Australian batsman Andrew Symonds during play – AAP Image/Tony McDonough
So South Africa has become the first team to defeat Australia in three successive bilateral ODI series’. Pity the poor West Indies. Their many Tri-Series successes in Australia seemingly do not count in this context.
On top of this comes the news that, at least until the present series concludes, Australia has (deservedly) slipped to third in the ODI rankings, behind South Africa and India.
The first of Australia’s sequences of losses against South Africa came in early 2006 and was more a South African miracle than an Australian loss: somehow the Proteas chased down Australia’s score of 434 to win the deciding fifth match of the series in Johannesburg.
So really it is only in the two recent series against South Africa that Australia has been second rate. That is what is at issue.
This decline and fall has been a topic of some discussion at The Roar.
In particular, Kersi Meher-Homji opined in article that “Aussies struggle because quicks picked like a raffle”.
My contention is that Kersi’s focus is too narrow, and that really everything is a problem in the Australian one-day team at the moment.
One day it is the batting that is the problem, the next day it is the bowling.
I am accustomed to this from living in New Zealand for the last fifteen years, because this is how it always goes with the Black Caps.
We regularly hear that the retirement of McGrath and Warne is the root cause of Australia’s cricketing ills. I absolutely agree with this for Test cricket, a form of the game that above all else relies on having bowlers who can take 20 wickets in order for victory to be achieved.
But the “limited overs” nature of one-day cricket makes it fundamentally different, and results in it relying much more evenly on contributions from across the board.
So Australia’s decline and fall in one-day cricket is not primarily due to the absence of McGrath and Warne, as indeed can easily be seen from two simple facts.
First, Australia was a dominant team in one-day cricket for many years without Warne, whose last such appearance for Australia was in January 2003.
Yes, McGrath played until 2007, but frequently he was rested or absent due to wife Jane’s ill health. This had no perceptible effect on results.
Secondly, even after McGrath retired, the Australian ODI team rolled relentlessly on, recording very notable achievements like a 4-2 series win in India in 2007 and a 5-0 whitewash in the West Indies in 2008.
Here are the many factors that I believe are contributing to Australia’s current woes in one-day cricket.
1. OPENERS:
Gilchrist and Hayden have gone, and even our next generation of openers, Marsh and Watson, are absent at the moment. It is almost impossible to be an excellent one-day team without excellent openers.
Haddin at least has promise, but Clarke has been dismal in this role, and really has done nothing more than prove that he is only suited to batting at no. 4. One wonders why the selectors did not consider Brad Hodge as a stop-gap opener, a position at which he has excelled in T20 cricket.
We need to be realistic about Marsh and Watson when they come back.
They have clocked up some good numbers so far, but they are not going to be Gilchrist and Hayden. Gilchrist’s career average may “only” have been 36, but, exactly as with Sehwag with India, it was the way in which he made those runs.
Even an “average” score of 30-40 would usually be made so rapidly that it set up the entire innings. He was quite rightly named Australia’s best-ever one-day player.
Neither Marsh nor Watson will cause opposition hearts to start racing just by walking out to bat, as Gilchrist did and Sehwag does.
Similarly with Hayden, whose physical presence at the crease is matched only by Viv Richards over the last 30 years. Marsh and Watson cannot achieve this.
2. MIDDLE-ORDER BATTING:
Love him or loathe him, it stands out that the missing player here is Andrew Symonds. Like Gilchrist and Hayden, his mere presence often has a demoralising effect on the opposition.
The Husseys have been tremendously disappointing in their failure to fill in for Symonds. I am beginning to think that David simply does not have what it takes (which surprises me), and I also wonder whether Mike will ever get his mojo back.
Speaking of returning mojos, once again we need to be realistic about what lies ahead: Symonds is to return, but nothing about his form for Queensland suggests that he will be the player that he was.
3. ALL-ROUNDER:
James Hopes is admirable, but he is no Shane Watson, simple as that.
4. SPIN BOWLING:
Brad Hogg could never strangle an innings a la Daniel Vettori, but he always took wickets (156 in 113 innings), and he never got belted. There has been essentially no progress in finding a replacement for him.
Show me a successful one-day team of the last two decades that has not had a spinner from whom 10 overs could be relied on.
Hogg’s departure has had an immense effect, and one wonders why the selectors have not tried the most successful (by far) spinner from the last few seasons of Australian domestic one-day cricket, Bryce McGain.
Yes, I am serious.
Have a look at how many wickets McGain has taken in domestic one-day cricket, just as Stuart MacGill also did. Successful one-day cricket requires a spinner who will chip in with a wicket or two every innings.
