The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Australia's era of batting weakness: Clarke takes over (Part 4)

Clarke was a fine captain, but Ponting may have always been regarded as the skipper for some players. (AFP PHOTO / Greg WOOD)
Roar Guru
29th July, 2016
1

Australia’s Test batting when Michael Clarke took over the captaincy had become painfully predictable. Australia’s Test batting after Clarke took over the captaincy to the end of 2011 was much like Clarke’s batting when he started his career; entertainingly unpredictable.

Australia had a workmanlike series victory in Sri Lanka; Michael Hussey was the man of the series, Shaun Marsh became the new No.3 after Pallekele, when he stood in for Ricky Ponting as he was at the birth of his child, and forced Ponting to No.4.

Phillip Hughes’ third Test century was in the series-saving commission in Colombo. That didn’t make the decision to drop Simon Katich any less silly, which I rank on a par with Daniel Bradshaw’s treatment by Brisbane, but it did show his special talent once more.

Australia’s batting, like every part of their game, was grease and sweat, enough to keep them ahead of their opponents, who had a failing one-man attack led by Rangana Herath.

Most significantly, Clarke become a No.5 batting captain after he helped save the series in Australia’s final innings of the series.

Another captain’s knock followed in his next Test innings at Newlands, Marsh providing the only other real help in getting Australia to 284. The other nine batsmen were even worse in the second innings, when Clarke failed and Marsh was injured.

47 all out. Actually, that isn’t the most damning or revealing score. 9-21 is. It wasn’t carnage when Peter Siddle and Nathan Lyon were at the crease.

Another Shane Watson LBW started proceedings. Brad Haddin’s shot still haunts houses. Ponting’s second LBW dismissal of the match showed how close to the precipice he was. Hussey’s loose drive used up some of his Sri Lankan breathing room. And did I mention Shane Watson LBW’s dismissal was the first wicket of the innings?

Advertisement

South Africa were poised to end their Australian hoodoo at the Bullring. Seemingly everything was lined up for that end. South Africa had the better batsmen, bowlers and fielders.

But somehow it didn’t happen.

Watson and Hughes became as fond of 88s as Erwin Rommel, both falling on that score in the first innings. Mitchell Johnson, in one of his lowest lows with the ball, was not out in both innings. In the first innings, that meant Australia ended up with a slim lead.

When Australia needed 310 runs to preserve their South African record, Ponting, one ball away from oblivion, scored 62. Usman Khawaja scored his first half-century as the two took Australia from 2-19 to 141. Then, when six wickets had fallen and Haddin spent the tour and the period before tea on day five as though he would get out at any moment, he and Johnson launched one of the more bold counterattacks after tea, with Australia still needing 88 to win. The second new ball saw off Haddin and Siddle, but Pat Cummins, who had kept Australia in touch with the ball in hand, hit the winning runs with Johnson at the other end.

Three debutants were included in Australia’s next Test, of whom only David Warner was a batsman. It was Australia’s older hands along with New Zealand incompetence that gave Australia victory at the Gabba. But when the New Zealanders cleaned up their act at Bellerive, Warner became Australia’s last hope in the fourth innings. He couldn’t pull off a one-wicket victory with Lyon, but his century showed he belonged in Test cricket.

But back to the rest of the Australians at Bellerive. I knew what the conditions would be like. I knew Australia’s batting weakness. New Zealand were $9.50 at the start of the second day, but that their 150 was worth a lot more than it seemed, and it was the only time I wished I was old enough to place a bet on a New Zealand victory.

Chris Martin exposed Hughes to Martin Guptill again in both innings, Khawaja was similarly dealt with, and Ponting had a horror match, walking on a plumb LBW that he tried to avoid while in several minds, and bunting an ugly catch to cover in the second innings. Hussey also didn’t score any runs.

Advertisement

With two changes expected for the Boxing Day Test against India, these were the four players in most danger of being dropped, with Hussey the least likely.

With Watson still not ready to return from injury, Shaun Marsh returned from his injury and Ed Cowan made his Test debut. Cowan then spent Boxing Day playing the innings everyone wished had been played exactly a year earlier: stability, preventing a chaotic world. It meant that Australia batted for three-and-a-half sessions, rather than not being able to bat two sessions. Cowan’s natural game allowed others, particularly Ponting, to play their natural game.

