Rotate on This!

By Scott 2 years ago, at the end of January Leave a comment on this post

There’s a packed out crowd at the Adelaide Oval, but I am not there. I don’t feel much like paying $50 for my favourite grandstand seat when Australia’s cricket team doesn’t think it is that important a fixture.

I am sure if you asked them, they would say that they are treating this as a serious match, will be giving 100% effort, and all that sort of thing. But if that were true, I am sure Ricky Ponting would be playing. Actions speak louder then words. This rotation policy is a farce.

So do inactions, which is why I’m watching the game at home.

Tags: adelaide-oval, australia, ricky-ponting, rotation-policy |

Comments to “Rotate on This!” Wraye wrote:
January 26th, 2006 at 10.22 pm

well, I followed the game on cricinfo, and towards the end when Murali got his 2 wickets, I thought there might have been a game on, but no luck.

It’s strange. I am normally nuts about cricket but recently this Pak-India travesty and the VB leaves me somehow feeling pretty neutral. Do you know what I mean?

SpryCorpse wrote:
January 26th, 2006 at 10.51 pm

I think it’s a little harsh to be labelling a farce the process of giving senior players who are playing an enormous amount of cricket a bit of a break.
I’m delighted that the Aussies came through with the goods without Punter having to lead the way.
Gilchrist had a break and came back with his highest score for a while now.
It also gives other guys a chance to advance their own causes for World Cup selection.
Pros and cons, yes - but perhaps not entirely farcical.

Stu wrote:
January 27th, 2006 at 3.45 am

I am in favour of the rotation policy, but Scott has a point - he’s in Adelaide - Adelaide get far fewer ODIs than Melbourne and Sydney, so he misses out on seeing Ricky Ponting! Not an angle I had considered, but it’s for the “greater good” right…

Nick wrote:
January 28th, 2006 at 7.07 am

I’m not a fan of the rotation policy or of ‘resting’ key players. I believe that if you are playing a sport at the top level, you should be able to play every game unless injured. Plenty of other sportsmen do it with greater work loads that cricket.
That said, I think it is important for new faces to get a run, and for the calendar to stay full. If rotating players is the only way to achieve this, then so be it.
It is also a matter of perspective. If you asked a player from one of the nations that doesn’t get to play much cricket, I reckon they would tell you they’d be happier playing 365 days of the year, than the little they get now.

Stu wrote:
January 28th, 2006 at 11.19 pm

I wouldn’t be in favour of rotating players in Test Match series either - which I feel is really the top level, and I don’t think players would agree to rotation there either. ODIs are a bit different.

Harry wrote:
January 29th, 2006 at 7.22 am

Nick I’m not sure your completely right. Cricket can be quite as tiring as any other game. Batsman at times have to bat for periods of 50 overs or more and i know the few times i have managed that i have not been able to walk for a week. And that’s not mentioning all the fielding, or the work the fast bowlers have to do! Lleyton Hewitt and Ian thorpe are a couple of elite sportsman to have recently taken massive breaks, and even Steven Gerrard will get games off at liverpool when the work load is a lot. I’m sure Ponting would love to play when ever he can, so if he’s taking a break then good for him.

Comments

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

« Ashley Giles doubt for India | Main | Who ate all the pies? »

The Corridor (a cricket blog)

"Peering down the corridor of uncertainty. It’s about cricket, sport and journalism"

Quotehanger

Recent Posts

The headlines

The news

TWC

Related pieces

Search

Eat your feeds

Tags

Tag Cloud

Polls

Sponsors ?

Cricinfo blogs

Cricinfo articles

Scorecards

Rotate on This!