What is the NSP doing (part 2)? Australia’s T20 Squad announcement / ODI debacle

This morning Cricket Australia’s National Selection Panel announced it’s squad for two T20 games against Sri Lanka on 26 and 28 January 2013. The squad is:

George Bailey (c)
Ben Cutting
Xavier Doherty
James Faulkner
Aaron Finch
Ben Laughlin
Shaun Marsh
Glenn Maxwell
Mitchell Starc
Adam Voges
Matthew Wade
David Warner

There are few ommisions from and inclusions in the team that stick out like the proverbial and warrant comment. First let me be clear: I have no cavil with the selections of Bailey, Warner, Starc and Wade and make no comment on their lack of form or otherwise in the BBL because they either did not play in it or did not play enough for a good guide to be found. I would have replaced Wade with T Ludeman if I had my choice but he is the incumbent and has earned his spot.

I am delighted that Shaun Marsh has received a second opportunity having, seemingly, been in the wilderness after his test form left him and I am also delighted Messrs Finch, Faulkner and Laughlin have received call ups after an excellent BBL season. There my delight ends.

The failure by NSP to select either of Luke Pomersbach or Ben Rohrer who, along with Shaun Marsh, were the stand out batsmen of the tournament for mine is just incomprehensible. Rohrer’s performances for the Renegades were every bit as compelling as those of Aaron Finch and drove them to only being one game short of the final and the efforts of Luke Pomersbach were second only to those of Shaun Marsh in the run scoring takes. In their place are Adam Voges and Glenn Maxwell. Voges is a fine player but at nearly 34 one must question the longevity of his selection. Maxwell is so out of form at the moment he can not make the, in must be conceded, below par Australian ODI team and is coming off a seven game stint for the Melbourne Stars where, again, he failed to take a wicket and only got past 20 once.

Surely this was an opportunity to reward an excellent BBL summer from two players who have been on the fringes for a long time with selection. In going with an older player unlikely to have a long stint in the team and a player out fo form and out of answers yet again the NSP is sending the message that, on the one hand whilst they say they are preparing for the future they actually are not, and, on the other hand, if you are one of their “project players” it matters not what form that player is in. These are ubundantly the wrong messages in my opinion.

Of course there is also the problem that the team that won the competition again appears to be underrepresented. I am an unabashed Queensland (Brisbane) fan I concede however it remains incomprehensible to me that a team that wins both the Sheffield Shield and the BBL can only have one player worthy enough for selection in this nations teams in red ball cricket, ODIs and T20. Forget the argument about whether Chris Hartley is the best wicket keeper in the country; Burns and McDermott are also stars of the future that, if the NSP is genuine in its alleged remit to develop the teams of the future, then surely they, along with the many other young players knocking on the door, should be in the frame for selection rather than seemingly forgotten.

Innings of 170, 74 and 9/220 (off the back of our number 10 batsman) should be the wake up call that the NSP needs to look hard the top six and truly select a top six that they see representing Australia at the next World Cup in 2015. Of the current top six can anyone genuinely see, on current form and noting age, the names Bailey, Hussey and Maxwell in that team? Surely now is the time to genuinely plan for 2015 and blood players like Finch, Khawaja, Burns and Lynn (if a spin bowling batsman is needed) with an eye on the future rather than using one day internationals a forums for centre wicket practices for the Ashes as the NSP appears to be.

Don’t get me wrong, selecting any sort of team is a tough job. As a fan of the game though, I crave consistency in selection and at present the messages being given by the selection panel, being the failure to select based on domestic form, the continued selection of “project players” and dropping players after a single opportunity, could be nothing further from consistent.

What is the NSP doing? The selection of allrounders is indicative of a deeper problem

January 15, 2013 By shumpty77 in Shumpty Speaks Tags: cricket, Cricket Australia, national selection panel Leave a comment

It was a case of another day, another selection storm for the National Selection Panel of Cricket Australia yesterday. For those who missed it Aaron Finch was replaced by David Warner, Steve Smith was replaced by Michael Clarke and Ben Cutting replaced by Moises Henriques. Kane Richardson was also left out with Mitchell Starc again fit.

