Can Australia still salvage Hyderabad Test?
Columnist By David Lord, 5 Mar 2013 David Lord is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Australian Cricket, Cricket, Glenn Maxwell, Indian cricket, Phil Hughes, Test cricket, Xavier Doherty
158 Have your say
3,424 reads
Phillip Hughes (AAP Image/Dave Hunt)
Related coverage
Maybe batting legend Matt Hayden’s comment on television two days ago was a tad early when he predicted, “Today the great Australian fighting spirit will surface.”
As it turned out Cheteshwat Pujara and Murali Vijay flogged the Australian attack all around the ground.
But today there’s a big chance to save this Test when all appeared lost at tea yesterday with India looking set for a 400-plus first dig lead.
The unlikely heroes were orthodox spinners Glenn Maxwell and Xavier Doherty who were an integral part of the flogging two days ago.
Maxwell on debut captured 4-126 off 26 including the prize scalps of Vijay (127), Virat Kohli (34), MS Dhoni (44) and Ravindra Jadeja (10).
Doherty cleaned up the tail to finish with 3-131 off 46.1 to limit the first dig deficit to 266.
Having already lost David Warner and Phil Hughes to ill-disciplined sweep shots both bowled by Ravi Ashwin, it’s up to Ed Cowan and Shane Watson to set up the launching pad to save this Test.
If Maxwell and Doherty can overcome the mountain of criticism they copped to grab seven wickets between them, Cowan and Watson can do likewise with the bat.
Cowan’s Achilles heel is in the 30s, he resumes on 26. Watson hasn’t scored a Test ton in 37 digs, he resumes on nine with Australia 2-74 still 192 runs shy of making India bat again.
If the Cricinfo scorecard is right, there’s been a change in the Australian batting order with Maxwell promoted over Moises Henriques, but still batting behind keeper Matt Wade.
That doesn’t make any sense, Both Maxwell and Henriques are batsmen who can bowl, Wade’s a keeper who can bat. It would seem more practical to bat Wade at eight.
Whatever happens, the Australians must knuckle down today to do the job they are well-paid to do – save a Test that looked out of the question two days ago.
Providing they limit their stroke-making to the V and give away the sweep, they can do the job.
The biggest disappointment has been Phil Hughes, With all his exciting talent he lets himself and his team mates down so often by playing poorly selected shots.
So far in India he’s scored six, duck, 19, duck – a total of 25 runs off 84 deliveries.
Australia has been effectively two down in a hurry once a opener is dismissed. That’s a burden on any side, especially one as brittle as this one.
So let’s see how much bottle the baggy greens have on display today.
Let’s hope Matt Hayden’s prediction comes alive.
March 5th 2013 @ 7:49am
Johnno said | March 5th 2013 @ 7:49am | Report comment
Would take a bigger miracle, than Botham’s 1981 Headingley, heroics, or Laxman’s 2001 heroics’.
March 5th 2013 @ 12:06pm
kid said | March 5th 2013 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
Well, considering 2 batsmen scored over 150 in india’s innings, yet only 8 australian batsmen have ever sored 150 in india. And only M Hayden and D Jones have scored 200, (M Waugh was not out on 153). You have to think it very unlikely australia can win the match with Heroics
March 5th 2013 @ 2:21pm
matt h said | March 5th 2013 @ 2:21pm | Report comment
Was that Heriocs or Henriques? Sorry, couldn’t help it
March 5th 2013 @ 7:54am
Dasilva said | March 5th 2013 @ 7:54am | Report comment
We need the batsman to FAF it out
March 5th 2013 @ 11:13am
ShmaxShmillas said | March 5th 2013 @ 11:13am | Report comment
India need a right faffing
March 5th 2013 @ 7:57am
JGK said | March 5th 2013 @ 7:57am | Report comment
No. The batsmen are not equipped for long innings, Clarke is poor in the second innings of a match and the tail is weak.
It would be a mini victory to have Indian bat again.
