Sixty-Six Sigma: Western Australia

Ben Roberts with Matthew Wood

Openers: Shaun Marsh and Wes Robinson

His selection and immediate success in the Australian test team speak for themselves, but Shaun Marsh enjoyed a strong Sheffield Shield season despite being available for only four matches. He averaged 59 with one ton in his 414 runs. Chances are he won't be available for much Shield cricket this summer with higher duties calling but he is of course WA's number one opening batsman.

Wes Robinson was a late starter, having been selected at almost 28 years of age to debut back in 2008. Now nearly 31, it is unlikely that he will push to be selected by the national teams and faces competition from Liam Davis to open with Marsh and/or 19-year old phenom Marcus Harris. Robinson protects the middle order, but does so at an almost glacial pace.

Number Three: Marcus North

Converted opener North is likely to feature at three for the Warriors this term in the absence of a true lynchpin. Both North and Adam Voges have skirted (North more successfully) the fringes of the Australian teams, offer dibbly-dobbly off-breaks to relieve the fast men into the Doctor, and will have to compensate for the loss of Luke Pomersbach, who's taken the year off for mental health reasons. Travis Birt could also enter the equation here.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/clivemoore/6250052095/

Middle Order: Michael Hussey and Adam Voges

One keeps on keeping on in the Australian XI. The other was given his marching orders and can focus on leading WA back to the top of the first-class game. When we doubt him, Hussey almost always speaks for himself - he clean swept the MOTM awards in Sri Lanka and picked up the series title as well. He won't play much though, so Birt or Mitch Marsh are likely to bat here.

Voges' reputation behoves better performances than those he's delivered. Once the power-hitting no. 4 of the future, he's now lucky to retain his place amidst youngsters like Marsh the Younger, Birt, Tom Beaton and Cameron Bancroft. He and North are nearly interchangeable - they average around 42 in First Class cricket, are 32 years of age. Where North's strength is as a leader (surprise, surprise, Australia fans!).

Voges is a respectable bowling average of 34. He's still in WA's top eleven, but only just. Leadership can buy a cricketer more time - think of Mark Taylor's horror run - so expect Voges to struggle for his spot before his captain does.

All-Rounder: Mitchell Marsh

By the age of nineteen, Geoff's younger son has become a bit of a great white hope in Australian cricket. Now, he represents his country, albeit in T20 colours. The hope is premised more on what he does in those coloured clothes as despite a maiden first-class century in 2010/11, he didn't do a whole lot either with bat or ball. Look closely at him this year, Australia, he could still be playing in 2028 or so.

Wicket-keeper: Luke Ronchi, but only just.

Like a number of players in the WA squad, he's been tried and discarded by the Australian team. Ronchi is hard-hitting bat whose form and technique has rather deserted him in recent seasons. Understudy Michael Johnson didn't do a whole lot in his two chances last season, but started the recent first class game against Tasmania.

Spinner: Michael Beer

Until last season, no-one had ever heard of Beer. That was until Shane Warne happened to mention his name and Andrew Hilditch took notice*. A full season (10 matches) for WA had the St. Kilda graduate (see where Shane got the name from?) take 21 wickets at a high average of 46. What stood out about Beer, despite no better than average figures, was his willingness to attack, give the ball flight and create doubt in the batsmen's mind.

Pacemen: Mitchell Johnson, Nathan Coulter-Nile, and Ryan Duffield

I question the ongoing permanence of Mitchell Johnson in the Australian test team, but he remains the leader of his adopted state's fast bowling attack. Despite myriad frustrations with him, we still know that he can turn on an amazing show when he's got his mind right. The Doctor only helps him, as his remarkable 9/82 in last year's Ashes proves.

Coulter-Nile and Duffield are youngsters who delivered exceptional numbers in 2010/11. Coulter-Nile's 21 wickets at 22 in four matches and Duffield's 33 wickets at 23 in seven matches pushed the 31 year old Michael Hogan out of the side. Coulter-Nile has been in particular singled out for high praise from coach Mickey Arthur, who suggests he's the only player in his team "locked in" for future Australian caps.

Who's locked in?

The pace attack is strong, and given its youth is unlikely to shift except for higher honours or injury. The same can be said for Shaun Marsh and Michael Hussey. Mitch Marsh must play, as must Beer - should he not displace Nathan Lyon for an Aussie spot.

What's disappointing?

