Same story: T20 destroying longer format in Australia too.

[Chandan]

LINK Picking batsmen from bashers is a bridge too far BY: GIDEON HAIGH From: The Australian January 01, 2013 THE role of a selection panel is never ending, rather like painting the Sydney Harbour Bridge: no sooner do you finish at one end than you must start again at the other. For John Inverarity and his colleagues, however, it's just grown harder still. Mike Hussey's retirement has committed them to working simultaneously from the middle, and the paint is suddenly very much thinner. The high-gloss enamel they have to work with, in fact, raises some disturbing questions about the whole structure they have responsibility for. In days of yore, selectors looking to replace a key batsman would have scanned the first-class cricket scene to see who was making what where, and for how long they had been doing so. The Sheffield Shield was actually a pretty reliable guide, and in some respects still is: it has been instructive in the last week or so to hear Mitchell Johnson's testimonials for interstate cricket's role in his rehabilitation. But the Sheffield Shield has been on hiatus for more than a month while Cricket Australia dedicates itself to pimping the Big Bash League, and will not resume until just prior to the naming of the Australian touring party for India. Two Shield games are scheduled in the last week of January. Neither involves Tasmania or Queensland, with some of the best candidates to succeed Hussey and to understudy Shane Watson. Before the dog, pony, bike and boyband show got under way, for example, Tasmania's Alex Doolan was batting as well as anyone in Australia. In the Shield fixture at the MCG, he outshone Ricky Ponting; in the Australia A game at the SCG, he mastered the Proteas attack that later humbled Australia. Yet Doolan has not played a game of consequence since. A supernumerary for the Melbourne Renegades, he has played some club cricket for the Camberwell Magpies. Dan Harris, cut from the Redbacks list in July and with a BBL average this summer of 6.5, is felt to be the superior T20 batsman. Mind you, Doolan may be better off not playing when the fortunes of some of his peers are considered. In the last month, Doolan's Tasmanian captain George Bailey has faced 42 deliveries, Rob Quiney 54, Peter Forrest 52, David Hussey 63. The runs they've wrung from these opportunities have been virtually irrelevant, although it is odd to see so many concluding that Australia's best middle-order solution is consanguinity -- simply swapping one Hussey for another. Fine player that he has been, David Hussey made 120 runs in five Shield matches at 17.14 before his 79 runs at 19.75 in the BBL. Perhaps it does not mean much. But at 35, it may mean something. While statistics can never be definitive, they can be powerfully indicative, and what they indicate at the moment is dismaying. In July and August, Inverarity's panel showed its hand in the batsmen it picked for a tour of England with Australia A, captained by Ed Cowan: Bailey, Forrest, Joe Burns, Michael Klinger, Tim Paine, Liam Davis and Tom Cooper. In the first half of the domestic first-class summer, Burns averaged 30.8, Bailey 28.16, Klinger 26.8, Paine 25.8, Forrest 16.6, Davis 13.9 and Cooper 7.5. Yet instead of going back to the drawing board and working on setting this to rights, they, like their colleagues and rivals, have spent the last month travelling, training and generally lolling about between games in the BBL, cricket's attempt to pass Red Faces off as The X-Factor. Seen the Sydney Thunder recently? They recall the line in Jimmy Breslin's famous story 'The Worst Team Ever' about the New York Mets of 50 years ago: "With this team, nothing changes. Only the days." For our Test cricketers, the season isn't working that well either. Consider Cowan. After the Sydney Test, he has a month to prepare for his first Test tour of India. In that time, he is scheduled to play a maximum of one BBL game for the Hurricanes and one Ryobi Cup game for the Tigers. Consider Watson. Basically we need to find a form of cricket for him requiring no actual exertion. He is becoming Australian cricket's equivalent of the dinnerwear your grandparents keep in the sideboard because it is too precious to use. How, with all the expertise, talent, resources and goodwill at Australia's disposal, did we end up with this clusterf . . k? After all, it's not 18 months since we were assured that the Argus review would fix everything, with its salutary incantation that "it is the Australian team that underwrites the appeal and financial health of the sport". The problem really lies in a parallel document, less often invoked. CA's strategic plan for 2011 to 2015 was a curious affair, approved by the old board shortly before its dissolution, and left for the new board to implement whether they agreed with it or not. It seems innocuous enough. The summary of its "strategic imperatives" contains the usual pointing at the fences, such as "increasing the performance, efficiency and agility of Australian cricket administration". (I know what you're thinking. You're thinking Dave Gilbert, doing pilates). But what we're witnessing, if it was not already apparent, is the tension between the plan's first two "pillars". Pillar 1 is the injunction to "put fans first", which CA interprets as prioritising the Big Bash League at every juncture, but which on the evidence is conducing to a surfeit of sloppy, mediocre cricket. Pillar 2 is the directive to "produce the best teams, players and officials in the world", which Australian cricket has done for most of the last century with a vigorous and Darwinian first-class competition that's now apparently at odds with the new "customer is king" mentality. Depending on semantics, this tension may or may not amount to a contradiction. Whatever the case, if Australia loses the Border-Gavaskar Trophy and forfeits the Ashes this year, it's hard to imagine the average fan concluding: "Oh well no biggie; at least Cricket Australia has put me first." Warning signs are there if we care to look. After all, a selection panel can only take responsibility for painting the bridge. It can't be expected to build the bridge itself.

