Warne calls cricket boss (ex Wallaby Pat Howard) a muppet

Greg Buckle,
AAPUpdated January 29, 2013, 5:09 am

Test great Shane Warne has launched an extraordinary attack on former Wallaby Pat Howard, calling him a muppet.

Warne says Cricket Australia needs to look beyond the rugby community and get current cricket people involved in the game at administrative level.

As CA's high-performance chief, Howard has overseen the selection panel's controversial strategy of rotating players in and out of the side this summer in an attempt to avoid injuries, particularly in terms of managing fast bowlers' workloads.

Warne, who is a close mate of Australia's Test and one-day captain Michael Clarke, said on Twitter on Monday night that it was ridiculous to deprive the Aussie sporting public of seeing the star batsman in action during some of the one-day games against Sri Lanka earlier this month.

"I think CA really need to look at the people who are making decisions on all facets of cricket in Australia, we r (sic) seriously becoming a joke!" Warne said.

"Absolute rubbish re selections,rotations,resting & farcical decisions on matches, joke.. Dudding the public & to many excuses.. Wake up CA.

"Can CA please put current cricket people in charge to run the game,select teams, not ex rugby or any other sports people plse, seriously

"We have the best batsmen / captain in the world in @MClarke23 (Michael Clarke) - He needs current cricket people to help him out not muppets "

Warne was fined a total of $9500 and suspended for one match during the just-completed BBL season while playing for Melbourne Stars for various breaches of discipline including clashing with Melbourne Renegades' player Marlon Samuels and not naming himself as captain in a semi-final in a bid to avoid a possible suspension for slow over-rates.
Warne's comments were made during Australia's two-run loss to Sri Lanka at the MCG as the tourists claimed a 2-0 Twenty20 series win.


http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/spo...boss-a-muppet/

Warne is spot on
Posted via Mobile Device

so Jargs, if Clarke does have a sore hamstring, he should be played anyway, because assuming "that's what the fan's want" ?

There is merit to both sides of the argument. Play your best players, even if they have got niggling injuries, the team will have more success, the fans will be happy etc etc, but then you run the risk of long term/chronic injuries and playing with a much depleted team resulting in poorer performances. There is no right answer. But I lean more towards Pat Howards philosophy.

Of course not but this rotation system is ridiculous

In the South African series we rested our entire bowling attack that was a large part responsible for Australia having a sniff at the the number 1 Test ranking and played an entirely new set of bowlers including one of which will be lucky to play another test ever.

The player management is a joke and I'm talking about Michael Clarke with a dodgy hamstring.

James Pattinson only being allowed to bowl 8 overs in grade cricket because they're worried he might get injured again

Ben Hilfenhaus getting injured after being rested for a test match

Mitchell Starc wins the Test in Hobart and then is rested for the Boxing Day Test

No other Test match playing nation has the player management Australia is using and one of this countries is England and they currently play a hell of a lot more cricket then Australia are playing and aren't suffering injuries either

I'm not saying Pat Howard is 100% responsible but he and others are to blame for the mess

Give Howard the sack and while they're sacking people sack John Inverarity for being a muppet as well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jargan83

I'm saying Pat Howard is 100% responsible but he and others are to blame for the mess

Give Howard the sack and while they're sacking people sack John Inverarity for being a muppet as well

---

I think you missed a "not" in there but anyway, I completly disagree with sacking management, I would start look at the support staff - the trainers, the physio's - the question is why do our players get injured so quickly that has caused this hesitative rotation policy, it seems clear to me something is wrong with our players bodies if they keep breaking ?

They keep being rested hence they are breaking down

How is bowling 20-30 balls at training prepare them for bowling three sets of 8-10 over spells during a Test Match? Especially for younger bowlers who haven't played much in Shield Cricket and are suddenly being thrust into Test Cricket

If they want to rest players then sit them out for ODI's and 20/20 games that mean nothing. Or of the players want a rest then do what England has done and limit the time their players are allowed to play in the IPL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jargan83

They keep being rested hence they are breaking down

---

And there's the chicken and the egg problem, is it the resting causing the problems or is it the cricket causing the problems

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jargan83

If they want to rest players then sit them out for ODI's and 20/20 games that mean nothing.

---

And how do you explain to a crowd / opposition that you are resting players for this particular game / series because in your view "it means nothing"

I can't believe I'm saying this but I agree with Jargs and Warnie.

Young fast bowlers need to bowl lots of overs to harden their bodies. Sports science, excessive gym work and rotation policies clearly aren't working. Resting them too often is causing them to become soft. Play your best players as often as possible unless they have a legitimate injury.

---------- Post added at 09:25 ---------- Previous post was at 09:22 ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Happy

that you are resting players for this particular game / series because in your view "it means nothing"

---

They should be mostly different squads with some of the guys that play two forms.

It's like Rugby and Sevens. Not too many guys play both forms. They generally focus on one or the other at any given point in time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Happy

And how do you explain to a crowd / opposition that you are resting players for this particular game / series because in your view "it means nothing"

---

Because I know I'm not the only person who has that view, there have been plenty of people condemning the selectors/CA hierachy over the past 4-6 weeks for this rotation nonsense.

South Africa rest players for ODI's and T20's as do England and they don't have nearly the same injury dramas as we do and they play a lot more Cricket

If a T20 series meant something then they would be scheduling a three game series not two (although that wouldn't matter given the Sri Lankan series)

Test Cricket is the pinnacle of Cricket and handing out Baggy Greens at will is a joke

The two games against Sri Lanka weren't even a series. They were apparently two stand-alone games.

Two stand alone games?

That's retarded

It appears, to me, that we are breeding a bunch of princesses.
We molly codle them at home and school and then wonder why they can't manage in the work place or on the sports arena.
Harden the f@rk up princess!

My view is that the introduction of 'body scientists' and 'experts in biomechanics' into sport is having a negative effect. They seem to have too much say and too much influence.

Properly qualified & experienced medicos and allied health professionals such as physios - not to mention the players themselves - seem to be being side-lined and I think that's a mistake.

I am very keen to see how the Force fare this season under the new guru - David Joyce. Granted he qualified as a physio 10 years ago but he seems to have gone down the sports science route since then and has flitted all over the place in that time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jargan83

Two stand alone games?

That's retarded

---

It sure is.