Lamenting the end of a great cricketing era
Roar Pro
By Mr Sports, 9 Dec 2009 Mr Sports is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- Australian Cricket, Cricket, West Indies cricket
As I watched the live scorecard from Adelaide barely moving throughout my work day on Tuesday, an unsettling realisation settled in my stomach: this Australian cricket team is ordinary.
The confluence of greatness that I enjoyed throughout my formative years (I am now 26) has now been irretrievably lost.
I do not mean to say that the Australian team is bad, for it is patently obvious that they are still a very good outfit. My point is that they are no different to South Africa or India or England (well, maybe a little different to England because we don’t steal all our players from South Africa).
On average, Australia is no better or worse than any of those teams.
The Australian team used to win all of its home series and most of the away series. Now we would only barely start as favourite at home to India and might even be underdogs to the Proteas.
The worst part of it all though isn’t simply losing games. It isn’t even letting a piddling little thing like the fourth highest chase in Australian cricket history deter us from chasing a win.
No, the worst part is that there is not a single intimidating player left in the Australian team. There is nobody left with the unmistakable ‘turn a game in a session’ potential.
During the Waugh and early Ponting eras, Australia had nearly half a dozen players who were a legitimate threat to swing a Test match in a single session. Hayden, Gilchrist and the younger Ponting could all do it with the bat, and McGrath and Warne could do it with the ball.
Sure, Ricky Ponting still has the gift, and he may well turn a few Test matches yet in the same way that Lara did for several years and Tendulkar is still (barely) doing.
But on the whole, he seems much like Obi Wan Kenobi standing on the Death Star flight deck: skills diminished and focused only on securing the next generation.
Aside from the fading skills of one master, what else do opposition teams need to worry about?
None of the other batsman are at all scary. There isn’t a single West Indian cricket fan who sees Marcus North or Mike Hussey walk out to bat and who sits up a little straighter in their chair and thinks, “better get this bloke early or we’re in trouble.”
Let me be clear on this point, though. All six of Australia’s top order, and Brad Haddin for that matter, are fine batsman with Test match level ability.
However, none of them have any explosiveness. When Matthew Hayden walked out to bat on day one, everybody in the ground knew it was possible that he would be 140 not out at the tea break, and just winding up. When Shane Watson walks out to bat, Australian cricket fans just hope we get off to a good start.
Sadly, the bowling is in even worse shape.
Certainly Mitchell Johnson does have the ability to run through a team and get a 7 for 40 or something like that. However, since leaving the Republic in February, he has seemed just as likely to get 1 for 70.
As for the rest, Peter Siddle is widely respected for being a ‘tryer’ but it has been a long time since we’ve had to rely on tryers to open the bowling. Everybody else, from Bollinger to Hilfenhaus to McKay and beyond, are just ‘potential.’
During the era of dominance, nobody had to ask why we were picking a bloke.
These days, the selectors and the mainstream media have to justify every selection: “well, this bloke gets a bit of swing” and “this bloke is really tall so he should be able to get some bounce.”
You know why we picked Jason Gillespie? Because he was good and he got wickets. Nothing more was said and nothing more was needed.
It is a sad state of affairs for those of us raised on win after win after win. Regrettably, I bring no solutions to the table. I can share only my discontent and sorrow.
The era of dominance has passed. The Australian team will, for the foreseeable future, be ordinary. Just like everybody else.
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.
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)
- 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
- Game-by-game preview of round 19
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (5)
- Like father, like son: Alister McDermott on a fast track to the Test team (30)
- Australia vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (197)
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (5)
- 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)
- Pakistan win shows what’s beautiful about the game (13)
- Explore:
- Australian Cricket, Cricket, West Indies cricket
Freud of Football said | December 9th 2009 @ 2:46am | Report comment
That’s a pretty harsh assessment of a very inexperienced team.
Nobody feared Matthew Hayden after 13 Tests (as many as Watson has played), Steve Waugh wasn’t much after 9 tests (as many as North has played), McGrath didn’t have to lead the line with just 28 Tests under his belt (as does Johnson) and Lee was given free reign for the first 5 years of his career to just thunder in and bowl quick whereas Siddle with 14 Test matches expierence has to bowl tight to compensate for others.
The Australian team weren’t feared until they’d played together for a number of years, only really Warne and Ponting were great from the off, the others took their sweet time to become the legends that they eventually became, even Langer had questions over his head after 50 odd tests (a few more than both Katich and Hussey). There was a lot of stick for Gilchrist because Aussies were used to Healy’s excellent keeping (although I think Gilchrist was a fantastic keeper both with bat and gloves) and it took him a few good innings and diving catches down the leg for those voices to be hushed.