The failure of Luke Pomersbach to come through as a truly top-end talent is sad for multiple reasons - not least his continuing battle with mental health issues. Mitchell Johnson's Australia tenure isn't over yet, but neither is it on as solid a footing as pre-Ashes.

Who's up next - or alternatively, who's loan bait?

Nathan Rimmington backs up the pace attack with Michael Hogan. Young batsmen Tom Beaton and Cameron Bancroft will be the next picked, while both Ronchi and Michael Johnson could cement the keeper's position with a good season.

* For the purposes of politeness, we have refrained from including our usual explosive swearing when he who shall not be named was, in fact, named.

Back to Sixty-Six Sigma homepage.

Target 2014

Whether Australia's 3-1 defeat at the hands of the Old Enemy doesn't really matter even though the gut feeling is that Australia's best side hasn't ever been as outplayed as convincingly as they were during this series. The Australia defeated yesterday was comprehensively outgunned and more disturbingly, out-thought.

According to Greg Baum of The Age, this was Australian cricket at it's deepest depths, it's perihelion, so heads must roll. Fair enough - but which ones? When examining the players who didn't perform - Hilfenhaus, Johnson, Hughes and Ponting chief among them - there aren't adequate candidates awaiting in first class cricket to replace them. There's undoubtedly the talent but it's either too young or too old to be considered ripe for representing their country.

The objective now must be to qualify for the inaugural Test World Championship mooted for 2014. It's only three years away and therefore it must be at the forefront of Cricket Australia's planning - to fail to qualify would be an embarrassment on a par with Canada failing to qualify for an Ice-Hockey tournament or New Zealand being eliminated in the first round of the Rugby World Cup. Only the four best Test-playing nations will be entered into that competition and it's now nearly impossible to argue that Australia form part of that quartet.

But all is not lost. To think back, four years ago England were humiliated to a similar extent by an Australian team no longer great but simply very good. Of the current Ashes tourists, seven played in the 2007 debacle. Once the correct path for regrowth is established for a nation, the regreening of their playing stocks can occur relatively quickly, especially with the amount of cricket currently played. In the next two years there are nineteen Tests against everyone from Bangladesh to South Africa and the "New Enemy" India, enough for youngsters to establish themselves and develop their own techniques coping mechanisms.

Of the seven Englishmen who returned to the antipodes this year, the only trundlers were James Anderson and Monty Panesar and Monty didn't play a match. It's the bowling stocks which needed refreshment and that's a situation with which Australia can readily identify. Ben Hilfenhaus and Mitchell Johnson must have exhausted the selectors patience by now and with Ryan Harris willing, though physically unable to be relied upon, the search for new-ball bowlers must begin in earnest, bowlers who can put the ball in threatening areas time and again. All of Peter George, Josh Hazelwood and James Pattinson have the talent and both Clarke and Ponting have shown they are serviceable leaders of fast men. There is hope for Michael Beer as the spinner designate and the sooner he is flown to India to learn from the great Indian spinners, the healthier Australian cricket will be.

More troubling is the lack of application displayed by the Australian batsman this series. Every single player got out with ill-advised shots and to a lack of patience. With questions still remaining over Shane Watson's position at opener and the longevity of Ponting and Hussey, their replacements must be young and given time to grow into their roles rather than shoehorned into position and told to perform. The focus isn't now crushing Bangladesh or beating Sri Lanka in 2011, it is ensuring that each player elevated to national player experiences the game in all conditions against the very best players the world has to offer. If a player - especially a batsman - has a future as a Test cricketer there is a good argument that they shouldn't be bothering with Twenty20. If T20s aren't played then enough space can be created in a player's schedule which could be used to hone their Test game further.

If Australia misses a Test World Championship in three years' time, the sport risks irrelevancy in the entire Pacific region. New Zealand hasn't been anywhere near the right path since several of their stars defected to the rebel ICL and Australia's slide into sub-mediocrity has been slow and painful. Change is needed, though not necessarily in personnel but in approach.

Lessons from the Past

When installed as captain of England in 1975, Tony Greig had a plan to revitalise his adopted country's Test form. After their innings defeat in the first Test at Edgbaston had cost his side the Ashes, he felt the batting was a misery - as collapsible as an accordion and just as flamboyant. As the new leader of the England cause, he decided to approach the problem in his own manner.

