Australian bowler Brett Lee appeals for LBW on Indian batsman VVS Laxman - AAP Image/Paul Miller
Yes, we know. Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath have retired. But what about Peter Siddles, Ben Hiffenhaus and Jason Krejza? The first two did extremely well in the Test series in South Africa last month. And Krejza made an outstanding debut in India last November.
Is there that much difference between Test and one-day internationals?
I agree you need more economy, but none of the New South Wales’ Nathans – Bracken and Hauritz – provided an economic stimulus package, did they?
Especially at Port Elizabeth yesterday when Bracken conceded 6.40 runs an over and Hauritz 7.28, taking just one wicket between them.
I am not criticizing the bowlers, and Bracken is currently perhaps the finest ODI bowler in the world. But he appeared off-colour yesterday. And what has Hauritz got that “Crazy” Krejza lacks?
Or is the latter injured? Or kidnapped?
Shane Harwood bowled well yesterday. But to pick him for an international debut at the age of 35 appears strange. And he was not in the original squad. It certainly won’t be a laughing matter for squad member and fast-medium bowler, Ben Laughlin.
Are Australian bowlers picked on form or as lots in a raffle? Bring back the aggressive quickies Siddles and Hiffenhaus, I say.
They may concede more runs, but they will pick up wickets before Herschelle Gibbs, AB de Villiers and JP Duminy go on a treasure hunt for fours.
Since winning the second Test at Durban on March 10, Australia have lost six matches and won only one. They lost the third and final Test in Cape Town by an innings, lost the Twenty20 series 0-2, and now the ODIs 1-3.
How to reverse this trend?
Like Mitchell Johnson, Siddle and Hiffenhaus, opening batsmen Phil Jaques and Simon Katich had done extremely well in the Test series against the same opponents. But apart from Johnson, the other four who contributed to Australia’s Test series victory were sent home, as if with a label: “not suitable for ODIs.”
I disagree.
Jaques would be an ideal opener in ODIs, with his dynamic batting at the start of an innings. Katich would provide effective support and can bowl his chinamen more economically than Hauritz does his offies.
The Ashes are barely two months away and Australia’s number one position in Test cricket is very much in the balance. True, England are in worse shape, but they have the home advantage.
Also, they have match-winners in Kevin Pietersen and Andrew Flintoff.
Australia was much stronger in 2005 than now, but still the Lions had the last laugh. It’s about time skipper Ricky Ponting exerts his authority in team selection.
Hopefully, the return of fast guns Brett Lee and Stuart Clark will make a difference.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
The Crowd Says (9) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Cricket articles
- What we do and don’t know about our Baggy Greens (112)
- Success of Twenty20 spells trouble for ODI cricket (106)
- Channel 9 commentators an annoyance this summer (102)
- One Day Cricket is suffering from Middle Child Syndrome (89)
- Cricket Australia must take a stand against racist spectators (89)
- Dave’s Warner-ful switch-hit panned by precious critics (84)
- Khawaja shouldn’t have been Shaun from the Test side (71)
- Mathews heroics almost shakes Clarke’s resolve
- Resurgent Pakistan inspire new generation to play
- Clarke stars as Australia beat Sri Lanka
- Australia vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (197)
- Hall of Fame for Indian legend Gavaskar
- Sri Lanka to target ‘weak’ Aussie bowlers
- India backing Rohit Sharma to find form
- Resurgent Pakistan inspire new generation to play (0)
- Australia vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (197)
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (6)
- Pakistan’s win over England a triumph of character (21)
- Steve Waugh is right about cricket’s succession plan (5)
- India vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (180)
- Let’s talk about selection, Test fans (28)
sheek said | April 15th 2009 @ 8:22am | Report comment
Kersi,
Chappelli was fond of saying the best way to keep the scoring rate down, was to take wickets. The opposition can hit you for 5-6 runs an over, but it won’t help them much if they’re dismissed for 200.
If winning teams are based on clever/inspired selections, then the Aussie cricket team is being let down by its selectors. I’m a great fan of ying/yang. You do need players who complement each other, not all the same type. Anyway, it’s the footy season now!!!
sledgeross said | April 15th 2009 @ 10:45am | Report comment
ALways enjoy your articles/books Kersi.
I agree re Krezja. If you pick players from Sydneys Western Suburbs, they generally wont let you down!
Skull said | April 15th 2009 @ 12:31pm | Report comment
Do you mean Jacques or Hughes
Kersi Meher-Homji said | April 15th 2009 @ 12:47pm | Report comment
Oops, Skull.
Sorry, I meant Hughes. My apologies to readers and Phil Hughes. First the selectors ignore him, then I mix him up with Jacques!
And thanks Sledgecross for making my day.
Greg Russell said | April 15th 2009 @ 3:27pm | Report comment
One day it’s the batting that is the problem, the next day it’s the bowling. I am used to this from living in New Zealand for the last 15 years, except that this discussion is not about the Black Caps! The truth, as I will explain, is that everything is a problem in the Australian one-day team at the moment.
