Across three years since Shane Warne retired, the Australian selectors have tried nine specialist spin bowlers in their search for an adequate Test replacement.
Of those, Nathan Hauritz was persisted with for longest, but the manner of his omission has been the most cruel.
Had chairman Andrew Hilditch and his panel intended to dent the psyche of Hauritz, a man of honesty but wavering self-confidence, they could not have gone about his demotion any differently.
Where Hauritz will go from here is questionable, and how he will rebuild belief in his methods, after having them dismantled by the advice of his captain Ricky Ponting, moreso.
When Hauritz was first called back into the Australian Test team in 2008 to replace the injured Jason Krejza – another hard luck story – it was a genuine surprise.
For a time he made decent strides, with the brief interruption of a curious absence from the final Ashes Test of 2009 at the Oval, and at home last summer appeared to have arrived as a Test spinner with the capability to influence the outcome of matches.
This year’s winter tour of England was missed due to injury, placing Hauritz in the unfortunate position of returning from convalescence against the best players of spin bowling in the world in India.
All the groundwork duly began to unravel on the subcontinent, where Hauritz’s modest gifts of spin and fizz were made irrelevant by self-doubt about his own best method of attack, which had been placed there not by the Indians, but by Ponting.
Having called for his spinner to bowl more like Harbhajan Singh – a technical impossibility – Ponting watched as Hauritz was taken apart, losing his all-important ability to maintain pressure.
This quality is what had brought him into the team in the first place, then kept him there as a foil for the wayward Mitchell Johnson.
Bruised inside and out by India, Hauritz expected to make amends during the Ashes, and the selectors’ decision to play him in the Sheffield Shield rather than one day cricket against Sri Lanka would have enhanced that notion.
But early season rain and a startling limited overs debut by Xavier Doherty did not help, and despite improving with every ball at the SCG against Victoria, Hauritz was made to feel more uncertain when the 17-man Ashes squad was named.
As former Test paceman Stuart Clark has suggested, players prefer to be shown confidence than to feel the axe at their necks, and Hauritz went into a final Shield encounter with Tasmania a worried man.
In this match, weighted far too heavily as a Test trial, he was only granted one over.
At its end Hauritz was maddeningly told by Hilditch and Ponting that he had not done enough to convince he was the right man for Brisbane, even though the past year had given the distinct impression that he was a choice for the long haul.
Like the victim of a relationship gone badly, Hauritz was left to ponder the worth of all that had gone before, and it is impossible to look upon him as the guilty party.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Bayman,the next move is upto Hauritz. He can sulk or come back a better bowler. He has to take lots of wickets in grade and shield. If I were him I would work my butt off because technically he is good. It needs the mental strength and this can be learnt.
Bayman
Guest
Vinay, If John Howard is a mediocre off-spinner, I'm a champion!! I tend to agree with you in regard to Ponting/Hauritz but my point was more about, "What now?" Now that he's gone fom the side it will be very difficult for Nathan to reclaim his spot. If Doherty does anything at all Hauritz is history. The real question is whether the NSW selectors keep picking him now he's no longer an Australian representative or do they start promoting Smith and O'Keefe as the next in line - which leaves no room for Hauritz.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Bayman, I am not convinced it was Ponting who is to blame for Hauritz's woes. I think this article has got it all wrong. Daniel seems to be an apologist for hauritz. Having said that I think Nathan can still develop into a good offspinner. It is not the physical side. It is the mental. Anyone can be a mediocre offspinner...just think John Howard. But to be good requires "killer" and Nathan struggles with this. He has to learn to be "aggressive" when he crosses the white line. Its all about persona and body language. He has the skills but not the "chutzpah" to carry it off.
Bayman
Guest
The trouble now for Hauritz is that he's under siege. History shows that once you're out of the Australian team it is very difficult to get back in. Nathan was, at best, a solid cricketer but he never threatened to win games for Australia. Given that, and the fact that the selectors know exactly his capabilities, it is hard to see how he could ever be picked again. That said, his Test career is over. This, of course, raises the next question. If his Test career is considered done and dusted, why would New South Wales pick him when there's Smith and O'Keefe coming through the ranks. Smith, rightly or wrongly, has been branded the next "great white hope" and O'Keefe is a very promising all-rounder, highly thought of by those close to NSW cricket with definite leadership capabilities. Given the potential of these two then Hauritz's future becomes murky - and immediately so. I'll watch with interest how the next phase of Hauritz's career develops. He is one of the nice guys of cricket and it will be a pity if he does a Beau Cassin and simply disappears (but then Cassin was also one of the nice guys). His future, though, looks bleak.
Fly on the Wall
Guest
9 Test spinners since Warne? MacGill, Hogg, Casson, Hauritz, Krejza, White, McGain, Cullen, Smith. Omit Hogg and MacGill cos they were around with Warne and the rest have taken a combined 88 wickets in 28 Tests at 40.02. We just have to admit we don't have any Test standard spinners. Any A teams / tours should all have 3 spinners and preferably be to the subcontinent, that would teach them more than they are 'learning' out here. And Australia is a spinner's graveyard, unless you're world-class like Warne and MacGill.
Rabbitz
Guest
Well if being dropped for poor performance dents "the psyche of Hauritz" to a point where he will struggle to rebuild his form then he was never suited for the top levels of sport anyway. He is alledgedly a professional sportsman, being paid just short of a million bucks a year. If he can not accept the downsides of being a sportsman, but is willing to take the upsides then this should also disqualify him. To sum up: Boo Hoo, if you can't take the critique, bad luck and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Goodfella
Guest
Hauritz has never threatened to set the world on fire, but he's developed over time into an honest toiler. By most standards every bowling attack can do with an honest toiler. It's highly unlikely the selectors are going to unearth another 'Wisden Top 5 of the Century' quality spinner any time soon, but my guess is the revolving door spinner policy will continue whilst ever Ponting and co. keep looking in vain for Warne Mk.II to come waltzing up to the bowling crease.