Retirements in cricket, how to.

[DizzywasRobbed]

Retirements in cricket, how to.

Well my username sorta gives this thread away.

What i would like is some opinion on is the way cricketers retire, in particular, Australian cricketers.

We are all aware that in the realms of AFL, servants to the club get a pretty good send off in their final match. The same can't be said for Australian cricket.

Yeah McGrath and Warne, Gilly, JL, got what they deserved, but what about the rest?

Dizzy, of course, but what about Marto? Border? M.Waugh? Slater? surely any cricketer, who was in particular, part of the dominant side of the late nighties/2000's, deserved some sort of send off.

I dare say Huss will be the next one in line to be simply 'replaced'.

Love to hear some opinions and/or protocols to be introduced.

Cheers.

 

[joshie91]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

Well my username sorta gives this thread away.

What i would like is some opinion on is the way cricketers retire, in particular, Australian cricketers.

We are all aware that in the realms of AFL, servants to the club get a pretty good send off in their final match. The same can't be said for Australian cricket.

Yeah McGrath and Warne, Gilly, JL, got what they deserved, but what about the rest?

Dizzy, of course, but what about Marto? Border? M.Waugh? Slater? surely any cricketer, who was in particular, part of the dominant side of the late nighties/2000's, deserved some sort of send off.

I dare say Huss will be the next one in line to be simply 'replaced'.

Love to hear some opinions and/or protocols to be introduced.

Cheers.

I agree with you mate. Unfortunately, cricket is a game of chance and if luck isn't on your side, you're gone. The only way that Australian cricketers get a send off is if they leave on their own terms. Dizzy was dropped, taken to Bangladesh and then 'left for dead', Martyn retired and Slater was, well, unfortunate.

By way of protocols and that jazz, it is unlikely that they will bring in a few rules to make sure that 'dropped' cricketers can get their farewell. As I mentioned before, it is unlucky how some players go, but that's just the way the cookie crumbles. Any thoughts?

 

[distributer of pain]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

Well my username sorta gives this thread away.

What i would like is some opinion on is the way cricketers retire, in particular, Australian cricketers.

We are all aware that in the realms of AFL, servants to the club get a pretty good send off in their final match. The same can't be said for Australian cricket.

Yeah McGrath and Warne, Gilly, JL, got what they deserved, but what about the rest?

Dizzy, of course, but what about Marto? Border? M.Waugh? Slater? surely any cricketer, who was in particular, part of the dominant side of the late nighties/2000's, deserved some sort of send off.

I dare say Huss will be the next one in line to be simply 'replaced'.

Love to hear some opinions and/or protocols to be introduced.

Cheers.

i suppose if players knew when their time was up then they'd get the send off they deserve, but not many players know when their times up, its too lucrative now days so everyone wants to play for as long as possible, im not sure about protocols they could use, if a player like huss is out of form the selectors arnt going to say score a ton or your gone, so IMO retiring is one thing, being dumped by the nationall team is another, a lot of dumped players feel if they can get back into form they'll make it back, but when your nearing 35 the odds are against you, and if they retire after their dumped im sure CA could find a jazzy convertable for them to do a lap of honour before their next home test.

 

[a for effort]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

The incorrect way to retire is the Steve Waugh method.

By than, I mean the 'hey everybody didn't I have a fantastic career, watch as I turn this massive series against India into the Steve Waugh show. What's that, we need 6 an over for the last session? I'm sure the crowd would much rather watch me crawl along to a nice big not out, because I'm Steve Waugh. Steve Waugh, Steve Waugh, Steve Waugh. I am Steve Waugh.

The correct way is the Anil Kumble method.

By that, I mean call a press conference on the eve of your final test (or in his case, the 4th evening), get your proper farewell and don't turn the whole match/series into a great big ego-boosting exercise.

 

[hattrick]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

I tend to think that it has become a marketing exercise and not something which the game should be actually have protocol. In South Africas last 3 years we had Shaun Pollock using a one day series to say goodbye.

