Trevor Hohns resigns as chairman of selectors

[Demolition Man]

One of the easiest jobs in cricket. Being a selector for australia, in an era when we have had so many players that picked themselves

1. warne
2. McGrath
3. Ponting
4. Gilly
5. Hayden
6. Langer
7 Martyn
8. M Waugh
9. S Waugh

The guy had very little to do and far to often made the wrong choice. Either way what he did mattered little, the aussies were so dominant that even if the best team was not picked they invariably won anyway.

 

[BoyBrumby]

On paper it looks easy, but I reckon it's something of a thankless task. I mean if Oz win whoop-de-doo, everyone expects it; but if they lose.....

FWIW I think some of his Ashes '05 selections were a little off. He stuck with Dizzy at least a test too long, Hayden probably should've made way at some point & Hussey has since proved his omission was a shocker too.

The dropping of Martyn after was knee-jerk & his recall seemed unjustifiable on form, but he has just scored a vital ton, so what do I know?!

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Dropped Hayden would have been a bad move in retrospect, however we felt about it at the time. His performances since show that it was a form slump and nothing more.

Dropping Martyn was a shocking call, as was selecting Symonds over Watson and Clarke, Kasprowicz over Bracken and Gillespie, and a few others. Nevertheless, the Australian selectors have made some tremendous decisions in recent times. Picking Hussey to bat down the order in both forms, selecting Clark over more obvious seamer choices for the SA test series, and so on. As has been said, it's a thankless task - you make the right call and get no praise, you make the wrong call and everyone is all over you. Make an obvious one and half the country will disagree with you anyway just for the hell of it.

 

[Richard]

IMO, he did a pretty good job, till the end of 2004.

What did he do wrong at the end of 2004?

 

[Richard]

Theres an arguement thought that hes going out on a high, Clark has been the best bowler for Australia this series, and it seems Martyn has repaid the faith in his recent innings. His track record was good, its unlikely his successor will live up to it. Could end up being a loss for Australia.

Martyn has made it look ludicrous that he was dropped ITFP.
Not to mention that Hohns said "throw performances back at us" - and Martyn so did that, with a wonderful average of 23...

 

[Richard]

On paper it looks easy, but I reckon it's something of a thankless task. I mean if Oz win whoop-de-doo, everyone expects it; but if they lose.....

FWIW I think some of his Ashes '05 selections were a little off. He stuck with Dizzy at least a test too long, Hayden probably should've made way at some point & Hussey has since proved his omission was a shocker too.

The dropping of Martyn after was knee-jerk & his recall seemed unjustifiable on form, but he has just scored a vital ton, so what do I know?!

Hohns IIRR had no influence on the away series that was The Ashes 2005 - tour selection is generally left to the coach and whoever he wishes to consult.

 

[Richard]

selecting Clark over more obvious seamer choices for the SA test series

Who were these more obvious choices?
I'd say it was stupid that Clark was picked as late as he was.
How on Earth Tait ever got anywhere near ahead of him I don't know. Nor Bracken and Williams.

 

[Richard]

On paper it looks easy, but I reckon it's something of a thankless task. I mean if Oz win whoop-de-doo, everyone expects it; but if they lose.....

Then most people blame the Umpires, or the pitches, or the ball swinging more than it was allowed to, or whatever...
An Aussie losing is rarely an Aussie's fault.

 

[Langeveldt]

Good for Aussie cricket this.. Mother Teresa could have picked Warne, the Waughs and McGrath and the Aussies would have been number one for many a year.. Hohns, equally rubbish for mine..

 

[Richard]

Good for Aussie cricket this.. Mother Teresa could have picked Warne, the Waughs and McGrath and the Aussies would have been number one for many a year..

And equally, no good selectors can create a good side when the players aren't there.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Who were these more obvious choices?
I'd say it was stupid that Clark was picked as late as he was.
How on Earth Tait ever got anywhere near ahead of him I don't know. Nor Bracken and Williams.

Could be because Tait smashed the wicket taking record in the season leading up to the Ashes directly? Tait has a FC average of 26 and an SR of 42, and if you filter out the very start of his career it is even better. He's also 23 years old. Clark averages 30 odd, is 30 years old, hasn't topped the wicket taking even for his state in a recent season (or even gone very close), and performed moderately in ODIs. Clark only averages a rather poor 3.3 wickets per first class game, which also goes to show how unpenetrative he generally is. Tait averages 4.2, despite playing on less helpful surfaces the majority of the time. Nobody could really have predicted that he would bowl so well at test level.

For someone who places so much emphasis on first class records in selection decisions, you seem awfully quick to dismiss Tait's and look past Clark's. Bracken also consistently outperforms Clark in domestic cricket whilst playing for the same team, and is younger, and has had more success in ODIs. That's not to mention Jason Gillespie or Michael Kasprowicz. Or indeed Brett Dorey or any of the other guys the selectors have been looking at for future test cricket.

 

[Richard]

Sorry, Clark only made his ODI debut at the start of this season? He can hardly outperform Bracken if he wasn't playing (as he wasn't for most of Bracken's ODI career).
Brett Dorey has only been back playing cricket this year, no? Hasn't been around for about 6 years before.
Tait has looked, to me, half the bowler Clark has done. I don't have the foggiest how his First-Class record was so good in 2004\05. But it sure ain't that good in the rest of his career. Clark has been far the more consistent bowler.
And I for one am not surprised at the turn their Test careers have taken thus far. Albeit Clark couldn't have wished for too much better surfaces on which to start his career.

