Is Hauritz the answer to Australia’s spin woes?
Columnist By Brett McKay, 14 Jul 2009 Brett McKay is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Australian Cricket, Cricket, english cricket, Nathan Hauritz, The Ashes
Australia's Nathan Hauritz appeals unsuccessfully for the wicket of England's Paul Collingwood during the final day of the first cricket test match between England and Australia in Cardiff, Wales, Sunday, July 12, 2009. AP Photo/Tom Hevezi
Less than twelve months ago, one of the first articles I wrote for The Roar was Where For Art Thou, Australian Spinner?, a quick look through the Australian spin bowling options for the first domestic season without Warne, MacGill or Hogg.
With Nathan Hauritz currently over in England as the sole specialist spinner in the Australian squad contesting the Ashes, I thought it would be appropriate to devote my debut as a columnist for The Roar to re-examining this topic of spinning depth within Australian cricket.
Specifically, in the case of Hauritz, it’s whether he is to be or not to be the Australian spinner going forward?
That is the question, and after his early tour form, including some success in the First Test at Cardiff, I’m sure I’m not alone pondering the answer.
The motivation behind that article last September was the sudden rise and rapid fall of New South Wales’ Beau Casson, the left-arm “chinaman” bowler who earned Test selection in the Caribbean in April 2008 after a breakthrough domestic season.
Despite enjoying some success with ball and bat, Casson never received the expected follow-up selection for the tour to India last October.
Casson then suffered injury, indifferent form and a massive loss of confidence during the 2008/09 season, and lost his spot for NSW. Having now lost his Cricket Australia contract after just one year, it’s hard to see him wearing his Baggy Green again anytime soon.
Casson’s debut and subsequent dumping triggered the proverbial revolving door for the Australian spinner’s role, with Cameron White, Jason Krejza, no-one, Hauritz, Krejza again, Hauritz again, Marcus North, and Bryce McGain playing the part in Tests since.
Hauritz has the role again now, and being the only specialist in the squad to England, you’d expect only a Perth-like pitch along the way (and, I guess, ordinary form) would stop him playing out the Ashes series.
Further, with White the only other spinner with a CA contract for 2009/10, Hauritz really has been granted the best chance to cement the spot.
Now, the Australian selectors are paid to select, and I’m not, so presumably they are better placed than I am to explain the spin-blowing merry-go-round of the last twelve months or so.
If they are now saying that Nathan Hauritz is THE Australian spinner for the immediate future, then let’s see them support this stance. Stop the endless speculation and uncertainty as to whether he’ll make the Test XI, and instead back him as the man to do the job.
Don’t go as far as saying “Nathan has our full support”, because that’s a career-ending comment. Just remove the uncertainty.
Once that’s done, Hauritz needs to be given every chance to succeed within the team, and that includes proper attacking plans and field placements to suit.
If he bowls a couple of bad balls early in the spell, don’t just drop four men straight back on the boundary. Give him a little time to adjust his lines and get back into his groove. And don’t just force him to bowl containing lines with a “ring” field either.
That’s unimaginative thinking, and it’s boring cricket to boot.
On the whole, Hauritz out-bowled both of his more-fancied English opponents in Cardiff.
In particular, I believe Hauritz should have been given more credit for his first innings wickets. He exploited Kevin Pietersen’s premeditation perfectly, yet the only public rap seemed to be from Pietersen himself, even if that was more to do with deflecting criticism from his unbelievably bad shot selection.
Likewise, Hauritz’s change of pace and targeting the rough brought Monty Panesar undone completely, but this was also quickly overlooked because Monty’s not the most comfortable with a bat in his hand.
Let me state that I’m not the biggest fan of Hauritz around the place, but at the same time I do think he’s better than popular opinion suggests.
I will say though that if indeed he is the guy that spin-bowling hopes and plans have been pinned on, then I’m prepared to give him the support and time he needs.
In my mind, however, this time and support needs to be coming from selectors in the first instance, and then the team themselves.
You can’t take one specialist spinner on a three-month tour, speculate for the first two weeks whether he’ll play, and then expect him to bowl with the confidence of a 700 Test wicket phenomenon when the team is only finalised on the morning of the Test.
Is a “Nathan’s playing, and for the next couple of Tests, and he’ll do a great job for us” too much to ask for, a couple of days out?
While ever this uncertainty remains, and unless Hauritz gets the required time and support from the top, then the musical chairs can only continue, and surely that would be in no-one’s best interests (apart from perhaps Australia’s opposition).
We shall see. Based on selection history over the last twelve months, however, I won’t be surprised if I broach this subject again in future columns.
Recommend this story.
Follow Brett McKay on Twitter: @BMcSport
- Explore:
- Australian Cricket, Cricket, english cricket, Nathan Hauritz, The Ashes
July 14th 2009 @ 2:29pm
Benjamin Conkey said | July 14th 2009 @ 2:29pm | Report comment
Well done Brett, on entering the red side. I think Hauritz surprised everyone with how well he bowled in the First Test.
I felt a bit sorry there for him at the end. His fingers were clearly tired from bowling so many overs..but even in that last over he got the ball to turn.
Hauritz has done well, but as you said needs support from his captain and selectors.
Who Needs Melon..It wasn’t your imgagination. Every kid I knew had one of those Shane Warne yellow balls..that show you where to put your fingers to bowl a leg-break, wrong-un, and top spinner. I don’t know why spin bowlers haven’t developed in this country.