March 5th 2013 @ 8:01am
JGK said | March 5th 2013 @ 8:01am | Report comment
As for Hughes, anyone with a modest knowledge of cricket could see he was going to struggle in India.
Give me Cowan any day in these conditions.
March 5th 2013 @ 10:48am
Julian said | March 5th 2013 @ 10:48am | Report comment
Depsite the shortcomings in their technique against spin, Cowan seems to be mentally stronger. The question is, who is more likely to eke out ugly runs knowing the limitations of their game? I’d say Cowan.
March 5th 2013 @ 12:02pm
Disco said | March 5th 2013 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
Chris Martin isn’t the only bowler who can make Hughes look rubbish.
March 6th 2013 @ 3:24am
Bearfax said | March 6th 2013 @ 3:24am | Report comment
You are right in that. Cowan does seem the one batsman outside of Clarke who mentally can rough it out. But that is only because he is so defensive in style. Unfortunately despite that resilience, and he should be commended for that, he is at best a reasonable Shield player who is only there because we have such a limited stock of batsmen available at present. He’s only ever going to be good for about 30 runs an innings
March 5th 2013 @ 8:08am
Prateek Sharma said | March 5th 2013 @ 8:08am | Report comment
This is not an Australian side we were expecting. When we play Australia, we expect challenge and there is an evident lack of the same in current Australian side. This series is the most boring one, really. Even the matches with the English were thrilling. They made a good series. Though we lost, we enjoyed it. Seems like we are playing against Australia A.
March 5th 2013 @ 9:07am
Wolfie said | March 5th 2013 @ 9:07am | Report comment
We thought the same when pasting India 4-0 in Oz last time. Swings and roundabouts I guess…
March 5th 2013 @ 10:12am
Colin Stuart said | March 5th 2013 @ 10:12am | Report comment
Too true
March 5th 2013 @ 11:50am
Prateek Sharma said | March 5th 2013 @ 11:50am | Report comment
Ok… India never made an impression in Oz. We never won a series that is true. But that is not true for Oz in India. Looking more like a one man army, this time. Clark must be Clark Kent.
March 6th 2013 @ 3:28am
Bearfax said | March 6th 2013 @ 3:28am | Report comment
Very poor training in Oz against spin. Will be our undoing in Brit as well. Oz pitches have been designed for pace bowling not spin. That’s why our spin bowling stock is so low and why our batsmen cant handle the good spinners on spinners wickets.
March 5th 2013 @ 8:37am
Swampy said | March 5th 2013 @ 8:37am | Report comment
Prateek, you just put in words what every Australian supporter knew but didn’t want to hear.
The great Australian cricket team is no longer feared or even respected.
Lets hope Watson and Cowan now do a Laxman and Dravid and India have to chase 150 on a crumbling pitch…
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download it now [http://itunes.apple.com/au/app/the-roar/id327174726?mt=8].
March 5th 2013 @ 11:47am
Prateek Sharma said | March 5th 2013 @ 11:47am | Report comment
I’d love to see that. What is a test without a competition?
March 5th 2013 @ 2:22pm
matt h said | March 5th 2013 @ 2:22pm | Report comment
India touring Australia. Sorry, you just walked into that one
Seriously though your point is well taken. A competitive test match is what we all want to see. At least Day three was closer to that.
I remember when Australia were dominating through the 2000′s and test matches did get boring, especially at home, as there was little uncertainty as to the result.
Having said all of that, I am looking forward to today becasue of the little battles:
- can Cowan push through the thirties
- can Watson conetrate harder than goldfish with ADHD
- can Clarke keep going? It seems impossible that a failure isn;t around the corner
- can Henriques reprise his first test heriocs
- can Maxwell bat for longer than 40 balls
March 5th 2013 @ 5:03pm
Jay said | March 5th 2013 @ 5:03pm | Report comment
- Cowan – yes… into the 40′s
- Watson – no
- Clarke – yes… although is a failure still a failure when it was a delivery that would’ve gotten every other Aus player out?
- Henriques – No
- Maxwell – No
1 or 2 ain’t bad… right?… right?
