Hussey Hussey Hussey, oi oi oi
Columnist By Kersi Meher-Homji, 21 Sep 2011 Kersi Meher-Homji is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Cricket, Michael Clarke, Michael Hussey, Sri Lanka cricket
Australia under new skipper Michael Clarke won a Test series for the first time since January 2010. Not just that, but on foreign soil, and against a higher ranked team in Sri Lanka.
This series win promotes Australia to No. 4 in Test ranking and demotes Sri Lanka to No. 5.
Many contributed to Australia’s series victory, but none more than Mr Cricket, Mike Hussey. What a unique trifecta he achieved.
Uniquely in the history of Test cricket, he was awarded man of the match in all three Tests, making his man-of-the-series award a foregone conclusion. Call it a Grand Slam of cricket!
And the Roar website was the first to predict this.
Not many statisticians keep records of man-of-the-match awards. I made many inquiries including to statisticians on CricInfo but drew a blank until Sunday night.
Then I struck gold when India’s top statistician Rajesh Kumar did his homework and confirmed that it would be unique for a cricketer to be named man of the match in all three Tests in a three-Test series.
This was written as a comment to my recent Roar piece “Will Marsh be dropped or will he join the greats?”
Hussey scored 95 and 15 in the first Test, 142 in the second and 118 and 93 in the third.
Thus he topped the batting aggregate and average (463 runs at 92.60 with two centuries and two nineties) from both teams and, freakily, topped the bowling averages as well, with two wickets at 3.50.
Next best in batting was Sri Lanka’s Angelo Mathews, scoring 274 runs at 91.33 with one century and a ninety, followed by Australia’s Shaun Marsh with 240 runs at 80.00 with a debut century and an eighty.
In bowling, Sri Lankan left-arm spinner Rangana Herath was on top of the table with 16 wickets at 23.00, his best spell being 7-157 yesterday.
At one stage it looked like he may take all 10 wickets in a Test innings to join England’s Jim Laker and India’s Anil Kumble.
But Sri Lankan skipper Tillekeratne Dilshan spoilt the party by dismissing Hussey after Herath had captured the first five wickets.
The Test was memorable for Kumar Sangakkara, who scored 79 runs in his 100th Test, and opener Phil Hughes, who scored a career-saving 126 as an opener.
The series will be remembered as the series of the debutantes. Four of them – Nathan Lyon, Trent Copeland and Shaun Marsh from Australia, and Shaminda Eranga from Sri Lanka – struck gold at the first attempt.
The happiest man at the prize distribution ceremony was not quadruple award-winner Hussey, but captain courageous Michael Clarke.
He had scored a magnificent 112 yesterday, adding a record-breaking 176 runs with Hussey for the fifth wicket.
Had the fifth wicket fallen early Australia could have lost the Test and tied the series to remain at No. 5 in the Test rankings.
Clarke also led the team wisely and with conviction.
Has Australia turned the corner? It is too soon to say as Sri Lanka on the whole underperformed.
They had a good chance to put pressure on Australians by batting aggressively on day four of this Test in Colombo.
But they pussy-footed, especially the usually aggressive Mathews. He was more concerned about his century than what was good for the team.
And captain Dilshan did nothing about it.
As all Australia wanted was a draw to win the series, this tortoise-march was a gift from the Almighty.
So Clarke’s men have yet to be tested against a team with more aggro and mojo.
The tour of South Africa next month will give us a better indication.
But in the meantime, let’s all chant: “Hussey, Hussey, Hussey, oi, oi, oi.”
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
The Crowd Says (14) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
- Explore:
- Cricket, Michael Clarke, Michael Hussey, Sri Lanka cricket
September 21st 2011 @ 8:24am
Savvas Tzionis said | September 21st 2011 @ 8:24am | Report comment
Sri Lanka were ranked higher because they had Muriah in their team.
Australia could not really lose this series.
And of their best player is their second oldest, then they are still in trouble.