It was simple enough: Greig went straight to the best bowlers on the county scene and asked them who were the toughest players to dismiss. The answer came back unsurprisingly that inimitable Yorkshireman Geoffrey Boycott was one of the hardest. The second name that came back was a veritable shock - it was "The bank clerk who went to war", Northamptonshire's David Steele. A prematurely grey middle-order bat, thirty-four year old Steele sported a first-class average of only 31 and at AJ Greig's insistence was promptly selected to play against the two greatest attacks of the era, Australia and the West Indies. Boycott remained in exile, refusing to play for England in protest at being looked over for the captaincy.

Steele only played eight Test matches, yet averaged just over 42 for his Test career and the Anglocentric cricketing tome Wisden named him Cricketer of the Year in 1976. He scored 45 and 50 on debut and followed it up with his only hundred against the Windies the following year. It was a transitional time for the England squad with newcomers Mike Brearley, Graham Gooch and Bob Woolmer sandwiched between veterans Snow, Lever and Amiss. But Steele gave the England batting some spine sorely lacking and showed, more than anything, the youthful Gooch and Woolmer how to be a professional.

Gone are the days where shotgun selections pay the most benefit as every country's team has access to footage going back ten years. By reaching for Michael Beer in the hopes of uncovering another Peter Taylor, the Australian selectors showed their hand devoid of trumps. The first step in developing a team's fortunes is to make them hard to beat and though Australia's bowling stocks aren't anywhere near their nadir, the batsmanship on show has been laughably inept. As Mike Hussey ages there have been many questions as to his longevity in the national squad and now it may be in Australia's best interests to retain him as long as possible to help show the next generation how to prize one's scalp.

With Ponting probable to miss the Sydney Test and Phil Hughes's immediate status in jeopardy, the selectors could do worse than partnering Shane Watson and Hussey with other batsman who treasure their wicket. The current intent on playing to a certain style - getting on the front foot early, dominating the bowlers, scoring runs quickly - rather than just doing what best suits the situation is hurting Australia's prospects of a quick recovery from their current Test doldrums.

Pitching it up: A commentary

Matthew Wood investigates how much the pitch actually makes a difference.

As play during the Third Test match at the WACA ground showed, the character and life of a pitch is essential to the type of cricket that it produces. Long renowned as one of the fastest and bounciest pitches in the world, over the past decade or so the strip in Perth lost a lot of the speed that made it famous. Changes in the type of grass and the drainage system employed meant that suddenly the vicious fast-bowling paradise of yesteryear became an easier proposition for batsmen to take on and score runs.

In similar circumstances, Sydney's strip still holds it's name as a "turner" yet in recent Tests has become more bland as batsmen have increasingly controlled proceedings. The ground still "takes spin", but not to the same extent as during the 1980s where fair-to-middling spinners Bob Holland, Peter Taylor, Peter Sleep and, famously, Allan Border were able to bowl Australia to victory.

First under Dennis Lillee's control and now under fellow Test player Graeme Wood, the WACA has recently sought to rediscover its own pacy nature, sometimes at the expense of a full five days of cricket. The Third Ashes Test ended inside four days, meaning that the WACA itself was deprived of at least one day's attendance money, a sacrifice they seem prepared to make to ensure that the Perth strip maintains its reputation as a pitch that bowlers would like to carry around with them.

But the Perth Test's pacy strip didn't preclude performances; it's just that both batsmen and bowlers had to play well to get results. Hussey's technique was exemplary during his two innings and there's no coincidence that the guy with (probably) England's best technique, Ian Bell, was the pick of their batsmen. The bowlers who got rewards bowled to wont of the pitch and not to how they thought they should bowl.

As cricket increasingly becomes a business and revenue is all-important, making a Test match carry on for the full five days has become paramount to filling the pockets of state cricket associations. That, combined both with drop-in pitches and a subcontinentally-led trend towards One-Day strips favouring batsmen means since the mid-1990s each pitch in Australia has become more bland and, to a certain extent, lost their individuality.

The ideal pitch was always said to produce a result on the afternoon of the fifth day of a Test. That way, it ensured there was something in it early for the quick bowlers and something in it late for the spinners. Perhaps it's time to dismiss the notion that crowds and administrators get their money's worth by how long a match endures. Surely the quality of match ensures value for money, not the quantity?