March 6th 2013 @ 3:40am
Bearfax said | March 6th 2013 @ 3:40am | Report comment
My answer
Cowan – No. He is at his best already at his best. 30-35 is the best average he will get in test cricket
Watson – Yes but not in the short term. Has a FC batting average of 45 so we know he can bat better
Clarke – Yes. He’s a tough cricketer but dont expect the purple patch to continue. He will however remain Australia’s best bat for a few years yet
Henriques – We got a peak of his potential in the first test. Eventually he will be a good test all rounder, maybe even better. But will be dveloping for a few years yet
Maxwell – Yes but not in the short term. He’s a kid with raw talent like Steve Smith, but its unrefined and needs good coaching. At present too impetuous. Bowling is improving but still a long way to go. Fielding excellent. Batting, too focussed on limited over cricket. Needs to learn patience. Potentially could be a good test player but not yet.
March 5th 2013 @ 8:42am
Pope Paul VII said | March 5th 2013 @ 8:42am | Report comment
A 100 run partnership would be handy right now.
A couple of early wickets and the lads are stuffed. If they do manage to draw level and the big show let’s go anything could happen but it almost certainly won’t.
Good news is the spinners gained some respec’.
March 5th 2013 @ 11:05am
Nihar said | March 5th 2013 @ 11:05am | Report comment
We have pulled back slightly but yet again they havent shown foresight in the batting.Why bring Hughes ahead of Watson & Clarke when he is a walking wicket this series. Honestly I have never really rated Hughes very highly though some other folks think otherwise. I hope to see Watto play well today and along with others give a good account of themselves. With the way the wicket is starting to play up more tricks, I dont think we will be able to save this match but atleast play for pride. Going forward in the series at the interval, I think they should drop Hughes for the Mohali test match and bring Khawaja in. He wouldnt play any worse. Break up the order wherein Cowan & Watto could open, Khawaja at 3, Clarke 4 & Warner at 5. Keeping in view Pattinson s past injuries, manage his workload well and bring Starc or Johnson for him.
March 5th 2013 @ 2:28pm
matt h said | March 5th 2013 @ 2:28pm | Report comment
Again, as has been stated repeatedly, Watson is GOING HOME. So Khawaja is in and the question will be whether they persist with Hughes, bring in Smith or bring in a bowler and move Henriques/Maxwell up the order.
As for sending Hughes out at 3, frankly I would rather that and get it over with.
March 6th 2013 @ 3:52am
Bearfax said | March 6th 2013 @ 3:52am | Report comment
Hughes needs to experience spin bowling as much as he can. This kid has outstanding raw talent, but he has deficiencies, especially with spin (mind you most Australian batsmen these days have that deficiency because of our pace doctored wickets). We know this kid can bat and score big. He’s done it before and he’s not the first top batsman to be found wanting on the sub continent. He’ll come out of this a better batsman. Its also the reason Khawaja needs to be in tests so he also can experience the spin bowliing expertise. I think he’s likely to be our best batsman against spin after Clarke, but he needs to go through the gauntlet to learn what he needs to learn. That’s one of the reasons these selectors are so incompetent. Batsmen like Hughes, Watson and Khawaja need this experience at this age to make them into top test players.
Personally I think this experience for Oz batsmen, Smith, Maxwell, Henriques included, is priceless. They will all emerge better for the experience if given the chance to face the best spin attack and spin grounds in the cricketing world.
March 5th 2013 @ 8:43am
Atawhai Drive said | March 5th 2013 @ 8:43am | Report comment
Henriques, a batting all-rounder who got among the runs at Chennai before failing in the first dig here, is the logical No 6.
Wade, a batting keeper with two Test centuries to his name and a Test average of 37.85, is the logical No 7.
Maxwell, on debut, a bits-and-pieces player whose selection remains a mystery, should bat no higher than eight.
The selectors may disagree.
March 5th 2013 @ 11:50am
Cantab said | March 5th 2013 @ 11:50am | Report comment
Might as well rearrange deck chairs on the Costa Concordia.
