TOPIC:

I have set up this thread because of the profound continuity of eccentric test sections which have occurred in recent times; but it is targetted too, at selections throughout the ages which have raised an eyebrow or two.

There are loads, but I will start us off with the 1981 tour of England.

The potty thing about this team was that the side contained just four fast bowllers for a full tour of England; they were bound to get tired and break down; in large measure too, the fast men were an unknown quantity, Alderman had not played test cricket, Hogg and Lawson, for their part, had not bowlled in England.

Matters could have been made so much easier had they simply included Pascoe as well, whom had played in Australia's last test against India.

I believe that Pascoe was troubled by a knee injury & opted to miss the 1981 tour to get it right. I remember Peter Taylor being plucked from obscurity when he was selected to play for Australia in in the 5th Ashes test in Sydney on January 10, 1987, despite having only played a handful of games for NSW. He did end up being a very serviceable player, but his initial selection was way out of left field.

Firstly, GS should have defended the Ashes he had lost in 1977. I do have some sympathy for the selectors of the day, in so far as, the Shield figures of the day are very revealling. Both trevor chappell and Kent, for example, were very high up in the averages. In this case, whom do you take if not those two?

ArkRoyal wrote: I have set up this thread because of the profound continuity of eccentric test sections which have occurred in recent times; but it is targetted too, at selections throughout the ages which have raised an eyebrow or two.

There are loads, but I will start us off with the 1981 tour of England.

The potty thing about this team was that the side contained just four fast bowllers for a full tour of England; they were bound to get tired and break down; in large measure too, the fast men were an unknown quantity, Alderman had not played test cricket, Hogg and Lawson, for their part, had not bowlled in England.

Matters could have been made so much easier had they simply included Pascoe as well, whom had played in Australia's last test against India.

Good point about stupidly only taking 4 quickies to the old dart in 81 AR as we then had to call on a young raw Mike Whitney who was playing League Cricket over there at the time and he had only played a couple of first class games at that stage as one of the 4 (Hogg?) had broken down.

Great topic AR. I remember as a young man the 1970-71 ashes series when Bill Lawry was sacked as captain with one test to play ( this was also a live match as far as the ashes were concerned). He was replaced by Ian Chappell but was also dropped from the team even though he was by far the best performed Australian batsman in the series. He was replaced by another Victorian, Ken Eastwood who failed twice and never played another test. Australia lost the game by 62 runs and it could be argued that Lawrys batting may have made the difference if he had played.

In 1973 a spin bowler called John Watkins was selected after only playing a handful of games for NSW. Watkins had a serious case of stage fright when it came to the test and he could hardly hit the pitch when bowling. Some other selection doozys were Wayne Phillips in 1992 ( not the wicketkeeper from SA, this was a short Victorian batsman who replaced Geoff Marsh in a test at the WACA), Bryce Mcgain who was thrown to the wolves in South Africa and Chris Matthews from WA who was a great Shield bowler but completely lost his control in test cricket. I'm sure that there are lots of other examples. One thing that the selectors cannot judge is temperament until the player is put into pressure situations.

Of course the selectors do pick a diamond out sometimes, a great example of that was Peter (who?) Taylor

BH -- that is right -- Whitney did okay considerring the circumstances of his debut in test cricket. Had a quick look at the side which Pakistan has picked to come to Australia -- just to illustrate our point BH -- and quite correctlly, it contains five fast bowlers -- even though tours are much shorter today.

mikeh -- Bill was treatted badly by the ACB; the one good thing about it was that it was Chappell whom lost the Ashes, although, I am certain that neither would see it that way. I love Bill. In fairness to both Chappell and Lawry, as you would remember mikeh, the England side was a bloddy strong unit.

More selections to ponder:
1974-75
the absence of Boycott and Snow. The best bowller and batsman in England; we know why Boycott never travelled, but why did they not pick Snow?

GN Yallop

I have always believed he was harshlly treatted: made runs in his first test; he made an 81 against the full WI bowlling attack in 1977-8; made runs as captain against a good English attack in 1978-9; batted well in India in 79 and made 172 in Pakistan in 1980; made a 100 in England -- his only score of note; but was dropped for the following two seasons. Returned under KJ in 83-4 and dominatted. He performmed well throughout his career, and yet, often, from 79-84, the batsmen shown below were picked before him:

Toohey
Weiner
Wellham
Hookes
Walters
Dyson also batted number three at times

It would be good to have the thoughts of others.

More than likely all to do with player/officials politics AR and he wouldn't have been the only cricketer to fall victim to that old chestnut over the years.
I remember reading about the great sportsman Laurie Nash and how it was a tragedy he only played 2 Tests for Australia as many considered him the most lethal bowler in the country back in the 1930s and could have taken it right back at the Poms in the Bodyline series but Woodfull wouldn't have a bar of it. Nash was also considered one of the best footballers in the country at that time as well.
I remember Yallop made a massive 264? in a Test at the MCG in about 83/84 and yet seemed to be out of the side not long afterwards.
But getting back to the selections for this upcoming Test vs SA surely RWM was taking the piss when he remarked Jackson Bird wasn't selected because his batting wasn't deemed good enough sheesh if RWM was Chairman of Selectors around 23 years ago GD McGrath wouldn't have got a look in and we would be 500+ wickets for the poorer!

Beasley Hutton wrote: But getting back to the selections for this upcoming Test vs SA surely RWM was taking the piss when he remarked Jackson Bird wasn't selected because his batting wasn't deemed good enough sheesh if RWM was Chairman of Selectors around 23 years ago GD McGrath wouldn't have got a look in and we would be 500+ wickets for the poorer!

Marsh has been a disaster as chairman of selectors and that ridiculous statement of his about the batting credentials of a No.11 being taken into consideration for the test squad says it all. He's run the white flag up on behalf of the team before the series has even started. The sooner he pisses off the better.

BH: interesting stuff about Laurie Nash. It is true, as Australia barely had a fast bowler of note, Wall and McCormick tried hard against some very good English batting.

One of the most notorious non-selections, of course, was Sid Barnes. I believe he has the second highest test average of any Australian as a batsman, but DG refussed to pick him.

Your one hundred per cent right on Yallop. I don't think the Chappells liked him full stop, there is no other form of punctuation necessary. He got injurred against the WI, and then, GS, as a selector, apparentlly, told him he would not play for Australia again.

The Mcgrath comparison is a good one, rememmerring too, that, Marsh played with Jim Higgs, whom was possibly a worse batsman then Glenn. I will never forget him because he is the only player I have ever seen given not out due to being unable to play a bumpper from a slow seamer called, Lance Cairns.

It is good a few people are speaking out against RW, whom, as you say, will soon be gone. I feel very sorry for Meenie -- he basically said 'you can't bowl'. If he was asked about his selection, all he had to say was the lad was picked on his merits; people whom follow the game will make up their own minds about whether it was a well considerred selection.

Go back to the dropping of Garth McKenzie's dropping during the series against India or the non-seletion of Ian Brayshaw.