There is a solution. Time. Faith. Consistency. Get Katich out and bring Hughes in. Move Watson down the order. Make sure Ferguson comes straight back into the team after his rehab, give this young Steve Smith a chance, make sure Paine gets a lot of ODI experience etc.
Australia has a very good batch of young players, better than we’ve had for the last 10 years but we don’t have the right selectors. We need some men with guts and courage, who are willing to give some of the younger guys a chance and to keep them in the team even when they have an off-match.
Fisher Price said | December 9th 2009 @ 10:24am | Report comment
I’m pretty sure Katich would be statistically the team’s best batsman over the past couple of years.
On what basis do you think Steve Smith is ready?
Freud of Football said | December 10th 2009 @ 5:38pm | Report comment
I don’t know that he is ready. I’ve only read good things about him and haven’t had the chance of seeing him play yet but by all accounts he has got the goods and considering Katich is old enough to be his father I’d much rather see Smith given his chance.
Australia needs players who will go on to have 100-125 Test matches in there career, Katich might make 70-80 and even then he will have been hanging on, he is 34 already and seeing as he got his chance so late he won’t bow out, he’ll have to be forced.
vinay verma said | December 10th 2009 @ 5:53pm | Report comment
FP and FOF..I have seen him play on half a dozen occassions now,twice live and the rest on TV. He is ready. He loves the pressure situation and yesterday powered NSW to a victory in a controlled knock. Put on 92 with Rohrer and then a quick 70 odd with Warner. He took his time and you could see him change up a gear when required. He hasn’t lost his baby fat yet but between the ears he is as hard as nails.
His bowling needs work but he is prepared to throw in the googly after being hit. He is looking to take wickets and is not deterred by batsmen coming after him. The guy is nineteen but he is a wicket taker. He will get better. I’d throw him in against Pakistan,who surprisingly dont handle leggies as well in OZ as they do In pakistan. It is the bounce here that worries them,against the quicks and the leggies. I think he is ahead of Bailey and McGain.But i would play him instead of North.
Freud of Football said | December 10th 2009 @ 6:23pm | Report comment
Well Vinay, it would certainly be interesting if he did get a bit of a run-out but then there is the dilemman, who makes way?
Watson will most likely retain his spot in the side but I think most people agree that he isn’t the opener Australia is looking for which is somewhat strange in my opinion as Aus have Jacques, Hughes, Warner and Katich who are all capable of opening, why do we need to add extra pressure on to an all-rounder who isn’t cut out for that role anyway?
I’d like to see North retained, I like his technique and I think he will be a solid player for a number of years to come whereas Hussey (who is pushing 35) has been given far too many opportunities and what the hell is he doing batting at 4 anyway? He’s a 6/7, I feel like Clarke is shirking some responsibility, he should be coming in at 4 and building the Australian innings, Hussey is the kind of player to finish one off.
Anyway Vinay, why North and not Hussey? And where does Smith slot in? My key stats for this:
*North – 30.5 years old – 9 tests with 3 hundreds – century every third test (plus he is a good bowler)
*Hussey – 34.5 years old – 44 Tests with 10 hundreds – century/4.4 Tests .
Hussey -
vinay verma said | December 10th 2009 @ 7:06pm | Report comment
I have a high regard for Hussey’s work ethic and I am backing him to play at the level he did two years ago. His recent form in India was exceptional. He is starting to hit his cover drives with fluency. He did not look good at Adelaide. but neither did North( 16 and 2) Hussey put on 79 with Clarke in the first innings and I still back him despite your misgivings. He belied his 35 years with the flying catch off Barath in the first innings. I see him integral to the rebuilding,more so than North. North has done well and perhaps would be unlucky to be dropped. But if you want to fit Smith in then the options are only North or hauritz. And I wouldn’t like to drop Hauritz now that he is beginning to believe in himself. Smith at six for me.
Michael C Jordan said | December 9th 2009 @ 3:35am | Report comment
I think the most disappointing thing for world cricket is that we have come back to the field not the field catching up.
I can’t imagine any teams of today coming close to the Australian team of a decade ago or event the west indies of the 70′s and 80′s.
I’m not sure how many other professional sports you could say the same thing about.
Dave1 said | December 12th 2009 @ 4:57pm | Report comment
I think today’s Indian side would have been competitive against previous sides.
jameswm said | December 9th 2009 @ 5:35am | Report comment
Get rid of Katich Freud? And you criticise the selectors?