September 21st 2011 @ 8:45am
Brett McKay said | September 21st 2011 @ 8:45am | Report comment
Kersi, I hope that’s your headline there – one of the best of 2011, without doubt!! Well played, good sir…
Good series for the Aussies, and some timely returns for some individuals too. And more hundreds in this series than through the 5-Test Ashes series, so some good signs..
September 21st 2011 @ 9:03am
Kersi Meher-Homji said | September 21st 2011 @ 9:03am | Report comment
Thank you, Brett. Yes, it was my headline.
Savvas, yes Murali has gone. So has Warne. It is gratifying that the Trophy is named after these living legends.
September 21st 2011 @ 9:23am
Bayman said | September 21st 2011 @ 9:23am | Report comment
Kersi,
A good result for the Aussies and nice to see Clarke leading from the front. This innings was important for him to establish his captaincy credentials and he seems to have passed the test admirably.
It was also encouraging to see Phil Hughes make another Test hundred given his less than stellar performances since being reinstated to the team. Several times recently, and going back to the Ashes, he has seemed to be batting soundly before playing a mystifying stroke and committing suicide. It was great to see him go on and get a score when it counted. Australia was in a perilous position when the second innings began so it was pleasing to see the batting respond to the situation.
Now if only Watson could follow suit things would be looking up all round(er). Watson’s bowling has been handy on this tour and maybe this increased load has impacted on his batting. Given that concentration was never Watto’s strong suit opening the innings while still tired from bowling is perhaps a recipe for disaster. Perhaps it’s time to promote Marsh or Khawaja, put Watson at six and let Ponting go.
Of course, the jury is still out on Shaun Marsh. A debut Test century for sure, and an 81, but still only seven centuries in a decade of first class cricket. Hughes, for all his critics, has double that in a third of the time. I think if Marsh can survive the South Africans then we may be on to something and found a player. The sad fact is that I can never think of Watson as an opener. Couldn’t then, can’t now, won’t in the future.
The other pleasing aspect of this tour, as you have alluded to, is the results provided by the newcomers. All did well at the first attempt and have played their part subsequently. Marsh came through with his ton and his eighty, Lyon got a debut bag of five and while not approaching that result again has shown he is worth an extended trial. Copeland, while not taking a bag of wickets, has chipped in here and there and kept things tight which Johnson seems unable to do. On more responsive pitches Copeland might prove a handfull and on any pitch he will keep the batsman under pressure.
Hussey’s success may help Katich’s possible return although with Ponting still around and the newcomers all pushing their claims this is probably unlikely. At least, given Hussey’s great success, Katich can feel that his age should be no barrier provided he’s scoring Shield runs.
As for the result of this game Australia played well to clinch the draw and the series but, it must be said, Sri Lanka played less well than might have been the case. Having got themselves into a strong position they wasted time, and the chance to win, by placing too much emphasis on Mathews getting his century. For this the blame can be squarely placed at the feet of Mathews himself with a bit left over for the captain.
A more ruthless captain might have sent the message, “You’ve got this amount of time and no more before I pull the pin”. Remember Lawry and Atherton declaring on batsmen in the nineties? Perhaps the real problem was that Mathews had never scored a Test century before and had just missed out earlier in the series. Maybe the skipper thought it more inmportant for him to get that milestone out of the way to make life easier in the future. Who knows? The immediate upshot was that it cost Sri Lanka valuable time in this particular Test.
Mind you, a couple of batting failures by Australia’s top order and maybe Sri Lanka could still have won this Test even with a dawdling Mathews. Had they done so I guess nobody would be criticising Mathews or his skipper.
As the Chinese say, “The longest journey starts with a single step”. Australia has now risen one rung on the Test rankings ladder and I’m very much looking forward to watching how they go in South Africa. A good result there and India might be looking over their shoulder next summer – and they will be under the pump to recover from the mauling England have just given them.
Despite our misgivings about the man himself I suspect Michael Clarke has shown us what we all suspected. He is, in fact, a better captain than Ricky Ponting. Whether he can have anything like the winning ratio of Ponting remains to be seen. So far, so good but this is a team in rebuild mode and setbacks are likely. However, the team is his now and his captain’s knock yesterday will not have done his position any harm. Quite the opposite. I await the future with interest.
