 Bradmans in your top 6, Gilchrist at 7, Warne at 8 and Cummins, McGrath and Lillee as your bowlers forever but it simply isn't possible. There is no point comparing the best players not to the 90s, they are a totally different generation and the best FC players now aren't as good as the best then but you still have to pick from your best available.

From that 90s era, any of Bevan, Siddons, Law, Love, M.Hussey, Hodge, etc would walk into this team now and McSweeney wouldn't be spoken about whatsoever as a contender for once the current blokes retire but that isn't the era we are in.

The issue isn't wish we had a Warne I am not pining for the good old days; the issue is why is the system not producing players like that anymore?

Why has the bar gone from average 60 to average 30. Why are State players so old now?

A spot in the Test team and we couldn't find one young player that was thought of ready or nearly ready to play Test cricket or could learn on the job at least.

Is it the break in the middle of the season?
Are players playing too long- Warner is 37 so the guy replacing him is 30 instead of 23.

There has to be a reason.

It's not about six Bradman's those guys on that list from 1993 aren't in the Test side they are the Sweeney's of 1993. Hayden just got back from an Ashes tour where he couldn't get a run and wasn't wanted.

 

[Browny]

T20 and other similar comps dominating the schedule and the Shield being an after thought would be a reason

 

[Fitzy]

The issue isn't wish we had a Warne I am not pining for the good old days; the issue is why is the system not producing players like that anymore?

Why has the bar gone from average 60 to average 30. Why are State players so old now?

A spot in the Test team and we couldn't find one young player that was thought of ready or nearly ready to play Test cricket or could learn on the job at least.

Is it the break in the middle of the season?
Are players playing too long- Warner is 37 so the guy replacing him is 30 instead of 23.

There has to be a reason.

It's not about six Bradman's those guys on that list from 1993 aren't in the Test side they are the Sweeney's of 1993. Hayden just got back from an Ashes tour where he couldn't get a run and wasn't wanted.

You are 100% right the system clearly went wayward because only Aaron Hardie and Will Pucovski average over 40 of players not currently in the test team. Thats a problem. But that’s not Nathan’s problem. That’s the countries problem. No point comparing his 501 runs @ 50 to a 1993 youngster because they have more shear runs on the board. Nathan is doing what a top calibre batsman should be doing. So is Cameron Bancroft and Beau Webster this year. What’s everyone else doing? Not Nathan’s problem. Has nothing to do with Nathan’s credentials what so ever. Any 24 year old that can average 50 in a year (he is 3/5ths of the way through so far) with a dramatically improving average of 34 (on trajectory to be 36.5 by seasons end) is not a big issue. That’s the point here that you aren’t understanding (again)Nathan McSweeneys average this year stacks up to those players in that year. Everyone else’s apart from a few don’t. You’re picking the wrong player or even age group of players to direct this inability to produce talent

Your tangent is mis-directed at Nathan and my opinion of him. There is not ever going to be a steady influx of high calibre low 20 something year olds. So many factors come into this rather than just straight shear runs. You could just as easily say why is there no 23 year old in the test team right now because there was such and such time ago. Well that’s because there is a lack of opportunity because the 30+ players are currently the best in the world. There is more than just age and runs scored attributing to this. I agree there is a problem with developing quality batsman in this country at the First Class level but that most definitely is not representative in Nathan McSweeney when he is averaging 50 in his second full year. The country has Cameron Green, Aaron Hardie, Nathan McSweeney, Teague Wyllie, Oliver Davies, Jake Fraser-McGurk, Campbell Kellaway, Will Pucovski, Joel Davies, Sam Konstas, Jack Clayton, Ashley Chandrasinghe and the likes all coming through. Not there fault that Peter Handscomb, Cameron Bancroft, Marcus Harris, Nic Maddinson, Hilton Cartwright etc etc to have all been the best of an average crop not to make and stay inthe test side (Labuschagne, Head and Marsh) and yet still be average themselves. That’s the real problem the fact that 25+ year old cricketers just aren’t very good at a first class level in this country. That’s the problem here. Not Nathan McSweeney’s career average of 34 because he has a slow start to his career at 20, that’s to be expected.

