Talent selection vs. Talent identification

[NUFAN]

Ive recently been part of a selection process where we chose a group of kids who will be part of a cricket program throughout their 6 years of high school.

Its been a fun experience and ill definitely put my hand up for next years intake. I was just curious if you think it should be more about talent selection or talent identification? If you think it should be more about identification, what attribute would the kid (who is around 12 years old) have?

 

[cnerd123]

Just my 2 cents for what it's worth.

I'm a strong believer in picking kids who are committed and coachable at that age, rather than selecting based on skills or potential. So much of cricket is played between the ears, and raw talent can often go to waste if a kid doesn't learn quick or stay the course.

Apart from that, natural athleticism goes a long way. Kids who have good body control or who are good athletes will be able to pick up skills faster and train longer without serious injury.

 

[cnerd123]

Oh and idk how relevant this is in your situation, but sometimes it's worth keeping a kids family situation and parental support in mind for a thing like this. A less talented kid might be worth investing in if you know he comes from a home that will provide him with supplementary training and playing opportunities outside of what you can provide at the school. Would mean he is likely to close the gap on his teammates quicker than other kids can.

I'm assuming that you don't re-pick the team every year btw, and that once in the program the kid is locked in for 6 years.

 

[NUFAN]

Thanks for your opinion, worth more than 2 cents.

Thats correct, we dont repick the same guys each year, although if someone from outside the program performs in second division they have the potential to get ahead of some of the guys in the program who would move back to 2nd XI.

Being coachable is definitely a component, we had a grading sheet which had lots of areas outside just batting, bowling and fielding.

TBH i didnt factor in academics or family situation my role was to find the most talented players but the director of the program definitely does take into consideration the things you pointed out.

Looking back, im confident I picked the right players but I dont think I ranked them correctly. I sort of got excited about the guy at the final trial who made the most runs through aerielshots and bowled tidy medium fast. But the quick with the new ball had the best action Ive seen from a bowler of that age. He is going to be the best player, im sure of it now.

 

[social]

Can only speak as a father and player

Cricket is both a physical & mental game and people develop at different rates

Trying to identify a top cricketer at 12 is generally a crap shoot

Reward the kids who put in unless you have a freak talent on your hands and even then there’s no guarantee due to “life”

Social Jnr is 13, 6’2” and seriously rapid

He’s also a freak athlete

Fun fact: only reason he plays sports atm is because his Mum threatened to throw his Xbox into the river

 

[social]

Somewhat relevant to this thread

Picked Social Jr up from school today after school sport trials

He got picked in his grade’s 3rd team after playing for his state last week

Just to emphasise - one of 5 best players in state last week but not in top 20 in his class this week

Had a laugh about it with a mate

His son plays in his school’s 2nds

He’s also the captain of Australia u/20s

Pathway/school programs are a joke so the more well meaning people involved, the better

 

[Jarquis]

In all seriousness, how does that happen? It's like if Smith only got picked for 2nd grade during his ban

 

[social]

In all seriousness, how does that happen? It's like if Smith only got picked for 2nd grade during his ban

Politics and money in private schools

My mates son played wing in his school’s 16z rugby team before playing in the Asia Cup while being on contract with Sydney FC

Just bizarre