Twin teams for internationals?

[Arjun]

The Australians started something unique. They had a tri-series at home involving England, and guess who, Australia A. You thus had two Australian teams in the same tournament, and both made the finals, but the way this happened was then questionable, and the international status for the series was withdrawn.

Then came the 1998 Commonwealth games. The Indians sent a team for the event, led by Tendulkar. That happened to coincide with the Sahara Cup, an exhibition series against Pakistan in Toronto. In a rather tight spot, they sent another Indian team for the event. These twin teams, however, were not so successful, as neither won anything.

Today, there's a problem of workload, and teams say there is too much cricket being played. The impact of T20 is also significant, even as we find more and more exhibition tournaments being scheduled. Is there any scope for two teams to play internationals together? It wouldn't hurt to send the main team for proper tours and (more or less) reserve teams with a frontline player or two for those Sahara Cups.

 

[Matt79]

England used to do something similar for tours of the Windies in the 30s IIRC.

Not a fan of the idea (of splitting the top players between two teams, or playing A teams in tests or ODIs. T20 I don't care about and wouldn't have cocnerns if those teams are very different to the proper teams.

 

[ret]

If I had to have two teams then I would select the top 12-13 players first for one team, then other 12-13 go to the other team and then divide the rest to make up the squad depending up on what the squads need

 

[Trumpers_Ghost]

Interesting to look back on that Aust A side and note that although they were beaten by the "real" team and were genuinly the 2nd team, the A team has historically a far better collection of players (would have said better team but for Warne & McGrath compared to awful A team bowlers)

Hayden
Blewitt
Martyn (c)
Bevan
Langer
Gilchrist
Reifel
forgetable crud bowlers x 3

This series actually showcased the skill of Australia's emerging batsman and very quickly led to the end of ODIs for Taylor, Slater, Healy.

I'd say easily the best batting lineup ever put out for an A team.

cheers

 

[Matt79]

Yeah, and didn't the senior team just hate those matches. No upside at all for them.

 

[Noble One]

Looking through the Australia 'A' squad from 1994/1995, I was reminded of one bowler.

Greg Rowell. Never understood why he never moved his game up a level. Remained a state journeyman for the majority of his career. Had a really smooth/classical action, nippy pace, capable of swinging the ball, and one of the biggest reverse swingers of the ball.

I watched him play maybe 2-3 games live, and another 5-6 on television. Always the most impressive bowler. Simply must have been luck that I caught him on his good games, and was average in all others.

 

[chaminda_00]

Looking through the Australia 'A' squad from 1994/1995, I was reminded of one bowler.

Greg Rowell. Never understood why he never moved his game up a level. Remained a state journeyman for the majority of his career. Had a really smooth/classical action, nippy pace, capable of swinging the ball, and one of the biggest reverse swingers of the ball.

I watched him play maybe 2-3 games live, and another 5-6 on television. Always the most impressive bowler. Simply must have been luck that I caught him on his good games, and was average in all others.

I presume that why his career ended after he got pulled up for throwing.

 

[Noble One]

I presume that why his career ended after he got pulled up for throwing.

Never realised that. I thought it was injuries that ended his career, I know he had to remodel his action due to back problems I believe.

My references towards Rowell's action are from circa 1992-1995.

 

[NUFAN]

Interesting to look back on that Aust A side and note that although they were beaten by the "real" team and were genuinly the 2nd team, the A team has historically a far better collection of players (would have said better team but for Warne & McGrath compared to awful A team bowlers)

Hayden
Blewitt
Martyn (c)
Bevan
Langer
Gilchrist
Reifel
forgetable crud bowlers x 3

This series actually showcased the skill of Australia's emerging batsman and very quickly led to the end of ODIs for Taylor, Slater, Healy.

I'd say easily the best batting lineup ever put out for an A team.

cheers

Paul Reiffel deserves to be highlighted.

Reiffel was the form bowler of the A team through the group stages, he was so good that he got a call up to the Australian team! For the Finals he was named 12th man for Australia instead of opening the bowling for Australia A, a definite ploy to help Australia defeat Australia A.

 

[chaminda_00]

Just had back through that Aus A side and this was a potential starting XI for them. So gun.

GS Blewett
ML Hayden
*DR Martyn
MG Beven
JL Langer
RT Ponting
+AC Gilchrist
GR Robertson
MG Hughes
PR Reiffel
J Angel

Add in Tom Moody and Lehmann off the bench that side was crazy. Shane George and Greg Rowell we at the time the two best domestic quicks and both had the potential to make it further just lack consistency.