There’s 2 teams no player wants to touch with a 20ft pole in SA and Tasmania direct your attention to that. That leaves 4 teams to essentially develop all the talent and whilst NSW has all the Aus players the next level of players down are literally asshole and performing ass hole. For the glory state historically of cricket that’s not ideal. That’s then 3 teams producing consistently high quality results at state level which means only 3 teams producing results good enough for test talent to thrive in. The problem is highlighted right there. Also FC and test cricket have to contend with privatised white ball leagues taking top tier talents attention away from red ball cricket. Money will always talk but it appears the youngsters I referred to earlier are starting to set there eyes back on the coveted red ball format which is always good for test cricket in this country.

 

[Sproj]

The issue isn't wish we had a Warne I am not pining for the good old days; the issue is why is the system not producing players like that anymore?

Why has the bar gone from average 60 to average 30. Why are State players so old now?

A spot in the Test team and we couldn't find one young player that was thought of ready or nearly ready to play Test cricket or could learn on the job at least.

Is it the break in the middle of the season?
Are players playing too long- Warner is 37 so the guy replacing him is 30 instead of 23.

There has to be a reason.

It's not about six Bradman's those guys on that list from 1993 aren't in the Test side they are the Sweeney's of 1993. Hayden just got back from an Ashes tour where he couldn't get a run and wasn't wanted.

The issue isn't rocket science, just look at India to find the answer. They have the IPL and as far as I understand, their players aren't allowed to play in other T20 leagues, so they still have an emphasis on FC. They are now churning out multiple batsmen who average 50 / 60 regularly at FC level. This is making them such a strong team as a result.

Meanwhile, all the other countries are churning out guys who can hit a bit or bowl a bit and then everyone wants to sign them up to play in pointless leagues around the world. Not only is their T20 on all the time, there are now T10s and The Hundred with take up more time on the cricket calendar and offer more money than any FC comp does.

If T20 was around in the 90s, most of those blokes would have been playing them instead of working on their FC games. Plus, there used to be a clear demarcation between the long format and the short forms. Now they are all happening at the same time, so there is no opportunity for the young guys coming through to spend any significant time focusing on the one format before switching.

You've also now got guys like Sams, David, Lynn, etc who knock back state contracts to go in search of big paydays in said pointless T20 comps around the world now.

If most countries are not careful, they'll all end up like the West Indies and South Africa where the best of the best become mercenaries instead of test players in the near future.

I wonder if the way England is playing tests now might end up becoming the norm to make tests more attractive to non-purists.

 

[1910]

You are 100% right the system clearly went wayward because only Aaron Hardie and Will Pucovski average over 40 of players not currently in the test team. Thats a problem. But that’s not Nathan’s problem. That’s the countries problem. No point comparing his 501 runs @ 50 to a 1993 youngster because they have more shear runs on the board. Nathan is doing what a top calibre batsman should be doing. So is Cameron Bancroft and Beau Webster this year. What’s everyone else doing? Not Nathan’s problem. Has nothing to do with Nathan’s credentials what so ever. Any 24 year old that can average 50 in a year (he is 3/5ths of the way through so far) with a dramatically improving average of 34 (on trajectory to be 36.5 by seasons end) is not a big issue. That’s the point here that you aren’t understanding (again)Nathan McSweeneys average this year stacks up to those players in that year. Everyone else’s apart from a few don’t. You’re picking the wrong player or even age group of players to direct this inability to produce talent

