View Single Post
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 31-10-2007, 12:00 PM in reply to greg's post starting "If the 36 year old is better than the..."
flanflinger's Avatar
flanflinger flanflinger is offline
WAT England A Selector-2005
WAT Journalist  Read my Articles
(AUS-captain) Passed Kim Hughes' 4415 Test runs
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bristol
My main national team: England
My other team/s: Surrey and the Mighty Mighty Quinns
Posts: 4,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by greg View Post
If the 36 year old is better than the 23 year old and is already proven at test level then surely it makes sense to pick the 36 year old for now,
If you are re-building a team, why include a player that will mean in three years time you are going through the process all over again.

The fact is that Warne and McGrath both burst into the team in their early twenties, and became great players, but if you are going to remain Number 1, you need to find the next generation of greats. For me picking Hogg and MacGill would be brilliant in the short term, but could be disastrous for Australia long term. As it is if they want to go down that route, than I am happy!!
Reply With Quote