Brett McKay said | December 9th 2009 @ 7:40am | Report comment
Apart from dropping Simon Katich, I’m pretty happy to side with Freud here. Comparing the current Australian cricket team to any team containing Warne, McGrath, Gilchrist, etc, is simply not comparing apples with apples. A more suitable comparison might be with Allan Border’s side of the mid-80s, post the retirement of Marsh, G.Chappell, and Lillee. Certainly on this front, you’d have to think the current batting line-up is stronger that what Border had available to his at that time.
Secondly, why is such a bad thing if there are several teams now on pretty equal footing? No-one is going to dominate forever.
And thirdly, though this really should be the first point addressed, how about giving the West Indies some due credit for an incredible turnaround after being belted in Brisbane? I don’t know that I can pinpoint a single session in Adelaide in which I can say Australia dominated. Gayle batted brilliantly in both innings, Bravo has probably had one of his best Test matches in his career, Nash cemented his spot, and in Sulieman Benn, the Windies have unleashed possibly the meanest-looking, most intimidating left arm orthodox spinner in recent memory!!
What’s more, despite ridiculous calls that this series be cancelled after Brisbane, and all tickets refunded, the Perth Test next week shapes up as a cracking contest, that despite the series result, will truly be the deciding match in this series. And fair play to the Windies for earning this situation..
vinay verma said | December 9th 2009 @ 7:43am | Report comment
Mr Sports…It would prove interesting if you reviewed your piece five years from now. You may well find that this Australian team is not as “ordinary” as you think it is. In Johnson,Hilfenhaus,Siddle and Watson they have a pace attack with the potential to rival the glory years of the mid seventies and late nineties/early 2000′s. Watson’s reverse swinging yorker to get rid of Nash was a superb piece of old ball bowling. The batting is in good hands with Katich,Watson Ponting and Clarke. Michael Hussey remains an enigma. I dont think he should be batting four. Michael Clarke is the man for that spot. I am expecting Hussey to rediscover his best form over the next six months and be a force come Ashes 2010. The next in line is Callum Ferguson and if he had not been injured would be pushing to take Hussey’s spot. In Brad haddin we have a keeper batsman every bit as good as Gilchrist. And we have not seen the best of Haddin yet. He is the cleanest striker of the cricket ball straight down the ground and his timing sets him apart.And he can graft as he showed yesterday. Apart from the lack of a quality legspinner Australia looks in good shape. Young Smith may well be the answer but Australia,unlike Pakistan,seem reluctant to hand a cap out till you are 25.
MC Jordan..I disagree that Australia has come back to the field. The very opposite is the case. South Africa,India and Sri Lanka have lifted and in some cases surpassed Australia. Australia may just have the edge in fielding but South Africa are not far behind. Also the current Indian Batting line up from 1-5 would rival any of the past 100 years. Sehwag is one of only three to have scored two triples..the others being Sir Donald and Lara.And Sehwag is arguably the most destructive opening batsman the world has ever seen. Add Dravid ,Tendulkar , Laxman ,Gambhir and Dhoni and it is hard to argue this is not a super lineup.
The interesting aspect for me is to see if Australia can lift another gear. I am concerned they let the Windies get this close and there may be just a hint of complacency around. Peter Siddle was a handicap and one must question if he went in carrying an injury.
Freud..was getting rid of Katich an aberration on your part?
Fisher Price said | December 9th 2009 @ 10:35am | Report comment
Hussey Out.
Don’t know how much more of seeing his off-stump uncertainty and worried grimace-white nose combo I can stand.
Jameswm said | December 9th 2009 @ 8:19am | Report comment
I do tend to agree with you guys about the rebuilding.
The pace attack can’t have a reputation until it’s done the job consistently for a few years. That’s how intimidation is developed. Johnson and Hilfy are the right guys and probably Siddle. Bolly in there as well.
The batting – how can’t they see Hussey has lost it? Anyone else in the top 8, once they get to about 20 seems set, yet Hussey stills scratches around and looks like he could get out at any time.
It’s absurd to hear them say that they’re keeping Hussey because they can’t put Ferguson in as a straight swap as he’s injured, and Hughes isn’t in good enough form yet. What do these quotes say to guys like Jaques and Rogers, who are clearly test quality openers (I’d go for Jaques but I wouldn’t argue with Rogers). It is bleedin obvious that Watson is not opener (not that he’s not good at it), and his opening hurts the balance of the team. I’ve never been convinced about North either, but I guess he deserves to stay for now.
Ponting really has to lose the captaincy. The only time he scores a big innings is when he has to. At other times, like the 1st innings of each test here, he loses his wicket out of boredom. That’s right – boredom. You can see it while he’s batting and it’s just not good enough from your Test skipper. However his mates Nielsen and Hilditch are the ones making those decisions, so we’ve got buckleys of that happening.