The thing is personal and should be done in a respectful way for both your team and the opposition I think.I like the Anil Kumble method as mentioned by a for effort, do it in a classy manner.

 

[distributer of pain]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

yep, press conference, wave to the crowd and a bit of a piss up afterwards will do fine, no one wants to see tears and stuff.

 

[Caesar]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

i suppose if players knew when their time was up then they'd get the send off they deserve, but not many players know when their times up, its too lucrative now days so everyone wants to play for as long as possible, im not sure about protocols they could use, if a player like huss is out of form the selectors arnt going to say score a ton or your gone, so IMO retiring is one thing, being dumped by the nationall team is another, a lot of dumped players feel if they can get back into form they'll make it back, but when your nearing 35 the odds are against you, and if they retire after their dumped im sure CA could find a jazzy convertable for them to do a lap of honour before their next home test.

That's pretty much it.

The difference between the Australian cricket team and an AFL club is that the Australian side is a rep side. If you get dumped in AFL, it's by not having your contract renewed so you know your last game well in advance. Representative teams are different - you only get a send-off if you pre-empt the selectors and retire.

It's the same with the Wallabies in rugby, State of Origin teams in rugby league, national sides in soccer, etc. Unfortunate, but the nature of the game.

 

[Boris]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

i like to think that if a player serves your country long enough then they can have a bit more leeway to chose when they like. like matty hayden didnt get, the choice to leave when he wanted to even though he knew VERY big form was just around the corner. im pretty sure haydos was aiming for one last ashes tour... but instead was booted out by hughes and his flop so far.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

The incorrect way to retire is the Steve Waugh method.

By than, I mean the 'hey everybody didn't I have a fantastic career, watch as I turn this massive series against India into the Steve Waugh show. What's that, we need 6 an over for the last session? I'm sure the crowd would much rather watch me crawl along to a nice big not out, because I'm Steve Waugh. Steve Waugh, Steve Waugh, Steve Waugh. I am Steve Waugh.

The correct way is the Anil Kumble method.

By that, I mean call a press conference on the eve of your final test (or in his case, the 4th evening), get your proper farewell and don't turn the whole match/series into a great big ego-boosting exercise.

Agree with your call about not using the "Steve Waugh Method". But disagree quite strongly with your observation that Steve Waugh crawled along to a not out.

From memory we were never a realistic chance in that run chase, a draw was the only viable option which was achieved. Steve Waugh's objective was to save the game, winning it was a long shot, the fact people even expected us to try and chase down that target says a lot about your good we were back then.

I don't think there is any protocol and nor should there be.

Players who have served Australia well should be farwelled at the appropiate time. Some like Dizzy and Kasper will be dropped playing their last game in Australian colours in a foreign country. Kasper in SA, Dizzy in Bangladesh.

Those players should have a lap of honour at their respective home ground during the next international game involving Australia to give the chance for fans to thank the respective player for their efforts.

Other players will be lucky enough to forwarn the public of their intention to retire. But that announcement should NEVER overlay team goals. With Warne and McGrath the Ashes were already won when they made their announcement.

Thats the way it should be.

Those two players were all-time greats and the public were given the chance to say goodbye. At the time the team was, and still is, very well led by Ponting and he would have ensured the last two games didnt degenerate into a circus.

Personally, i prefer the way Hayden did it. Call a press conference and announce your retirement after your last test.

At the end of the day though we must remember that most players won't have a chance to say goodbye, and most will be kicked out the front door. Thats the way professional sport is.

The players will come and go but cricket will always stay.

