International selection policy

[Cyril Washbrook]

I've been at the helm of Hampshire for quite a few years in my most recent save game, and I've noticed a definite trend emerge in terms of international selection for England. There are a lot of players who have performed outstandingly well for some time, both for my team and for other teams. For example, Ben Howell's averaged 57 from his forty-seven first-class matches and Michael Carberry's average is above 50 after several seasons of outstanding performances. Over at Somerset, Michael Munday has taken 682 wickets in 116 matches with a strike-rate of 46. Et cetera.

Yet these players, who perform exceptionally well in the championship, just aren't getting so much as a look-in at international level. In real life, if a bowler was getting an average of 6 wickets a match, especially a spin bowler - as with Munday - the selectors would be putting them on the plane as fast as possible. If a batsman had season first-class hauls of 1731, 1571, 1417 and 1840 runs - as with Carberry - then you'd think they'd get a squad post for maybe one series at some point.

Meanwhile, I'm looking at the England squad now, and of the seven batsmen currently in that squad, only one (Alistair Cook) has a first-class average of over 45. Two of them have first-class batting averages of just 35, and two have test batting averages of under 30. All of these players have over 20 test caps to their name, despite their poor performances. Kevin Pietersen only recently lost his central contract, despite having gone almost three full seasons without scoring a test century (I terminated his Hants contract upon the loss of the central contract, too - I can't afford an £80,000 deadweight). The only explanation I can think of for this extremely odd selection policy, is that when the game selects international sides, selection is done almost entirely by hidden attributes and not at all by performance. I mean, it's great that I get to keep my high-performing players without fear of them getting called up, but still...

I haven't yet started a game under the patch - I want to get to the end of my current season - but as far as I know, the patch doesn't have anything that addresses this odd situation. Has anyone else noticed this sort of thing?

[Typical Stroke]

I have noticed that some players get England Contract but never play a single International match.

[afridi118]

I have noticed that some players get England Contract but never play a single International match.

i agree with you this happend with me alot of times.

[aus5892]

Cyril I too have noticed this with Hampshire. I have both Carberry and Munday playing for me at Hampshire and both of them have dominated the competition for years without reward. (Carberry has the best average of any English player, and Munday takes 90-120 wickets a season and a career average of about 24).

I'll ask Chris about this because I feel this is a big issue. The other problem I hate about selections is that England take a massive squad as if they were doing an overseas tour for an entire test and ODI series, instead of the customary 12-man test squad and 15-man ODI series squad, that you generally get in both real life and if you're playing as a nation yourself.

[Cyril Washbrook]

Just a thought I had this morning... the problem also affects contracts, too. For instance: I have a regen called Richard Blundell who is clearly an outstanding prospect. I know this because he's played a lot of second team cricket and averages 70 in those games. Last season he was perpetually on match form of about 5-20%, yet still averaged 47 in second team action - so his ability is excellent. But whenever I give him an opportunity at first class level, he keeps failing.

This season he just demanded a huge contract - £73,000 - despite the fact that he clearly doesn't deserve it on form. I gave it to him because I could afford it comfortably (won CC, Challenge and Pro-League, and I've got a small squad) and because he'll come good eventually, but it's baffling. Meanwhile, Sean Ervine is happily bouncing along on a £30,000 contract despite the fact that he's been one of my top two batsmen for the last few years. Again: this has to be down to hidden ability attributes rather than performance or form.

[rishi]

Very Nice observations!!!

To add to the above, the salary requirements do decrease for older players losing form. So don't know if this was & is entirely happening due to age, or 'form' aspect was/is considered too.

[Imager36]

Have been playing with Sussex now up until july 2014, and have a batsman, Michael Stock, or 'Stocky', who has been consistent in First-class and one day cricket. He has topped the run charts once at the end of a season, and consistently is top of the FC batting averages, 58.84 at this moment, but it has been as high as 65! For a brief period, I managed England as well, and in the 10 tests he managed, he racked up 814 runs including 3 100s and 3 50s at an average of 47.88! This may have been a couple of years back now but he still owns the second highest English Test average, second only to Pietersen. His ODI average, 30.71, leaves alot to be desired, but is still average. Not that I want Stocky to be in the england team and leave me, but he deserves a chance. Now he is 27, and has settled in to a regular role at 5. Another question about him, in his first few seansons, he was Mr.Consistent, getting 30s, 40s and 50s for fun, but now he has dropped to a level whereby he seems to get either 100 or a single-figure score. Anyone got any thoughts?

UPDATE:- Since posting, he has earned an england callup, the day before the challenge trophy final... as has R Cleef, a RFM with an average of 41 who never makes it into my team

[aus5892]

Very Nice observations!!!

To add to the above, the salary requirements do decrease for older players losing form. So don't know if this was & is entirely happening due to age, or 'form' aspect was/is considered too.

It's more their hidden ability dropping I think.

Just to add to this all, when I first started the full game I noticed Australia selecting certain players (before I'd earnt the right to captain them) at young ages who were supposedly talented but yet to really make the jump up, and were performing badly which ruined their FC (and test) averages.

Luke Pomersbach is an example. When I do international only and don't select him for a few years, he dominates the domestic competition, demands selection and I pick him because of his career FC average of 60. When the computer is picking for Australia, it picks him almost immediately and his FC average drops to about 40-45, and his test average is even worse.

It seems that the AI does not take into account results or form at all, which hurts nations' chances of winning and their overall results really.

[rishi]

Yes. By age I did mean the ability.

If this is indeed the selection process (in case of youngsters), AI using this unfair advantage, must be extremely hard to beat.
But I don't find that to be the case. Unless the poor run of scores due to underdevlopment of those potential players spoils their hidden abilities & not just avgs.

[Cyril Washbrook]

It's more their hidden ability dropping I think.

Just to add to this all, when I first started the full game I noticed Australia selecting certain players (before I'd earnt the right to captain them) at young ages who were supposedly talented but yet to really make the jump up, and were performing badly which ruined their FC (and test) averages.

Luke Pomersbach is an example. When I do international only and don't select him for a few years, he dominates the domestic competition, demands selection and I pick him because of his career FC average of 60. When the computer is picking for Australia, it picks him almost immediately and his FC average drops to about 40-45, and his test average is even worse.

It seems that the AI does not take into account results or form at all, which hurts nations' chances of winning and their overall results really.

Mm. I've also noticed when looking through the world batting ratings in my current game (2015 season), many of the top twenty test batsmen have averages of about 30-35, which just doesn't happen very often in real life. Those who have an average of 45 or above are often reasonably experienced real life batsmen who already had good averages at the start of the game: e.g. Graeme Smith, Alastair Cook and Mahela Jayawardene. The seventh best batsman in the world has an average of 31. The second best batsman in the world has an average of 33.

[muhammad saad]

These hidden attributes selection should be removed in next edition and it should be replace by dynamic increase/decrease in hidden attributes for eg if an avg regen having second team bat avg of 25 start performing well in couple of season than his hidden batting attributes should get enough boost up so that he can get a international call up. same for the talented batsman avg 80 odd in second team but if not given many chances in domestic season or perform badly when given than his hidden attributes should decrease until he turned out to be an avg player( Just like real life)

Currently the hidden batting/bowling attributes increase(and decrease when it comes to bowling) with fix rate b/w 30 and 50(when players are young) and b/w 0 and 50(when players get bit mature) every year until player reach the age of 27 (I figure it out after extensive testing with the editor). This should be change and its range should be like -100 to +100 so that player abilities looks more dynamic.