Of all of those changes the one that sticks out is the replacement of Ben Cutting with Moises Henriques. In his one opportunity Cutting came to the wicket with Australia in trouble at 6/83 and scored a solid 27 runs in partnership with Brad Haddin and then with the ball took one of the two wickets Australia took against the resurgent Sri Lankans. All things considered it has to be said that Cutting did his job and, indeed, did it admirably.

In response to this he has been replaced in the squad by Moises Henriques because, to quote John Inverarity (the chairman of selectors) “we need allrounders” and “we were looking for a seam bowling allrounder to suit the conditions at the Gabba”. The other allrounder who remains in the team is Glenn Maxwell who has remained in the team despite not taking a wicket in his first six games for Australia and barely worrying the scorers in this competition so far.

The astonishing part about all of this is that the player excluded from the allrounder hunt in the favour of Henriques is a seam bowler whose home wicket is at the Gabba and who is in the form of his career this year. That is not to say that Henriques is not in form; the short answer is that he is but surely it is incongruous to suggest that you want a bowler who is going to suit the conditions at the Gabba and then drop the Gabba based player in the team?

On the one hand Cricket Australia have selected, and continue to select, a player who is clearly a “project player” for them with an eye on the Indian tour (Inverarity admitted as much in his interview) in Maxwell whilst on the other hand they have dropped a player who did his job when asked to and despite the next game being at the ground at which he is most comfortable.

All this leads one back to a point that even 24 months would have been ridiculous to consider; viz., that the Australian one day set up is nothing more than a Petri dish into which Cricket Australia is seeking to grow players for the long term and, it seems, for future involvement in four or five day cricket. This in turn shows the folly of Cricket Australia’s focus on the Big Bash League rather than the Sheffield Shield Competition which, previously, would have been the place that “project” players would have learnt their craft rather than in international one day cricket.

This is international cricket not a centre wicket practice like Cricket Australia seems to think it is. The players punished and, no doubt, confused by the regime are those very players (save for Glenn Maxwell) that Cricket Australia should be trying to nurture: Khawaja, Smith, Finch, Cutting, Richardson are all on the precipice of international careers and yet find themselves again jettisoned. Wouldn’t you be confused?

Surely it is better for cricket in this country for the Australian team to be the best team available for selection every time it plays and for “project players” to develop through the Sheffield Shield and Ryobi competitions. If I am wrong on this and, in fact, it is better for the development of the players in this country for the remaining one day fixtures this summer to continue to be the centre wicket practices they seem to be then I will happily concede the point. Until Glenn Maxwell scores a hundred at international level or takes 4 wickets in one innings no such concession will be forthcoming.

Shumpty’s Punt: it’s back!

January 11, 2013 By shumpty77 in Shumpty's Punt Tags: cricket, Magic Millions, NBA, NFL, punting, Racing Leave a comment

Well I am sure some of you will say “I told you so” and I concede that I threw the toys out of the cot last year when I stated that I would not be publishing a tipping blog again after a run of terrible form. A new year means a new start and after a couple of nights of study I think I have come up with a couple of bets on the weekend as well as a sports multi-bet that I am confident about.

Racing:

It is Magic Millions Day on the Gold Coast on Saturday and whilst I will not be down there I will have an interest in a couple of races:

Race 5:

Really like the Waterhouse horse Driefontein in this. Not sure the other fancies have much chance from the gates they have drawn and Driefontein has the plum gate of number 3. I expect Tommy Berry to salute here.

Race 6:

In the 2 year old classic no matter how much I look at this race I keep coming back to the mount of L Birchley: Missy Longstocking. Four starts for four wins is the best form you can get and from the 5 gate will get a plumb ride. The money has been for it on Sportsbet.com.au having shortened from $7.50 into $6.50 in early betting.