Your tangent is mis-directed at Nathan and my opinion of him. There is not ever going to be a steady influx of high calibre low 20 something year olds. So many factors come into this rather than just straight shear runs. You could just as easily say why is there no 23 year old in the test team right now because there was such and such time ago. Well that’s because there is a lack of opportunity because the 30+ players are currently the best in the world. There is more than just age and runs scored attributing to this. I agree there is a problem with developing quality batsman in this country at the First Class level but that most definitely is not representative in Nathan McSweeney when he is averaging 50 in his second full year. The country has Cameron Green, Aaron Hardie, Nathan McSweeney, Teague Wyllie, Oliver Davies, Jake Fraser-McGurk, Campbell Kellaway, Will Pucovski, Joel Davies, Sam Konstas, Jack Clayton, Ashley Chandrasinghe and the likes all coming through. Not there fault that Peter Handscomb, Cameron Bancroft, Marcus Harris, Nic Maddinson, Hilton Cartwright etc etc to have all been the best of an average crop not to make and stay inthe test side (Labuschagne, Head and Marsh) and yet still be average themselves. That’s the real problem the fact that 25+ year old cricketers just aren’t very good at a first class level in this country. That’s the problem here. Not Nathan McSweeney’s career average of 34 because he has a slow start to his career at 20, that’s to be expected.

There’s 2 teams no player wants to touch with a 20ft pole in SA and Tasmania direct your attention to that. That leaves 4 teams to essentially develop all the talent and whilst NSW has all the Aus players the next level of players down are literally asshole and performing ass hole. For the glory state historically of cricket that’s not ideal. That’s then 3 teams producing consistently high quality results at state level which means only 3 teams producing results good enough for test talent to thrive in. The problem is highlighted right there. Also FC and test cricket have to contend with privatised white ball leagues taking top tier talents attention away from red ball cricket. Money will always talk but it appears the youngsters I referred to earlier are starting to set there eyes back on the coveted red ball format which is always good for test cricket in this country.

You're ranting and emotions, are first class unlike the young batting in this country.

McSweeney was used because he represents what I am talking about- been playing since 2018, averages 34 but being spoken about as a Test player.

He's pretty much a classic 2024 First Class state player in a nutshell.

It's not a personal attack on him, he's just the poster boy for my issue- insert pretty much anyone.

The issue was obvious this week when the debate is who is less crap to play for Australia. Not who is the best but who has less damage and problems.

In a team where the youngest person is Marnus at 29- Green back in stands out. 24 and not a player anywhere near his age ready or demanding. A whole generation has missed something.

That's the point demanding, not potential not oh maybe if he can get his average up by 20 but demanding cold hard runs.

 

[Fitzy]

You're ranting and emotions, are first class unlike the young batting in this country.

McSweeney was used because he represents what I am talking about- been playing since 2018, averages 34 but being spoken about as a Test player.

He's pretty much a classic 2024 First Class state player in a nutshell.

It's not a personal attack on him, he's just the poster boy for my issue- insert pretty much anyone.

The issue was obvious this week when the debate is who is less crap to play for Australia. Not who is the best but who has less damage and problems.

In a team where the youngest person is Marnus at 29- Green back in stands out. 24 and not a player anywhere near his age ready or demanding. A whole generation has missed something.

That's the point demanding, not potential not oh maybe if he can get his average up by 20 but demanding cold hard runs.

A 24 year old averaging 50 3/5ths of the way through a shield season is always going to end up in the speculation of coming into the test team and that’s been the case for a long time.

The test team shows pretty clearly that to perform at a high standard your average doesn’t need to be in the 60’s anymore. A top 5 batsman needs to be averaging more than 40 in my opinion and if the season average is in the 50’s you can excuse whatever happened earlier in there career, that’s just how it is. 6 gets a bit of leniency due to style of play these days but still preferably over 40. Crickets a rare sport in that what happens in your past is always, always held over you regardless of how long ago or whether you were in the infancy of your career rather than current ability. After a certain point sure it represents consistency but at 24 come off it.

Players have to ply there trade across 3 formats at the same time. Gone are the days of averaging incredible amounts of runs we are now in an environment where one game can be red ball the next two white and then red again in the space of 2 and a half weeks and then in a month you have to perform at T20’s for 2 months and then continue the same patch of form in those other formats from 2 months ago or you are deemed shit.

When you have a bloke averaging 50 in a season at 24 don’t you worry, regardless of there career average they will jump into selection. It would very much at his stage of career be acceptable to just be plodding along with barely a 30 season average batting 5 or 6 in that SA environment like 90% of the batters older than him are doing (if they are even playing). He has scored 150 runs more than the bloke who is 13th man in the Aus side and has an average of 50 at 24 that always, always, always gets you on the selectors note sheet for the next meeting. Doesn’t hurt when your list A average is nearly 40 and t20 average is nearly 30 with you being the anchor of the undefeated team in big bash. That never hurts either.

