How will Australia’s three Ws fare in the land of the three Ws?
Columnist By Kersi Meher-Homji, 15 Mar 2012 Kersi Meher-Homji is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Australian Cricket, Cricket, David Warner, Frank Worrell, Frank Worrell Trophy, Matthew Wade, Michael Clarke, Shane Watson, West Indies cricket
Related coverage
From the 1960s to 1995, the tour of the Caribbean was the holy grail, the litmus paper to test a country’s cricketing greatness.
Australia and the West Indies fought many thrilling Test encounters home and away, the most famous being the 1960-61 Test series which included the first tied Test in Brisbane.
This inaugurated the Frank Worrell Trophy, which Australia has held since 1995, winning four times in Australia and four times in the West Indies.
Will Michael Clarke’s men return home from the Caribbean on the 28th of April holding the Frank Worrell Trophy again?
Different Australian squads have been chosen for the Windies tour; for the five one-day internationals starting in Kingstown on Friday, two Twenty20s starting on March 27, and three Tests commencing on April 7.
Only seven players have been selected in all three squads: vice-captain and top order bat Shane Watson, openers David Warner and Matthew Wade, middle order batsmen Michael Hussey and Peter Forrest, fast bowler James Pattinson and off-spinner Nathan Lyon.
How will the Aussie trio of Ws — Warner, Wade and Watson – go in the land of the three fabulous Windies Ws – Frank Worrell, Everton Weekes and Clyde Walcott? Like Worrell, Watson is an all-rounder, and Wade keeps wickets as Walcott did.
They have a long way to go before they could be considered in the same bracket as the Windies wonders, but it’s an interesting coincidence to discuss at the water cooler during morning tea breaks.
Will Clarke be fit enough to lead Australia in the first ODI? Watson showed promise as captain in Clarke’s absence in the recently concluded tri-nations series in Australia, beating India in Sydney on the 26th of February and Sri Lanka in the third final in Adelaide to lift the trophy.
My XI for the first ODI, in batting order, would be Warner, Watson, Clarke (all-rounder Daniel Christian to bat at No. 6 if Clarke is unfit), Forrest, Michael Hussey, David Hussey, Brad Haddin, Pattinson, Ben Hilfenhaus, Clint McKay and Lyon.
12th man would be top-order batsman George Bailey. Reserves would be Wade, Brett Lee, and slow left-arm orthodox Xavier Doherty.
To me, Wade’s wicket-keeping was disappointing in the finals of the recent series. Lee gives away too many runs in ODIs.
I would have picked Peter Siddle above Hilfenhaus in my XI, but he is not in the ODI squad.
Pattinson and Hilfenhaus will start the attack in the ODI opener at Kingstown with in-form McKay coming at first change. Then run-saver Watson and offie Lyon.
My prediction is that Australia will win the ODI series 3-0.
They are the top-ranked ODI team with 127 points, leading second-ranked South Africa by nine points. The West Indians rank eighth, with 79 points.
Kersi is an author of 13 cricket books including The Waugh Twins, Cricket's Great All-rounders,Six Appeal and Nervous Nineties. He writes regularly for Inside Cricket and other publications. He has recently finished his new book on Cricket's Conflicts and Controversies, with a foreword by Greg Chappell.
Sport, all day long. Does this sound too good to be true? We're searching for a Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. If you're a sales star who doesn't mind a hit, kick, throw, or cycle, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
March 15th 2012 @ 4:24am
AndyMack said | March 15th 2012 @ 4:24am | Report comment
Hey KMH,
I love how you open up with the “how will the three-W’s fare” and then proceed to tell us one of them won’t (or shouldn’t) make the team. Lets hope the other 2 W’s fare better!!!
Wouldn’t be surprised in the Windies pinch an ODI (or even 2). We will have to be on our game.
March 15th 2012 @ 6:32am
ManInBlack said | March 15th 2012 @ 6:32am | Report comment
I’ve no idea why you’d be naming Haddin as the ODI keeper??
because, serioiusly, he was dropped from the ODIs with a run of poor form and I don’t see any reason why Wade would now make way for Haddin.