Race 7:

The Magic Millions Cup is a much tougher race for mine than the 2 year old classic. In this one I have always looked for form at the track as a guide more so than in the 2 year old classic. Combining good form at the track and a good gate is the Hawkes horse Stratford. I think it will win and at $6.50 at the moment is pretty good value.

Race 8:

A shorty in the last for the “get out stakes” I’m Cool. Just can not see anything beating it in this field but if you like this horse I would lock in the $2.60 about it you can get on sports bet right now as I expect it will shorten on the day.

Sports multi-bet

I have a four leg multi for the weekend that I reckon is right on the money and will reap a good return for punters without being spectular.

Leg 1: This evening kicking off at 4pm Brisbane time India at home to defeat England in their ODI fixture at $1.67.

Leg 2: On Saturday morning, in the NBA the Atlanta Hawks to cover the line (-4.0 points) against the Utah Jazz at home at $1.92.

Leg 3: On Sunday morning, in the NFL finals the San Francisco 49ers to cover the line (-3.0 points) against the Green Bay Packers at home at $2.05.

Leg 4: On Monday morning, also in the NFL finals the Atlanta Falcons to cover the line (-3.0 points) against the Seattle Seahawks at home at $2.02.

All up this multi will return $13.28 if it gets up.

Good luck and good punting to all.

A night at the cricket … or was it? My first BBL experience

January 8, 2013 By shumpty77 in Shumpty Speaks Tags: BBL, Brisbane Heat, cricket, the Gabba, Twenty20 2 Comments

I have been a fan of cricket for as long I can remember and have always watched every possible game I could. I have also been in a privileged position to watch more games than I can count live at the home of the game for me: the Gabba. Those facts alone probably make it a bit out of character that I had not set foot inside the Gabba for a Big Bash League fixture until last night. Indeed last night I attended my first Twenty20 game live since the very first one at the Gabba a few moons ago.

The fact is that I have never really warmed to the shortened form of the game and thus, I concede, have probably been a bit dismissive of it. Aside from watching it on TV, because I will watch any sport on TV, and aside from following the Brisbane Heat (the Queensland team after all) I have not really gotten into.

Last night, I have to confess, did little to increase my warmth for the concept. I know I will be considered to be an “old man” here but I did not like the “extras” that seemingly form part of the performance that is a BBL game. I did not like the “dance cam” or the “kiss cam”. I did not like ground announcer shouting at me between every ball and I found the “Brisbane Heat dancers” nearly as bad as the Queensland Reds before game entertainment.

All that said, there was still a cricket game on and I am more than happy to say that the cricket was pretty good. Fast bowlers charging in, another mystery spinner from the sub-continent and a viewing of some of the young batsmen who might find themselves on a plane to England were all pleasing to the cricket purest in me.

So to recap: I enjoyed the game but hated the performance that was BBL. Why stop there though? With me was a very good mate and his son (aged 8) neither of whom had watched a game of cricket live before much less picked up a bat. This is one of the target markets of the BBL, introducing new fans to the game, is it not? Surely these guys had a great time?

During the game it was clear to me that the only things that were keeping the interest of the 8 year old were the “extras” in the performance. He was enamoured with the hovercraft at half time, he liked the music (I weep for the children of today’s devotion to the cults that are Gangnam Style and One Direction) and thought it was pretty cool that there were police officers in the crowd. When it came to the cricket he was, to quote him, “bored and hungry” and if I heard the question “how long to go?” once I heard it 200 times.

In the car on the way home I steered the discussion around to how my mate enjoyed the game. His feedback was that whilst he would have preferred a comfier seat and a bit less noise he was pretty happy with the night. However, he also said it was unlikely that he would be back given the 8 year olds lack of interest in the game. Indeed when pressed further by me, the 8 year old when asked by me “do you want to play cricket now?” was fairly resounding in his negativity: well as much as an 8 year old could be.