It was the only match in the series in which India took 20 wickets. When Australia lost four wickets cheaply in the second innings, Ponting and Hussey came out to bat with voices saying: “They must go!” Those voices were somewhat quieter after the pair made a match-winning stand, focussing on India’s veteran batsmen instead.

Hussey was able to silence that voice, “Hussey must go”, in the latter stages of his career. Ponting never could. All he could do was change what was added to it: “Ponting must go (because he isn’t good enough and his form isn’t good enough)”, to, “Ponting must go (because he isn’t good enough despite his recent change in form).”

Former New Zealand bowler Iain O’Brien has argued that Ponting used to produce “f*** you hundreds”. Innings that were “the proverbial middle finger”, to his and/or the team’s critics and enemies. Ponting’s first innings of 2012 was no such hundred. The smile when he got off the ground, having dived to reach his ground for his 100th run, revealed that. It was a “thank goodness” hundred.

When he had last made three figures, Ponting had gone onto the bigger score, while Clarke fell first. Now the roles were reversed, and Hussey took up from where Ponting left off. Pup was now the top dog – 329 not out made that fact unarguable.

Warner made the WACA his playground for an innings, before Clarke Liquid Gold’s share price continued its climb with a double century in Adelaide, aided by Ponting, whose last Test score of three figures ended up as a double century.

Advertisement

Watson’s door back into the Test side was through Marsh’s binary form. Haddin’s sick daughter meant that Matthew Wade also played in the West Indies, and with the only century of the tour and decent wicketkeeping, he was able to keep his spot in the side after that Dominica Test in which he scored the century.

That West Indies tour was an interesting contest, probably because of the flaws of both teams. Australia’s batsmen couldn’t establish a dominant position in decidedly foreign conditions in Bridgetown after the West Indies had declared on 450. But the West Indies’ biggest flaw was more significant than Australia’s flawed batting unit: they didn’t believe they could win a Test match against Australia.

Ryan Harris, Ben Hilfenhaus and Nathan Lyon are not great batsmen, but they believed they could win Test matches against the West Indies. They got Australia back into the match with the bat after they were 8-285. Then, Michael Clarke’s declaration and Australia’s bowlers gave Australia an achievable fourth innings target of under 200 on the final afternoon.

Australia’s enterprise was rewarded with that little bit of luck – the light held for longer than any other day in the Test – and the tourists squeezed home by three wickets at the very end of the match.

However, while Australia left the West Indies with the Frank Worrell Trophy safely in their grasp, they had needed help from the tail to get past 300 in every match of the series. They weren’t easy batting conditions, but it was still a sign of the weakness. Australia would face similar conditions on their next two tours, but much better opponents.

Before that came the South Africans. With their arrival came a single-minded Australian focus: taking the number one ranking off the Proteas through a series victory.

Clarke Liquid Gold was at its height in Brisbane and Adelaide with consecutive, fast-paced double centuries. Hussey made runs on both occasions with him, following on from a century from one of the openers: Cowan in Brisbane, Warner in Adelaide. Australia were going to need a full five days to beat this resilient South African line-up. A full day of rain and great batting conditions in Brisbane meant that was always likely to end in stalemate.

Advertisement

Not a drop of rain fell on Adelaide. On day one, Australia scored nearly 500 runs. But when Ponting looked over to the other dressing room, the South Africans must have reminded him of his old team – who got themselves out of tough spots.

Hindered by injury to James Pattinson, South African captain Graeme Smith led a resolute first innings that, while it fell well short of Australia’s score, did eat up a fair bit of time. Then with the ball in the second innings, they again razed the Australian top order, and fought enough to ensure that only four-and-a-bit sessions were left in the match when Clarke called in his men.

Clarke Liquid Gold also had some bowling stocks. While he had not scored a century in the Caribbean, Clarke had taken his second five-wicket haul in the fourth innings in Dominica. One of his best tactical attributes is that he was an excellent captain of part-timers. He could occasionally lift himself to the rank of secondary bowler, but he generally fit into the part-timer description.

Michael Hussey’s bowling often gave Clarke the look of a Midas touch. Warner’s occasional leg-spin was well utilised before Steven Smith’s return to the team. Even Ponting himself was more threatening in his occasional visits to the crease under Clarke.

