As an non-Aussie, it appears to me that there is some sort of clique in the Australian team. Otherwise how can Johnson and North retain their place? Reading the Australian press today online, the readers' comments are scathing about those two.
Can our resident Aussies shred some light?
---------- Post added at 07:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:25 PM ----------
Well Johnson's still there because he is lethal at his best, and without Lee, McGrath and Warne (one of the best bowling lineups ever), he has to take on a leadership role, even though he's not consistent enough to achieve that regularly. It will take a lot for him to be dropped.
North retains his spot because, for every 5 or so low scores, he pops up with a hundred. It's basically all or nothing for North...and he always seems to get a hundred at the right time, when his position is in doubt. He's also a handy bowler and good fielder. Selectors are also hesitant to drop the older players, because they know if they drop him, they won't recall them in most instances...and they don't want to risk betting on a youngster, and having an even worse result.
Their policy of not recalling players killed Brad Hodge's international career, despite the fact he continued to be one of the best state comp performers for years after he was dropped.
And to the person who suggested Tait...yes, he is terriffic, but he would break down in a test....very easily. Or he'd have to bowl slower, which would reduce his effectiveness. He doesn't swing the ball, or seam the ball much...he relies on raw pace...much like Lee at the start of his career (although Lee had a bit more to him)....but no, Tait will never be a regular in the test team.