No 24 year old doing what he has done so far with the season he is having doesn’t end up in the discussion no matter how realistic the ascension. The issue at hand is not that he is in the discussion it’s that nobody else is. McSweeney is full and well deserving of his spot in the discussion.

McSweeney isn’t your regular first class of this era if anything he is showing hope of the new era that’s to come alongside Green and Hardie. He has shown heaps more relatively early in his career than a lot of these blokes with test caps have in there supposed peaks. Nathan is a fine candidate there are others above the age of 25 that truely represent what is wrong with the development of batters in the last decade. Not Nathan’s average of 34 because it took him till he was 23 to find his feet that’s not representative of our issue. Nathan has just had a unique path to scoring at a high rate for a season than most do. The bloke averaging 50 for the season should never be the poster boy for shit development of batters in the earlier generation of players.

I 100% agree with your notion that the ability of cricket players at the international level is not high enough at a big enough production rate but the 24 year old with a 50 average this season isn’t representative of that because a rugby league forum have chucked up his name. Thats just the reality. Its represented in the massive number of blokes who have test caps over the last 8 years and none of them average above 40.

Anyway I dont think either of us are budging on our stance and as much as I love arguing about cricket I love my Friday evenings even more so I wont keep arguing this from here on out.

 

[1910]

Fun fact.

Over the past 11 years Smith and Khawaja have been Australia’s most bountiful batting partnership with 10 century stands, and 2470 runs at an average of 58.

 

[Sproj]

Fun fact.

Over the past 11 years Smith and Khawaja have been Australia’s most bountiful batting partnership with 10 century stands, and 2470 runs at an average of 58.

Even more than Labs and Smith? It would be interesting to compare them over the same time span (I guess Labs is about 5 years only).

 

[1910]

Even more than Labs and Smith? It would be interesting to compare them over the same time span (I guess Labs is about 5 years only).

2242 at 60.

 

[Sproj]

2242 at 60.

Thanks :)

Pretty amazing that Uzzie and Smith have almost as good a record over longer, it is a bit of a surprise to me. Probably highlights that Uzzie has been pretty underrated over the years.

 

[Big Del]

McSweeney was used because he represents what I am talking about- been playing since 2018, averages 34 but being spoken about as a Test player.

I`ll see your Mc Sweeney and raise you a Labuscagne .
There your argument falls over . How about a David Warner who had never played 1st class cricket ??

 

[1910]

I`ll see your Mc Sweeney and raise you a Labuscagne .
There your argument falls over . How about a David Warner who had never played 1st class cricket ??

It makes a good story but it's not true, Warner played Shield two years before his Test debut.

Got 165 in his second game against Tasmania. Had Chappell's support from the start.

I acknowledged that it has worked at times, Healy is a great example but to think if you pick a keeper that's played eight games for his state will always end up the keeper of the century probably shows your level of cricket knowledge.

That is one of the great mysteries of cricket for me but it always interests me. When you speak to selectors or players they can't even articulate why- they just knew.

Steve Waugh- 11 matches for NSW-605 runs
Langer-14 matches for WA-1121 runs
Healy- 8 matches for Qld-19 catches
Warne- 7 matches for Victoria- 26 wickets
McGrath- 8 matches for NSW- 32 wickets

Really none of those players should have made their Test debut.

Cricket is unique too, if I said I was going to pick an NRL winger that had never scored a try in his eight-game career, but he'd score three on debut in Origin you'd be laughed at. Say it in cricket and people think how wise.

 

[Big Del]

Apology I got it confused with this stat .

January 11, 2009
Age 22, Warner makes his international debut in a T20I against South Africa before having played a first-class match.

 

[Fitzy]

Pretty poor they keep bowling shit to the lower order. At least the commentators are calling it out that will lead to a bit of pressure to approach it differently. It’s just not good enough when it happens every innings from a team that can knock over any top order in the world pretty easily.