Australia must play five bowlers
Related coverage
One thing has become obvious during this summer. Australia’s batsmen will not win a series against India and will not reclaim the Ashes.
Through out the whole summer the Australian batting line-up has been prone to collapses, with the low point coming in the recent ODI series against Sri Lanka where Australia was rolled for just 74 at the Gabba.
This problem is nothing new for Australia. It has actually been going on for a few years but the great batting form off Michael Clarke and Mike Hussey has so far kept us out off deep trouble.
But now Hussey has retired and won’t be a part of either the India or Ashes series, creating a massive hole in the batting line-up with no obvious replacement.
The selectors need to bite the bullet and play five specialist bowlers to give Australia any chance to win back the Ashes.
To win a Test match you must take 20 wickets and there is little chance Australia’s batsmen will be posting scores big enough too bat out India or England.
Our best chance is to load up on bowlers and try and get them out has cheaply and quickly as possible. This especially becomes vital with rumours that Shane Watson has given up bowling to focus on batting.
Australia did go with five bowlers at the SCG Test match. They had a bit off a batting fail but they still managed to win the Test.
Any way I look at the batting line-up it seems weak to me. But the talent is there with the ball.
Peter Siddle continued to led the attack with a few lion hearted bowling spells, James Pattinson looks a gun if he stays fit, Mitchell Starc also looks to have some great weapons and Mitchell Johnson came back into the team as a much improved bowler.
Jackson Bird also debuted and had an instant impact. Add Ryan Harris, Pat Cummins and Ben Hilfenhuas pushing for selection with support from spinner Nathan Lyon and I think there is a group off fast bowlers good enough to trouble any batting line-up.
Johnson already has a Test hundred and came close to another at the MCG. with his improved bowling he should be backed in to take the no.7 slot. Matthew Wade can bat at six where he scored a century at the SCG.
This also helps Australia in another area the side has had trouble with and that is player workloads.
Pattinson, Starc and Cummins would be given much less off a workload with older players like Siddle and Johnson in support. It also gives the selectors the option to play two spinners in India with Xavier Doherty likely to be part of the tour.
It may not be the best long term solution but for India and the Ashes it is Australia’s best chance at a short term victory.
My XI
Watson
Warner
Hughes
Khawja
Clarke
Wade
Johnson
Siddle
Harris
Pattinson
Lyon
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.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Cricket articles
- England are a greatly overrated Test team (127)
- Australia needs to bench Nathan Lyon for Ashes success (84)
- DIZZY: Australian bowlers look the goods for the Ashes (76)
- Warner’s case to bat at six (74)
- Clarke take note: England has some weak points for Ashes (48)
- Who will Sam Robson represent: Australia or England? (47)
- David Warner unleashes stream of abuse on Twitter (46)
- IPL stars refused bail over spot fixing
- DIZZY: It’s time for the Aussie batsmen to fulfill potential (15)
- Has cricket corruption been filed in the ‘too hard’ basket?
- IPL has been ripe for the taking since its arrival
- Cricket’s all-time alphabetical G team (8)
- England are a greatly overrated Test team (146)
- Warner in cricket hearing on Wednesday (2)
- Has cricket corruption been filed in the ‘too hard’ basket? (1)
- Cricket’s all-time alphabetical G team (8)
- England are a greatly overrated Test team (146)
- David Warner and Australian cricket’s ‘Siege Mentality’ (29)
- Could Bird be the difference in the Ashes? (30)
- Warner’s case to bat at six (74)
- Cricket’s all-time alphabetical F team (35)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- Cricket, Michael Clarke, Test cricket, The Ashes

January 26th 2013 @ 4:25am
Jeremy said | January 26th 2013 @ 4:25am | Report comment
I disagree. The best way to strengthen the batting lineup shouldn’t be by playing an extra bowler. Johnson is too inconsistent with both bat and ball to play as an all rounder and Wade should concentrate on his keeping without the added pressure of batting at 6, of all places in India and England. Also, come the Ashes I’m sure Watson will be thrown the ball at least a few times.
We need a genuine top 6, Khawaja in for Huss, he deserves another shot.
January 26th 2013 @ 7:42am
aggregated drupe said | January 26th 2013 @ 7:42am | Report comment
Having 4 fast bowlers is no better than having three. It will just create pressure on Clarke to keep on switching them.
Why haven’t you got Bird in the side? He is our 3rd best bowler behind Siddle and Pattinson.
Harris has not played a first class game since April. Let him get some form before picking him.
Starc is a better left armer than Johnson if you’re going to play five bowlers, pick him.
January 27th 2013 @ 8:50am
Jammel said | January 27th 2013 @ 8:50am | Report comment
Agree entirely!
January 27th 2013 @ 1:52pm
Brendon said | January 27th 2013 @ 1:52pm | Report comment
I’d absolutely have Bird in the side
Bird, Patto and Siddle is a great line up. Johnson can’t play, I know his best is great, but he can also throw a test match away in a spell, although I don’t think Clarke will allow that to happen ala Ponting style.
