Kim Hughes....

The circumstances of the match were largely overlooked. Until it was significantly pointed out by the Australian coach Tim Nielsen, so too was the recent history of the first Test at the Gabba. And comparisons with Australia's similar decline in the 1980s, when their overall win-lost ratio in 92 Tests was 18-36 (5-16 against West Indies), were conveniently ignored.

Instead, we had this supercilious comment from Malcolm Conn, the long-serving writer for the Australian: "Have the West Indies really sent their full-strength team to Australia? Surely the real team must be still on strike, because if this is the best the combined might of the Caribbean can muster, then Test cricket is in terminal decline."

He was in the Caribbean with the Australian team in 1984 when West Indies did not lose a single second innings wicket in the five Tests, winning the series 3-0 on the way to six successive victories. As I recall, no one suggested then that Test cricket was in terminal decline because of it.

Nor was there any consideration by the West Indies board that the series "should be cancelled and all tickets refunded", the line Ben Dorries came up with in the Brisbane Courier-Mail after the Brisbane match. And, as bad as the Aussies were back then, they were not chided that their Test cricket had become "a complete and utter joke", another of Dorries' pearls.

Th captain of Australia during that dismal period was Kim Hughes.In his 28 Tests at the helm, Australia lost 13 Tests, against four victories. He resigned in 1984 after his team had been beaten for the fifth successive time by the West Indies, ironically at the same Gabba.

He cut a forlorn figure as he openly wept in front of the assembled media, pleading: "The constant criticism, speculation and innuendo by former players over the past four or five years have finally taken their toll". Given such a background, he might have been expected to keep his thoughts about the present situation to himself. Instead, he weighed in.

West Indies, he charged, were "an embarrassment to themselves", adding that Chris Gayle doesn't believe in Test cricket and "his body language suggests he doesn't want to captain".

"I'm a passionate person about Test cricket and this was not a Test," Hughes added. It was an observation that could be applied to his last five Tests against West Indies that produced two defeats by an innings, two by ten wickets and one by eight wickets. As he made his whimpering exit from the captaincy, did Hughes think, as he did now, that "it's not fair on sponsors and the public, who would be asking `why did you accept this lot'".

Shoeshine wrote:Anyone with the interests of world cricket at heart will be deeply concerned by the plight of the West Indies. But it is also true that people are quick to forget that things go in cycles a lot of the time. It's not that long ago we had some people talking about the Ashes dying because it was so one-sided.

Rob I wrote:

Shoeshine wrote:Anyone with the interests of world cricket at heart will be deeply concerned by the plight of the West Indies. But it is also true that people are quick to forget that things go in cycles a lot of the time. It's not that long ago we had some people talking about the Ashes dying because it was so one-sided.

All we had to do was to wait for (TGM)2 to get crocked or retire.....

In 2000 and 2004 I shouted in exultation at the Windies' humiliation. They had inflicted too much pain on England for far too long. But now watching them play tests is like watching a puppy get kicked about.

WIFAN wrote:
Indeed. But we did win the Wisden Trophy back earlier this year, if only for a month .

WIFAN wrote:Indeed. But we did win the Wisden Trophy back earlier this year, if only for a month .

WIFAN wrote:Yes but on the only decent wicket we thrashed you with an excellent brand of cricket. Disciplined batting followed by stumps flying all over the place.

At that point things were very much looking up but fate had other ideas.

Basil wrote:We had our chances to take that series, but:

a) We weren't good enough
b) Strauss's captaincy was too conservative

Saying that, nearly a year later, we are a more hardened/cohesive unit and, frankly, we would butcher the Windies now if that series was re-run.

Basil wrote:We had our chances to take that series, but:

a) We weren't good enough
b) Strauss's captaincy was too conservative

JKLever wrote:It's why Englands win in Jamaica in 1990 is one of my favourite test results.

WIFAN wrote:Two guys gave Swanny an absolute hiding. One Lendl Simmons who was a bit of a disappointment against the fast bowlers in May I freely admit.

The other was a certain Adrian Barath. Now he's been in the news a bit recently hasn't he? Barath is excellent against spin, unlike Devon Smith who any half decent finger spinner has a field day against.

But yes I was wrong to decry Swanny on that occasion as I had not seen him bowl for a year or so and he had obviously improved a huge amount from his previous performances in totesport cricket live on Sky.

JKLever wrote:

WIFAN wrote:Two guys gave Swanny an absolute hiding. One Lendl Simmons who was a bit of a disappointment against the fast bowlers in May I freely admit.

The other was a certain Adrian Barath. Now he's been in the news a bit recently hasn't he? Barath is excellent against spin, unlike Devon Smith who any half decent finger spinner has a field day against.

But yes I was wrong to decry Swanny on that occasion as I had not seen him bowl for a year or so and he had obviously improved a huge amount from his previous performances in totesport cricket live on Sky.

Ah yes Simmons & Barath. Well 1 out of 2 aint bad!