 

[nightprowler10]

Paul Reiffel deserves to be highlighted.

Reiffel was the form bowler of the A team through the group stages, he was so good that he got a call up to the Australian team! For the Finals he was named 12th man for Australia instead of opening the bowling for Australia A, a definite ploy to help Australia defeat Australia A.

Why not just play him in the Aussie XI? He was certainly good enough from what I remember.

 

[inbox24]

Concept would only work if all teams were in a golden period like the one Australia just had, otherwise the quality of the cricket becomes diluted etc.

 

[Matt79]

Nah, even then the quality is diluted. Players who made the 'A' team competitive, like Ponting, Bevan, Gilchrist, Martyn and probably even Hayden, were not in the main team due to incumbency issues rather than merit. If one team only had been selected, purely on merit at that point, it would have been stronger than either of the actual teams.

The concept only works if selection for the first team is a bit off, or selectors deliberately divide the best players.

 

[Migara]

The similar thing would have happened during IPL debacle between SL palyers and SLC. Jayawardane, Sangakkara, Murali, Mendis, Thushara, Maharoof, Jayasuriya, Dilshan, Malinga, Vaas and later Matthews joined IPL. If SLC has gone ahead with proposed test tour of England a side like this have been touring.

Squad - Michael Vandort (LH), Tharanga Paranavithana (LH, OB), Malinda Warnapura (LH, OB), Thilan Samaraweera (RH), Angelo Matthews (RH, RFM), Chamara Kapugedara (RH, RMF), Indika de Saram (RH), Prasanna Jayawardane (RH, WK), Dhammika Prasad (RH, RF), Chanaka Welagedara (LH, LFM), Malinga Bandara (RH, LBG), Sekkuge Prasanna (RH, LBG), Nuwan Kulasekara (RH, RFM), Chamara Silva (RH)

They would have been as competitive as Windies if not more.

 

[Richard]

The Australians started something unique. They had a tri-series at home involving England, and guess who, Australia A. You thus had two Australian teams in the same tournament, and both made the finals, but the way this happened was then questionable, and the international status for the series was withdrawn.

The status for the series wasn't withdrawn, it was the matches involving Australia A that weren't given ODI status. And it wasn't like they were given it then withdrawn - they just weren't given it ITFP.

It meant the closing matches of the 1994/95 B&H Series (or whatever it was at that point - C&U Series, VB Series, CB Series later on) weren't ODIs, but some of the qualifiers were.

England used to do something similar for tours of the Windies in the 30s IIRC.

Well, in 1929/30 England sent a team to play Tests in New Zealand and another to play games in West Indies. The ones in the Caribbean were retrospectively awarded Test status (Mr Chandler or Mr Ehlers will probably be able to tell you how long after the event this happened) but there was no thought at the time of having two separate teams, both representing MCC, playing Tests.

Not a fan of the idea (of splitting the top players between two teams, or playing A teams in tests or ODIs.

Yeah the idea of England A or New Zealand A being a Test\ODI side is utter nonsense. The only time I'd be in favour of it would be if the Australia A and West Indies A sides that played for their cricket boards for a few games during the Packer Schism were reclassified to what they were - because they certainly weren't full sides, nor close to. The matches themselves must remain Tests in order to emphasise that Packer's games were the non-Test ones even though the best players were playing. But Wayne Clark, Paul Hibbert, Tony Mann etc. should not have full Australia caps, nor should the team that contested the 1978/79 Ashes or the other series' around then be called Australia nor count in Australian Test records. Ditto Alvin Greenidge, Norbert Phillip, Sew Shivnarine etc. and West Indies' two series' during the Packer Schism.

No way, however, should one A team be constantly popping-up to play Tests. Whether "A-team Test" deserves a separate classification is a moot point, but TBH I'm quite happy with such games being classified First-Class under the exact same umbrella as a County Championship or Sheffield Shield game.

 

[Arjun]

What will a twin team look like now? The Indians don't get a break and barely two months after this series, they go to Sri Lanka once more. Let's see what India's twin team would look like, with a specific reference-

• Sehwag--------Vijay
• Tendulkar--------Pandey
• Gambhir--------Dhawan/Virat Kohli
• Yuvraj--------Badrinath
• Dhoni--------Mahesh Rawat/Naman Ojha
• Raina--------Rohit Sharma
• Yusuf Pathan--------Irfan Pathan
• Harbhajan Singh--------Praveen Kumar
• Pragyan Ojha--------Amit Mishra
• Zaheer--------Nehra/RP Singh
• Ishant--------Sreesanth

The bowling looks stronger, but it's a little thin on the batting.