I'm also in the same boat. I never understood the large support he receives.SJS said:I must admit I am a bit biased against Lehmann. So I am not surprised. I have always been surprised by the huge support he enjoys amongst Australian supporters.
But as I said at the outset, I am biased I suppose
They are dropping him for a season of indiffernt form, not 3 poor games. You can't just drop a player as soon as the World Cup ends and say "you're not going to be in the next World Cup, so see ya". These things take time, Players can't just be rushed in, especially if the squad is settled. Now is the right time to look for a replacement for Lehmann, another year or 2 would be too late.tooextracool said:
Daniel Vettori? Danesh Kaneria? Shahid Afridi? I don't think those guys play for India...tooextracool said:
It isn't just getting bowled around the legs, it is the immature shot making of an under 12 that is the main problem.tooextracool said:
Yes it is. In hindsight he probably shouldn't have played the series, and should have been rested. Whether that is Hayden's fault or that of the ACB/selectors we don't know. If Hayden had of been performing like he did without contributing factors I have a feeling he wouldn't be going to New Zealand.tooextracool said:
I'm not a selector, so how should I know.tooextracool said:
Yes, but Martyn took Mark Waugh's spot at 4, and Lehmann took Martyn's at 6...dah!tooextracool said:
The selctors cannot be right 100% of the time. Sometimes the gambles pay off, other times they don't.tooextracool said:
indifferent form?Mister Wright said:
even though thats precisely what they're doing? except that they were looking, just like they were for bevan for a period where his form wasnt quite there so that they could use it as an excuse to drop him. AFAIC if you dont think someone is going to make it for the next world cup, then drop him right there, because it gives you a good 4 years to develop another player.Mister Wright said:
when he averaged 44.50 in the series you mean?Mister Wright said:
yes he was dismissed once by kaneria in the series, clearly he has a weakness against him.Mister Wright said:
..Mister Wright said:
how does it matter if his shot making is immature if hes scoring runs? which is what he was doing in the games prior to the 3 failures. and AFAIC, 2 out of those 3 failures came towards the end of the innings.Mister Wright said:
doubt it, hayden would be going to NZ regardless because the aussie selectors obviously like him. if he was ill, he wouldnt have played, simple as that. hes been in poor form in both forms of the game off late, so his failures in ODIs are something that stems from the same form that hes been having in tests.Mister Wright said:
which is precisely my point, its called double standards.Mister Wright said:
so what is this put faith in martyn and it paid off then? martyn was already scoring runs, not like promoting an already successful player, 2 positions up the order from 6-4 is a particularly bright idea.Mister Wright said:
Mister Wright said:
And nothing after that.tooextracool said:
Seven pronged, Hussey can bowl.Monty said:
Tests (last 3 series):tooextracool said:
Yeah, that's a wonderful idea. Let's drop 4 or 5 players that we think or know aren't going to be around for the next World Cup. That will ease the introduction of new players into the team...great thinking.tooextracool said:
The two innings in question - Lehmann was out to Vettoria & Wiseman.tooextracool said:
Just getting out to a player doesn't mean you have a weakness against them, you can play shockingly against one type of bowler, but somehow survive and get out to the fast bowler from the other end...That's cricket.tooextracool said:
Maybe Hayden is in their thoughts for the World Cup & don't want to drop him just because of one season of bad form, if he has another bad series it could all be over. Also, this illness looked as though it was worse than first thought, had he been diagnosed with it earlier, he probably would have had the series off to recover.tooextracool said:
It hasn't exactly backfired.tooextracool said:
It is more than that. Yes, Australia do have a higher source of quality talent, which means they can gamble a bit more. However, they have given players a tap on the shoulder when it is the right time to go, and it has paid off almost every time. They are not afraid to make the tough decisions no matter what the palyer's status is in the game.tooextracool said:
nothing after that? he won the game against pakistan in the vb series if you remember correctly. hes done nothing in 3 games, on the same basis you would be dropping nearly everyone whos ever played the game in terms of indifferent form.LongHopCassidy said:
when will you learn that tests and ODIs are completely unrelated? i havent claimed that he should be in the test side.Mister Wright said:
err how is that indifferent form? so if someone has 1 good series and one mediocre one then its mediocre form? so basically anyone who has 1 mediocre series(or rather 3 poor games) should be dropped?Mister Wright said:
even though australia havent dropped 4-5 players on the basis of age since the last world cup?Mister Wright said:
yes and he averaged 44.50, whats your point? just because he got dismissed by them it doesnt mean that he struggled against them. by that count lara has a weakness against fraser and caddick because they've both dismissed him 6 times each, even though hes scored prolifically against them.Mister Wright said:
rubbish, he played about 1.5 overs of kaneria in the other 2 games(all of which came in one game), which included him coming down the track and hammering kaneria for a 3 and a 4 respectively. id like you to name me one inning where lehmann showed any sort of weakness against kaneria for an extended period of time or even struggled for half an over against him.Mister Wright said:
