Doctor Who Club of Australia

[Cyril Washbrook]

Damien Martyn, by all accounts, had a poor Ashes series. Averaging less than 20 is a low standard for someone of his calibre, and in a losing side, you've got to expect to cop some flak. However, to see him dropped from the side despite being the most consistently performing Australian batsman for five years goes beyond belief. You could say that sentimentality cannot rule the selectors' minds - that past endeavours cannot excuse poor form. However, let's take a look at some facts.

Last year, Damien Martyn was Australia's test player of the year. He notched up 1353 runs at a more than tidy average of 56.37. He fell only a few votes short of winning the Allan Border Medal, and was heralded as being in the best form of his life. In 2004, he had batted better than any other Australian had in the past decade in India, consistently frustrating the Indian bowlers with a game built on a bedrock of patience. The Ashes of 2005 proved to be his first substandard series for nearly two years, going back to his stretch of poor form that had lasted through most of 2003. Back then, he had a run of four or five series where he could barely get past 40, yet was retained in the side on the basis that the team was winning and he had contributed much to the side since his return in 2000.

Yet now, the Australian selectors have abandoned him. One bad series was enough to derail his international career. His chances appear slim of returning to the Australian side. It is not impossible, but for a 34-year-old, it is improbable.

The sheer injustice of it all is highlighted by the case of Matthew Hayden. Not since Sid Gregory at around the turn of the century had a specialist Australian batsman gone for more than thirty innings without a century. Steve Waugh took 27 innings before notching up his first, and that's about as close anyone else has got. Not only was his form bad, it was consistently bad. Because of his high profile around the world, he stayed in. It helped that Australia were winning. Yet if the same circumstances were applied to Hayden, he would have been dropped in early 2004 when his form began to slide. Sure, he scored a century in the final test, but given his disastrous form for a year, he is exceptionally fortunate to still be in the Australian side.

Dean Jones said that Damien Martyn has had long enough to cement his place in the side. Isn't being Australia's test player of the year, almost winning the Allan Border and being arguably Australia's most consistent batsman over the last five years enough to cement a place in the side? Or do the Australian selectors throw out all the bricks when the mortar starts to crack?

Anyway, enough rambling...your opinions (and vote in the poll).

[meglos]

Martyn being dropped is an absolute bloody disgrace. He has been the scapegoat again

[Cyril Washbrook]

[rundoctoritsthegatherer]

I remember being at the SCG the day he could have won the game for Australia against South Africa, and instead of letting Craig McDermott do the work as he had all morning, he decides to lash out and get caught, ensuring Australia once again failed chasing a three figure target starting with 1. He should never have been chosen to play for Australia again, and I'm glad he's gone.

Having said that, your poll should have an option "Yes, he's a rubbish player but I still want to chop off the head of Trevor Hohns". The man is useless - he bows to Ricky Ponting pressure and insists on picking Andy Symonds when the whole country knows he is crap, and keeps dropping Simon Katich even though he is scoring runs. I saw Michael Slater grilling Allan Border about that during the Indian tour when they dropped Katich for Ponting to come back, after Katich had filled in more than admirably for Ponting at number 3 in the first 3 tests and was not even close to being our worst batsman. The traitor had no answers. He was squirming in his seat and his pissweak "it's a hard one, and we had to drop somebody" fooled no one. At least he isn't a selector anymore. Hayden can consider himself more than just lucky he is still in the side. He should have been dropped before the Ashes, let alone before the series ended. The sooner the Qld influence on the selection committee is gone the better.

[Cyril Washbrook]

[meglos]

Cyril, you are absolutley spot on!

[rundoctoritsthegatherer]

Knew I'd get at least one of you going with my post.

I'm not Damien Martyn's biggest fan, and I've never made any secret of that fact, but certainly one Hayden, M. should've been dropped before considering anyone else in the last test side for a return to state cricket. The fact that he was even chosen for the Ashes tour, let alone in every test in the series smacks of favourtism, which is the way the Aussie cricket team works.

Why was Michael Slater dropped? He wasn't playing badly at the time - but stories surfaced (true or not I don't know) about him fooling around with Adam Gilchrist's wife. Result - never played for Australia again. Matthew Elliott, another player I'm not a massive fan of, had a great tour of England (didn't he score 199 in one of his test innings?) came home and told his wife about all the sorts of things players did on tour, including all the sordid details. Word spread like wildfire that he had broken the golden rule - "what happens on tour stays on tour". Result - never played for Australia again, despite kicking arse for Victoria in the Sheffield Shield. I'm guessing that Damien Martyn has done something (or not done something) that has pissed off someone in high places, or at the very least, not stayed mates with the right people.

There are several other examples. Why was Andy Bichel permanent 12th man for 10 years? Bowlers came and went, some worthy of a test spot and others laughable (the can't throw can't catch fiasco springs to mind), but Andy Bichel only played a handful of tests, despite the fact he never let Australia down and could bowl into the wind when none of the other quicks wanted to. Why was Andy Symonds picked in the World Cup? Sure he had a great tournament, but his form going into it hardly warranted selection. His form after it has been far from consistent either, yet he continues to be chosen. Why? He's a good mate of Ricky Ponting. Why was Ian Healy picked for Australia after something like 6 first class games and there were at least 3 better keepers playing Shield cricket at the time? Why was he dumped so quickly for Adam Gilchrist after being vice captain for years? Why did Allan "the traitor" Border promise him he could play his last test at the Gabba, his home ground, and then not select him? Why was Stuart McGill not given a gig in the Ashes, despite the fact that there were pitches that turned, Shane Warne was knocking them over like flies (40 wickets in the series is a damn fine effort) and the quicks weren't really doing their jobs well. Gillespie just seems to have lost it, after that freak injury before the second test McGrath just couldn't get it right when he did play, Lee was good in patches, and Shaun Tait was nothing short of woeful at times. McGill still wasn't given a go.

I could go on for pages. There are several more selections over the past 10 years and more that defy conventional logic. Fact is, we may never know the real reason Damien Martyn was dropped, and I'm sure it won't be the last decision made by the selectors that baffles cricket followers in this country.

[meglos]

Some valid points in there as well rundoc. There are so many things I could say on this matter but I don't know where to start or finish so I think I'll just keep scratching my head

[Cyril Washbrook]

[rundoctoritsthegatherer]