All of this raises an interesting point for me: if BBL is designed to get people into the game of cricket is the glitz of the “performance” overshadowing the cricket to the extent that it is not succeeding in that goal. I wonder: how many people who are introduced to cricket through the BBL remain fans of the game? And how many of those people are also going to attend a test match or ODI fixture? These are questions that Cricket Australia will need to consider (if they are not already).

One final comment: the price of tickets of $30 for an adult and $10 for a child is very good and clearly is a selling point. Makes me wonder though: should that also not be the pricing for a ticket to test match cricket? I sat in the same class of seats for the test match this year and paid $68.50 for the same seat. The amenities are the same, the cost of food and drink is the same and the staffing is the same (save it is a longer day). Surely the way to get more people in the test match gates is to lower the price? Maybe that is too obvious.

Anyway, I am not sure if I will be back to watch the third instalment of the Big Bash League next year. I still can’t warm to the game if I am honest and watching the comfort of my lounge without a ground announcer shouting at me between balls certainly has some merit right now.

100th blog: for the love of writing

January 5, 2013 By shumpty77 in Shumpty Speaks Tags: blogging, sport, writing Leave a comment

This is the 100th post to this blog. It is not my 100th blog / article as I was writing (or should I say ranting) about cricket and rugby on another blog and for another website. This blog had its genesis in two things: my purchase of an iPad and a trip to New Zealand. What came from a mobile travel blog has morphed into a blog about anything and everything I feel like writing about.

I have tried in writing this blog to, on the one hand, write about issues that bother me both from my life and also in sport whilst also, at times, seeking to be irreverent. I have been overjoyed by the fact that there are people out there who enjoy reading what I write and I will concede to being disheartened at times when a blog I have spent hours on researching and writing is read by one person (and that may have been me).

I get asked a lot: “why bother writing, you are busy enough as it is?”. My regular reply, and the truth, is that I love the writing. Actually that does not give justice to why I write: I love the process of getting the written word on the “page” and massaging it into a form that is readable. In a previous life I wrote legal opinions for a living and with that part of my life gone writing this blog has gone some way to fill that void. Now I get to write about what I want, when I want, in a form that means that anyone with an internet connection can read. The fact that people from 32 countries have read this blog has made me deeply proud.

The help and feedback I have received along the way from some wonderful people can not be discounted. Three people deserve special mention for helping (or trying) to polish the rough edges in my writing and giving me a forum coupled with this blog to write: Irene Watt (@pinkrugby), Jeremy Irvine (@Jeremy_Irvine) and Kate Stone (@oskythespy) you know how I feel about the help you have given me so all I will say, again, is, thank you.

Finally, before the festive season I was thinking about shutting down this blog. The daily grind of work coupled with a dwindling readership led me to thinking it had run its course. I have been reenergised over the Christmas / New Year period by the writing I have done, both here and in private, and will again be “strapping in” for another year of rants, sport and frivolity.

Thank you for reading.

Stephen

Free to Air Television and live sport: not a new problem but we live in a new time

January 4, 2013 By shumpty77 in Shumpty Speaks Tags: channel 10, free to air television, Hopman Cup, sport 1 Comment

I love sport, it is as simple as that. When you add the fact that I have an argumentative streak and am opinionated then it is obvious that much of this blog will look at sport and include my rants about it from time to time. Aside from the conduct of players and respect for match officials, the one issue in sport that sees me get the red mist behind the eyes more than any other is the broadcast of live sport on free to air television.

We are blessed in Australia with a multitude of free to air television stations (both analog and digital) along with an excellent pay television service both of which do play more than their fair share of sport during the week for sports nuts like me who get up at 4:30am to watch, for example, darts. I have, I concede, no cavil, with the amount of sport that is shown on our television sets in Australia. Where my cavil lies is in the broadcast of sport on television, free to air television, on delay.

I probably should be clear here about what I mean by “delay”. I am not talking about Channel 9 showing the cricket on a 3 second delay (by the way is this just the Ian Chappell swear factor or do they just want to screw up fans wanting to sync up with ABC Grandstand?). I am talking about a free to air channel having the rights to telecasting a sport and starting the telecast of it later, in some cases, significantly than its starting time.