March 15th 2012 @ 7:59am
Jason said | March 15th 2012 @ 7:59am | Report comment
The 1999 Windies tour was one of the best series of all time as well. It’s only been since the 00s that the Windies havetotally sucked and even then they had the 417 chase in 2003.
Also, the greatest 3 Ws were Waugh, Waugh and Warne!
March 15th 2012 @ 12:08pm
Bayman said | March 15th 2012 @ 12:08pm | Report comment
Jason,
I didn’t realise you stuttered!!!
Certainly your three W’s are a long way ahead of Warner, Wade and Watson – and by a factor.
A comparison with Worrell, Weekes and Walcott is much more even – especially if you also consider the legacy each has left to the game following their retirement.
Worrell changed the way the game is administered in the West Indies – black captains became the norm. Warne changed the way we view a cricketer’s social life! Walcott was a long time administrator for the West Indies and the ICC. Steve Waugh helped prepare the Argus Report.
Weekes and Mark Waugh settled for the quiet life.
Of course, the Windies trio had a much shorter Test career span the the Aussies but they certainly packed a lot in. The Aussies might win on the sheer numbers – courtesy of that longevity – but the quality is much closer than some might think. Those Windies Three Ws were pretty good players.
March 16th 2012 @ 1:35am
amazonfan said | March 16th 2012 @ 1:35am | Report comment
The WIndies Three Ws were amazing players, and in fact, I would put them above Australia’s Ws. While Warne was the greatest W of all time, Mark Waugh’s legend is based upon more his ability than his achievements (although he had some pretty good achievements), and Steve’s legend was mainly based upon his longevity. All three Ws were knighted; I would argue that only Warne (and to a lesser extent Steve) deserves a knighthood among Australia’s Ws.
March 16th 2012 @ 8:13am
Kersi Meher-Homji said | March 16th 2012 @ 8:13am | Report comment
Amazonfan,
Here are points out of 10 for the famous W trios:
Worrell 9/10
Weekes 9/10
Walcott 7.5/10
WI total: 25.5/30 (85%)
S Waugh 8/10
M Waugh 7.5/10
Warne 9.5/10
Aus total: 25/30 (83.3%)
March 16th 2012 @ 11:13pm
amazonfan said | March 16th 2012 @ 11:13pm | Report comment
A tough marker. Why only 7.5/10 for Walcott, who averaged 56.69 and who remains the only batsman to score five centuries in a single Test series? I also think he should be ranked ahead of Mark Waugh.
As for Warne’s being ranked 9.5/10, do you believe that nobody deserves to be ranked 10/10, or is 10/10 only reserved for the likes of Bradman (and perhaps Sobers)?
March 16th 2012 @ 4:44pm
Bayman said | March 16th 2012 @ 4:44pm | Report comment
amazon,
I am inclined to agree with you…….
March 15th 2012 @ 8:39am
Brett McKay said | March 15th 2012 @ 8:39am | Report comment
Kersi, there’s two changes you can make to your team for the first ODI right now, as both Pattinson and now Hilfenhaus have been ruled out. I’ll suggest Lee (as the only other fit quick) and Doherty (to take advantage of the slow dusty decks) in their places..
March 15th 2012 @ 8:50am
Kersi Meher-Homji said | March 15th 2012 @ 8:50am | Report comment
Thanks Jason, Wow — Waugh, Waugh and Warne were just as wonderful as Worrell, Weekes and Walcott.
AndyMack, My selection was only for the first ODI starting tomorrow. Wade can come back in the team in subsequent matches to justify my headline!
Another trivia: Ten Hs represented Australia in international cricket in 2009-10: Mike and David Hussey, Brad Haddin, Phil Hughes, Ryan Harris, Nathan Hauritz, Moises Henriques, Ben Hilfenhaus, James Hopes and Josh Hazlewood. And five of them are from NSW: Haddin, Hughes, Hauritz, Henriques and Hazlewood.