September 21st 2011 @ 10:02am
Matt F said | September 21st 2011 @ 10:02am | Report comment
It was a good series overall. Some good positives came out of it but there’s a few questions as well.
Watson – How do we use him? Is he more valuable bowling less and opening the batting or bowling more and batting down the order? Whilst it could just be a standard form slump it looks like that’s a question we will need to answer.
Hughes – Bought himself until the end of the summer with that hundred.
Marsh – Same as Hughes. His performances are completely at odds with his Shield record.
Ponting – Serious questions need to be asked. Has been an age since he seemed to be in good form. The Ponting of old would almost never get out in the 40′s. If he made it past 20 he’d almost always make a big score. That’s not the case anymore. How long do we give him? I”m not sure why we put him at 4 and moved Hussey, our form batsman, to 6 to accomodate him.
Clarke – Hopefully that century can lift his batting form back to where it needs to be. I was very impressed by his captaincy.
Hussey – Absolute star. We gave him plenty of chances to find form in the lead up to the ashes last year, maybe too many given how many series we lost during the period, but he’s paying us back now.
Haddin – Under pressure. Looked all at sea with the bat and his glovework has never been great. Has the summer to prove himself worthy of staying in the team. Paine/Wade on the fringes provide great competition.
Johnson – Had an average over 50 for the series. That’d be great if he was a batsman! Given Sddle’s good performance and assuming Harris is fit for SA he should be under enormous pressure for his spot. They’ll probably drop Copeland instead but they shouldn’t.
Harris – Outstanding but his body is not reliable for extended test cricket. Automatic selection when fit but we need to to be able to play without him.
Copeland – Very good. It’s amazing what damage you can do with the new ball when both openers actually hit the right line and length. Lacks a bit of penetration but builds up pressure which can lead to the other bowlers cashing in.
Lyon – Deserves a run in the team but I’m not yet convinced. 5 wickets on a raging turner but not much afterwards. Memories of Krejza still haunt me at night…..
Siddle – Horrible in the warm-up game but did well in the last test. If only he bowled a good, full length more often….Will probably keep his spot for the 1st tet in SA but consistancy has always been his problem.
Khawaja – Very unlucky. Got one test on a minefield and never got a chance in the second test. Next in line if Ponting continues his performances of the past few years.
September 21st 2011 @ 11:52am
Ben said | September 21st 2011 @ 11:52am | Report comment
Ricky Ponting actually looked very good considering he didn’t get a warm up game and considering that his wife had a baby and he had to fly home mid series.
Ponting’s 44 in the first test was the second highest score in our innings and considering the pitch, it was almost the same has a century.
His still clearly our best fielder, and arguably, our greatest fielder of all time.
the guy is a great, deserves more respect.
September 21st 2011 @ 1:11pm
Matt F said | September 21st 2011 @ 1:11pm | Report comment
I’m not denying his history or his record. He’s the best Australian batsman I’ve ever seen and I have him in the top 2 of any nation, with Tendulkar, over the last 20 years and second to Bradman as Australia’s best ever batsman but the man hasn’t made a test hundred in almost 2 years (2 in 3 years) in fact he hasn’t even passed 80.
This isn’t a reaction to one bad series but a prolonged run of poor form. The man obviously deserves respect due to his history but how long can we afford to play him if he doesn’t score runs? I’m not saying that we should drop him for the SA series but what happens if he fails there too?
September 21st 2011 @ 1:15pm
Renegade said | September 21st 2011 @ 1:15pm | Report comment
I agree with what your saying here Matt F however i too believe Ponting should be allowed to go out in his own terms.
He is a legend for the sport in our country and internationally.
I suspect he will more than likely retire in the next 2 years anyway.
September 21st 2011 @ 2:46pm
Matt F said | September 21st 2011 @ 2:46pm | Report comment
I think it depends on how the team goes in that period. If the team is winning then perhaps we can afford to carry him, if he can’t regain his form of course. However, poor results against SA and India will leave everybody demanding change leading up to the next Ashes.