March 5th 2013 @ 8:49am
MadMonk said | March 5th 2013 @ 8:49am | Report comment
A technical question, when you have an off spinner bowling over the wicket to a left hander, mosts balls will pitch outside leg. If you are on zero why wouldn’t you stand up straight and play with a vertical bat next to pad. You can’t be LBW and the bowled is virtually eliminated.
Hughes sticks his front foot towards mid off and tries to sweep.
Warner made a similar techincal error but as he was set the sweep is legitimate way to score runs. His problem is he also forgot his big advantage that he couldn’t be out lbw and therefore play in front of your pads.
Anyone with more technical knowledge got a view.
March 5th 2013 @ 9:11am
langou said | March 5th 2013 @ 9:11am | Report comment
Great point Mad Monk. Traditionally a text book sweep shot is played by stepping towards the ball so that if you do miss it, the ball should hit your pads. Like you said if the ball pitches outside leg it is a safe shot barring a top edge. The shot they played was more of a modern paddle sweep that is best left to limited over cricket.
March 5th 2013 @ 10:24am
jameswm said | March 5th 2013 @ 10:24am | Report comment
It was very poor technique. when sweeping, the front pad has to cover the ball in case you miss. Sweeping 101.
Basic errors, and Hughes’s was even worse considering he was on 0 and Warner had just got out exactly the same way. It’s as if they assume they’ll hit it when they sweep and don’t make allowances for the possibility of missing.
March 5th 2013 @ 11:09am
Nihar said | March 5th 2013 @ 11:09am | Report comment
Hughes is officially a walking wicket again. Surely, Khawaja will be back for the 3rd Test. Just give him the run extended to others and see how he goes. Pujara is emulating Tendulkar and Dravid and scoring big tons in his early career.. Guess he is staying for a long time and hope he becomes the pillar of the Indian cricket… Should see his overseas prowess when India tours SA..
March 6th 2013 @ 3:55am
Bearfax said | March 6th 2013 @ 3:55am | Report comment
Patience Nihar. This is a steep learning curve for our young batsmen. They will come out of this experience better batsmen. Needed to happen. Dont despair
March 5th 2013 @ 1:24pm
The Barry said | March 5th 2013 @ 1:24pm | Report comment
Well said MadMonk…
Perhaps Hayden’s services should have been enlisted as a specialist coach. Before the 2001 (I think) series most people thought he was going to struggle against spin. He played the sweep to devastating effect, averaged over 100 for the series and was by far Australia’s best bat.
As an aside Adam and Will on JJJ penned the song ‘Sorry Matt Hayden’ to the tune of Outkasts ‘Sorry Miss Jackson’ after the tour because of the spray they gave him pre-tour. I still hum away to that when Haydos’s name comes up…
Hayden did it by plonking his big right pad outside leg stump so the ball couldn’t come behind his legs before sweeping. The sweeps of Hughes and Warner were cringe worthy because they clearly exposed the stumps. Basic, fundamental technique errors. Where’s the coaching ?
March 5th 2013 @ 2:30pm
matt h said | March 5th 2013 @ 2:30pm | Report comment
It also helped that Hayden had a massive stride and reach. Hughes and Warner do not, so they have to be even more careful of the sweep becasue they cannot as easily get to the pitch of the ball.
March 5th 2013 @ 9:53pm
chris b said | March 5th 2013 @ 9:53pm | Report comment
No, no,no
Hayden and gilly are a big part of the problem of modern Aussie batting for mine.
All this hitting across the line, trying to dominate early in an innings, eyeand power rather than technique. It was ok for these champs in a champion team, now almost everyone follows suit.
The problems these two had in the 05 ashes were a warning of the problems of this approach on all but the most benign of conditions.
March 6th 2013 @ 4:05am
Bearfax said | March 6th 2013 @ 4:05am | Report comment
Your idea has merit I think The Barry.