no they dont, but they were extremely prepared to do that with m.waugh werent they?Mister Wright said:
oh come off it, its all just an excuse to cover up his poor form, thats been going on in both tests and ODIs for a while now.Mister Wright said:
which is not what i claimed. but it didnt take any amount of intelligence to push him up the order to let lehmann bat in his position at 6.Mister Wright said:
Mister WrightIt is more than that. Yes said:
My claim was that he had an indifferent summer with the bat in both tests and ODIs. And yes, if a player is playing both forms of the game, form can be transferred. However, if a player is only performing poorly in one, it does not highlight poor form in the other as much. Just look at Gilchrist. If he had of had a poor test summer, there would be talk about his form as well, he had an extremely mediocre One Day series. IIRC not one half century.tooextracool said:
What is your point here. You said that if the selectors are not considering a player for the next World Cup they should be dropped instantly. I am saying they shouldn't as players should be integrated into the side, as replacements at different intervals. Since the last world cup Bichel, Bevan & Lehmann have all been dropped. Had all three of those players been dropped at the end of the last world cup at once, it would have left a big gap for Australia to fill.tooextracool said:
Stats don't tell the full story here. Vettori bowled awesome, and a lot of people other than myself thought he should have got player of the series. My point was not that Lehmann got out to spinners, but rather he struggled against them all summer (tests & ODIs) the reason I posted he got out to those two players was to highlight my point.tooextracool said:
*Yawn* I apologise, I cannot, I don't sit down and watch every single ball of the summer.tooextracool said:
The talk of dropping Mark Waugh was around for more than one season before he was dropped. He became a hit and miss player in the last 2-3 years of his career. He lost his consistency, and usually more times than not he made a big score in the last test or towards the end of a ODI series to keep his nose in front.tooextracool said:
Somebody forgot to take their anti-cynicism pills.tooextracool said:
eh?tooextracool said:
Mister WrightIt is more than that. Yes said:
precisely the point, while no one will deny that lehmann has been poor in tests of late, but the fact that it was only in the last 3 ODIs that he failed in, it would suggest that he was still doing fairly well in ODIs. and the fact that gilchrist has maintained form in one form and not in the other would suggest that form isnt always transferred, which is the same for lehmann.Mister Wright said:
err they dropped 2 of them at the same time, i dont see any reason why a third one would have made that much of a difference.Mister Wright said:
vettori bowled well yes, but if you watched the series you would clearly see that lehmann showed no real problems against him.Mister Wright said:
Mister Wright said:
and if you look at hayden's stats for the last 2-3 years, you would see that it follows the same pattern(except that hayden would score against b;desh and zimbabwe). hes only had about 2-3 genuinely good series in the since and including the world cup.Mister Wright said:
you know its simply an excuse to protect hayden from any criticism thats sent against him. if he wasnt fit he shouldnt have been playing in the first place, the fact that he did awould suggest that it didnt affect him seriously.Mister Wright said:
im saying that getting martyn to bat at 4 didnt require any amount of intelligence from the selectors.Mister Wright said:
who says he wasnt going to be there? did bevan say that? no he didnt. the selectors assumed that he wasnt good enough anymore and dropped him, simple as that. we've seen several players play till they are 37, why couldnt bevan? and his domestic form would suggest that hes still capable of doing it.Mister Wright said:
No Bichel was dropped for the previous seasons Summer's VB series finals and Bevan was dropped after the Sri Lankan tour. That is almost a year between droppings. It was good and allowed other players to feel comfortable in the team.tooextracool said:
Let's agree to disagree.tooextracool said:
Bullocks. If we are talking tests, Hayden's top score against Bangladesh is something like 51, and he has only played two test against Zimbabwe, so to say he has scored the bulk of his runs against this two nations is ridiculous. If we are talking ODIs the same can be said, IIRC Hayden would have only played Bangladesh at the previous Champions Trophy, and maybe a few games here and there, and over the last few years would have barely played against Zimbabwe. I will admit he has not got as many centuries as he should have, but the way the team has played the last few years, that is understandable.tooextracool said:
If that were the case, than anyone going through some kind of form slump would have had an injury. This injury has turned out to be quite serious, he was at risk of not touring New Zealand - his lung capacity was down to 42%. Had the team know the seriousness of the injury in the first place, I doubt he would have played at all during the VB series.tooextracool said:
Of course not, but my point was that technically Martyn replaced Mark Waugh not Lehmann.tooextracool said:
Domestic form does not matter, if that were the case Bichel would have been rushed back into the Australian team months ago, along with Bevan. The fact is the two were not performing well enough in the International side to warrant a place with so many other strong contenders sitting on the wings. Add to the fact that the Australian team's tactics had evolved where they would attack almost all the way through the 50 overs and Bevan really doesn't do that.tooextracool said:
