Haha. Read the link - Kane Williamson has visited there. I am sure  Australian teams will make great use of it. And India really should be there now practicing. But they're not. England have used it already - as have their county sides. I bet the Hobart Hurricanes used it the month before last as well.

52 FC / List A or higher teams used it in 2017.

Australia used it for Pakistan. Doesn't really count, though - as tests were there. Pakistan used it for England in 2016.

https://www.cricket.com.au/news/australia-test-squad-training-dubai-matthew-renshaw-justin-langer-pakistan-test-series/2018-09-23

Aus were going to use it for India:

https://www.sportskeeda.com/cricket/australia-prepare-for-india-tour-training-icc-academy-dubai

Its been bought and paid for by ICC dollars, so really any member should have a right to use it at a reasonable fee (if any fees at all).

So it is only for the use of by teams.. not individuals? Funny that I always had the notion academies were to polish a promising players game. Australia had an Academy for years..based in Adelaide. Many of our past greats passed thru it. These days the National Cricket Centre in Brisbane passes as our academy with attendees named the National Performance Squad.

It is for use by people - individuals and teams. You're overthinking it. It is a bunch of cricket pitches with analytical coaches available nearby.

See what I mean?

About 7 or 8 years ago the signs where clear that once the stand out players of the day, Johnson, Lee, Clarke, Haddin and a few others retired, the whole state set up has become too sub-standard as a feeder to the international team. Many questions need to be asked and changed including ensuring as part of their contracts, that if regular national players don't play some state cricket (prefer all at same time during certain periods set out by CA). Players are rested so they can manage work load and still play more shield particularly at becibegin of season. It has long been the case that you cannot put any faith in players state performances, which is a long way from the days of early sheild rounds often up to 3 games and often with D 1 day games following on where the real barometer of our likely home series performance for the coming summer. Killing that model that would have been the envy of all other cricket nations has now led to a situation where state players almost never play with or against our very best and when they get selected they are often way out of their league despite good state stats. To make it worse, cricket Australia went over board with a 12 month ban for 3 quality players. Du Please who had been caught doing same as Smith and Warner, still captains SA and got one match. This will not be fixed quickly and will take all of Justin Langer's skills and patience for Australia to become competitive. A good start might be to bring back a 4 team ODI series with Austrailia A. I don't care who is offended by a crowd cheering the A team as the underdog, it should be about bringing the standard of Australian domestic cricket up to scratch. It's not a lack of talent, it's the poor pathways and I am really concerned at how some players appear to be going backwards this season 

Welcome to the forum, David.

Welcome!

Most cricketing nations recognize the issue between domestic and international being such a large step up that there has been a proliferation and increase in A tours. This seems to be the way forward for India, Pakistan, England and New Zealand right now. Australia has not embraced the A tour system. Maybe it is time that it should? What the A tours provide is the opportunity for the players to play at a level above domestic, but below international, and compete to the be the next cab off the rank for an international spot. The A team players often include recently dropped international players. 

All domestic structures have their faults in creating the perfect squad for international. England is down to only Joe Root as its 1 specialist batsman not in threat of being dropped from the test team anytime soon. They have plenty of all-rounders, but with TRJ's injury - they're short of seamers if Jimmy or Stuart get injured and Moeen is still their best spinner though Leech is doing well in SL. Right now the only country churning out batting talent is India. But India still struggles for a successful spin bowler outside of Asia, so even their player development is far from perfect. South Africa and Pakistan both are desperately short on quality batsmen right now even if they keep making quality quicks. New Zealand has not had a decent test spinner since Vettori was young, and Taylor's retirement looms closer every day leaving a big hole in the batting. The West Indies batting is simply laughable. Bangladesh  - well they just lost at home to Zimbabwe. Sri Lanka are short on batting and seam bowling, and their best spinner just retired (but their domestic set up is not the smartest in my view - far too many clubs with FC status!). And Zimbabwe is pretty much a rubbish side relying on a couple of true international quality players.

So noone has a complete team at the moment in international cricket. I do not believe it is the domestic structure's fault. Everyone identifies and grooms the young talent, brings them through the systems and processes. People oft blame t20 - which is a weak argument because India, Aus and Eng pay mega bucks for their international stars. T20's greatest effect is just to cause premature retirements of players from WI, NZ and SA (of which county cricket also does to SA: see Abbott, MMorkel et al).

I think the answer may be simply be that professionalism and player analysis is far more widespread than it used to be, and the gaps between nations are closing. This is made more visible by the fact that countries defend their home turf very well, and often lose away.

..and what a soft dismissal just when we needed Stoinis to go on. Soft underbelly like some others wearing Oz colors. 

Ben Horne and his assumptions...pfffttt. Shaun Marsh cements his Test spot.. yeh sure Horne on the back of a white ball 100 on a belter. Give me a break. if CA also shares this theory of a Test spot from white ball cricket form then  all our selectors need to be moved on.

David I too welcome you. Im Baggers...

I do not believe it is the domestic structure's fault. Everyone identifies and grooms the young talent, brings them through the systems and processes.]quote] Neither do I... nor does the The Cultural Review. It has recommended that our elite cricketers needed to play more red ball domestic cricket when available.. while our established state players needed to keep playing Premier Cricket .This is hoped will keep them more grounded and will reconnect with their roots. Get them out of this "gilded bubble" as the review called it.

Reciprocal two yearly tours by India is the only current A tour program in which Australia is currently involved. A Saffer A team toured here a few years back from memory. When was the last time an England or Kiwi A side toured here. There also used to be a regular reciprocal Under19 arrangement between us and the Poms. These days it is at best sporadic. I see other nations conduct regular Under 19 tours. The new CA needs to also get out of its "gilded bubble" and start acting like Australian crickets governor and not a lapdog to the those running our game and those holding the purse strings.

I have to admit that the old arrangement of a touring side playing a strong Shield side as a tour warm up match was the way to go. The touring side knew they were f going to be in for a contest, specially if that state's Test players were also lining up for the hosts. These were always exciting no holds barred games that attracted healthy crowds. These days a touring side to our shores gets to play a bunch of talented rookies, many of which are out of their depth. 

Think of the good old days when Oz toured the shores of the old enemy for the Ashes and played every county side before and during the lengthy tour. A touring side knew that they were going to be tested by a strong county side every game. They knew that every game better prepared them for a gruelling Ashes campaign. Like in recent past tours when our boys arrive in The Old dart they will be given warm up matches against a couple of understrength lower division county sides. Big deal.

Yeah - to be honest India and England put a fortune into A tours - they're constantly playing at home in the summer and away in the winters. NZ just a full A tour series in the UaE against Pakistan (who will now play Eng A in a long tour), and Ind A are heading to NZ to play NZA.

Australia as the remaining member of the Big 3 really does seem to have fallen behind in the A tour scheme, but you have to be prepared  to pull players out of Shield, List A and possibly even BBL. And possibly Cricket Australia is not so keen to do this. But the beauty of the A tours is not just the player development, it makes selecting the next best batsman or bowler for the international team - so much more simple. Because they've seen the options, in the same team, in same conditions, play against the same opposition, and have a much fairer idea who is the next best cab off the rank. They're also useful for getting some match time into test specialists who have not played top cricket in a while.

For instance - NZA just played 3 wicket keepers in the same team against Pak A - as the race is on to find the t20 and back up world cup wicket keeper. Unfortunately they all sucked, but Will Young proved that he is the next best batsman for a test spot when a vacancy opens up. That is immensely valuable for the selectors.

The A tours are actually quite interesting to follow as well - I hope in the future they get television coverage. The standards are high, as these are former and future international players.

Tour games are no longer trusted. People often prepare conditions that will not be like the test conditions. People send in weak players. And often, people play the entire squad in the game to give everyone a bowl or a bat. Kohli skipped tour games entirely for Safrica and only played one 3 day in England. 

But India had an A team in England playing England A and West Indies A - and Kohli used that to warm up talent for the wider squad. Rahane will play for Ind A against NZA soon, to warm him up for Aus tests. Rohit Sharma, Nair will all be playing for Ind A in NZ in case needed in Australia.

India are very smart with their A tours. And they have the money. It is a bit more financially difficult for SAC and NZC. 

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/25252494/headaches-aplenty-one-dimensional-australia

This would be my WC XV for Australia: bats to 8 and has 6 bowlers. It also has Warner in the middle giving it far more punch and solidity than it has at the moment. Australia has been getting wrecked in the middle overs for since 2016/17. This is when Kohli takes over for India. This is when Morgan puts his foot down for England (and Buttler is just a menace). Smith has been stuck trying to hit it off the square and the rest have been getting out. Warner will boost this. It doesn't matter how easily MMarsh and Stoinis hit 6's when they're so far behind the game already.
1 Finch
2 Lynn (if he fails - promote Khawaja)
3 Smith/Khawaja
4 Warner
5 Carey + (unless there's someone better)
6 Stoinis
7 Maxwell /MMarsh
8 Agar/MMarsh /Maxwell
9 Cummins
10 Starc
11 Haze
12 Pattinson (if fit) / NCN if not fit
13 Spare wicket keeper not named Wade

Aus can rejig the team and get to the semi-finals and go even deeper and win it, but they have to change their approach to selection. SA I just don't see having enough batting firepower to make the semifinals. They are relying way too much on Amla and QdK. Whereas Australia can have Finch up top who still scoring big hundreds regularly, Warner in the middle, and have a 6,7, 8 combo of Stoinis, Maxwell and MMarsh that can finally have Australia putting up 350 scores! I think Aus has the talent, the question is - do they have the selectors with the balls to do it? Because right now, Australia is playing 1990's cricket. Australians think they don't have the talent (when they do) - it is simply that their approach to selection is all retrospective and not progressive. Stop thinking about bowling teams out for under 200 and dreaming about match winning blonde leg-spinners, and start thinking about how to score 350!

The bright thing for Australia is I think Finch, with all his BBL and IPL experience, who observed how England has been thrashing them and why (because he observed they bat deep and foot down earlier than Australia) is actually the captain to say to Langer - this is the team I want. Him saying Maxwell is an allrounder to bat 7 - is just the tip of the Finch iceberg - he will want MMarsh at 8 next. Guaranteed. ;-) Finch knows the beauty of batting deep, and knows 6 bowlers is better than 5. The only way to get both - is to boost the all-rounders. And any team not weary of a 6,7,8 of Stoinis, Maxwell and MMarsh is in for a massive surprise - because these guys can change a game in the last 10 overs - big time. They all have the talent and ability to do it - but they need to be in the same XI because it is a numbers game - so sayeth moneyball.

I mean lets be honest - a 6, 7 and 8 of Stoinis, Maxwell and MMarsh is better than NZ has with the bat, and lacks only Santner with the ball where CdG is a bowling liability far more than the Aus trio and Nicholls does not bowl. I like Santner a lot, but I think Aus wins this round.
Vs Pak: Shadhab, Wasim and Ashraf (less with ball but Aus wins on batting here). Even stephens at worse if not an Aussie win.
Now the real test: how does it compare to Buttler, Ali and Woakes? Bare in mind Stokes at 5 has been a passenger for England for a while now!
Close right?

Stoinis, Maxwell and MMarsh should be Australia's 6-8 for this World Cup. But will they be?

Aus has the talent available to play the English way - they're only missing Rashid. That's all. As a substitute, they have 3 big quicks. They have 2 options for the Root role in Smith and Khawaja. Finch can do Bairstow's job. Lynn can do Roy's job and if he fails, Khawaja can step up. England would kill to have a death yorker bowler like Starc. Plunkett only has his heavy balls. England DO NOT HAVE a death bowler at all. No Starc, No Bumrah - England do NOT have a single guy who can mop up a tail defending a score. England rely SOLELY on scoreboard pressure.

But is Australia smart enough to work this out? Because right now, Australia has the talent, but stupid selectors.

#Elite honesty.

 A lot of uncertainty in your squad Paddles. 

Carey is doing a good job with gloves and bat. Only other consideration would be Tim Paine. 
Mitch Marsh @35 bat @35 ball gets my vote.  Maxwell @32 bat @48 ball does not.

Ben Horne at it again. He is already calling for the head of Chris Lynn.  Steyn got him in two minds. probably should have left it. Lynn is your x factor and remember he was the best performed ODD player this season.

Khawaja is in my X1 and Agar would be my spinner. I would also like to see him batting up the order.. perhaps even open. Zampa also in the squad. We dont know what decks the Poms will prepare. Two tweakers may come in handy. Agar could bat in top six.  I also have Warner in middle order.  I have doubts picking Haze and Cummins. Both are economical until about the 7th over then when the tempo is raised they lose their composure and gift east runs.  In other words they are poor death bowlers. Should not be bowling in the final 10 overs.   Tye is a specialist short format man.. He must be on the plane. Kane Richardson remains one of our best death bowlers... but his opening spell is reason he is not playing ODI at the moment. 

My WC Squad:

Finch
Khawaja
Smith
Warner
Lynn
M Marsh
Carey
Agar 
Starc 
Tye
Cummins/Hazlewood

Zampa, Heazlett, McDermott / K Richardson (failing him.. James Faulkner)

I like how you have batting to 8. I have no issue with Tye (but England surprisingly and repeatedly wrecked him earlier this year).

Points of disagreement:

Lynn:
Lynn has to open or not play. For me it is that simple. He needs to make hay with the field up in the powerplay when it miscues and mishits don't get swallowed up as wickets. His fielding is a problem - so either he makes runs or gets rotated out.

5 bowlers:
It is not enough to rely on MMarsh and Agar for 20 overs and have noone else. I would get Stoinis in there and the three of them share 20 overs. 

Maxwell:

48 with the ball you reckon? All I care about is his E/R 5.59 and his 32 runs with the bat at 121. Then add in his fielding and he is more than carrying his own worth.

Lets compare Maxwell to Santner (a bowler regularly ranked in the ICC top 10 for both t20 and odi) - 

28.55 at 91 and bowling at 4.9 and dropping catches left right and centre. Those 6 runs more Maxwell gives up off his bowling, 3.5 he will score with the bat, and the remaining 2.5 will more than be made up for when he leaves the team to bat with 10  more balls after he gets out.

Lets compare him to global super Andre Russell  - 

28.5 at 130 and bowling at 5.86.

Mitch Marsh -
35 at 93 and bowling at 5.52. 3 more runs for Marsh when he bats but he will take up a lot more balls to make them. I know who is better in the field too. Marsh's average score 35 off (38) vs Maxwell's 32 off (27) - would the batsmen after Maxwell in 11 balls score 3 runs? Because this is where Maxwell's hidden value with the bat truly is.

My point is - Maxwell's numbers are not bad. For an allrounder - they're very very good. Want further proof?

Hardik Pandya - bats  29 at SR 114 and bowls at 5.55 (with a bowling average of 41). He is one of the three Indian fieldsmen who are useful with Kohli and Jadeja.

Finch is right, Maxwell is not a great ODI batsman, but can he be an excellent ODI allrounder?  I believe that he can. He has all the attributes needed - plus he adds a lot of value in the field.

Agar is bowling along at 5.75 and averages 20 with the bat at 87. I see nothing in Agar to suggest that he should displace Maxwell first up. Agar would be the spare part for mine. I'd take both to the cup, and I would be prepared to play both if a pitch warranted it, but for most the tournament barring injury - I'd have Agar running the drinks. 



Squad:

1 Khawaja 2 Finch 3 Smith 4 Warner 5 Carey 6 Stoinis 7 Maxwell 8 MMarsh 9 Tye 10 Starc 11 Hazlewood 12 Cummins 13 Agar 14 Keeper 15 Lynn?

I really would have liked to find room for Pattinson - but possibly Tye takes his spot. I guess who has the best Big Bash will determine a lot of this. And whether the selectors forget about Tye being blasted in England.

A serious lung problem has forced John "the Duke" Hastings into retirement. The 33 year old Sydney- born gentle giant played one Test, 29 ODIs and nine T20s for Australia. Overall, Hastings played 75 first-class matches for Victoria at home and Durham and Worcestershire in the English county circuit..  scoring 11 fifties with a top score of 93 and took 239 wickets, including seven five-wicket hauls, at @27.22. He played 113 List A matches for 179 wickets at @27.59 and his best figures of 6 for 45 came for Australia against Sri Lanka in August 2016.