In proof, The best One-Day match I have attended was in 1992 when the Australians defended 199 against a West Indies side at the tail end of their greatness. The pitch, the players and the situation made for great cricket, not the fact that the match went the distance. The match, in Melbourne, went to fifty overs per side but ended only just after 9.30pm.

Once Cricket Australia acknowledge that we watch cricket for astounding feats and just to kill three, eight or forty hours, then pitches the country over will hopefully begin to regain their own unique natures and we'll again have the greatest variety in the world of pitches. Also, Australia as a team would be so much the stronger because players in domestic competitions will have matured playing on different types of wickets and not the same uniform tracks which encourage a good eye rather than a good technique.

The WACA, an association faced with bankruptcy only a matter of years ago, has made the conscious decision to ensure the pitches they prepare are different and true to the form that's been the case in Perth over forty years of Test cricket. By being prepared to make the choice of identity over profit, they will in time benefit firstly as the Warriors develop a home-ground advantage that no other state can match, and also as fans flock to matches because a pitch that demands perfect technique will produce performances of the highest quality. I'd take three days of magnificent all-around cricket instead of five days of batting on a flat deck any day: we watch sport for the challenge as well as the result and the WACA, by remaining true to what it believes, has invigorated this Ashes series.

What's gone right for Australia?

These are dark times for the Rebel Alliance. After the attack on the Death Star... No, hang on, that's The Empire Strikes Back.

The reference may be valid anyway. One team has dominated the other so far this Ashes series and since Australia's crushing defeat at Hoth - sorry, Adelaide - and Simon Katich being frozen in carbonite - err, pulling up lame with achilles trouble - it appears as dark a time as can be remembered for the Australians. (I'm not suggesting England are actually evil, just dominant like the Empire were in the real Star Wars trilogy).

So without hint of jingoism it's time to examine after two Tests - one lamentably poor, the other suffering from one poor innings - what the Australians have done well through the start of this Ashes campaign. Obviously with Australian down 1 - 0 and with strife consuming the Baggy Green camp, the positives may be harder to find than negatives. To use Ricky Ponting's words - There are positives. To say what Ponting does not forces one to is to add - Australia is simply the inferior team this year. Although there are the following seven positives, it's unfortunate they come from a talent-deprived team and are overshadowed by negatives.

Nevertheless, on the plus side for the Australians are:

Mike Hussey's return to form

"Mr. Cricket" has been a millstone around Aussie necks for nigh-upon two years now, sprinkling poor performances with rigid batsmanship and an occasional impressive One-Day innings. He only made it into the First Test team by way of Khawaja and Ferguson failing to impress, yet has responded brilliantly: he's stroke-played, rather than ground out his scores. And best of all: he's the likeable Mike Hussey that Australia rallies around.

The Return of the Peter Siddle we all know and love

Peter Siddle's first innings hat-trick in Brisbane generated more hype than The Oprah Winfrey Show, yet in two subsequent innings he's been unable to reproduce the same bite and venom. That's not particularly surprising given his history of taking only a few wickets interspersed with occasional Michelles at Test level. What he does offer is abrasiveness, consistency - you know what you're going to get - and an optimism currently lacking in Mitchell Johnson's cricket.

Mitchell Johnson's omission from the Second Test

Harsh? No, not really. Because where we are as a cricket-playing nation is dependent on the whims and fragile confidence of Jess Bratich's boyfriend. When firing, Johnson is on a level with Dale Steyn as the best, most hostile fast men around. He was dropped for lack of form, but not discarded as having played out his usefulness like Jason Gillespie five years ago. His not playing in Adelaide hopefully will provide enough spark for him to rediscover his best form, but statements like "I need to get my head right" aren't inspiring - frankness regarding one's headspace just show how low confidence is, and how far one has to come to get back to full mental fitness.

Shane Watson's leadership

Hussey and Shane Watson, more than Ricky Ponting and much more than Michael Clarke have said what his team and the cricketing public of Australia have needed to hear: Australia have been second-best throughout this series. This comes from a man who two years ago I would have bet had played nearly his last Test for the Aussies and had less leadership ability than lettuce. Now an automatic selection, perhaps his nascent leadership ability could be used in the national setup.