With no Pattinson or Watson as a fifth bowler, Clarke had three front-liners and a bevy of part-timers. Clarke nearly dismissed Faf Du Plessis twice, only to be overturned on DRS. The South Africans were pushed to the brink, but they held the line. The teams went to Perth level.

Australia went, after a match that wasn’t too divorced from Cardiff in terms of the feeling of ‘so close’, with a new attack and, in his final match, Ponting.

“Ponting must go!” headlines had bombarded Australia’s former captain for years by the South African series. While there was significant support in the public for Ponting, there was a loud voice saying he needed to leave.

Advertisement

The “thank f***” scores against India might have helped boost his supporter base, because there was a subconscious image that performances that the Old Ponting could be attached to; he was a mortal batsman who deserved the immortal treatment because of what he gave to the team. They saw his Sheffield Shield scores for Tasmania. They knew he could still bat.

But the Sheffield Shield wasn’t the problem. Ponting became more and more aware of his critics, and of his potentially precarious situation, particularly after he was dropped from the ODI team after being stand-in captain. Where there was clarity, there was the negative inner voice, getting louder and louder. Ponting wrote in his autobiography that by the end, he “couldn’t get rid of the little bastard.”

Ponting had considered even retiring straight after the Adelaide match, but he believed he could help Australia win a Test match; he didn’t want to leave his teammates in the lurch.

His retirement Test was the only match in which he could ever hope to play by now without hearing suggestions he should leave. It could make his head clearer. It could lead to runs. It could lead Ponting using those runs for the sole reason he had ever played cricket: to help his team win matches.

He didn’t score runs. But as Mike Brearley used to say, “You never know, the alternative might have been worse.” It’s hard to think of an alternative that would have done much better than Ponting.

Australia’s new bowling attack kept South Africa to 225 on the first day at the WACA. But South Africa’s bowlers, with the series on the line, were superb. Dale Steyn sensed the occasion, which meant he was in ‘crazy eyes’ mode. Australia’s vulnerable top order was blown away on the first night. The stars were protected by Nathan Lyon on that evening, but no one was protected the next morning. Steyn won the battle with Clarke, and in effect, the series, with one of the best balls Clarke faced in his long career.

The best batsman was that scrapper, Matthew Wade. Today many, including many Roarers, don’t think much of Wade as an international cricketer. I don’t doubt that his wicketkeeping has its flaws, and that it needs to improve. But you don’t discard Wade’s type of fight, the type of grit he brings to the team. Whether it is as a keeper or a batsman – and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s the latter – write off his future at your peril.

Advertisement

Wade and the tail ensured Australia scored at least some runs. Unfortunately, South Africa powered away from Australia in the third innings, and Australia faced Mission Impossible in the fourth innings. A true great left the international field for the last time.

Some of Ponting’s critics never understood why Ponting’s captaincy was so respected by many who played under him. Here’s my theory: anyone who has played cricket for a long period of time, professional or amateur, has that one captain who for them is their once and future captain. They’ll respect other captains. They’ll even admit they are better in certain areas, or even better overall captains. But they’ll rate that one captain more. Because, for whatever reason, they enjoyed that time the most on or off the field.

It’s why each captain should be judged on their own merits. For example, Kane Williamson will likely be a finer captain than his predecessor, Brendon McCullum. But it would be completely understandable and not at all a sideswipe at Williamson if some players enjoy that time under McCullum more. They’ll have their reasons, such as the excitement of New Zealand in the 2015 World Cup, but Williamson will still deserve respect, which he will be given.

Australia weren’t ever likely to lose to Sri Lanka, but the most immediate impression of that series was of another loss to the Australian cricket team, Michael Hussey. Ponting was the man who could have prevented ‘Homeworkgate’, but not the player who could reasonably have been expected to score more runs than anyone who was in India, because he no longer believed he could.

But Hussey went out on a batting high. He just couldn’t face another tour, with all the pressure, where a few failures would have people calling for his head. As ever with retirement, it was right that the decisions was Hussey’s. But it left Australia thin for India, and when Haddin wasn’t taken as a second keeper, it left even more experience behind in Australia. Trouble loomed.

close