The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Why losing in India might be good for Australian cricket

14th February, 2017
Advertisement
Is Mitch Marsh worth a gamble? (AAP Image/David Mariuz)
Roar Pro
14th February, 2017
68
1521 Reads

There is something deeply wrong with the way the administrators are managing the Australian Test cricket side.

From the CEO to the selectors to the coach, there is a growing sense of unease about whether they are capable of exacting the best performances out of our Test side.

In its current state, the national selection panel is doing more harm than good.

It feels distinctly un-Australian to wish bad fortunes on the national team’s chances in India; however, given the state of the governance surrounding it, a complete capitulation may be the only catalyst to truly instigate lasting change.

Every instance of significant upheaval to the Australian Test cricket hierarchy over recent years has occurred in the wake of a crisis.

The Argus report – a wholesale review of Australian cricket in 2011 – was prompted by a disastrous 3-1 home Ashes defeat. This saw the reshaping of the selection panel and the coaching structure, which ultimately led to the removal of chairman of selectors Andrew Hilditch and coach Tim Nielsen.

Yet, many of the recommendations were ultimately ignored by Cricket Australia, especially in regards to the Sheffield Shield scheduling and long-term succession planning. The team started winning again, and these changes were quietly shelved.

Then in 2013, there was the shocking whitewash in India, as well as an early Champions Trophy exit. Combined with the “homeworkgate” disciplinary issues, all of this contributed to the sacking of coach Mickey Arthur, while captain Michael Clarke also relinquished his selection duties.

Most recently, there was the fallout from the loss to South Africa in Hobart. Afterwards, the selectors promised to revise and update their selection policies to focus on youth.

Advertisement

The problem is that none of these events has actually led to positive long-term outcomes for Australian cricket. Though there is much talk of reforming the way the game is administered and run, seemingly little has actually occurred.

After many of these crises, home wins over struggling or inconsistent nations such as Pakistan have deflected attention and papered over the cracks. Each of these victories seems like a band-aid on a gaping wound, disguising the real issue while allowing it to continue to fester, and Cricket Australia have been happy to sit on its hands.

The Sheffield shield remains a problem. The previously strong domestic competition, once long ago capable of filling stadiums with loyal fans, has faded into almost complete insignificance.

Games seem more like a glorified trial for the Australian team, with the emphasis on competition removed in favour of selfish individuality.

Then you have the selection panel, who promised so much in November.

Selector Mark Waugh told the Inside Cricket panel that they intended to select the team based on shield form with a focus on youth.

Less than four days later, Nic Maddinson was selected, despite being out of form and boasting a first-class batting average of less than 40. You have Darren Lehmann publicly criticising Glenn Maxwell by telling him to score big runs to be considered, while simultaneously picking someone who has scored very little.

Advertisement

And of course, there is the continued selection of Matthew Wade, who they said had improved his keeping. One could argue that he is even less consistent than he was before.

On top of all that, there are the suggestions from Waugh that Mitch Marsh was picked for the tour of India potentially to open the bowling and bat in the lower order. Our greatest strength is our limitless supply of quality fast bowling; to simply ignore that is an almost suicidal notion.

Mitch Marsh of Australia

The selection panel’s mentality can only be described as obtuse. This cannot be allowed to continue.

What we have is a young, inexperienced Test side, chosen by a bunch of selectors unable to agree on our future direction, heading to the hardest and most unforgiving place to play cricket.

If we win, the underlying issues will still be there. The status quo would be maintained.

If we lose, the aftermath could result in one of the biggest shakeups in our history. The bigger the loss, the bigger the seismic shift will be. And it could just be for the best.

Advertisement

Maybe this time it will result in lasting change.

close