Will Australia sink as low as the Windies?

Yep, I was referring the present squad. If he can clear some of them out it will help.

Of course, that would have helped Arthur as well.

AUS have a lot of pace bowling talent, their batsmen will get better if they follow my idea(read the other threads for my idea)

The Pakistani leg spinner should be given a chance too

PeterCS wrote:I agree with taips' comment re: Lehmann.

Except he doesn't exactly have to be a miracle worker to "get results". He just needs a bunch of unspoilt-brat players, who will commit themselves to technical application, rather than self-obsessing, bellyaching, tattoo choices and bitching about their opportunities.

To be fair though, that would be a miracle  

Henry wrote:
The whole "Lehmann's a great bloke who commands respect....there's a great team spirit and they're all having fun" thing will start to wear thin very quickly with Aussie fans if Australia don't start winning soon. They'll want to see actual technical improvements, rather than just smiling faces (which isn't a good look when you're losing)

Lehmann smiling at Lord's...

Henry wrote:
I have no doubt Lehmann is a great guy, but I suspect he's better off working with a successful, established team rather than a struggling one...

Or Allan Border. He captained a team from the depths of despair in the early to mid 80s, to a world cup win in 1987, to close to the second best team in the world from 1989 until 1994. He knows his stuff.

Or.....or......Duncan Fletcher?...  But would Australia allow a floppy-faced old Zimbabwean complete control over Australian cricket in the way English cricket allowed him complete control? The collective ego would probably say "no way."

I don't quite get your beef Trev? Darren Lehmann is an exceptionally qualified candidate. You seem to be casting around for someone else just because. I don't think anyone thinks he's a miracle worker. I mean, he's only been in the job for a few weeks for Christ's sake!

It's worth remembering that Allan Border did not start out as a strong leader. He was made captain against his wishes because there was no one else. After Australia lost to New Zealand at home in 1985/86 Border threatened to quit unless he had the unconditional support of his team.

It was at this point Australia appointed Bobby Simpson as coach and he deserves as much credit as Border for turning things around. It didn't happen overnight - things remained horrible until the 1987 World Cup.

Australia doesn't need to look overseas for its coach because it has a very strong pool to draw from on these shores. That's not an ego thing - it's just the way it is. Coaches aren't just technicians helping players right their technical failings, they are leaders in their own right. I don't think it makes Australians xenophobic to prefer an Australian to be in charge of the Australian team. A former Australian Test cricketer can ask things of his players that others simply cannot.

Pff you young whippersnapper Poms sticking in the knife when Australia are down. I had reservations about Boof's appointment long before all these proclamations.

"You young whippersnapper Poms". Do you mean Trevor? Or Horace?

Or me?

Hass wrote:

Henry wrote:
I have no doubt Lehmann is a great guy, but I suspect he's better off working with a successful, established team rather than a struggling one...

Or Allan Border. He captained a team from the depths of despair in the early to mid 80s, to a world cup win in 1987, to close to the second best team in the world from 1989 until 1994. He knows his stuff.

Or.....or......Duncan Fletcher?...  But would Australia allow a floppy-faced old Zimbabwean complete control over Australian cricket in the way English cricket allowed him complete control? The collective ego would probably say "no way."

I don't quite get your beef Trev? Darren Lehmann is an exceptionally qualified candidate. You seem to be casting around for someone else just because. I don't think anyone thinks he's a miracle worker. I mean, he's only been in the job for a few weeks for Christ's sake!

It's worth remembering that Allan Border did not start out as a strong leader. He was made captain against his wishes because there was no one else. After Australia lost to New Zealand at home in 1985/86 Border threatened to quit unless he had the unconditional support of his team.

It was at this point Australia appointed Bobby Simpson as coach and he deserves as much credit as Border for turning things around. It didn't happen overnight - things remained horrible until the 1987 World Cup.

Australia doesn't need to look overseas for its coach because it has a very strong pool to draw from on these shores. That's not an ego thing - it's just the way it is. Coaches aren't just technicians helping players right their technical failings, they are leaders in their own right. I don't think it makes Australians xenophobic to prefer an Australian to be in charge of the Australian team. A former Australian Test cricketer can ask things of his players that others simply cannot.

Proves my point really.

So realistically, who is in the "very strong pool"? Was Tim Nielsen a part of that? Who else? Lehmann....and? Bear in mind that a coach needs to do more than say "come on lads, let's get out there and DO THIS!"

If there's so much coaching talent to draw from, then why aren't they drawing from it?

They conducted quite an extensive search for Tim Nielsen's replacement in the wake of the Argus report, and they decided that Mickey Arthur was the man to lead Australia back to the top. 18 months later, it seems they panicked after a few bad results and off-field issues and made him a scapegoat for the failings of a much wider and more established base.

I've done nothing but lift Aus while they're down. I'm like Motherf*cking Theresa

You're Fred Flintoff, bending over Lee and mumbling:

Any chance of a BJ now, Brett? Spose not.

No - I'm full to the brim with altru-f*cking-ism. Qunt!

So come on, who are the alternative coaches if Aus can't pick an Aussie and want to get rid of Arthur?

baggygreen wrote:So come on, who are the alternative coaches if Aus can't pick an Aussie and want to get rid of Arthur?

John Wright.

But John Wright's a good man.

Hass wrote:I don't quite get your beef Trev? Darren Lehmann is an exceptionally qualified candidate. You seem to be casting around for someone else just because. I don't think anyone thinks he's a miracle worker. I mean, he's only been in the job for a few weeks for Christ's sake!

It's worth remembering that Allan Border did not start out as a strong leader. He was made captain against his wishes because there was no one else. After Australia lost to New Zealand at home in 1985/86 Border threatened to quit unless he had the unconditional support of his team.

