Star quality, rather than an interchangeable raft of good ordinary players, will be the key to Aussie cricket getting back to the business of world domination, and inspiring the next generation.
Harris, Nannes, Laughlin, Pomersbach, Ronchi, Hartley… hardly a who’s who of Australian cricket, yet they represent just a handful of a growing cast of Aussies boasting national starts.
So far in 2009, a staggering 41 individuals have represented Australia across the three forms of cricket – a figure that doesn’t include Hodge, Rogers, Jacques, Cosgrove or Krejza. Surely we are not that good, or desperate, to to be dipping into our 4th eleven! No wonder names and numbers on shirts have become de rigueur.
Australia is in a well documented transitional phase, frantically endeavouring to sort the wheat from the chaff. The task is made even tougher by the wall-to-wall fixturing phenomenon. Stakeholders the world over – players, coaches, selectors, administrators, media, sponsors and fans – are all grappling with a major mind-shift as to what form of cricket, and which games matter the most.
Such external influences on workload, combined with indecisive selectors and a clutch of retirements, have brought about a situation where representing Australia has sadly lost its ‘wow’ factor.
That so many have donned the green and gold isn’t all bad. Giving more an entrée to the big time is a terrific boost for the players concerned, and breaks down what once appeared an impenetrable wall around a small, elite group. Taking a punt has paid dividends in the past, and observing who thrives or wilts when the heat is on can prove invaluable.
Bar the odd disaster, most newbies have at least held their own this year, which augers well for the future. What’s more, the decision facing multi-talented youngsters deciding between cricket, and a more readily achievable football/rugby career, isn’t so straight forward.
The downside is players constantly feeling one knock or bad spell away from the axe. Part of the selectors’ role must surely be identifying the most talented and supporting them in a way that sees them fulfil their potential. Collectively, the strength of a close-knit unit cannot be underestimated. When the chips were down, the Aussies of old were even greater than the sum of their accomplished parts.
Whilst injury has been a factor, a revolving door does not a succession plan make. Surely national honours must be earned, not bandied about to any bright prospect whose potential far outstrips their actual catalogue of performances. Are fans and the opposition being disrespected by not necessarily picking the best team available? Isn’t an international match the end game, not the practise ground?
From a marketing perspective, whilst new faces make for a fresh and vibrant package, the hero factor is also a key ingredient. The punters’ wallets, and their kids’ attention spans, will only endure the best of the rest for so long. It’s the hardest of sells this summer, as two barely recognisable tourists battle to compete against an increasingly unfamiliar home team.
A common key to success is striking a balance between youthful exuberance and experience. What Australia really needs to reclaim its mantle is a core of cricketers at the peak of their game. Tellingly, Clarke, and possibly Johnson, are the only players who’ve neither their best cricket in front of them, nor behind them. Time should see a nucleus emerge, but only if the selectors start making the right calls now.
The mistakes are mounting; the costly selection or non-selections of Krejza, Lee, Symonds, Hodge, Hughes and Hauritz have baffled all and sundry. Chief selector Andrew Hilditch now believes that 50 over internationals are stronger Test form indicators than the Sheffield Shield – a new and interesting rationale.
Coming on the back of the most dominant, stable period in history, certainly magnifies the sense of chaos. Messrs Hilditch, Hughes, Boon and Cox have an unenviable task assessing the relative merit of the smorgasbord of players before them.
Hopefully the cream is given the right opportunities to rise to the top, before the green, and old, turn sour.
Jeff Dowsing
Roar Pro
The issue we must grapple with Vinay is that 'Test' cricket has gone past the tipping point and is no longer compatible with the demands of 21st Century entertainment. Call a new form of the game whatever you want, the reality is that two of the three forms of cricket, the oldest and previously the most popular, are on life support. It's sad, but unless we can deal with change, the game will either die or merely exist in it's shortest, most commercial form.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Jeff this would not be my preferred option. As far as possible I prefer Test Cricket to remain "Test" cricket. Anything else then you may as well not call it Test Cricket. It may well be that is what happens but then let us not fool ourselves. It does not remain Test Cricket anymore. I come back to context and sporting pitches. I have espoused this on other occassions and I remain convinced this will do a lot to revive the primacy of Test Cricket. Test Cricket and ODI when played in the right context,ie meaningful encounters against competitive teams,and sporting pitches you have a spectacle worthy of the spectator.
