Another rant about cricket

James Pattinson (middle) celebrates yet another wicket, leaving me both happy and humbled.

On the same day that a raw and undeserving Australian bowler proved his value to the national team, the Sunday Age published a now-redundant rant by yours truly.

What they should do... is publish my comments on days when I'm less likely to sound like a fool.

In my contribution to the sport section’s “What They Should Do…” column (4/12, p.24), I wrote how Australian selectors should choose players according to statistics alone, not their name/media profile.

The irony of course is that James Pattinson would not have taken a match-winning 5/27 if the selectors followed my policy. Instead they would have picked someone like Jayde Herrick, who probably would have picked up one – maybe two – wickets at best.

Likewise, my policy would have prevented the selectors from choosing somebody like Nathan Lyon, who was also vital in Australia’s annihilation of New Zealand this week.

In light of that, I hope you enjoy my article (click on the picture on the right). It contains a very unsubtle poke at Steven Smith and I believe that alone is good reason to read it.

This is the second comment I’ve had published in this section of The Age. Click here for my other contribution.

For yet another unjustified complaint about the cricket selectors, click here.

Advertisements