Fawad Ahmed

[Burgey]

Given the billions spent on them and the legal processes available to people who pay to enter a country illegally destroying their documentation I think they are treated rather well in fact. If Ahmed came here with documentation and legally then he deserves to be treated preferentially. If he didn't then you may have a point.

It's not illegal to seek asylum. Get that out of your head right now.

 

[Spikey]

He has done nothing to justify being in the discussion for selection.

you could say he's a regular michael beer and nathan lyon

 

[Jono]

 

[social]

Full disclosure, I have not seen him bowl so my comments are not directed at his talents as a cricketer. However, his potential inclusion is lunacy. He isn't young and he has a wafer thin cricketing CV.

This is an interesting human interest story, especially in a world where everyone on a reality TV has recently lost a parent or was bullied at school, but from a cricketing perspective it would be ****ing bonkers. A worse decision, IMO, than the Darren Pattinson selection. He has done little in a very short cricket career, barely been in Aus 2-3 years and IMO has not paid his cricketing dues and it would be a slap in the face of all other Aus spinners. Someone like Imram Tahir had played over 100 FC games before playing for SA.

He has done nothing to justify being in the discussion for selection. This is a back story overpowering the cricket relevant issues.

As I said at the beginning, IMO, this entire discussion is ****ing lunacy but it is great entertainment watching Australia create their own mess and seem not to have a clue. 10 years ago I would never have dreamed Aus cricket could sink so far so fast into incompetence on and off the field. Steve Waugh must be turning in his grave.

These are pretty much my thoughts

Mind you, I might think differently if he was a batsman

 

[Burgey]

The way our blokes are going, he is a batsman.

 

[the big bambino]

It's not illegal to seek asylum. Get that out of your head right now.

I know that. People barging illegally over borders, illegally paying for smugglers to assist them, pushing in front of genuine refugees, destroying their documents to avoid identification, illegally arriving without documentation and coming from a safe haven country, aren't legal though. Get that into yours.

 

[Burgey]

austlii is your friend. Go look it up.

 

[the big bambino]

Is that the human rights lawyers that overturned a successful policy for one giving us 1000 deaths and counting? Yes yes: They have so much to teach.

 

[Burgey]

No, it's the Australasian Legal Information Institute. You can look up lots of things there. It'll educate you, assuming your mind is capable of being broadened.

Actually, don't bother. Be a waste of time. Some words they use have more than a couple of syllables.

 

[Top_Cat]

MAB not really getting just how moribund the spin stocks in this country are, tbh. He hasn't earned selection on performance, absolutely, he's earned it on potential which explains the majority of Australian spin selection since, well, ever. Without checking, pretty sure only MacGill was picked after a solid bunch of wicket-taking amongst post-War Aussie spinners.

 

[the big bambino]

Gee Burgey I'm disappointed. The old appeal to authourity followed by ad hominem sledge. Its your cute way of saying "fmd I got nothin'

 

[Goughy]

MAB not really getting just how moribund the spin stocks in this country are, tbh. He hasn't earned selection on performance, absolutely, he's earned it on potential which explains the majority of Australian spin selection since, well, ever. Without checking, pretty sure only MacGill was picked after a solid bunch of wicket-taking amongst post-War Aussie spinners.

Sure but let us take the case of Peter Taylor for example. He came from nowhere for his Test debut but I am sure he paid his dues in Grade cricket. He was in the system. Australia clearly have issues in the spin bowling dept, have made selections that are difficult to comprehend and clearly cant make a decision on who is number one. However, making bad decisions in the past isnt an excuse for continuing to make them.

I don't know how well this guy bowls but I'm also sure that the selectors in Australia don't really know either. His body of work in Australia is limited. I am naturally wary of supposedly talented cricketers with limited accomplishments. I think it is discouraging for those who have invested a decade to climb the mountain and frequently the talent is exaggerated. Playing cricket is really the only way to tell.

However, if he really is the best option and is qualified then he should play.

 

[Spikey]

Pretty sure Ahmed's been a regular net bowler at the MCG for the last couple of years, and I definitely know he was called up by team management to bowl in the nets at the Gabba before the SA series. They've seen him bowl enough to have a decent idea of how he bowls. And you might say it's only nets, but as Top Cat says, we haven't been picking spinners based on performance and what not, they've been picked on how they look, and they've definitely looked at him enough to have formed an idea.

 

[Top_Cat]

That's pretty much the size of it!

For every PTaylor, there's a bloke like Benords or Warne who were averaging closer to 50 with the ball than they'd like in FC cricket before being picked in the Test side. In a place where it's tougher than most to get on the park (especially if you're a finger-spinner) let alone be that guy who plays 100 FC games and proves himself, intuitition plays a big role in terms of who's going to be a Test threat anyway; Tahir's been awful whereas Warne was a monster.

Not that I'm suggesting spin in this country hasn't been horribly mismanaged, even during Warne's time.

 

[social]

Sure but let us take the case of Peter Taylor for example. He came from nowhere for his Test debut but I am sure he paid his dues in Grade cricket. He was in the system. Australia clearly have issues in the spin bowling dept, have made selections that are difficult to comprehend and clearly cant make a decision on who is number one. However, making bad decisions in the past isnt an excuse for continuing to make them.

I don't know how well this guy bowls but I'm also sure that the selectors in Australia don't really know either. His body of work in Australia is limited. I am naturally wary of supposedly talented cricketers with limited accomplishments. I think it is discouraging for those who have invested a decade to climb the mountain and frequently the talent is exaggerated. Playing cricket is really the only way to tell.

However, if he really is the best option and is qualified then he should play.

Peter Taylor wasn't even the best spinner in his grade team - far from it in fact but that's another issue

Anyway, back to Ahmed

The disappointing thing for me is that the whole thing feels a bit "contrived" and we are supposed to be better than that

Not only that but the next best on form is Agar (not Ahmed) and I don't see his name being discussed in parliament

 

[Burgey]

Someone might have inadvertently said "Ashton" reef instead of Ashmore.

 

[the big bambino]

Someone may have read reef instead of Agar.

 

[uvelocity]

im gonna call ashton agar reefer from now on

 

[the big bambino]

Ashton reefer. That's some srsly good ****.

 

[BoyBrumby]

The putative selection does look a tad desperate, but I'm from the country who picked Darren Pattinson after half a net session, so no stones from this glasshouse.

However, if we exclude all the extraneous guff that comes along with his selection, wasn't Lyon called up to the test squad after even fewer SS games? If he's the best man for the gig, then where's the beef?

Never seen the kid bowl, myself.