The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Lords Test shows up poor selections

Expert
19th July, 2009
27
1454 Reads
Australia's Nathan Hauritz appeals unsuccessfully

Australia's Nathan Hauritz appeals unsuccessfully for the wicket of England's Paul Collingwood during the final day of the first cricket test match between England and Australia in Cardiff, Wales, Sunday, July 12, 2009. AP Photo/Tom Hevezi

Do you get the impression that Marcus North doesn’t play off spin very well? A week ago in Wales, England were very lucky to survive a thorough whipping. Australia lost 6 wickets, England 19.

Only the strength of the final wicket partnership and some Captain Ponting dithering with Marcus North instead of his strike bowler (no matter how poor his previous spell was) saved the Pommie bacon.

The English celebrated a draw with champagne.

They looked ordinary in all facets, including dress sense. Their bowling was wide and short and lack spin and seam, apart from that they were a good match for the visitors.

Graeme Swann couldn’t drift it or spin it, and very often couldn’t land it, he looked a shadow of the bowler who bamboozled the West Indies home and away.

I was impressed with Swann during those series and thought he would be a handful for the Australians, a definite ‘not’ at Sophia Gardens flipped quickly to a definite ‘yes’ at St Johns Wood, when he finally got a bowl.

How nice is it for the finger spinner to come on when serious holes have been made in the top order and the rest of the batsmen are facing another 400 runs or 140 overs occupation to save the game.

Advertisement

I’m not sure if Mike Hussey actually hit his but it was a delivery worthy of a wicket.

Marcus North reminded me of Damian Martyn and Justin Langer when they came to play New South Wales at the Sydney Cricket Ground, after gorging themselves on the WACA. They were walking-wickets for Greg Matthews, he always put them down for single figures as they came through the gate.

This series was seen as being a close one. The teams evenly matched in most departments.

What we have seen is successive Test matches of dominance by each team, and I cannot remember last time a side has turned around such a depressing performance within a week.

England’s bowlers have been very good at Lords. They have conveyed control, movement and discipline which put pressure on the Australia batting all down the order.

In contrast Australia had a strike bowler who could find none of the above mentioned characteristics. Mitchell Johnson is the nominal leader of the attack but from the time the first delivery he bowled disappeared for four behind square leg, as most half volleys on leg stump do at any level, he was a stretcher case and the bearers were Peter Siddle and Ben Hilfenhaus.

Johnson was not up to standard at Cardiff either and now finds himself very likely to be dropped from the third Test XI.

Advertisement

Australia cannot afford to carry a player in such abysmal form. Johnson did not get the seam upright for a single delivery in either innings. While we see constant shots on TV of the English bowling coach, his Australia counterpart is tucked away into the deepest recess of the rooms.

Which brings us to the next question. What is a number 8 batsmen who bowls 115 kph with red hair doing on this tour when an extra seam bowler was required?

Doug Bollinger has been in better form than even the golden haired chosen one Mitchell J.

Stuart Clark must be biting his lip in the dressing rooms watching the tripe being sent down by his compatriots. Brett Lee is injured (selected even though he was untested over a number of first class games for endurance and resilience) and Shane Watson isn’t bowling until further notice.

The prodigy Phillip Hughes has now failed 4 times in a row, he looks uncomfortable and unsettled but his position is not in jeopardy for the entire series because the selectors, for the first time in Ashes history, elected not to take an extra opening batsmen on tour.

Perhaps the notion of selection pressure from other member of the squad is a dated one.

Mr Hilditch and co. were obviously not expecting injuries or form lapses. Thank heavens for Michael Clarke’s batting (and Brad Haddin’s, although his wicketkeeping is a bit dusty at the moment).

Advertisement

When South Africa lost yet another semi-final, their 9th in ICC events (this time the Twenty20 World Cup to Pakistan) they were criticised for having a wonderful Plan ‘A’ , but no Plan ‘B’ when things went off the rails or your opposition actually played well.

The Australian selectors must have done a case study of the Proteas’ inflexible alternatives, and then tried to improve on it.

close