This is a little off the topic but I remember A Current Affair story a few years back, when Murali was in Australia. There was this stupid coach who was teaching his juniors to bowl like Murali because “he was getting away with chucking so why can’t we?”
If this coach was any reflection of junior cricket coaches in Australia, it could be a reason.
Clearly you need coaches who know what they’re talking about when it comes to spin bowling…and there aren’t too many of them around.
July 14th 2009 @ 3:32pm
Brett McKay said | July 14th 2009 @ 3:32pm | Report comment
Cheers Conks, I’m just happy it’s turned out like it has, I was a bit nervous until I saw Sheek and Alan’s comments..
On those Warnie balls, I just remembered I got given one as a secret Santa pressie at work a couple of years ago. After some a quick session with the SpinMaster (or whatever it was called), I was unplayable in Cubicle Cricket….
Think it was last seen accompanying a fresh bone in a new hole in the garden actually. The labrador bowls a mean flipper now!!
OME, harsh call on Hussey, sits around for two days and then cops a snorter with the new ball!! And not completely sure I’d like Haddin batting at 6 too regularly either – tends to find mid-on and mid-off too easily for me. You are right about Hauritz’s flight and control though, and as I suggest above, it goes unnoticed largely, becuase most people are watching for him to turn it square. I don’t recall Tim May being a big turner either…
July 14th 2009 @ 3:42pm
Jameswm said | July 14th 2009 @ 3:42pm | Report comment
Brett – Hussey didn’t get a snorter – it went dead straight when he was expecting it to swing in. Anderson swings it both ways though so you can’t bat with those assumptions, plus he made the classic Ponting mistake of pushing at a full one too hard outside off stump early in his innings.
I said elsewhere he’s got 2 more innings before he’s dropped.
July 14th 2009 @ 3:53pm
Brett McKay said | July 14th 2009 @ 3:53pm | Report comment
James, it’s quite likely my recollections of Hussey being done by the swinging new rock were actually hallucinations induced by sleep deprivation. I certainly recall him not moving his feet very well and wafting his bat – Ponting style, as we’ve discussed – a long way from his body.
I’m happy to carry him for the rest of the series, partly because he’s a personal favourite, partly because there no back-up bats. Hopefully he’ll come good at Lord’s.
Actually that’s something, if Hauritz bowls his offies downhill at Lord’s, he’ll look like he’s turning it a mile!!
July 14th 2009 @ 5:05pm
Brian said | July 14th 2009 @ 5:05pm | Report comment
Well done Brett and well said on Hauritz. Personally I would have chosen Krejza but having chosen Hauritz they should stick with him. I can think of no better example of this than the very limited talent of South Africa’s Paul Harris. On the sheffield shield I never knew there was so many spinners around the 1970s. This is just a sudden theory but I wonder if todays batsman being much better players of spin has anything to do with the struggle of spinners in domestic cricket. 30 years ago I suspect most of our test players had toured the sub-continent maybe once and most shield players never. However these days between ODI, IPL, A Tours etc every state team has a lot of proficient batsman of spin bowling.
July 14th 2009 @ 5:38pm
Dave said | July 14th 2009 @ 5:38pm | Report comment
One of the thing s David Hookes said is because he played world series cricket he missed the Indian tour of Australia in 1977/78 and the tour of India in 1979 where he would have learnt about playing spin bowing.
Alan border went on the 79 tour and came back an expert player of spin.
July 14th 2009 @ 6:20pm
Fred Magee said | July 14th 2009 @ 6:20pm | Report comment
Brett, congratulations on the move to the red…love reading what you have to say and this article isnt anything different.
I think that when it comes to spinners, we have to realise that (i) there will never be another Warne and thus set our expectations to a realistic level and (ii) this means that the spinner will leak runs, wont have the same control. Provided that they get wickets, then that is the key.
This also means that the old game plan of the Warne/McGrath days doesnt work…the only thing that remains is that we have to take 20 wickets and for me, that is still a concern on the mix to do it. While before the the first test I would have been happy with a draw, the way the game went we should have won. At tea, we needed 3 wickets and 34 overs to get them…that should have been enough with the lineup we had.
One more point to ponder for all – Andrew McDonald did a very good job at keeping a end tight and picked up the occasional wicket which contributed to recent wins…is there a place for him?
By the way, GRJ Matthews will be 60 and still believe he is the best spinner in NSW.
Best of luck on the red side
July 14th 2009 @ 6:44pm
Brett McKay said | July 14th 2009 @ 6:44pm | Report comment
Brian, Dave, you’re both onto something there, and I’d never really joined these dots before.
In his autobiography, Adam Gilchrist spoke at length about the improvements gained by the youth and academy teams no longer going to England religiously, instead heading to the subcontinent. A young guy from my club heads to India with the Aust U15 team in September.
Mind you, our young tweakers should be reaping the same rewards..
July 14th 2009 @ 6:51pm
Brett McKay said | July 14th 2009 @ 6:51pm | Report comment
thanks Fred, and you’re right. But not only must we realise there won’t be another Warne, there might not be another MacGill either..
July 15th 2009 @ 12:10pm
Chop said | July 15th 2009 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
Being a Holden Fan Brett you belong on the Red Side
Congrats
I think part of the reason there are no spinners coming through is that the wickets are prepared so well that they don’t generally crack and provide the assistance they used to for spin bowlers.
Even though there were footmarks at Sophia Gardens, you would say it was still a reasonably easy pitch to bat on.
Hopefully the Lords deck will be more of a bowler friendly pitch, even though there should have been a result in the first test it was only because the poms batted so poorly twice.