5. FAST BOWLING:
Brett Lee was always a much, much better one-day bowler than Test bowler. It should also not be forgotten that another absent fast bowler, Shaun Tait, did well as wicket-taker in Lee’s absence at the 2007 World Cup.
Both these players are in a different league to bowlers like Harris, Geeves and Laughlin, with whom the selectors have been fiddling around recently.
The fragile Tait still seems to be injured, and Lee’s return has just been put on hold.
Further, Lee’s test bowling in the second half of 2008 was so poor that there must be the same questions over him as there are over Symonds.
Hopefully this analysis makes clear the numerous significant ways in which the Australian one-day team has disintegrated in the last 12 months.
It is not just the fast bowling and it is not just the selectors (as Kersi contends). But I agree that doing better in both these spheres would be a good start.
Finally, a team needs a heart and soul.
All season the Australian one-day team has been playing like a team that has lost its heart and soul. Ponting and Mike Hussey are the best evidence of this: quite obviously things just do not feel right to either of them, as reflected in their insipid play.
Is Andrew Symonds the missing life force, or is it someone like Hayden or Hogg, who will not be back?
From this pot-pouri of retired players, injured players, returning players, out-of-form players, failed new players and promising new players (Callum Ferguson?), a purposeful, animated, confident, in-form team must somehow be fashioned by the selectors.
I am not holding my breath.
luke
Guest
The selectors are to blame. they should be replaced. why was symonds and hayden removed? aggressive players are necessary agaisnt cocky, aggressive and sledging sides like england,. Australia does better with some aggressive players who are important in the confidence aspect. We need some more waugn brothers(retired) players who were not afraid to dominate the pitch as batsmen, something the current batsmen seems afraid to do., The agrresive style of gilchrist(retired) is another example of the attitude necesary by aussie batsmen to win, at the moment the only player of the right stuff in the current selection is shane watson., but he is effected and declines when his team does bad ,but dominates when we are winning. Ponting has a worse team now thanks to the selectors mistakes.
LeftArmSpinner
Roar Guru
Greg, good analysis. But, off field, I roughly calculate that the Australians and Protea's have approx. 40 days of cricket against each other this summer. I was struggling to maintain interest after the Aussies batting collapses in Aust. Boring or what. And the second half is not available on free to air tv so that is a problem. Throughout this boredom, I still listened to the ABC cricket coverage, not for the cricket but for the brilliantly clever and funny carryings on of the boys, as they dealt with lines dropping out. How they make such uninteresting and frankly boring sport so entertaining for 8 hours a day for 40 days is beyond me. Well done to the ABC Boys and girls.
drewster
Roar Pro
Is Marcus North the forgotten man in cricket, with Symonds unavailable and the Hussey's not achieving much surely he would have been worth a game or two instead of sitting on his bum and doing some nets. His stats from last years "Ford Ranger" Cup are Imressive enough (7 games, 343 runs, 57.16 ave, 84.48 S rate). The opening bat position/s is a real worry, especially Clarke and with only one strike bowler playing it has exposed the weakness of bowling depth. Great article Greg and some great input from the Roar faithful. Maybe you should Email this page to the selectors!
Brian
Guest
I wouldn't underestimate the Warne/McGrath loss. In their era tests were often won inside 4 days with only 4 bowlers. Australia would win test matches with Lee being an impact bowler who would be fresh for the ODI. Now fast forward to 2008 Australia played six tests without once claiming 20 Indian/South African wickets and Lee, Clark and Watson all broke down. Furthermore in this series Siddle & Hilfenhaus had to be sent home because of their exertions bought on by the lack of spinning firepower in the test matches. If the test attack continues to play without a spinner it is inevitible that the ODI attack will continue to suffer.
Jameswm
Guest
I'm afraid I find Ponting a very conventional and uninspiring captain. There is a distinct lack of practical thought within the team. I said earlier Katich has to be one opener. How can a guy who was clearly our most comfortable batsman in the test series not even get a look in? You can't throw part-timers in to open, as they're facing top fast bowlers with a new ball. Dave Warner was the perfect example - he simply didn't have the class to deal with that level of bowling, and it showed. I agree Symonds could be the missing link. Whatever his form for Qld, he is an intimidating figure. He has a record of failing for Qld and then performing for Australia and if his head is right, he has to be thrown in. I was one who was convinced David Hussey would shine for Australia and he has had his moments, but Callum Ferguson has clearly outperformed him overall. Shane Watson's injuries are so disruptive it's a major disappointment. Hopes is a consummate pro and has done his best. Spinning wise, I'm torn between Hauritz's control and Krejza's out and out aggression. Krejza might do better in one-dayers because he has 5 men out, and he is a wicket taker if nothing else. Phillip Hughes was the other one. If his test form continues to flourish, you could definitely try him there. Class shines through, and he can score quickly. If you used him and Mike Hussey doesn't get his mojo back, then you have: Katich Hughes Ponting Clarke Symonds Ferguson Haddin Hopes/Watson Johnson Krejza/Hauritz Bracken Lee/Tait That's 12 and the balance is not entirely easy. I guess a quick goes, but that leaves you with two front line quicks and a spinner who can be attacked, plus Symonds/Clarke as your 5th bowler. Lose a batsman and Haddin is at 6 (or Ferguson if Haddin opens), Hopes/Watson 7 and Johnson 8. Still pretty reasonable depth.