The big problem we do have is we don’t have six top order batsmen, the only two people I can think off are Haddin (I don’t like him but he’s in good form with the bat) and Burns, who I haven’t seen, I’m just going on what people have been saying. Ideally I wouldn’t choose either of these, but I don’t see any other options, Khawaja must play, but that still leaves us a bat short.
I don’t think the answer is playing 5 bowlers, we need to strengthen the batting and our top three quicks are good enough to do the job, having a fourth quick doesn’t really do anything is the point, it’s just another bloke bowling overs that would have been bowled by someone else anyway.
January 26th 2013 @ 8:40am
TheGenuineTailender said | January 26th 2013 @ 8:40am | Report comment
Uhm, so you’re admitting that batting is our weakness and then arguing that we should further weaken it by sacrificing a batsman? Right…
Good luck with that theory.
January 26th 2013 @ 8:56am
Red Kev said | January 26th 2013 @ 8:56am | Report comment
Bird and Siddle and Lyon all bowl long spells. No need for 5 bowlers. Clarke showed in Sydney that 5 bowlers puts too much pressure for rotation, 4 over spells except that one 5 over stint from Bird.
January 26th 2013 @ 9:01am
pope paul v11 said | January 26th 2013 @ 9:01am | Report comment
It will give India an uneccessary advantage. Puts too much pressure on a player who is not really good enough to do both jobs.
January 26th 2013 @ 9:23am
Varun said | January 26th 2013 @ 9:23am | Report comment
Our issue has been our batting collapses, and we lost a fantastic bat in mike hussey so in order to replace him we need the best batsman that we can bring in, I would initiY bring in khawaja and ensure that this is cleans last chance as watto wants to open and is better at it. If Cowan fails then get watto to open and slot khawaja in at 4 as him and Hughes will have some big partnerships for us
January 26th 2013 @ 10:21am
Dean said | January 26th 2013 @ 10:21am | Report comment
I agree with Varun, we don’t need 5 bowlers as its our batting collapses that is the issue. After the number 1 test batsmen (our captain) our next best batter on the ICC rankings is number 39: Shane Watson. With Hussey gone, we are left with a hold for
the ashes series in 2013 and we need to fill it with our next best young batsman and that is Khawaja. I ask one simple question for everyone, if our top order woes continue and we are 3 down for not much who do you want coming in for you in the ashes at 6, Khawaja or Johnson, i know who has scored runs on some absolute green decks in shield this year and its not Johnson. Keep 6 batsman, and 4 bowlers as the ratio
January 26th 2013 @ 10:38am
Andy_Roo said | January 26th 2013 @ 10:38am | Report comment
The fifth bowler you suggest should be an all rounder, but only if he is good enough to be a genuine all rounder. Johnson is not good enough and I don’t see any other all rounders pushing for selection, so we have to go with six batsmen.
January 26th 2013 @ 11:13am
Seano said | January 26th 2013 @ 11:13am | Report comment
I actually kind of like this argument especially as Macdonald is injured. However Lyon, bird, Siddle and pattinson will be in the side so the 5th bowler will be Starc or Johnson. Harris is the best bowler in the country and must tour England but he won’t go to India!
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download it now [http://itunes.apple.com/au/app/the-roar/id327174726?mt=8].
January 26th 2013 @ 1:27pm
Ian said | January 26th 2013 @ 1:27pm | Report comment
So our batting is weak and we fix this problem by making it weaker. Right, that works?
I think if 4 bowlers can’t do the job, we’ve got the wrong 4 bowlers.
As for all rounders, apart from Watson, only McDonald and perhaps Steve O’Keefe are remotely good enough to play test cricket.
January 26th 2013 @ 2:53pm
Timmuh said | January 26th 2013 @ 2:53pm | Report comment
If you have to give five bolwers enough work to justify their selections, you will inevitably give up a lot of runs and need all the batting you can get. That is especially true if the available batsmen don’t have a record of high scores or consistency. Requiring a full workload out of five bowlers, with weak batting, mrans you have already lost.
If the job can’t be done with four bowlers, and a reliable keeper (not Wade in India or any time a spinner will be used more than exceptionally sparingly) and maybe a little fill-in from a part-timer; then a fifth bowler adds bugger all to the chances of winning.
January 27th 2013 @ 8:54am
Jammel said | January 27th 2013 @ 8:54am | Report comment
Disagree w this author. The batting is too weak.
If that’s the problem then strengthen the batting. I could see us losing a few tests w that Batting line up. An Clarke would be wasted.
Bird is a must in the XI.
Personally I think our best xi if Watson can bowl is:
Warner
Cowan
Hughes
Clarke
Khawaja
Wade
Watson
Pattinson
Siddle
Lyon
Bird.
And if Watson can’t bowl then I’d go with the following:
Warner
Cowan
Hughes
Clarke
Khawaja
Burns
Wade
Pattinson
Siddle
Lyon
Bird