With the test team it is easy to say what has gone wrong: McGrath and Warne have retired. But Warne’s last ODI for Australia was in January 2003, and McGrath was quite often absent from the one-day side, with little perceptible effect on results. Further, even after McGrath’s retirement, Australia recorded very notable achievements like a 4-2 series win in India (which actually was even more dominant than 4-2 sounds) and a 5-0 whitewash in the West Indies. So the sudden one-day decline is not due to McGrath and Warne having departed.
Further, the absence of McGrath and Warne is most relevant to test cricket, which relies heavily on bowlers to win matches (no matter how good one’s batting, a win requires 20 opposition wickets to be taken). One-day cricket relies much more heavily on contributions from all in a team. So I contend that we must look for many facets of the Australian ODI team that have broken down. I would point most strongly the to the following factors:
1. OPENERS: Gilchrist and Hayden have gone, and even our next generation of openers, Marsh and Watson, are absent at the moment. It is almost impossible to be an excellent one-day team without excellent openers. Haddin at least has promise, but Clarke is dismal in this role.
We need to be realistic about Marsh and Watson when they come back. They have clocked up some good numbers so far, but they are not going to be Gilchrist and Hayden. Gilchrist’s career average may “only” have been 36, but, exactly as with Sehwag with India, it was the way in which he made those runs. Even an “average” score of 30-40 would usually be made so rapidly that it set up the entire innings. He was quite rightly named Australia’s best-ever one-day player. Neither Marsh nor Watson will cause opposition hearts to start racing just by walking out to bat, as Gilchrist did and Sehwag does. And Hayden and Viv Richards stand alone with their physical presence at the crease.
2. MIDDLE-ORDER BATTING: Love him or loathe him, it stands out that the missing player here is Andrew Symonds. Like Gilchrist his mere presence had a demoralising effect on the opposition. The Husseys have been tremendously disappointing in their failure to fill in for Symonds. I am beginning to think that David simply does not have what it takes (which surprises me), and I also wonder whether Mike will ever get his mojo back.
Speaking of which, once again we need to be realistic about what lies ahead: Symonds is to return, but nothing about his form for Queensland suggests that he will be the player that he was.
3. SPIN BOWLING: Brad Hogg could never strangle an innings a la Daniel Vettori, but he always took wickets (156 in 113 innings), and he never got belted. There has been essentially no progress in finding a replacement for him.
4. FAST BOWLING: Brett Lee was always a much, much better one-day bowler than test bowler. We also should not forget that another absent fast bowler, Shaun Tait, did well as Lee’s replacement at the 2007 World Cup. Both these players are in a different league to bowlers like Harris, Geeves and Laughlin, with whom the selectors have been fiddling around recently.
I have not heard where Tait is at, and Lee’s bowling was so poor in the second half of 2008 (in India and against South Africa) that I am not going to get any hopes up about him until I see him do something.
Hopefully this analysis makes clear just how much the Australian one-day team has disintegrated in the last 12 months. It is not just the fast bowling, and it is not just the selectors. But I agree that doing better in both these spheres would be a good start.
Finally, a team needs a heart and soul. All season the Australian one-day team has been playing like a team that has lost its heart and soul. Ponting and Mike Hussey are the best evidence of this: quite obviously things just do not feel right to either of them, as reflected in their insipid play. Is Andrew Symonds the missing life force, or is it someone like Hayden or Hogg, who have departed forever?
Is it drawing a low bow to wonder whether the Clarke-Symonds row of last year has deflated the dressing room? Certainly Clarke has missed a wonderful chance to make a case for future leadership: with so many senior players gone or absent, a purposeful team performance would have reflected very well on him. But if anything the opposite is the case.
Someone (I have no confidence that the selectors can do this) needs to find or rekindle an animating force within the team, and build a team around it.
sledgeross said | April 15th 2009 @ 4:23pm | Report comment
Pick some more Bankstown boys I reckon!
onside said | April 15th 2009 @ 4:57pm | Report comment
In 1876 testicular proctectors were introduced .
In 1976 batting helmets were introduced.
It took 100 years to figure out brains were also important and worth protecting .Cricket authorities , including
national coaches and selectors dont move all that quickly, so dont hold your breath waiting for them to fix the
obvious.
sheek said | April 15th 2009 @ 7:41pm | Report comment
Onside,
Ahem, it can be argued the old-timers of 1876 got it right, protecting the brain where they believed it to be in the human male!
I will say no more……….
Kersi Meher-Homji said | April 17th 2009 @ 10:50am | Report comment
Greg,
You are quite correct. The weakness for Australia is just not bowling. As you say it is batting as well. The selectors must stick to the opening pair of Phil Hughes and Simon Katich, in both Test and in ODIs.
And I might add, Ricky Ponting, a superb batsman, is not an inspiring leader. He does not have Plan B. Steve Waugh, Mark Taylor and Ian Chappell had plans B, C right upto plan Z.
But if not Ponting, who can lead Australia? Michael Clarke? I don’t think so. I would have suggested Mike Hussey last year but he is going throug batting horrors right now. Perhaps Simon Katch?? He can bat and bowl. In my opinion he would make a good captain. He is my man. Relieved of captaincy, Ponting will regain his mastery as a world-class batsman.