 

[marc71178]

FWIW I think some of his Ashes '05 selections were a little off. He stuck with Dizzy at least a test too long, Hayden probably should've made way at some point & Hussey has since proved his omission was a shocker too.

Small point, but was it just him making the decision then?

Surely it was decided by the committee?

 

[aussie]

Who were these more obvious choices?
I'd say it was stupid that Clark was picked as late as he was.
How on Earth Tait ever got anywhere near ahead of him I don't know. Nor Bracken and Williams.

1.The obvious choices were Gillespie & Bracken obviously, Dizzy was back in form in domestic cricket in his past record in South Africa was good & Bracken could have done well on seaming pitches in South Africa.

2. I cant see how, no one would have expected him to do so well in his 1st series plus he only for the past 2 seasons being doing well in domestic cricket, while others mainly Tait have done better to get the call ahead of him.

3. Has i mentioned before NO ONE expected Clark to do so well in tests while its only for the past 2 seasons that he has done well to grab the attention of the selectors.

Tait broke the Australian domestic bowling record in 2004/05 so he was rightfully selected ahead of him come on. Bracken has always been regarded a better bowler than him & for a did more at domestic level to get the nod ahaed of Clark. Williams 1st made the aussie side during VB series 2001/02 & was doing well in domestic cricket while Clark was a novice

 

[Son Of Coco]

Who were these more obvious choices?
I'd say it was stupid that Clark was picked as late as he was.
How on Earth Tait ever got anywhere near ahead of him I don't know. Nor Bracken and Williams.

With the wonderful help of hindsight of course...Clark hasn't exactly set the world on fire up until now, in either domestic or international cricket. If you've been following his career from the start and come to this assumption then good on you, but I doubt it somehow.

 

[Jono]

Who were these more obvious choices?
I'd say it was stupid that Clark was picked as late as he was.
How on Earth Tait ever got anywhere near ahead of him I don't know. Nor Bracken and Williams.

LOL! Of course, Richard knew Clark would do well all along, didn't mention it of course until after he gets man of the series in his first series and averages around 15 with the ball... but don't worry, he knew it.

The amount of people that come out 'after the fact' on this board and claim they knew it'd happen or they always had suspicions, but never mention it before hand is quite amusing. But this Clark one takes the cake.

Next I'm sure someone knew Asif was a star and should have played in the tests against England.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Sorry, Clark only made his ODI debut at the start of this season? He can hardly outperform Bracken if he wasn't playing (as he wasn't for most of Bracken's ODI career).
Brett Dorey has only been back playing cricket this year, no? Hasn't been around for about 6 years before.
Tait has looked, to me, half the bowler Clark has done. I don't have the foggiest how his First-Class record was so good in 2004\05. But it sure ain't that good in the rest of his career. Clark has been far the more consistent bowler.
And I for one am not surprised at the turn their Test careers have taken thus far. Albeit Clark couldn't have wished for too much better surfaces on which to start his career.

?

Tait is 23 years old. Clark is 30. Obviously Clark has had more solid seasons at first class level, so has Andy Bichel, but it's not the point. Tait has only played three seasons in full for South Australia. The first was good (33 @ 29), the second was astonishing (65 @ 20), and the third was poor, but ravaged by injury(14 @ 38). The season he played before all those three was only a partial season as he was picked midway through the year, but he did very well in it too, averaging 20.

So, exclude the last season, and tell me how he had been inconsistent at first class level before he was selected for Australia? Averaging 20, 29 and 20 in three seasons is inconsistent? It's not just a matter of one good season, it's a matter of his whole career being good, culminating in one especially good season, after which he was picked ahead of guys like Clark who had been middle of the pack without significant success or failure for a number of years.

Now look at Clark's record in the Pura Cup, since he became a regular pick in 2000/01

2000/01 - 8 @ 25.75
2001/02 - 45 @ 23.26
2002/03 - 36 @ 33.00
2003/04 - 23 @ 38.26
2004/05 - 40 @ 25.97
2005/06 - 2 @ 35.50

Now, there's nothing wrong with that record, and there's a couple of very good seasons there, but it's not exactly domination, and based on that first class record there's no way in the world you'd consider him ahead of Tait. Take into account also the fact that aside from the 01/02 season he's never taken many 5-wicket hauls in a year, that he's bowled in a team with guys like Lee, Bracken, Nicholson and MacGill over that time who have consistently outshone him, his age (remembering he's the same age as Gillespie, who is considered past it) and his low number of wickets per test and inconsistency, and he's simply not an obvious choice.

 

[luckyeddie]

There's a reason it's called hindsight - looking back - now all we need is a word along the same lines for what Richard was doing regarding Clark.

I know - sphinctobabble.

 

[mavric41]

With the wonderful help of hindsight of course...Clark hasn't exactly set the world on fire up until now, in either domestic or international cricket. If you've been following his career from the start and come to this assumption then good on you, but I doubt it somehow.

Clark isn't that good - the South Africans were just bad

Clark wouldn't get into a full strength NSW team - McGrath, Lee, Bracken and MacGill get picked before him.

Clark is a case of a guy stepping up when he got his opportunity - good on him. But lets see bowl in more than 3 tests before proclaiming him the messiah. (Remember Bob Massie!!)

p.s. I hope he continues to do well.

 

[mavric41]

There's a reason it's called hindsight - looking back - now all we need is a word along the same lines for what Richard was doing regarding Clark.

I know - sphinctobabble.

sphinctobabble - what a crack up!! Made my day.