My top 8 building for the next 2-3 years is
Katich
Jaques/Hughes
Ponting
Clarke
Ferguson
Watson
Haddin (and develop Paine)
Johnson
Ponting and Katich only have a few years left, so we’ll see for the next 2-3 years who stands out as the replacement. Captaincy wise I have no idea – but not Clarke thanks.
The pace bowling for the next 2-3 years picks itself really, and they have no idea how to choose or use a spinner. Maybe make Warnie a selector for that purpose – anyone listening to his wired-up comments in the celebrity T20 match knows there’s a helluva cricketing brain on his shoulders.
Fisher Price said | December 9th 2009 @ 10:40am | Report comment
Did you all notice that Watson was (yet again!) plumb LBW early in his innings yesterday? Lucky for him the WI didn’t call for a challenge to the incorrect decision.
Justin said | December 9th 2009 @ 10:51am | Report comment
Thats not quite right FP. As he was 2.5 metres from the stumps when the ball hit him the decision would not have been overturned.
Fisher Price said | December 9th 2009 @ 12:37pm | Report comment
Replays suggested the ball was hitting three quarters of the way up middle… The ABC commentators suggested it would have been overturned.
Watson is a walking LBW shout; not an opener’s back door.
Brett McKay said | December 9th 2009 @ 12:46pm | Report comment
but FP, those same replays had the impact as an orange light, and suggesting >2.5 m as Justin mentions. The commentators this summer have been very good in advising what must happen for an overturn, and the short answer is that anything other than three green lights (pitching, impact, and stumps) cannot overrule the on-field discussion.
You’re quite right, it was going to hit three-parts up, but you can never give anyone out when they’re that far forward.
I do agree that Watson is still having trouble with straight balls though, although he looked a lot better in Adelaide..
Fisher Price said | December 9th 2009 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
Fair enough.
I think Watson gets hit on the pads far too often for a Test opener. India and South Africa would be likely to cash in as England did. Let’s see what Asif and Aamer can do with him.
Brian said | December 9th 2009 @ 8:25am | Report comment
I’m not a huge Clarke fan but he has to be the next captain. Katich & Hussey are too old by the time Ponting goes whilst North is unproven. A bowler or wicketkeeper is a bad idea whilst any new player from now until Ponting goes would be low on experience. Anyway you slice it Clarke will be the next captain.
Freud of Football said | December 9th 2009 @ 9:09am | Report comment
No-one seems to be with me in dropping Katich except maybe Brian who has read my mind. He is good, of that there is simply no question and he is probably the third best batsman behind Ponting and Clarke but he’s simply too old, I’d much rather see an early-20′s guy get his spot than a mid-30′s guy.
If Katich was brilliant he would have played 100+ tests by now, that he couldn’t displace Langer and Hayden at the top or any of the lower order batsman shows that he was never going to be a great of the game, however Ferguson (who should bat at 5, Clarke at 4 (agree with Vinay here, he’s the closest to ME Waugh I’ve seen in a while) and Watson at 6) is young and every bit as talented as Katich, but because he is young I’d rather he go on to play 100+ Tests than get another 20 out of Katich.
Just think of Ferguson at age 30 with 60+ caps. It’s a lot better than Ferguson at 30 with 15 caps because Katich stuck around til close to age 40.
Fisher Price said | December 9th 2009 @ 10:44am | Report comment
Katich has been more consistent than Ponting (who’s no spring chicken) since his recall.
I’d have him at number 3 and captain.
I think Clarke will achieve more in his Test career than M Waugh. I also think that Martyn was better than both of them.
Fisher Price said | December 9th 2009 @ 10:41am | Report comment
It does seem he’ll become captain by default.
Jameswm said | December 9th 2009 @ 9:20am | Report comment
You’re kidding Freud – Katich is the rock at the top of our order. So what if he’s 34 – his skill is still there. Once his powers are waning, I’ll be with you. Right now, the team needs his batting and brain – badly. I think that’s a shocking and illogical call (dropping Katich).
Fisher Price said | December 9th 2009 @ 10:30am | Report comment
I wonder: am I alone in thinking that Johnson’s tendency to bowl erratically and go for easy boundaries (including numerous byes from ill-directed short balls) in most innings is a major concern? Not only does it give the opposition’s total a hefty boost but it puts pressure on all the other bowlers to concentrate on bowling tightly?
For someone so highly rated he bowls plenty of absolute dross.
And weren’t ‘Untouchable’ Hussey’s innings excruciatingly ineffective?
vinay verma said | December 9th 2009 @ 10:44am | Report comment
FP..He got 8 for the match and is an out and out attacking bowler..the “dross” comes with the liscence he has to attack. On days that he gets it right he will run through the opposition..last year in Perth and then again in South Africa.
