Do I really have to start adding these tedious riders for the benefit of the pedants here?
This should be good.
Who exactly should have been playing for Australia for the last 3 years instead of Hussey?
"He's [Michael Clarke] on Twitter saying sorry for not walking? Mate if he did that in our side there'd be hell to play. AB would chuck his Twitter box off the balcony or whatever it is. Sorry for not walking? Jesus Christ man."RIP CraigosKnowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it into a fruit salad
Even Hussey's runs since then have done wonders for his ave but little for the team which is the true measure of their worth. Save the 116 at Perth in 2010 Hussey hasn't played a meaningful innings stretching back to his el nino like drought of runs up to the Oval in 09.
What was clear is that we had lost the ashes in 2009. That was the benchmark. Why would anyone expect that much the same team would have done any better in 2010/11? Especially as England had sought to improve their winning team. What excuse did Australia have to persist with the same ageing has beens? If younger players like Hughes and Usman or even older ones like Katich didn't get the same licence the why should have Hussey or Ponting? So there were alternatives. Its just that they came in for the wrong people.
RIP Philip Hughes - 1988-2014
The Wheel of Mediocrity | Compton, Root, Carberry, Robson, Trott, Lyth, Moeen | The wheel is forever
Founder and Grand Wizard of the CW Football Thread Statluminati. Potential hater of abilities. Blocked on twitter by Michael Vaughan, Brad McNamara and AtlCricket for my hard hitting truths.
I don't completely disagree with bambino, if Huss wasn't as nice a bloke as he is, it would be pretty much a massive **** you Australia for leaving us in the lurch at an important time with big Test series coming up.
I don't really get why he couldn't just retire from the short formats of the game. The time needed away from home just for the Test matches isn't THAT long.
Life does go on..
He knew that Langer and McGrath were retiring. He was only 35 and he was in the selectors minds for at least the next 2-4 years. Realistically Hussey was going to be given the tap after the Ashes anyway and if he's not as hungry for runs as he could be then it's probably a good thing that he's retired.
Warne had done enough in his career to retire on his own terms and retired at pretty much the ultimate time, a 5-0 drubbing against the old enemy, it can't be sweeter than that. Is Huss, a lover of cricket going to sit back when he's older and going to regret that he finished off against SL instead of testing himself again against India and England, yes IMO.
Warne's retirement was fine IMO. Australia still won every test they played in the first year after he retired, so him staying around for another couple wouldn't have been that needed.
I am surprised Hussey didn't go for one more year though, and I too think he may end up regretting it. All it takes is a few months away from the game, something he hasn't had for years, and the hunger may return. Especially for a bloke I always imagined would have to be taken out of the Aussie side kicking and screaming.
And that innings at the gabba was crucial. Otherwise we'd have lost4-1
Which leaves the Lanka smiting.
Great return for 5 years of investment; which has just been thrown back in the selector's faces.
Slightly exaggeration on the Gabba ton, its not like he could predict the future. Marco..
Yes but that was the effect wasn't it?
Btw Warney's retirement was fine.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)