Marcus North's failures at no. 6

Although affable, elegant and good captaincy material, Marcus North simply doesn't have what it takes to be a World Class number six batsman. Oh, for the days of Martin Love! Change is now inevitable at this position, and with North's career. That he has failed three times in three innings when Australia has needed him to fire means that he's now had enough chances. Only Simon Katich's injury - meaning Australia would perhaps take two "newbies" into the Third Test - may have saved his spot. An alternative: given Phil Hughes' shaky start to the Sheffield Shield season and North's past-life as an opener, it may be time to move him up the order to start the innings alongside Watson.

Brad Haddin

Personal opinion in cricketing circles vacillates between maintaining Haddin as 'keeper or going back to Tim Paine. Paine's injury obviously now precludes this, but so to does the form of the New South Welshman. Only two months ago he was a fading light but his application with the bat has earned him new respect.

The selectors' willingness to experiment

Xavier Doherty and Ryan Harris, two players who only three years ago were middle-of-the-road Sheffield Shield players are now Australian representatives, conjuring up memories of Simon Cook, Scott Muller and Matt Nicholson. But let's not forget that England have gotten their current attack to this quality by trying and discarding Sajid Mahmood, (Australia's) Darren Pattison, James Tredwell, Amjad Khan, Jon Lewis, Liam Plunkett, Shaun Udal and Ian Blackwell. In five years. Greg Chappell upset the Indian applecart by attempting to usher through new blood and it would seem he's intent on the same course as an Australian selector. All is not lost, Australia.

The battle is not yet half over. Given the disparity in consistent quality between the bowling attacks, Adelaide may well have always been the Test they were most likely to lose: it was where, should the bats fail, the bowlers would have the greatest difficulty getting them out of a mess.

But as a hopeful Return of the Jedi moment approaches for Australia as they move towards Perth, Melbourne and Sydney. It may be that Michael Clarke steps up to play Luke Skywalker (the one who's ostensibly the hero but still everyone thinks is a prat). Shane Watson could slide easily into that role also. The men in the Baggy Green would do well to focus on what they are doing well, rather than looking pessimistically at what they aren't doing.

Remembering the "A-Team", part 3

The Conclusion of our Special Feature on the twenty-fifth anniversary of the "A-Team's" Rebel Tour to apartheid-strewn South Africa.

For the record, I had rather a little too much fun working all this out.

To start with it was necessary to select the seventeen Rebel Tourists. What we did was to try and select the current players most resembling the 1985-87 tourists, based on his statistics up to that point, relative ages, reputations and playing styles. The ages don't tally up well because during that era players retired much earlier and as such a player at age 30 was much nearer the end of his career than a thirty-year old is today. Also matched, if possible, is their state of origin. As you'd expect, some comparisons proved easy, such as captain Hughes himself and the fast men while others weren't quite that simple.

In broad strokes, the touring party had to include:

- 7 players who played in Australia's most recent Test series (Australia in India),

- Australia's first-choice wicketkeeper, opening batsman and the two most damaging fast bowlers in the country, one out-and-out pace merchant and one who relies on the ball swinging,

and

- A few players who have played Test cricket but aren't currently around the team.

With these factors in minds, a direct comparison of the two teams could look a little like this:

"A-Team"	Current Equivalent	Reason for Selection / Comparison
Kim Hughes (c)	Mike Hussey (c) (WA)	Down-on-luck-and-form former best batsman in country, with spirit of the game first in thoughts
Terry Alderman	Ben Hilfenhaus (TAS)	Possibly Australia's premier fast-bowler, definitely the most rhythmic and best swing bowler
John Dyson	Phil Jacques (NSW)	NSW Opening batsman discarded by national selectors after being unable to convince despite opportunities
Peter Faulkner	John Hastings (VIC)	All-rounder capable with both bat and ball but without a dominant skill-set
Mike Haysman	Adam Voges (WA)	Exciting talent but largely ignored by national selectors. Also bowls useful off-spin.
Tom Hogan	Jason Krezja (TAS)	Tweaker examined and then ignored by national team leaders, perhaps unfairly. Also a reasonable bat and good team man.
Rodney Hogg	Mitchell Johnson (WA)	Inconsistent national teamer, match-winner on his day. Probably closer to the end of careers than care to admit
Trevor Hohns	Xavier Doherty (TAS)	Effective spinner with only middling first-class stats.
John Maguire	Nathan Bracken (NSW)	Fast-medium bowler with limited future Australian opportunities after being effecctively discarded
Rod McCurdy	Clint McKay (VIC)	Victorian fast-medium bowler with One-Day International experience but earmarked "Not of Test quality"
Carl Rackemann	Shaun Tait (SA)	Fastest bowler in Australia, more of a one-day specialist
Steve Rixon	Brad Haddin (NSW)	Incumbent wicketkeeper, perhaps reaching the end of his tether
Greg Shipperd	George Bailey (TAS)	Tasweigian top-ender never receiving adequate respect for abilities
Steve Smith	David Warner (NSW)	Swashbuckling opening bat, clearly labelled "Never again for Test matches"
Mick Taylor	Michael Klinger (SA)	Batsman toiling in obscurity yet with a fantastic average and many runs
Graham Yallop	Brad Hodge (VIC)	Experienced batsman inexplicably unselectable for Australia despite double-century within last five Test innings
Kepler Wessels	Shane Watson (NSW)	Best opener in country with most productive years ahead of him.