 

[Boris]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

i personally prefer the players leaving the one last match to remember back to their past performances, not like hayden had to do and retire after the test. just the feeling of that players last test and being able to reminisce back.

i am finding that players are being treated as objects lately, that only the money that they make is all that they are worth. the pressure on them to be very commercialised is high and a bit unfair.

i prefer a heirachial system in the team. if you are the newest player you dont receive the benifits of the older players. the oldest players have a bit more leeway because australian cricket was lucky enough to find them and nuture them to the top. they served their country so the country should serve them back. i know its not the players right to be playing for australia, rather it is an honour, but its just like firing employees that have worked you for many years just because they are starting to look old and wrinkled and you would prefer a younger and better looking one, but not necessarily better performing.

and you say that players will come and go, but cricket will always stay.
that is very true. cricket australia only get one chance to have these players playing for them, and if they dont treat them right they lose their chance to have them playing.

players are more then just an object to win games, they are people with lives and they deserve to be honoured for serving and entertaining their country to the highest standard.

 

[distributer of pain]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

its a sticky one, im not sure about the saying good bye thing, they arnt dieing are they ?, i do think hayden should've been givin the chance to play the ashes, getting replaced by a 20 yr old must of been a slap in the face for him, i really dont know what the rush was to get hughes into the team, its not like he was going anywhere, just another of the countless mistakes the selectors made during that series, they all shoukld resign or be sacked.

 

[DizzywasRobbed]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

Yes, very much a supporter of looking at selectors as a full time position.

Basically these idiots didn't have too much to do for the better part of a decade, the team sorta ran itself with great success. Now selections, and bringing up younger players is a process they MUST get spot on to ensure successful longevity of the Aussie team, something they have not go right yet.

If they want to preserve ODI's then they should be using T20 as a developmental game for players only. Give it too much credit with household names and it is only a matter of time before it succeeds the 50 over game. It could be a great proving ground for the next batch of test hopefuls.

 

[distributer of pain]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

hayden should've at least toured, hughes did a wonderfull job in SA but it was just a matter of time before his weakness was revealed, only a small weakness IMO, if they were going to drop hughes at the 1st sign of trouble (which they did) surely another batting option was needed, hayden would've fitted the bill perfectly, watson did a great job but may have tired when he reached 50 odd, i know who the English would've prefered walking to the crease out of watson and hayden, after the ashes would've been a perfect time for hayden to go, he probably would've retired on his own terms then, just a shame.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

Yes, very much a supporter of looking at selectors as a full time position.

Basically these idiots didn't have too much to do for the better part of a decade, the team sorta ran itself with great success. Now selections, and bringing up younger players is a process they MUST get spot on to ensure successful longevity of the Aussie team, something they have not go right yet.

If they want to preserve ODI's then they should be using T20 as a developmental game for players only. Give it too much credit with household names and it is only a matter of time before it succeeds the 50 over game. It could be a great proving ground for the next batch of test hopefuls.

Im not sure what all this talk about ODI's being on shaky ground. The problem is that there is to MUCH ODI cricket. After these games against England we go to South Africa for the CT, then onto India for some more ODI's.

Fundamentally I think ODI cricket has it spot on. The late Sir Don Bradman was a massive fan of One day cricket, a fact many people aren't aware of. The problem is that there is too much of it, consquently, it is impossible for all the best players to play and therefore the talent on show is diluted.

Some of the most memorable games I have ever seen have been One day internationals. I still remember the ODI's following the 2001 test series in India, they were great contests.

I remember the 2001/2002 Tri series between SA, NZ and Aus and Bevan's effort to lead us to victory. I remember watching some cracker games in the 2003 World Cup, one in particular was against NZ. We were 7/90 at one stage, got to 200, then destroyed NZ. Brett Lee bowled one of the quickest spells I have ever seen in the followin game against Sri Lanka. I still remember Attapattu's off stump go flying after he missed a full and straight one by the best part of 10 inches.

Who can forget the TVS cup final against India in late 2003. Australia win defending a small total with the likes of Bracken, Williams and Harvey getting us home to a tight contest.

I still love ODI's, they are long enough to allow teams to fight back after a poor start, unlike T20's, and at times the skills IMO eclipse test cricket.

I get the feeling that these days people talk themselves into believeing that ODI's are finished. People complain about the so called "boring middle overs". Well what do you want? 4's and 6's? go and watch T20.