Ok you win Lynn opens and gets full licence with field up. But he has to pick his shot. Steyn produced a steepling ball that he should have left or tried to put away with a horizontal bat. I have noticed Lynn prefers to hit in the vee when he goes big. Just needs to pick the correct time to go big. I forgot Stoinis. He has been going good with bat and ball. He ahead of Agar then I guess. Maxie's most valuable asset is his fielding. Or at least his most consistent asset. I dont want to see our lineup chocka with hit and miss players. It is heart attack territory. Smith needs an ally that can steady the ship when these hit and miss merchants fail.. Warner is not one, Stoinis, Maxwell or Mitch either. So who is? I keep coming back to veteran George Bailey.

Warner is the ally. He very much is. He is the best ODI batsman of late for Australia. Smith/Khawaja, Finch and Warner is your cake. Carey is the filling. Lynn, Stoinis, Maxwell and MMarsh the icing. If Lynn fails, add more cake in Khawaja.

The thing with hit and miss players, is when you have 3 or more of them, in most games - 1 will come off. 

England is all hit and miss players bar Root (amd Bairstow has been very consistent but he is still a total dasher in this format). But Buttler, Woakes, Stokes, Ali, Morgan, Hales and Roy - consistency is not their strength. Match winning is.

I think match winners are very important. A side packed full of match winners will win consistently as a team.

 Warner's 14 tons 17 fifties  proves he is not your steadier. He gets his 43 average from mauling attacks.  I would have Stoinis or even Maxie ahead of him. If Lynn opens then Khawaja as that other middle order cool head for mine.. Sadly, CA will miss the obvious and not pick George Bailey. The old man still averages @41. Is one hit and misser coming off sufficient? For the Poms I would rate Ali as someone who could steady the ship.. Morgan also. Even Buttler has learnt another gear since coming back into the England side...

I wonder if this is occurring  because of so much limited over cricket taking precedence over FC and tests?

Cricket NSW (CNSW) will leave Sydney's east for the first time in its 159-year history and take its headquarters to the west of the city as part of a new Centre of Excellence at Olympic Park. With the organisation's Moore Park base being suffocated by the new developments at  the Footy Stadium, a new $50-million base to open in 2022 was confirmed on Monday. Meantime CNSW) will operate from an existing site at Homebush for the next three years. 
Yet another infrastructure project going to our west.   

comments.

I don't think Warner mauls attacks in limited overs cricket so much as simply succeeds at a good clip.

I think it says a lot about the state of ODI cricket in Australia that Warner striking at under 100 has this impression.

Warner is simply going along at Shikar Dhawan pace and Finch called India's starts this week as "slow".

In the IPL Warner doesn't even seem to be aggressive, and he still keeps his sr at a good pace. He really has dominated the IPL.

But his odi pace is well below Johnny Bairstow and Jason Roy pace.

Just shows how much the speed of scoring in game is getting faster and faster.

Now Buttler - he mauls attacks! With ABdV retiring, Jos Buttler is now my favourite to watch bat at the World Cup now.

No - that is what gets the blame a lot, though. India still have the Ranji and England has many rounds of county cricket each summer. They're still chalking up big numbers of FC cricket.

A tours are to bridge the gap between first class scene and internationals - they are intended to be an increased leap in quality. Also help to get people used to foreign conditions and get them used to touring. And it helps the selectors work out who the next best cab off the rank is. 

The tour games just are not trusted by touring sides anymore. Too much gamesmanship has gone on.

There's been too much unethical behaviour going on with pitch types and opposition completely dissimilar and too far below to the international games.

Whereas in the A teams, people invariably pick the best team, that are fringe or former internationals trying to impress to make the step up to internationals.

A tours are really a big deal for England, India, and becoming so for NZC fans also. They're getting much more media and social media attention then they used to. Here's India's current A tour team:

