Brad Haddin - He is good...will he leap from good to great?

[Ram]

England were not capable of producing that, not with a grassroots system obsessed with the MCC coaching manual that discouraged free, enterprising strokeplay and variety, or with a county schedule that allowed no room for further expansion in that sense.

Oh please... Thats the reason thats been given for decades and frankly, I dont buy it now. England, has one of THE most professional and well-run domestic set-up and yet I cant recall any time, from post 1960 onwards, when England have come even close to dominating the world of cricket. Countries like Sri Lanka, New Zealand hardly have any domestic infrastructure and yet, at many instances in the last decade, they have either equaled or outperformed England. Are you going to come to me now, in 2008 and say the English players are still shackled by the MCC manual ? I wouldnt buy that at all.

BTW, if you are not convinced by the argument that the Windies players benefited from English cricket to the point they became a top team, I would suggest you read some Beyond a Boundary by CLR James and 'Viv' - the autobiography of Viv Richards in particular. As far as England's own system, look up Don Mosey's biography of Boycott, Botham's autobiography, Keith Fletcher's autobiography and the book recently published by Simon Hughes on the county circuit - all very insightful as to what the systems were like there and how it failed to develop truly skilled and enterprising players.

You really cant call the Windies players playing in English county cricket as a "system", mainly because, as much as i accept that county cricket does help *hone* the skills of a player, they are already full developed as far as their cricketing "build" is concerned. The moot point here is, The Windies players were talented to begin with, and to go along with it, had lots of natural flair. County cricket just helped them to maximize the use of their talents. To put things straight, almost all of the Irish and the Scottish cricket team players play county cricket. Do they do well in international stage too ?

Your examples about NZ and Zimbabwe are misleading and red herrings in this instance. We are not discussing a team with a small handful of talented players you could count on one hand. That can be put down to the odd fluke. We are discussing a full generation of players who kept coming with frightening regularity, all at top class.

Of course it is relevant. You could say its a sort of a counter-argument to the statement that you need a "good system" to produce "quality players". The Zim and NZ examples pretty much expose the fallacy of that argument.

The Windies' strength at the time was not about a fluke - it was about a combination of factors far more than the oversimplified excuse of 'very lucky with a lot of talented players together'. James' Beyond a Boundary makes the role of black sporting idols very clear - as they began to stand out and succeed, more and more in the Windies began to take to cricket to follow said idols. That and the culture of black West Indians 'standing up for themselves' through the 50s, 60s and 70s inspired by others in England and the USA both were major factors that contributed to people wanting to take up cricket, considered before then a 'white man's game' in the Windies (until Worrell, all the WI captains had been white). With the sort of grassroots cricket played - beaches and fairly poor grounds - cricketers learned how to innovate and be far more enterprising. The better ones began to use the county system to discipline themselves and learned how to perform in a unit and with consistency rather than just swinging the bats as they would at home casually - and that combination of factors led to a team that became world class, and then world dominating with time.

Honestly, you call that a "system" ? Its plainly not. Its more like a reason for the upsurge in popularity of cricket in the Caribbean Islands in those times. System is one where there a structured and well set out framework of Youth Cricket, under-15s, under 19s, Academy Training, Fitness and dietary regimen training, all that need to be given to a cricket at the age of 17-21. Why do you think the Australians send their most talented youngsters in that age-group to the Academy for a month ?

With Australia the other social/economic factors haven't been as big (if anything, they were present more in the late 30s and then the 40s with Bradman), but the young players there have had the combinations of idols and role models in the game to look up to, an excellent system domestically and another one overseas that helped them greatly.

I never said Australian players of today are totally NOT a product of a system. All I am saying is, a good system will ensure a constant stream of talented, disciplined cricketer with an excellent work-ethic, BUT, no system can ensure a single team can such a set of outstanding cricketers as Aus had, till recently.

With the NZ/Zimbabwe examples you bring up it's a completely different situation. Zimbabwe happened to have some talented cricketers - no more or less than a lot of other decent teams, but never produced them with the frequency that Australia or WI had in their dominant eras. And in NZ, the fact that they produced so many top cricketers together was a surprise in the first place - given that most young sportsmen there had rugby as their first passion (which still attracts the majority of the top athletes and gets most of the national focus and coverage). Again a very different culture that you can't make any parallel to.

Why not ? Isnt that what we are discussing here ? New Zealand has kept producing high quality cricketers throughout DESPITE the fact that the FC system there isnt as robust and comprehensive as it should be. And the reason why i quoted the Zim example was, to highlight the fact that, like how we cant take the Zim team of the early 2000s as a benchmark to decide how their quality further down the line is going to be, we cant use the the Australian team of 2007 to predict how their performance in the coming years is going to be.

As far as debating the issue with systems being part of great teams rather than just a whole lot of luck and flukes - I'd seriously recommend buying some of those books I suggested above on WI and English cricket - and hunting down reprinted copies of Charles Williams' 'Bradman' and Jack Fingleton's 'Cricket Crisis' - which I think would offer you a lot of insight towards some of the game's past and the real factors that helped make some of the great teams - rather than just the luck and flukes you suggest.