The solution is to cut down on the amount of ODI's, this current series should be either a 3 match series or a 5 match series. 7 is too long, obviously the ECB know that these games will sell out and they can cash in at the end of the Ashes series.

ODI cricket can provide some great entertainment.

 

[Boris]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

Im not sure what all this talk about ODI's being on shaky ground. The problem is that there is to MUCH ODI cricket. After these games against England we go to South Africa for the CT, then onto India for some more ODI's.

Fundamentally I think ODI cricket has it spot on. The late Sir Don Bradman was a massive fan of One day cricket, a fact many people aren't aware of. The problem is that there is too much of it, consquently, it is impossible for all the best players to play and therefore the talent on show is diluted.

Some of the most memorable games I have ever seen have been One day internationals. I still remember the ODI's following the 2001 test series in India, they were great contests.

I remember the 2001/2002 Tri series between SA, NZ and Aus and Bevan's effort to lead us to victory. I remember watching some cracker games in the 2003 World Cup, one in particular was against NZ. We were 7/90 at one stage, got to 200, then destroyed NZ. Brett Lee bowled one of the quickest spells I have ever seen in the followin game against Sri Lanka. I still remember Attapattu's off stump go flying after he missed a full and straight one by the best part of 10 inches.

Who can forget the TVS cup final against India in late 2003. Australia win defending a small total with the likes of Bracken, Williams and Harvey getting us home to a tight contest.

I still love ODI's, they are long enough to allow teams to fight back after a poor start, unlike T20's, and at times the skills IMO eclipse test cricket.

I get the feeling that these days people talk themselves into believeing that ODI's are finished. People complain about the so called "boring middle overs". Well what do you want? 4's and 6's? go and watch T20.

The solution is to cut down on the amount of ODI's, this current series should be either a 3 match series or a 5 match series. 7 is too long, obviously the ECB know that these games will sell out and they can cash in at the end of the Ashes series.

ODI cricket can provide some great entertainment.

exactly, good post.

i am not exactly sure on cutting them down. maybe perhaps not having T20s would be a better idea altogether, but thats obviously not going to happen.

they are now for me a traditional game, no longer a new one, and as such has developed very well and become almost as important as tests.

the only problem i have with ODIs is the powerplays. it is alright having the first 10-15 overs with players inside the ring as it used to be, but the batting and bowling powerplay is just stupid. get rid of them and a great game would be even better.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: Retirements in cricket, how to.

I agree mate, it annoys me when everyone goes on about ODI's, inadvertently everyone is convincing themselves that the game is dead. That comment I said about Bradman and ODI's comes from a meeting Steve Waugh had with the great man in late 99 and Waugh asked him what he thought of ODI cricket. To Steve Waughs surprise, Bradman said he loved it.

If it's good enough for Bradman then surely its good enough for us.

One problem I do have however is the use of slow bowlers, with moderate skill levels, being used to dry runs on slow pitches once the ball starts to get soft. This is normally in the range of the 25-40 over mark.

One possible solution to this would be to use a new ball at each end.

You'd have a number of positives IMO.

1) More interesting byplays - imagine what would happen if one ball at one end was swinging and the other ball wasn't. There has always been the talk that some balls swing and others don't? This would provide an interesting aspect of the contest.

More help for the bowlers and batsmen - Additionally bowlers would have a ball that keeps its seam longer, while conversely batsmen will enjoy the hardness associated with the newer balls.

The result?

More wickets, more runs.

You'd also remove the problem of ball colouration, im not sure about anyone else, but at times watching Day/night games its hard to see the ball on tele because of the discolouration of the ball.

So a better visual experience for the spectators.

I believe this configuration has bene used before in the 92 WC. I cant remember what the conclusions were? Maybe we could revisit this setup in our domestic comp.

Im especially interested about the possibility of one ball swinging at one end, and the other going dead straight. Would batsmen go after the gun-barrell straight bowler?

In the process bowlers are likely to become more versed in what is required to swing the ball, therefore improving bowlers skills.