Now, if you were to put this squad down on paper against an Australian team suddenly deprived of their services the comparison becomes more interesting. The starting line-ups would probably look like:

Australia	Rebel Tourists
Simon Katich	Shane Watson
Phil Hughes	Phil Jacques
Ricky Ponting	Brad Hodge
Michael Clarke	Adam Voges
Usman Khawaja	Mike Hussey (c)
Marcus North	Michael Klinger
Tim Paine	Brad Haddin
Peter Siddle	Mitchell Johnson
Peter George	Clint McKay
Nathan Hauritz	Xavier Doherty
Doug Bollinger	Ben Hilfenhaus
12th Ryan Harris	12th George Bailey

Now if the challenge was to select one of these two squads to win a five match series, it isn't an easy choice. As the first Ashes Test so aptly reminded us, it's much easier to compensate for a lack of class in a team's batsmen than to replace premier strike bowlers. Because of this, any lack of batsmanship potentially suffered by the Rebels could be overcome by their stronger attack. True to form, the "A-Team" suffered more from batting inconsistencies than bowling impotency so comparison is encouraging at this stage.

Over the short term, a rebel tour today would gut Australian cricket stocks and first-choice depth would be reduced to such levels that the rebuilding would need to match that overseen by Simpson & Border. Like in 1985 with McDermott, Gilbert and Chris Matthews, the first choice bowlers would be inexperienced and as such returns would be unlikely until their successors had wrested control of the bowling positions. It wasn't Matthews and Gilbert who took Australia into their Golden Age but Merv Hughes, Bruce Reid and McDermott, who were around the national team within a year of the Rebel Tour but had yet to make their mark. This suggests that rather than the Peters George and Siddle, their eventual replacements - potentially Starc, McDermott Jr. and Pattinson - may prove the next strong Australian attack.

Again mirroring the situation in 1985, the batsmanship remains notably unaffected. Obviously without the services of Hussey and Haddin Australia would have lost the First Test with nary a whimper, but recently evidence indicates they're both on borrowed time at Test level. As with the bowlers, it wasn't the batsmen drafted in immediately to replace their A-Team counterparts who succeeded and subsequently helped form Australia into a world power. The team beaten for the Ashes in 1985 included three re-treads and one Tasmanian keg-on-legs newbie. Those retreads didn't survive for even a year as they were pushed aside by the exuberance of Jones, Marsh, Moody and Steve Waugh.

Subtracting seventeen high-quality players from any country's First-Class competition sets almost an entire generation to one side and brings through their successors irregardless of readiness. In 1985 that meant farewell to almost everyone born between 1955 to 1962 and a welcome to those born after that date. For Australia today, we could kiss good-bye to almost all our cricketers born from 1985 to 1990; meaning three to four years of pain before those born after 1990 mature to the point of being able to represent their country adequately. The younger generation then learns "the hard way" creating further teething problems followed by the results of that hard maturation process. It isn't just Australia who followed this process: the England teams that toured South Africa also went through growing pains before their eventual maturation. The West Indies had enough talent in the early 1980s to compensate for the Rebel teams that visited the Cape, testament to the ultimate strength and depth of West Indian cricket during that era. Those teams also included several older players rather than ones mid-career.