The farcical nature of Channel 10’s coverage of the Hopman Cup into Brisbane is a stark case in point. Last night, the fixture between Barty and Schiavone was into the second game of the first set on my television set when I scrolled through my twitter feed and saw the score update showing that Barty had won in straight sets. The previous evening a similar irritation arose when I realised that the Djokavic and Tomic match was being shown on a delay of about 45 minutes into Brisbane, again thanks to my twitter feed.

Now I am aware that I live in Queensland, a state without daylight saving, and that, historically, daylight saving is a well trotted out excuse for showing sport on delay. The usual line put forward by the networks is “it is a ratings period and our regular line up takes precedence”. With a massive grain of salt I am prepared to accept the commercial reality of ratings and the effect that messing a regular line up can have on the viewership of a station. That said I also firmly believe that if a station does not wish to show a particular sporting event live for commercial reasons or because it can not be fit neatly into their schedule then they should not be seeking the rights in the first place.

The concession above with respect to commercial reality and ratings does not apply in the case of Channel 10 and the Hopman Cup however. Why? Because it is not a ratings period. It does not matter what Channel 10 shows. What I don’t understand about Channel 10’s decision to show the tennis on delay into Queensland is this: surely, in a year when you are keen to show your credentials in the telecast of live sport given the upcoming negotiations for the rights to show the holy grail of Australian sport: test match cricket, you would actually show some sport live wouldn’t you? Perhaps I am being too simplistic about this and, in fact, showing two episodes of Jamie Oliver torturing the English language and cooking meals that allegedly take 15 minutes is more commercially important to Channel 10 than showing live sport but I would have thought that would be deceptively obvious.

Those of you saying to yourselves, “this has been happening for years though: look at Sunday afternoon football”. This is certainly a valid point: Channel 9 has steadfastly refused to play its Sunday afternoon football fixture before 4pm during the NRL season for at least as long as I can remember and despite ongoing and consistent howls of derision from most quarters. It would seem that, at least until a couple of years ago, rugby league fans had accepted this method of delivery of their favourite sport because they had no other way to watch it.

If rugby league fans can be so accepting of delayed telecasts, why then can’t I just shut up and accept the commercial realities of showing “live” sport on television? The answer to this lies in the changes we are have seen in society over the last 5 years. Most people have a smart phone, a lot of people have a tablet and more people than not have a social media account of some description. Information about all aspects of life including sport is now available at the swipe of a finger across the screen of a phone. Live score websites predominate the favourites toolbars of sports fans on their PCs / Macs and apps on tablets make it all the more easy to find out the score.

The change in the ability of fans to get the score at their finger tips leads, of course, to the personal choice of a sports fan to check a score despite knowing that the telecast of said sport is on delay. In the context of it being a personal choice of the fan to get a score for a game another way, what then is the problem with showing a fixture on delay?

Setting aside the fact all of those people who do not have access to a live score service and the general disrespect shown to fans by showing a match on delay (and still spruiking that it is “live), funnily enough the problem may be one commercially for the networks with the rights more than anything else. With the increase in available means to check a score and to stream vision of a game is there not a real risk to the free to air networks that fans, such as me, are going to turn off their televisions because: a. they already know the result of the contest being shown or b. they have another means of viewing it? It strikes me that what, in fact, has happened is that the networks have not moved with the times and with that comes the risk that free to air channels may jettison the rights that they hold, at some point in the future, because fans have turned away from their telecasts. This of itself would be a tragedy: my childhood would have been very different without sport on my television and the next generation of sports people let alone fans could be left without the sporting education we had as kids.

The answer is obvious: in order to get back with the times the free to air channels need to show sport for which they hold the rights live. If not to show some respect to the fans who love the sports the networks are showing, then to protect their own commercial imperatives in the future. Until they do, fans will continue to turn off their televisions and look for other sources for their sporting “fix”.