Correction. I said you ALSO need luck to form a great team, not you need ONLY luck to form a great team. P.S - Thanks for the book suggestions, will try them out.

[Ram]

And with that last sentence, you just indicated by how much you miss the point. No 'luck' involved. The Warnes, McGraths, etc. didn't just happen along. Both were fairly ordinary at first class level but worked their arses off to become greats. Do I need to remind you of Warney's first Test figures ? Check out Pigeon's first 50 Test wickets against Clark's. Is Australia 'lucky' to have someone like Clark to step into McGrath's shoes ? No. He also got where he is through years of practice and hard work.

Well then, Australia should have also found a replacement for Warne by now too. Oh Wait.. Do i see the name George Bradley Hogg ? Someone who actually averages 40 in FC cricket in Aus and gave away 60 runs a apiece for every wicket he took in the recent test series ? Worthy replacement Indeed !

[Donny]

Once again, mm, your sarcasm belittles you. :regular_smile:

[Ram]

Once again' date=' mm, your sarcasm belittles you. :regular_smile:[/quote'] More like " You sarcasm bewilders me"... :regular_smile:

[Donny]

Perhaps you should look it up, mate. Sarcasm should include wit. Sadly lacking in your attempts. While your doing that, please check out what 'debate' means. :regular_smile:

[Ram]

Thanks for your lesson on humor. Appreciate it. :regular_smile: Is this some sort of tactic of yours ? Like when you have no cricketing points to make, you start saying stuff that is totally unrelated to cricket ? Good on ya, mate ! :two_thumbs_up:

[Donny]

Read the topic. No, it's not a lesson on humour. I was commenting about sarcasm.

[Ram]

I dont recall asking for your comment :regular_smile:

[Donny]

Check your recall facility. Read post # 26. Asking for my comment was exactly what you did - twice. mm, you're out of your depth in this department. Quit while you still have one foot free of gunshot wounds.

[Ram]

Are you alright mate ? When did thanking someone for a comment equate to asking someone for a comment ? :haha: Donny, you are out blah blah blah... zzzzz.................. blah blah...... gunshot whatever ! Go try your trick lines you flicked from the last movie you saw on someone else. I am plainly not interested. This is getting really boring now. Its out of pure courtesy that I have kept responding to your useless posts. Dont expect that to continue anymore. Now, keep typing those golden lines of yours to your heart's content. I wont give a damn anymore.

[Donny]

Five lines to tell me you're not interested ? :regular_smile:

[Gambit]

Some really good posts here.

Dont be too carried away by terms "system" and "bench strength" etc. Great teams are always made by great players' date=' not by systems. Australia was lucky enough to have the BEST opening pair of this decade,the Best no.3 of this decade, [b']The most prolific no.4 EVER, the BEST EVER wicket-keeper batsman, one of all time best paceman and arguably, the best ever spinner in the history of the game, playing in the same team, at the same time.

Who might that be marirs?

[16 str8]

Haddin is currently the best keeper/batsmen in the world, and that includes Gilly. He will make the transition smoothly.

[siddhu]

I think more than Gilly, Aus will definitely miss Hayden at the top (as and when he retires), although it seems that he won't be retiring any time soon (could play for another 4-5 years considering his fitness). And i agree with MM to some extent, yes Australia was in a way lucky enough to have talents such as McW, Langer, Martyn, Waugh etc to play at the same time. But at the same time it was the Aussie system that made them work hard and hone their skills. it was also their excellent work ethics that brought them this far. But at the same time, Eng and SA also has a strong "system" in place, but I don't see any exceptional ones coming through like they did in 90s for SA and 80s for England. 90s was dry for England with the exception of Darren Gough...Right now there is none bar Kallis in SA. To conclude, yes a strong "system" is needed to hone the skills but you still need enough talent coming through to replace current set of exceptional players. And Australia has been able to easily replace their players. In India, we have a crappy domestic system and seen only a select few who have exceptional work ethics. Although our domestic system seems to be improving.

[talksport]

In Englands and West Indies. may be it is to do with the top athletes from young, are not interested in Cricket because of bucks and glamour in Football and American Sports respectively... Systems have to be in place...a progressive league structure, Facilities , Coaching and more importantly a career opportunity for all those involved....

[Ram]

Who might that be marirs?

Hussey. He is batting at no.4 these days, isnt he ?

[16 str8]

In Englands and West Indies. may be it is to do with the top athletes from young' date= are not interested in Cricket because of bucks and glamour in Football and American Sports respectively... Systems have to be in place...a progressive league structure, Facilities , Coaching and more importantly a career opportunity for all those involved....

It is no different in Australia. Cricket is only the third most popular sport in the country. The two major sports are Rugby League and Australian Football Rues. These two sports get the best athletes Australia has to offer. Cricket cannot compete with these codes, and only gets the players that are left over. Besides the summer season, cricket does not even get a mention in Australia. Take this into account, and the fact that Australia has a population of just 20 million, and it shows just how remarkable Australia's cricket success is.

[talksport]

Australia is an exception in the last decade and half.......Its just not cricket ....Their Sporting Structure & Culture has become a model for almost every country..