Ashes squad may find England is no country for old men

I knew I shouldn't have given up cricket. The Australian team to tour the West Indies and England includes two 37-year-olds, two 35-year-olds, a 34-year-old and three 33-year-olds.

As Dainty Ironmonger showed, if you're good enough you're never too old. Ironmonger, Wilfred Rhodes and W.G. Grace played Test cricket in their 50s. Don Blackie didn't even debut until 46, and that was nearly a century ago.

If 40 is the new 30, hang in there, my friends, and 48 will soon be the new 21.The average age of the Australian squad is a ripe old 31. Younger Ashes teams have been greeted by bands playing the Dad's Army theme.

On Thursday, Michael Clarke turned 34. The baby of the tour will be 24-year-old Josh Hazlewood.Through history, there have been cyclical reasons for old Ashes squads.

In the years after the two World Wars, cricketers played into middle-age to make up for the years spent waiting. But even then, the average age seldom shuffled past 30; there were livings to earn, families to raise.

When the 1952-53 team's average age got to 32, the selectors hurried in a "youth policy", sending the under-23s Ian Craig, Richie Benaud, Alan Davidson and Ron Archer to England in 1953 to avoid embarrassment.

Today's new chums, Adam Voges, Fawad Ahmed and the recalled Peter Siddle, are all on what we self-kidders call the right side of 30. Poor old Simon Katich, shoved out when he was but a stripling of 35. The professionalisation of cricket has allowed players to go on longer, and its IPLisation has tempted them to go longer still.

In past times, to quit cricket was to start making proper money. Now, to quit cricket is to face an earnings precipice.

We are in a historical moment where the hyperinflation of player payments has changed the fundamental question of retirement. Once, cricketers retired to look after their family; now, that is the reason they stay on the road.

Health and nutrition have been part of the professionalised environment, and it's true that this squad looks younger than its years.

The grizzled old men of Warwick Armstrong's 1921 Ashes tour look like they could be Brad Haddin's father. Condemnation of the Australians' bibulous World Cup celebration ought to be balanced against old cricketers' lives.

Today's players have their wellness checked by computer and worship at the body-temple before letting loose at the end of their commitments; their forebears simply kept up a steadier pace, a smoke and a drink at the end of each day.

It was Bill O'Reilly who introduced Ray Lindwall to the benefits of a glass beer at each drinks break, to improve his bowling stamina. But the selection of the Ashes squad is even a break from the recent past.

Greg Chappell and his youthful instincts (sounds like a band name) have been junked, even though they gave us David Warner, Steve Smith and Mitchell Starc. By contrast, the 2015 squad could have been chosen by computer. Most runs in the Sheffield Shield: Voges, 1358. Most wickets: Fawad, 48. Most runs by a wicketkeeper: Peter Nevill, 764.

Best bowling strike-rate: Fawad, 44.8, followed by Siddle, 46.0. Pretty easy, huh? Peter Moores and his database might have picked this one. There is an important point in there, however, which is the reestablishment of a fundamental contract between selectors and cricketers.

There is a lot to be said of the "gut feeling" that Rod Marsh and his panel were not sensing as they surveyed the talent. Without that gut feeling, we might never have had Shane Warne, Ian Healy, Adam Gilchrist or, for that matter, Marsh himself, cricketers about whom selectors felt a stirring in the tummy that was not backed by figures.

But players hate the gut feeling. They have been told they will be judged by their runs and wickets. For selectors to renege on that, and choose players on potential, would breach the promise Marsh and Darren Lehmann made when they assumed their roles. (Is the day coming when a player will sue for breach of promise, or unfair dismissal, when his statistics are ignored?) Going purely by statistics, particularly when they are as imposing as those of Voges, Fawad and Nevill, is the safe, sturdy and defensible way. It should be noted, however, that Rod Marsh the selector of 2015 might not have selected Rod Marsh the player of 1970.

But those were different, amateur times: Marsh and Dennis Lillee were chosen for Australia when at least one of the selection panel had never seen them play.

There has been little comment and only stifled complaint about the Australian squad, because it is a good one, and we all like to think that age is only a number.

Siddle was an excellent member of the 2013 Ashes squad, and similar labour-intensive pitches can be expected. Voges has looked good enough for a very long time, averaging 45 in first-class cricket and 46 in the 31 one-day internationals he has played for Australia.

If he gets his chance, he might, like Chris Rogers, pose the question of why he was kept hidden for so long. Nevill is the latest of a rich crop of wicketkeeper-batsmen to be given a go.Marsh talked about hunger, and Australia's will be sharpened by the fact that they have not won a series in England since 2001.

There will be no lack of appetite from the young ones, or even the old ones. Much will hinge on those in the middle, particularly the two 33-year-old Queenslanders. How young are they feeling? It's not a question of age, but of who in this squad is going to get tired, as a long tour of attritional cricket on dry, dirty wickets will be no country for old men.