Australia v South Africa, 1st Test, Perth

[maccatak11]

Do we want 4 experienced players retiring at the same time again??! Stagger them, and we've got cover for hayden

This has to be one of the worst comments ever. Who are the 4 players about to retire? Hayden is on the way out yes, but brett lee still has another 2 seasons in him, ponting another 4-5. so im not exactly sure who you are refering to here.

Not sure how much cricket people watch on here, but it annoys me when people jump on someone for having a bad series. Yes we lost in Indiam but hang on, SO DOES EVERYBODY! We have only ever beaten them once or twice ever in a series there.

We have still belted everyone else for the past year.

Lay off hayden, he will come good. Australia hasnt been so successful because they change the team every test match....

[Bacon]

so don't change for the future cos it ain't broke.

Mack, are u a member of Sa Government?

If hayden stays for 2 years, then him and lee will go together, clark wouldn't be too far off, nor would symo.

Hayden is expendable. If the new bloke comes in and only averages 25, well we've lost nothing, but if they succeed, we are set for the next 5 years.

[Des]

Change for the future?

Lets bring in 12 year olds then so we can have them for the next 20 years.

Experience counts for a hell of lot in sport, just not cricket.

[Bacon]

ian healy had experience, and wanted to go on, but a decision was made.

G marsh wanted to go on, and was part of the then best opening partnership we'd had.

Plenty of experienced players have been retired because it was time. It's hayden's time... He's not playing as an opener should.

How old were all the current players when they debuted, and who did they replace? You have to have a succession plan, else we'll become the West Indies!

[Des]

This coming from someone who said MacGill is better than Warne.

See ya tonight at Para Hills BILLY!!

[Scotty]

Saying "let's replace an experienced player with a phenomenal average, who is currently out of form and nearing the end of his career with someone who might average 25 in his place" isn't much of a succession plan, Bacon.

[Des]

I guess in 1933/34 when Don Bradman averaged only 38.73 over the space of 6 tests then he should have been dropped because he wasn't averaging 100 anymore?

People have form slumps, you are just arguing for the sake of stirring people up.

[bennymacca]

ian healy had experience, and wanted to go on, but a decision was made.

he was only replaced by the best keeper/batsman of all time - i.e there was a pretty good reason to drop healy

G marsh wanted to go on, and was part of the then best opening partnership we'd had.

are you serious bacon? geoff marsh was never anything special - he averaged 33 over his career

there was also a really good reason to get rid of him - mark taylor was in the wings.


so i think there needs to be a really good reason to get rid of someone - just because he averages 25 at the moment, that doesn't mean drop him for someone that also averages 25, because hayden at his best averages 55, and the replacement player might only ever average 25.

jaques and rogers, while scoring a lot of runs, aren't screaming out "pick me" like simon katich did last season in domestic cricket.

i reckon they should keep him at least for the next 5 tests - if he hasn't regained form, then jaques should be included.

if not jaques, then maybe even phillip hughes - he is only 20, and has scored 3 hundreds and 9 50s in his 15 first class games so far.

but why change if the replacement is only going to be as good and not better?

[muzzington]

but why change if the replacement is only going to be as good and not better?

Bacon's saying that there's more upside with bringing in someone new, younger and fresher even if they're going to average the same.

[bennymacca]

yes but how many top class players score consistently highly without going through a rough patch? the answer would be bradman.

so i guess i am saying that bringing in a fresh face is good, but doing it for the sake of it is not