Though it's extremely unlikely that we will see another Rebel Tour, it's not too far-fetched an idea that a rebel cricket league such as World Series Cricket, the ICL or the Stanford Series could rob a country of many of it's top guns creating a similar talent-drain. Should the IPL become a larger concept then it could also conceivably do so. New Zealand has suffered since several national players signed ICL contracts including their premier bowler Shane Bond. Those once invincible West Indies now effectively suffers from Free Agency as players choose dollars over country. Should Australia - or indeed any country - lose seventeen of their top-level players then suddenly a team is thrust from gradual replenishment into full-throttle rebuilding.

Why they weren't picked

With the Australian side whittled down to thirteen as the first Test approaches, suddenly Callum Ferguson and (probably) Usman Khawaja have been left on the sidelines. The selectors have opted to stay with the same six batsmen who have led Australia to their current World ranking of fourth. The reason is simple: although the middle order has struggled mightily and watching Mike Hussey now reminds us all of David Boon's last, tedious, eyeball-stripping innings, neither the South Australian nor his younger New South Welsh counterpart have really made that final spot their own.

To look at Australia's last Test XI is to see mediocrity at several positions, namely in the middle order and the spin-bowling department. The team defeated in India will change, with Tasmanian Xavier Doherty replacing Nathan Hauritz on the strength of one good Sheffield Shield match and one outstanding ODI: his First Class figures aren't particularly impressive but he's performed well at the right time and thus has received the call.

The batsmen, however, are a different matter. Both Ferguson and Khawaja have had several chances recently to write their names in ink across the Aussie middle order yet have failed to do so; last week's paltry Australia A showings were the final nail in their collective coffins. Gone are the days of 1994-95 where Australia A were perhaps the second-best side in the World and this was proved emphatically at Bellerive as both "Next Best Things" surrendered their wickets to the English attack.

Khawaja or Ferguson would do well to heed the exploits of a young Damien Martyn. During the 1990s, an Australian had to force the selectors collective hands both with mountains of runs and with scores at the right time. The most striking example of this was in the early days of the West Indies 1992-93 tour. West Australian tyro Martyn was making runs for fun in the-then Mercantile Mutual Cup, in Shield matches and against a full-strength Windies pace battery in three separate matches. His front-foot slashes of Ambrose and Bishop to the extra cover boundary on a pacy WACA pitch were indelibly marked on my thirteen year-old brain as the most exciting cricket shots I'd ever seen. When the squad lists were submitted for the first Test at the 'Gabba, Martyn was there alongside an in-form Australian top six each of whom has claim to being an all-time great of the game. Martyn kept making runs and both popular and selector opinion was swayed immutably in his favour with a quickfire 36 against the tourists at Bellerive for the Australian XI. He made the team at the expense of Dean Jones.

It wasn't so much the weight of Martyn's runs that ensured his spot, nor the manner in which he scored them although his four-day Strike Rate nearing 100 was undoubtedly impressive. Damien Martyn was selected because he'd showed his readiness for the big time by making crucial runs in the right spots. When needing runs to cement his position, that one innings for Australian XI made not picking him a popular impossibility. The same stories apply with Matthew Elliott in 1997, Adam Gilchrist in 1999 and even Phil Hughes' 2008-09 domestic season: they made so many runs at the right time that Michael Slater, Ian Healy and Matthew Hayden were dumped so that Australia could progress. With mediocre recent form, neither Khawaja nor Ferguson have shown their mettle, posing the question: are they really ready? Are they ready to make the step up to Test match level?

As it happens, Usman Khawaja has been called up as an emergency replacement for a struggling Michael Clarke so we may well find out if he is ready anyway. Should Mike Hussey fail in Brisbane, we may find out how good a training-ground the Sheffield Shield really is. With many puzzling selections (and non-selections) over the past two years, it appears that Australia's selection panel has decided to award caps to guys they hope can do the job rather than to players they know can do the job. That's not their fault as there are more question marks over the strength of the Australian domestic competition than at any time since Packer - there isn't the same quality that inspires complete confidence in their delivering, so the next best thing is to plump for hope and call it development. What they can be pilloried for is the inconsistency with which they've applied this policy.

Neither Khawaja, Ferguson, Cameron White, Peter George, Mitch Starc or even Golden Child Steve Smith has forced the selection panel's to pick them even though Australia cries out for young talent to replace their ageing and tired top guns, now less howitzers and more derringers. Perhaps now we see more clearly why throughout the noughties so many Australian debutants have been aged in their late-20s and early-30s - the younger players just haven't had the responsibility that creates personal growth from an early age and so haven't taken it upon themselves to ensure their selection.