[Executioner]

australia's fall in cricket is not due to T20 cricket, but simply the lack of oppurtunities to youngster. 6 years ago they had a team like this: ponting, katich, hayden, gilly, clarke, hussey. No-one could sneak into this team, even guys like brad hodge didnt get enough chances. When these guys retired, the replacements didnt have enough experience to replicate the performance of the former players. SA on the other hand did quite well to replace their senior players. ABDV took up boucher's role, amla came in place of Old gibbs, guys like langaveldt and andre nel were replaced by someone like steyn and morne. Thus these guys got enough experience by the time they were at their peak. Another thing CSA has done is give enough exposure to guys like De Kock, kleinveldt, behardien, chris morries, phangiso, de lange by playing them in T20s so that when seniors like kallis and smith retire, the youths will have enough exposure to fill up their shoes. The Aussie team between 1997-2009 where such a good force, but after a golden period comes dark times and thats what australia is going through. India is going through dark times because of the retirement of dravid, laxman, while zaheer has lost his mojo and bhajji useless these days. But guys like pujara, rahane, kohli will fill those missing spaces but it will take time. The problem had not have happened had guys like Kaif, rohit sharma had performed to their expectations.

[Robelinda]

Well, the article has some harsh truths for sure. Its true we are becoming T20 mad, and how sad it is. Our young batsmen just cant bat for 2 sessions, and the selectors are putting faith in guys like Davis and Cooper that make Rohit look like an ODI Bradman. Its pathetic. We dont seem to want to D Hussey, its too late anyway. The domestic structure is failing, but nobody is listening. There was a directive from CA to force the states to produce better wickets for shield matches, as its been dreadfully poor for a while, being overly bowler friendly (understatement!). BUT, the big bash has completely messed up our whole summer. It, like the IPL, means more than the tests.

[DarthSimian]

People love T20 more than tests. It is inevitable. Nothing rocket science about it.

[Clarke]

Damn, Australia too has its T20 league more than a month long

[rkt.india]

Damn' date=' Australia too has its T20 league more than a month long [/quote'] Even Engand has.

[Clarke]

Even Engand has.

Do their main players (Cook, KP, Anderson, Swann, Finn) prioritize that over international cricket :hmmm:

[rkt.india]

Do their main players (Cook' date=' KP, Anderson, Swann, KP) prioritize that over international cricket :hmmm:[/quote'] It is not about priority of players but priority of the board. If they get chance they will play, but England has international cricket at that time in England. Australia do the same. That is the reason senior players do not play that. Otherwise, all of them want to play IPL. Ask KP, Anderson, etc.

[Zero_Unit]

Ain't nobody got time for TEST CRICKET ...

[Chandan]

Haigh hits back at fellow journalists. Fun reading this:

Iframe: Open in new window

[anotherhawkeye]

People love T20 more than tests. It is inevitable. Nothing rocket science about it.

Yep.

[SLICKR392]

They can still white wash other teams at their turf :idunno:

[Pagalpanti]

T20 leagues do pose a problem but they've shown better handling. Recommending key test players to sit out and give bbl a miss while international commitment is going on. While in IPL even half fit players are encouraged to play.

[Sandeep99]

All the T20 leagues plus the Chamions league. Ah I can see cricket dying..