September 21st 2011 @ 9:49pm
Lolly said | September 21st 2011 @ 9:49pm | Report comment
He really can’t be carried for a long time regardless of his past exploits. What is to be gained by carrying someone who turns 37 in December if they are not adding value to the team? I find it amazing that it took one innings from Shaun Marsh for Clarke to change the order around. That was one of the most interesting outcomes of Punter’s absence.
September 21st 2011 @ 4:04pm
Kersi Meher-Homji said | September 21st 2011 @ 4:04pm | Report comment
Matt F, Were we not saying the same thing about Mike Hussey for the last few years? It just needs one good innings to go from litter to glitter.
September 21st 2011 @ 10:31pm
Matt F said | September 21st 2011 @ 10:31pm | Report comment
Absolutely we were Kersi, and look at how many test matches/series we lost in his extended form slump. It’s admirable to give players a period of time to find their form, and certainly the greats deserve an extended period to try and find form but it’s been almost 2 years. More importantly it’s been 2 fairly unsuccesful years.
I know we have a history of carrying out of form players for long periods. This was a fine strategy when we were the best team in the world and were able to carry 2, 3 even 4 out of form players at a time and still win tests but we can’t do that anymore. Our recent results have proven that.
I’m more then happy for Ponting to be given to the end of the summer, he’s earned that, but what happens if after that he’s still out of form? How long is too long?
On another note why was Ponting at 4 and Hussey demoted to 6? Hussey is our form batsman at the moment yet in the first innings of the last test he ran out of partners. I know he got out at the end but that was chasing quick runs when batting with number 11. With Marsh doing well at 3 maybe we need to swap Hussey and Ponting around. He won’t be the first top order player to prolong his career by batting down the order.
September 21st 2011 @ 8:04pm
sheek said | September 21st 2011 @ 8:04pm | Report comment
I wonder – Kersi/Bayman & others,
How much this series win was due to the fresh air of new captaincy from Clarke, & how much was due to the wind being put up the players by the Argus report, &/or a combination of all those things.
There was a suspicion that, in recent times, the Aussies had just been going through the motions. Clock on, do a bit of work, collect your pay at the end of the day. However, the team appears to have definitely been energised.
September 22nd 2011 @ 11:26pm
Bayman said | September 22nd 2011 @ 11:26pm | Report comment
Sheek,
It’s a fair question you ask but I think, on balance, the credit should go more to Michael Clarke than Don Argus. The Argus Report may well impact on the lives and careers of captains, coaches and selectors but my gut feel tells me most players would feel immune to it’s recommendations.
The sort of energy and effort required to perform on the ground is more likely to come from within. In this case from both the individual and the atmosphere in the dressing room. The other interesting aspect of this series is the number of relative new boys in the team.
One can only imagine guys like Copeland, Lyon, Marsh – and even Hughes, Harris and Khawaja – simply trying their best to cement their place. When your spot is not a given then it usually means a hundred percent attitude. As a new captain I’m sure Clarke was able to harness that enthusiasm and get the best possible result. Hussey got the accolades – in every Test as it turned out – but Hussey is both a nice guy and a professional. The idea of him giving anything less than his best is unlikely at any time (regardless of the captain).
So with Clarke desperate to succeed the team was pretty much guaranteed to at least give the appropriate effort. Haddin doesn’t seem to have made the adjustment quite yet and Johnson is, well, Johnson.
The other consideration is not just the change of leadership, important in itself, but also the change of method. Clarke clearly has a better handle on what the bowler requires to improve his chances of success and he’s prepared to back the bowler and the decisions made regarding field placings.
Ponting had a tendency to chase the ball, caught as he often was between the desire to take wickets and the desire to save runs. Usually saving runs won that battle. Clarke, certainly on the occasions that I’ve seen him in charge, is more inclined to put the batsmen under pressure by putting fieldsmen in dangerous positions. At the first sign of a boundary Ponting put a man on the fence.
So, Sheek, until we get evidence to the contrary I reckon we’ve got to give Clarke some credit here. The dynamic of the newcomers should not be underestimated although that presumes that at least they have a portion of beginner’s luck which, in Sri Lanka, they did. South Africa will tell us more.