So Nathan Coulter-Nile has been included in the Test squad for the 1^st Test against West Indies in Hobart on a ‘gut feeling’ by selectors.

Oh dear. And the selectors had been doing so well. Despite the loss of the Ashes in 2015, I think the selectors did a pretty good job on that tour (see our earlier post ‘Lay Off the Selectors’). Time to give them a kicking.

Although we’re talking about the selection of 12th and 13th men who may not play in the First Test in Hobart, this selection is potentially more important than it seems. Mitchell Johnson is gone. Mitchell Starc is out injured for a while. Peter Siddle has a sore back. Josh Hazlewood has shouldered a heavy workload recently. James Pattinson is returning from injury and is hardly reliable when it comes to fitness. It is far from inconceivable that Coulter-Nile and even Scott Boland, the standby bowler or ’13th man’, could be playing in the Test XI before the end of the West Indies series.

The selectors have admitted they picked Coulter-Nile due to his ability to bowl fast. In other words, he fitted into their ‘velocity philosophy’. Hmm.

Yes, Coulter-Nile is relatively quick. But he also bowls far too short most of the time and does not (at least in my impression) move the ball appreciably off the seam. His first-class record is okay but hardly earth-shattering (see table below).

Victorian coach and former England bowling coach David Saker has labelled Coulter-Nile’s selection ‘ridiculous’ and accuses the selectors of looking only for pace at the expense of bowlers who can ‘put the ball in the right areas’. Saker is not a member of the Australian establishment and can afford to lob a few grenades, and it’s not unusual for state coaches to complain when their own players are overlooked for higher honours. But I think Saker is largely correct.

Chairman of selectors Rod Marsh said of Coulter-Nile “we’ve been very pleased with the way he’s gone when he has played” and “we think he is ready to compete at Test level if required.”

Really, Rod? What makes you think that? Coulter-Nile’s first-class career has been adequate for a Sheffield Shield player, but he has not been among the leading wicket-takers in the domestic competition in recent years. He’s taken 22 wickets in 13 ODIs at an average of 26.50, which is okay but not exactly stellar. He’s never taken a 5-wicket haul in his ODI career, for example. And, as Marsh readily concedes, he has not even played a red ball game since last season due to injury. Coulter-Nile was picked for Australia A’s tour of India in July-August 2015 but did not even play in either of the team’s two first-class games against India A! If he was on the cusp on Test selection, why was he selected only for the triangular one-day series against India A and South Africa A?

The usual refrain we hear at this point is ‘well, who else could they have picked?’ Well, there’s a bit of a list, actually, starting most conspicuously with Jackson Bird.

Only a few days ago,  Cricket Australia’s own website tipped Bird as a likely member of the Test squad to face the West Indies. It’s harsh that he has been left out. Is it his age? Doubtful. He’ll turn 29 next week so he’s hardly over the hill. Bird struggled with injury after taking 11 wickets against Sri Lanka in his first two Tests in 2012-13. However, he has since bounced back with 18 wickets in seven matches in the 2014-15 Sheffield Shield and an additional 18 wickets already in four games in the 2015-16 competition, including 5/69 last week against South Australia. I think Bird is entitled to feel a little hard done by. Perhaps the selectors feel Bird is a little too similar in style to Hazlewood; i.e. not the fastest bowler but one who hits the deck and tries to extract sideways movement. But, as Saker says, it’s not all about raw pace. At least it shouldn’t be, especially now that traditionally hard and fast pitches like the Gabba and the WACA have been unrecognizable this season for their dullness.

Scott Boland, on the other hand, is a good choice for backup bowler. He took a total of 43 wickets in the last two Sheffield Shield season and has already bagged 12 in three matches so far in the 2015-16 season including an eye-catching 7/31 against Western Australia last week. And he’s in that ‘sweet spot’ in terms of age;  old enough for his body to have matured enough to tolerate the stresses of fast bowling but young enough to play for a few years yet.

Surely WA’s Jason Behrendorff was on the cusp of selection as well, but has succumbed to injury and will be out for at least a month. Shame. Doug Bollinger is in good form but will probably be a last choice selection due to his age. Joe Mennie? He’s going to have to up the ante. Billy Stanlake? Too soon.

I’ve always believed James Faulkner should be a permanent member of the Test team but presumably the selectors feel he is too similar to Mitchell Marsh (the two have identical first-class batting averages). This is especially true now that they may promote Peter Nevill to No. 6 and drop Mitchell Marsh down the batting order to No. 7, where he will slot into the sort of position that Faulkner would otherwise occupy.

So for my money, Bird should have been picked first, with Boland as back-up bowler. State players are told to produce results if they want to be picked for the Test team. It’s not supposed to be about ‘gut feeling’. Bird traversed a long road to return from injury, and has been taking wickets. Instead, he is overlooked for a guy who hasn’t played for months, doesn’t move the ball and wasn’t even deemed good enough to play for Australia A in their recent red ball games in India.

Bird is entitled to be peeved.