March 15th 2012 @ 9:08am
Jason said | March 15th 2012 @ 9:08am | Report comment
Take it back a year or so and can’t add Hayden and Hodge.
Of course, the All Time England XI is likely to include Hobbs, Hutton and Hammond.
March 15th 2012 @ 9:26am
sheek said | March 15th 2012 @ 9:26am | Report comment
Jason,
Not “likely”. An all-time England XI “should” include Hobbs, Hutton & Hammond as the top 3. Followed by Compton, Barrington & Botham. A 2nd XI “might” include Sutcliffe, Boycott, Grace, Pietersen & two others.
Cook, Jackson, Jardine, Woolley, Paynter, May, Dexter, Cowdrey, Graveney, Gower being among the stronger other candidates.
IMHO…..!
March 15th 2012 @ 4:30pm
Jason said | March 15th 2012 @ 4:30pm | Report comment
Well I said likely because there is obviously a strong argument for Sutcliffe. Indeed you could possibly have Hobbs, Sutcliffe, Hutton at 3 then Hammond who I think was stonger at 4 than 3.
March 15th 2012 @ 8:53am
sheek said | March 15th 2012 @ 8:53am | Report comment
Hi Kersi,
The 1999 series was pretty special. This was basically the Windies “last shot in the locker” before the talent dried up. The 3 Ws, eh?
Warner, a specialist bat similar to Weekes.
Watson, a batting all-rounder similar to Worrell.
Wade, a keeper-batsman, or is that batsman-keeper similar to Walcott.
March 15th 2012 @ 9:44am
Kersi Meher-Homji said | March 15th 2012 @ 9:44am | Report comment
Sheek,
I would place May and Cowdrey above Barrington in my Best England XI.
March 15th 2012 @ 10:07am
sheek said | March 15th 2012 @ 10:07am | Report comment
Hi Kersi,
Barrington was a stone-walling barnacle, but his batting average of 58.67 from 82 tests is hard to ignore. Very hard to ignore!
By all accounts, May & Cowdrey were more attractive players, but with 46.79/66 & 44.07/114, they are respectively 12 & 14 batting points adrift of Barrington.
Even allowing for the vagaries of stats over different eras, the three careers overlapped sufficiently to make it difficult that 12 & 14 points batting difference can be explained away in another fashion.
Another fine lunchtime discussion perhaps…..?
With respect to Gayle, I don’t think he’s committed to Windies cricket. He’s a mercenary, selling his bat for T20 luchre. Of course, I guess there’s two sides to every story. Windies cricket has been poorly run for a long time. Maybe Gayle just got fed up with officialdom also. And he was in a position to go elsewhere.
March 15th 2012 @ 11:42am
Bayman said | March 15th 2012 @ 11:42am | Report comment
Kersi, Sheek,
Greetings to you both. I agree with Sheek that Barrington was – could be – a stone-walling barnacle and that average is pretty impressive from this distance. Especially given the quality of some of the opposition attacks that Barrington faced.
He was also, like Geoffrey Boycott, once dropped from the England team immediately after making a Test century and for the same reason – he was deemed too slow by the England selectors.
He was, after all, a hard-nosed English professional whose livelihood depended on him making runs – and lots of them. He also tended to bat from four to six and invariably May and Cowdrey both preceded him in the England lineup.
May and Cowdrey, of course, were of the gentler, university “amateur” variety of English batsmen. In the classic sense they were less “grafty” and more stylish than Kenny Barrington even on their bad days. Perhaps they could afford to be.
Cowdrey, of course, managed a long playing career (Lillee and Thommo at age 42…..) and had, from memory, the good fortune to marry well to enable his cricket career to continue without the burden of having to really work for a living.
May retired a good decade or so before Cowdrey to pursue his business career. At the time of his retirement he had also captained England more times than any other player so perhaps this may explain some of the difference in average. That, and the fact that as a true amateur he tended to be available only while it was convenient to be so.