Jeff Dowsing
Roar Pro
I truly believe something radical needs to be done to overhaul cricket. How's this for an idea, given both Test cricket and ODI's have gone stale; Merge 50 over ODI's with Test cricket. Each team bats 2 x 60 overs. If dismissed before compulsory closure, the bowling team may use those overs to bat (encouraging attacking bowling & fields). The four day game starts at 4pm so that workers and schoolkids can watch - and there's strict penalties for slow over rates. Also generates more money being played during prime time.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
I'm hopeful that there can be a result in the Test match currently on in Napier. The SAF/England series too is a litmus test. I agree that there is a big demand for the shorter versions and this has to be balanced. Test Cricket,too,cannot be a sacred cow. It needs to speed up its over rates and encourage Captains to play even more attractive cricket. Cricket in the last twenty years has been more attacking and result oriented than in the previous fifty years. But sporting pitches and context of series is a must. Lets hope the administrators can see this. Some good things are happening in the Indian Domestic scene but like Australia the Test Players rarely play for their States. This has to be addressed because the punter wants to see the best,all the time.
Jeff Dowsing
Roar Pro
I guess that's a whole other interesting debate i.e. which cricket really matters now. I'm all for test cricket but if 90% of fans aren't, then the sport (and the players) need to come to terms with the evolution... unless the ICC quickly get fair dinkum and address the ridiculous schedules, pointless tournaments and games and the specific issues that have rendered tests as the game's poor relation. If that can't be achieved very soon, we may as well wave the 5 dayers goodbye, for there's no point perservering if it is the figurative tree falling in the forest.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Jeff,Australia have won the last three world cups and are now looking to determine how to defend it in 2011. Apart from the money it is perhaps a good thing Australia is scheduled to play another 7ODI's in India in 2010. I believe India should be looking to play 2 Tests and 5 ODI's in October and this may well happen as India suddenly finds itself ranked No 1 in Tests. They have already requested SAF play 2 Tests in March. This is good for Test Cricket . Australia has not come to grips with the Twenty20 and need to have a different mindset. I for one do not lose much sleep over it.
Jeff Dowsing
Roar Pro
Yes Vinay, the test team has been reasonably stable, notwithstanding some costly blunders. The main point I was making though is that national caps have been granted to far too many players across the three forms of cricket. Injuries and the heavy schedule have played a part (as mentioned), but to me, either the shorter forms of the game are not being given due respect or the selectors are struggling to determine who is really capable at the international level.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Jeff, the average punter could be excused for thinking along the lines of your piece. But the facts are a bit different from your assertions. Firstly the revolving door you suggest is more to do with the One Day side than the Test Side. Also the injuries to bowlers on the recent ODI tour to India are well documented. It was not as you suggest the selectors "frantically trying to sort the wheat from the chaff" And a 4-2 series win justifies the selectors thinking. The Test side has been stable except for injuries. Starting with the home series against SAF the Test side has found able replacements for McGrath and Gilchrist in Johnson,Siddle,Hilfenhaus and Haddin. Warney may never be replaced as he was once in a century talent...One of only 5 Wisden cricketers of the 20th Century. Stars dont just drop out of the night sky. The 1% talent,99% perspiration formula still applies. In time I am confident the likes of Johnson,Siddle,Clarke and Haddin will have the "star" quality.Katich and Hughes/Rogers have the ability to be as productive as Hayden and Langer. In Clarke and Ponting we have two of the "stars" of the current era. "The barely recognisable tourists" are also going through a transition and in time will throw up their own heroes. In Bravo,Barath,Roach and Gayle they have the ingredients for "stars". So too, Pakistan in Umar Gul,Aameer and Kaneria. Australia made the mistake of taking the Windies lightly in Adelaide and were behind for most of the match. Captains from Border to Steve Waugh were part of the selection panel. It was after Steve Waugh dropped Slater that he requested to be absolved of selectorial matters. However even now Ricky is consulted.And if the only form they have to judge a player on is the 50 over game that is what they go on. Now that a few Shield games have been played we have names like Henriques, Smith,Khawaja,Hartley,Ronchi and the like putting their hand up. I agree that selectors have an unenviable task but they need to get it right. By the same token we should be thankful that Australia remains competitive given the loss of half a dozen "stars". For this the selectors ought to be complimented.