It was at this point Australia appointed Bobby Simpson as coach and he deserves as much credit as Border for turning things around. It didn't happen overnight - things remained horrible until the 1987 World Cup.

Australia doesn't need to look overseas for its coach because it has a very strong pool to draw from on these shores. That's not an ego thing - it's just the way it is. Coaches aren't just technicians helping players right their technical failings, they are leaders in their own right. I don't think it makes Australians xenophobic to prefer an Australian to be in charge of the Australian team. A former Australian Test cricketer can ask things of his players that others simply cannot.

I don't think that the last para holds true. Surely anyone who is deemed to be in a position to do the job well is worthy. Though not the same at all in that there aren't many good Indian coaches suited to coaching the national team, we used to say that a foreigner wouldn't know how to manage Indians before John Wright was hired, and as has turned out our two best coaches have been foreigners. An Australian may well be best suited to the job, but I don't think that just being an Australian test player should be count over another country's who's apparently equally qualified.

Despite all the escapegoat^TM claims, Arthur's time was a failure for washing dirty linen in the public, much like Greg Chappell did for India, and when the results didn't meet requirements... It would also be wrong to say that nothing positive would come out of Arthur's tenure, if not conspicuous immediately, then could be in the future. For one, players will likely have learnt about homework, to whatever extent.. Maybe Lehmann could be Australia's Simpson/Kirsten, maybe not, but far too soon to write him off.

its funny. our worst coach was australian. the kiwi and the saffie did very well. jury out on the zimbot, not so pretty so far

I think old Fletch-dog is finally allowed to stamp his mark on the side.. the oldies don't even warrant selection or have retired.

The One wrote:its funny. our worst coach was australian. the kiwi and the saffie did very well. jury out on the zimbot, not so pretty so far

I can't accept this. Surely an ex Aussie test player is better than anyone else.

baggygreen wrote:

G.Wood wrote:Chivy makes a reasonable amount of sense.  

Australia's strength used to be the quality of the Sheffield Shield competition.  Particularly that there were plenty of bowlers near test class playing most of the games (eg Kasper, Bichel). This made the step up from 1st class to tests much easier for batsmen.

But these days the bowling has dropped right off with the best bowlers either away playing (tests, ODIs, IPL etc), rested or injured.  On top of this most of the games are played on roady roads.  You just don't have to be that good of a batsman to score runs.  

It is little wonder that our batsmen struggle when they come up against the likes of Jimmy or a spinner that gets some spin.

That situation does not look like changing any time soon so it will be quite a few years before we get back up to a standard of challenging the top 3.

Bird, Faulkner, Butterworth, Sayer, Putland, Richardson, Hazelwood all say hi.

That's good because I was thinking of them when I wrote that.

That lot in the same class as Jimmy - funny

taipan wrote:

The One wrote:its funny. our worst coach was australian. the kiwi and the saffie did very well. jury out on the zimbot, not so pretty so far

I can't accept this. Surely an ex Aussie test player is better than anyone else.

may have helped stop the famous yarpie chokes

G.Wood wrote:

baggygreen wrote:

G.Wood wrote:Chivy makes a reasonable amount of sense.  

Australia's strength used to be the quality of the Sheffield Shield competition.  Particularly that there were plenty of bowlers near test class playing most of the games (eg Kasper, Bichel). This made the step up from 1st class to tests much easier for batsmen.

But these days the bowling has dropped right off with the best bowlers either away playing (tests, ODIs, IPL etc), rested or injured.  On top of this most of the games are played on roady roads.  You just don't have to be that good of a batsman to score runs.  

It is little wonder that our batsmen struggle when they come up against the likes of Jimmy or a spinner that gets some spin.

That situation does not look like changing any time soon so it will be quite a few years before we get back up to a standard of challenging the top 3.

Bird, Faulkner, Butterworth, Sayer, Putland, Richardson, Hazelwood all say hi.

That's good because I was thinking of them when I wrote that.

That lot in the same class as Jimmy - funny

If they're having a good day and he's on the bottom of the Anderson cycle ....

G.Wood wrote:

baggygreen wrote:

G.Wood wrote:Chivy makes a reasonable amount of sense.  

Australia's strength used to be the quality of the Sheffield Shield competition.  Particularly that there were plenty of bowlers near test class playing most of the games (eg Kasper, Bichel). This made the step up from 1st class to tests much easier for batsmen.

But these days the bowling has dropped right off with the best bowlers either away playing (tests, ODIs, IPL etc), rested or injured.  On top of this most of the games are played on roady roads.  You just don't have to be that good of a batsman to score runs.  

It is little wonder that our batsmen struggle when they come up against the likes of Jimmy or a spinner that gets some spin.

That situation does not look like changing any time soon so it will be quite a few years before we get back up to a standard of challenging the top 3.

Bird, Faulkner, Butterworth, Sayer, Putland, Richardson, Hazelwood all say hi.

That's good because I was thinking of them when I wrote that.

That lot in the same class as Jimmy - funny

Nothing to do with Jimmy. Unless of course, you were insulting him in that you don't think Anderson is test quality but I thought it was Red who was covering that angle.

We've never recovered from Joe Dawes retiring

I was using Jimmy as an example of Test Class. But I guess Johnson played tests and that lot would be in his class

G.Wood wrote:I was using Jimmy as an example of Test Class.  But I guess Johnson played tests and that lot would  be in his class

The crazed Midge was on the radio spruiking his form and that he is prepared for a callup to the Test team...

just what we need - a bowler whose skills and discipline match the batting expertise of nix, fuse, schoolgirl, haddit and the gcs...it is a wonder that he does not play for NSW