I have to agree on Hussey’s scratching around but would like to cut him some slack for his past deeds..but not too much slack. He is on notice. But who is really breathing down his neck?
Fisher Price said | December 9th 2009 @ 10:50am | Report comment
Figures don’t always tell the true story; Bollinger outbowled him comfortably. Those wickets flattered Johnson’s bowling very much and I can’t recall him bowling one consistently dangerous spell. Pressure wasn’t built and the West Indies got plenty of cheap runs off him in both innings to bat Australia out of the match.
This is the very same Johnson-spearheaded Australia that lost in India. lost at home to South Africa, lost in England and could well have been pegged back to 1-1 at home to a moderate WI side… The effectiveness of putting consistent faith in the Johnson ‘all out attack’ policy could be questioned.
Re: Hussey. How much slack Vinay? He’s got one Test ton in roughly 30 innings! And he’s in the key position of number 4. Surely you could see he looked out of his depth in Adelaide?
vinay verma said | December 9th 2009 @ 11:49am | Report comment
FP…Johnson is only two years into a Test Career..He has 125 wickets at around 28 per wicket. Worth sticking with.
Re Hussey,I could agree if there was someone beating the door down around Australia..the only one was Ferguson and he is out. I do agree he scratched around like a mother hen in Adelaide. I would give him the rest of the Summer.
Fisher Price said | December 9th 2009 @ 12:49pm | Report comment
Johnson: I agree he’s worth sticking with, but should he be undroppable? The team has been struggling, with the attack often expensive and ineffective. His wicket tally looks flash but his waywardness has a negative impact on the attack as a whole. Improvement necessary I reckon.
Hussey: has been awful for two years at a time when the team has been faltering. if proper openers were picked (two from Hughes, Jaques and Rogers) there’d be a surplus of middle-order players (Katich, Ponting, North, Clarke, Watson and Haddin), even now that Hodge has grown tired of ostracism. Possibly even Khawaja or Bailey would be worth blooding ahead of Hussey right now.
Freud of Football said | December 9th 2009 @ 4:02pm | Report comment
You don’t seem to realise Johnson’s place in the side. He is there solely to take wickets, a bit like Lee when he came into the team. The captain will expect his other bowlers to be tight but Johnson will be expensive and take wickets – even when he is bowling bad.
Fisher Price said | December 9th 2009 @ 5:37pm | Report comment
In Adelaide Johnson bowled wildly for the most part but took wickets. Other than Siddle the bowlers kept it reasonably tight, and yet the still Windies made two substantial totals.
In the first innings Siddle and Bollinger (note: Johnson was but is no longer always trusted with new-ball duties) had the Windies pinned down until Johnson came on and relieved pressure with legstump four-balls and wayward bouncers. The pattern was repeated later in the innings when Brendan Nash cashed in on a Johnson spell.
I realise this analysis suggests there are issues elsewhere in the bowling attack (and there are) but Johnson rarely rolls the opposition, so unless he can exert some control he becomes a bit of luxury.
Australia’s recent Test results are not flattering, so basically I’m just throwing up a theory as to why the Johnson-spearheaded Australia continues to struggle.
I actually like the comparison with Brett Lee; another who’s all-or-nothing style often put pressure on his fellow bowlers (see the drawn home series to India in 2003 and 2005 Ashes); of course the likes of McGrath, Warne, Gillespie, MacGill and Kasprowicz had sufficient skills to either a) carry the load or b) resign Lee to 12th man duties.
If all that mattered was that a spearhead bowls fast and takes wickets then maybe Wayne Holdsworth (not in Johnson’s class, of course) would have forged a Test career.
vinay verma said | December 9th 2009 @ 10:38am | Report comment
What many overlook is Katich’s determination. He made a brave move from WA to NSW. When he lost his CA Contract ,Dave Gilbert showed faith in him and gave him the security of a NSW contract and Simon put his head down and churned out the runs. Katich is a no frills player and does not crave “star” status. He is a team man and wears the baggy green with distinction. Hauritz,Bollinger,Haddin andeven Clarke all continue to feed off his positive energy and calm demeanour. I would say he is the first picked after Ponting.
There is a case for Rogers and Jacques but they have to do what Katich did. Score a mountain of runs and make it impossible for the selectors to leave them out. Katich has scored over 17000 First Class runs and is far from finished.
I can undertand Freud’s call for youth but unfortunately the selectors have not blooded a young Test man in recent years save for Clarke and Hughes. Clarke was dropped for a while and came back. It is upto Hughes to do the same.