Spiro Zavos
Expert
Greg's analysis is spot on, as usual. But I'd go a bit further and suggest that even with the retirements and so on the selectors have been making mistakes in selection. I can't see why, for instance, Hughes and Katich aren't used as openers. Hughes tends to scores more quickly the higher he goes. Haynes and Greenidge showed that a conventional if forceful opening pair can lay the basis for big ODI totals. Katich, too, could be used as a spinning option along with Clarke. The other mistake is selecting players as all-rounders like James Hopes who are not good enough at either batting or bowling to make a regular impact in either discipline. Pick four frontline bowlers, including hopefully a tight spinner (and there are some left-armers around, for instance). Then try a batting all-rounder who bowls (a la Symonds). A hitting wicket-keeper. And then five batsmen, with the bonus that one or two of them might be able to contribute a few overs from time to time. Greg's statistics on Brad Hogg are interesting. He averaged 1.3 something wickets an innings, which is very important. The best way to stop the flow of runs as every commentators tells us is to take wickets. Bowlers who average more than a wicket an innings are very valuable in ODI. The final point is that the coaching staff and captain must come up with great fields and challenging game plans from game to game. Bobby Simpson led the way here and Australia seems to have lost the track, in my opinion, in the last year or so.
sheek
Guest
If Australian cricketers, & for that matter world cricketers, are becoming dysfunctional, it's because they don't know any longer if they're 4/5 day industrialists, one day workers, or 3 hours hit & giggle recreationists. Cricket bosses might think they're very clever coming up with so many variational money spinners. But sooner or later something might have to give. Regrettably, that something might be test cricket. That's my pitiful input!
Hazey the Bear
Roar Rookie
Gonna have to disagree with you on a few points there Greg... You said: "One day it is the batting that is the problem, the next day it is the bowling." Well, that's easy enough - It's both. It's just one day we see the direct result of poor bowling and one day we see the direct result of poor batting. But it's good that you're looking at the overall picture, and you're probably right, it comes down to a number of things, not just one or two. Once the selectors find solutions in all the areas you've addressed, we'll start to get back on track to being a winning team. I'm just not sure the solutions you've pegged out are the right ones... You said: "Love him or loathe him, it stands out that the missing player here is Andrew Symonds." Uhhh, hold the phone there...Didn't you once say that for someone to be selected for Australia on ANY level, they must prove themselves in the State competition on EVERY level?!? You've said yourself that nothing of his form for Queensland suggests he's the player he once was - Well...Shouldn't he prove himself first then? You also say he has a demoralising effect on the opposition - I'd say that with all his stuff-ups, he also has a demoralising effect within the team. Seriously, which Andrew Symonds is the team gonna get from one week to the next? I'm not suggesting that he never be allowed to represent Australia again, but I do think he needs to sort himself out first, both on and off the pitch. You said: "James Hopes is admirable, but he is no Shane Watson, simple as that." Whoa, whoa, whoa and whoa! James Hopes has been punching well and truly above his weight, performing strongly when the rest of the team has floundered. As you say, the team seems to have lost its heart and soul - but I'd add that Hopes is one of the few players who was able to hold his head high when the rest of the team failed. He gives his all, every single time. I remember in the last final of the Commonwealth Bank series against India, when he almost (not quite) single-handedly stole the win for Australia with the bat, and I damn sure remember him bowling out of his league against South Africa, taking wickets when nobody else was. If that's not 'heart and soul', I don't know what is. He may not be as spectacular as Watson, but he doesn't break down as easily either... You said: "...one wonders why the selectors have not tried the most successful (by far) spinner from the last few seasons of Australian domestic one-day cricket, Bryce McGain." Oooh...That's a toughie. I reckon the selectors feel a bit stung by choosing McGain in the test side, seeing as he got belted all over the ground, and failed to take a wicket. That sorta (actually, it well and truly) negates your selection criteria on spinners for a one-day side. Anyway, that's all I got. My kids gave me and missus a rough night last night, so I'm tired and grumpy as hell.