He led England and he also captained Surrey after the legendary Stuart Surridge. May continued the Surrey tradition of the 1950s by winning the County Championship. Fellow teammates, of course, were the same Ken Barrington and May’s old Cambridge teammate, the Rev. David Sheppard (who captained May at Cambridge). Cowdrey, who attended Oxford, was also a long term captain of Kent.
Many good judges of the day, and since, proclaim Peter May to be the best English batsman since WWII. Having seen him play, admittedly as a youngster, I can happily agree with that assesment. He had all the shots, he had the necessary steel and he was pretty to watch. The May on-drive set the standard for others to follow.
While his career was much shorter than either of Cowdrey or Barrington I agree with Kersi that he’d be in my All England team before Barrington – or Cowdrey for that matter.
I am reminded of a mate who toured England with New Zealand in 1958. In a very wet summer the Kiwis only lost to England and Surrey – admittedly they were smashed in the Tests. Peter May scored five Test and first-class centuries against them when most of the rest were struggling to stay in. I know my mate has a very high opinion of PBH May.
On top of that, while he was England captain in that 1958 series, he also took the time, along with Kenny Barrington, to accompany my mate to the Stuart Surridge warehouse to find some bats for him. Remember, this fellow was an opposition NZ Test player that summer but did not have his own bat – he borrowed one from his club for the tour. May and Barrington soon fixed that. May even told him how to assess a bat and test its balance.
May, Cowdrey and Barrington also took the time that summer to sit down with my mate and talk to him about batting – and batting in England in particular. All in the middle of a Test series. Fancy getting free coaching lessons from the opposition captain and a goodly percentage of his top order while the battle was still raging!
In contrast, I offer today’s tendency to sledge!
Mind you, even my mate might say that had he been an Aussie perhaps that English help may not have been quite so readily available! Still, you can only judge what you see and know.
March 15th 2012 @ 11:53am
Bayman said | March 15th 2012 @ 11:53am | Report comment
……. incidentally, the above is written more as a tribute to May than a reduction of any admiration for Barrington. As Wally Grout once said, “Whenever Barrington comes out to bat against Australia you can see the Union Jack flying behind him”.
A gutsy, committed player who, despite his reputation for slowness, scored more centuries with a six than anyone else I can name. He also was a champion fellow. I once had the great privilege to speak with him for about half an hour when he was touring here as assistant manager for England and MCC. A fantastic guy and loved by all. It was a tragedy when he died in the Windies not so very long afterwards.
March 15th 2012 @ 9:50am
Kersi Meher-Homji said | March 15th 2012 @ 9:50am | Report comment
What is the REAL reason Chris Gayle is kept out of the West Indies team?
March 15th 2012 @ 12:05pm
Brett McKay said | March 15th 2012 @ 12:05pm | Report comment
$$$ or lack therof, from his perspective..
March 15th 2012 @ 11:37am
Sailosi said | March 15th 2012 @ 11:37am | Report comment
I cannot believe I have just read Kenneth Frank Barrington described as a ‘defensive barnacle’. Determined and committed, with the highest post war average of any englishman, this great player should never be described in such a way. My favourite pre 1980′s player to read about along with Rohan kanhai.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
March 15th 2012 @ 12:05pm
Kersi Meher-Homji said | March 15th 2012 @ 12:05pm | Report comment
Bayman and Sailosi,
Although I place May and Cowdrey above Barrington in style and elegance, I am a big fan of Barrington. It’s the same with Mark and Steve Waugh. Or Gower and Gatting.
In Australia Barrington is regarded as over defensive and over serious, I disagree. I had seen him in a Bombay Test and recall his sense of humour. When jeered for his slow batting, he pointed his bat towards the crowd and pretended to shoot them! And the crowd loved it and he became one of the most popular non-Indian Test cricketer.
March 15th 2012 @ 12:10pm
Bayman said | March 15th 2012 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
Kersi,
Barrington was just as popular here – it was just that he was so damned hard to get out!!