1st four-day game: Ajinkya Rahane (Captain), M Vijay, Prithvi Shaw, Mayank Agarwal, Hanuma Vihari, Rohit Sharma, Parthiv Patel (wicket-keeper), K Gowtham, Shahbaz Nadeem, Mohammed Siraj, Navdeep Saini, Deepak Chahar, Rajneesh Gurbani, Vijay Shankar, KS Bharat (wicket-keeper)
2nd and 3rd four-day game: Karun Nair (captain), Mayank Agarwal, Abhimanyu Easwaran, R Samarth, Ankit Bawne, Shubman Gill, Vijay Shankar, KS Bharat (wicket-keeper), Ishan Kishan (wicket-keeper), K Gowtham, Shahbaz Nadeem, Mohammed Siraj, Navdeep Saini, Deepak Chahar, Rajneesh Gurbani
Three one-day games: Manish Pandey (captain), Mayank Agarwal, Anmolpreet Singh, Shubman Gill, Shreyas Iyer, Ankit Bawne, Hardik Pandya, Ishan Kishan (wicket-keeper), Washington Sundar, Axar Patel, Krunal Pandya, Siddharth Kaul, Deepak Chahar, Khaleel Ahmed

You can easily see how seriously India takes them when they have such a big squad due in Australia at the same time.

Here's England's:

Four-day squad: Dom Bess (Somerset), Sam Billings (Kent), Joe Clarke (Worcestershire), Nick Gubbins (Middlesex), Max Holden (Middlesex), Tom Kohler-Cadmore (Yorkshire), Liam Livingstone (Lancashire), Craig Overton (Somerset), Jamie Overton (Somerset), Matt Parkinson (Lancashire), Jamie Porter (Essex), Jason Roy (Surrey), Josh Tongue (Worcestershire - subject to medical clearance), Amar Virdi (Surrey), Mark Wood (Durham).

These series are being taken very seriously. People are sending their best players, who are playing their best in the hopes of an international call up. Ollie Pope just got sent from the England team in Sri Lanka to the A team heading to the UAE. Australia just does not seem to be all that involved in the A scene at all. And just sticks to its Sheffield Shield stuff. England 's county and India's Ranji obviously don't think that is enough cricket  preparing for international level.

Perfect example is that England didn't just "find"  Sam Curran this year - he was picked out of the  the England Lions where he had starred:

Plays for England - gets dropped when Stokes returns, goes back to the Lions, then gets recalled to the test team and then becomes England star test cricketer of the year.

https://www.skysports.com/live-scores/cricket/england-lions-v-india-a/20698/11440953/article

(Notice how Cook, Woakes, Malan and Curran are all in the Lions. And Shaw, Rahane, Vijay and Pant are for India also.)

https://stage-ecb.pulselive.com/news/636162/sam-curran-smashes-hundred-for-england-lions

I mean I have read complaints how it is more difficult for Aussie batsmen to get into county cricket now, so as to get familiar with the English conditions, but the fact is - it is pretty easy to send an A team over there. England will field its best A team. They will play a full series.

It is too late to have an impact on Ashes 2019, but Aus A tours of 2021 or 2022 or early 2023  could make a huge difference to the 2023 Ashes result.

Ditto for India. 

Because noone seems to be playing silly buggers with the A concept and people are sending their best teams on typical pitches - the concept is working. Of course - if Aus got involved, at some point Australia will be asked to reciprocate and host, and this may clash with the Shield or BBL or something. But it is what the rest of the world is doing. Foreign boards prioritize A tours over domestic cricket.

For anyone confused by my earlier post, what would be called England A if they followed protocol is in fact actually called the "England Lions" because England likes to be different.

You can easily see how seriously India takes them when they have such a big squad due in Australia at the same time.
So has CA.. or the ICC.. scheduled any games between them and us? Not that I have heard.  

 How it is more difficult for Aussie batsmen to get into county cricket now, so as to get familiar with the English conditions, but the fact is - it is pretty easy to send an A team over there. England will field its best A team. 
Another case of CA sitting on its bum. Have they not heard that ECB has reduced the number of overseas players eligible for County cricket.  As you say 2019 Ashes is too late..should not have been. Where is the vision?

Absolutely nothing to do with ICC. 
It is all to do with CA getting off its bum and prioritizing A tours over Shield cricket.

Nothing to do with ICC.

The only reason I can think that Australia is not doing A tours is that it is still prioritizing the Shield.

The rest of the world no longer does. It could simply be penny pinching, but Aus invests so much into player development anyway this would an odd result. There is one more possibility, Aus doesn't want to reciprocate to protect its home town advantage.

I don't even think it would just simply benefit Aussie batsmen - it would let the Aussie selectors know who are the better bowlers in England - where pace is not essential for success if someone is able to swing the Dukes around corners.