All young batsmen have their deficiencies, Hayden included when he was younger, and I remember well the same call for his head, like is happening at present for Hughes, when he struggled.
Batsmen dont just appear. They develop. Most batsmen early in their test career struggle. Its part of the deal. Its just we have over half our team who are new to test cricket and we are seeing those deficiencies across the board. Its a learning process and we must be patient.
Yep we’ll be flogged for a while. But good cricketers need that experience to effectively work on their game. Get away from those safe pace doctored Oz pitches and feel what its like to face the World on other people’s grounds.
Two or three years from now we’ll be lauding the achievements of many of these kids being flogged now. And if you guys are still around, I’ll remind you of what I’m saying. I’ve seen this all before. One example was the introduction of the one day format when over half the Oz team left tests cricket for several years. The test team floundered for a year or two with inexperienced kids. Then they developed and many held their own against the one dayers who later returned. Australia’s phoenix will rise again
March 5th 2013 @ 5:19pm
Go the Wannabe's said | March 5th 2013 @ 5:19pm | Report comment
Why would anyone, in their right mind, try to sweep an Indian spinner on an Indian pitch early in their innings?
What’s the matter with playing a straight bat within the “V” until they get their eye in?
Didn’t Justin Langer get 6 years in a Gulag for playing one rash shot?
Why can’t we apply that rule again?
I bet they’d put the sweep away quicker than Del Piero into the back of a net.
They must be either a) acting under direction b) on drugs. In these current times, b) makes more sense.
March 5th 2013 @ 6:11pm
lolly said | March 5th 2013 @ 6:11pm | Report comment
very funny,
March 5th 2013 @ 8:59am
Christo the Daddyo said | March 5th 2013 @ 8:59am | Report comment
Plenty of batsman with good enough technique, but very few have shown they have the mental application to stick it out for a long dig. Watson is without doubt the most frustrating batsman to watch – he always look a million bucks until he inevitably loses concentration and gets out to a silly shot. Like in the first innings. What a waste of talent.
March 5th 2013 @ 11:52am
Prateek Sharma said | March 5th 2013 @ 11:52am | Report comment
He looks more like an Australian struggling Sehwag at this time.
March 5th 2013 @ 9:03am
sunshine said | March 5th 2013 @ 9:03am | Report comment
My view is that hughes should still be in the sheds, clark should be first drop.
March 5th 2013 @ 12:03pm
michaelh said | March 5th 2013 @ 12:03pm | Report comment
agreed. he needs to man up and face some of the new ball.
March 5th 2013 @ 1:25pm
The Barry said | March 5th 2013 @ 1:25pm | Report comment
Clarke HAS to put himself up the order.
March 5th 2013 @ 2:32pm
matt h said | March 5th 2013 @ 2:32pm | Report comment
Why? He is our only solid bet at the moment, at number 5. Why weaken one position to hopefully strengthen another? I have yet to hear a great argument on it other than “man up”. Well Steve Waugh batted 5. Go tell him to man up. Michael Clarke is not a number 3 batsman.
March 5th 2013 @ 2:51pm
Timmuh said | March 5th 2013 @ 2:51pm | Report comment
At number four he gets one more partner to bat with before the tail, maximising his chances of scoring big. In essence, there is every chance the rest of this team will fold meekly – in which case you want Clarke in for as long as practical if he is a solid chance to be the one who finishes not out, or at least the one left to bat with the tail.
Plus coming in at 5, the momentum of the innings has already been built. It looks completely different if the best batsman comes in at 2/60 instead of 3/70. It takes away one of the “cheap” wickets at the top of the order for the Indians to feel confident about before the main event (bigger than a big show) arrives at the crease. Coming in that little bit earlier might build confidence in somebody else to hang in with him before he opposition gets right on top.
Steve Waugh batted at 5 and 6, and had reliable batsmen above him. I guess Clarke could be seen as the modern version of a 1984 Allan Border though.
I woud agree that he probably shouldn’t go #3. That position seems to have some mental block for some Australians, one that doesn’t ordinarily get associated with difference between #4 and #5.