Australian cricket was shot. Down and out. It was without a paddle while exploring the upper reaches of a particularly pungent creek.
Now it is triumphant. Glorious! A bold and dominant future is on the horizon. Its future is full of exciting young players, always winning Test series, and a bevy of gorgeous women for all involved.
Is either of those two paragraphs true? Of course they are not. The true state of Australian cricket, as with most things in life, is somewhere in between.
Australia have won the three-Test series in Sri Lanka 1-0. Along with the series win the Aussies have demonstrated that rather than 40 pages and a few thousand words (at least in the public copy), the Argus Report on Australian Cricket should have been just a few points to tweak the running of the Australian team.
They were: getting rid of Andrew Hilditch. It didn’t matter how. Just do it. Leave a horse’s head in his bed. Send anonymous letters to his workplace. Whatever. The end justifies the means.
Removing Greg Chappell as a selector. After all, this guy orchestrated the worst moment in Australian cricket, the underarm ball, so his judgement has not always been sound. Also, we hear he has bad breath.
Making the captain a selector (my personal assessment of this one is still pending).
Having consistency with selection.
Recognising that Mike Hussey is a superhero. Continuing to pick him, forever (come to think of it, now that his sideburns are greying, Hussey does look a little like Reed Richards from the Fantastic Four).
There you have it. Problem solved!
Well, not quite. You still need a few talented players. But guess what? Australia has some.
It’s true that they don’t have anyone of the ilk of Lillee, McGrath, Warne, Border, or Waugh. Either Waugh. In fact, possibly not even Dean Waugh. However, they do have a few guys who can hold their own.
There’s Hussey, Ryan Harris (when fit), Michael Clarke, and Shane Watson. These guys aren’t legends of the game but they are decent cricketers.
And on this recent tour Australia have unearthed a few promising new players. Shaun Marsh has displayed style and concentration while batting in his first two Test matches. Nathan Lyon bowled with guile and confidence in his debut. Trent Copeland, while not getting the rewards on a couple of zombie pitches, has swung the ball and put it in good areas.
There are also a couple of players who may be a bit hit and miss but do have some x-factor about them.
Phil Hughes, despite a technique that would make Sir Donald Bradman turn in his grave, has a decent eye when he gets going. I personally thought he would be dropped for the last Test in Sri Lanka considering he was out of form and plays about as straight as Hansie Cronje. Kudos to him for making a hundred in the last Test and also to the selectors for sticking with him.
The enigma wrapped in a mystery that is Mitchell Johnson is also an x-factor for the Aussies. Mitchell is has the mental strength of a six year-old with a bed-wetting problem but he still has the talent to turn a match.
The realisation of that potential was missing in Sri Lanka but it is always lurking round the corner like an illegal cricket bookmaker.
When Hughes and Johnson are bad they are really bad but when they are good they are brilliant. Players like them may not be good for supporters’ heart rates but they will win a few matches off their own back.
Throw in a legend that is on the decline but still has something to offer in Ricky Ponting and the Australian team does have the capacity to be competitive.
So with a few tweaks around the running of the team thanks to Mr Don Argus, they have been able to prove what they really are during this series with Sri Lanka.
They’re neither a good cricket team nor a bad cricket team. They’re just an average cricket team. There is no shame in that.
I’m certainly not saying that Australian cricket fans should resign themselves to that fact but they should realise that it is the current state of play.
A generation of Australian cricket fans have been brought up thinking that when you rock up to the cricket your team just kicks ass like Chuck Norris on Red Bull. Everyone needs to realise that was never going to last forever.
However it can happen again.
Australia aren’t as good as England or South Africa, but they are clearly better than Sri Lanka and they are probably better than India given the evidence presented during the English summer.
With a solid cricket culture as well as a renewed focus on the development of young talent, Australian cricket will never be bad.
Australia’s outgoing coach Tim Nielsen is considered one of the worst in charge of the national side since the job existed. A record of nine Test series wins out of 15 and maintaining the number one ranking in One Day Internationals isn’t too shabby for a ‘bad’ coach.
The next series in South Africa in the long form of the game will be an examination of whether Australia can take another step towards being a good side. No wonder they call it Test cricket.
Rugby Reg
Guest
great artical, we are definitly off the canvas and standing, we are OK, repeat australia OK. We won't win the ashes for some time, but will give plenty of sides some curry (india) when they come downunder. more pluses than minuses from the lankan tour. Clark showed is is a good , solid, agressive captain. While he may have to temper his will a bit with his trundlers, he has heart. Marsh was very impressive, so was the "Huss". Mitch has been rightfully dropped from T20, and if he does not improve the test side as well. SA tour will be interesting, for some reason they do not play that well at home? one thing is for sure, i will be watching and treasuring every wicket or run, because they are surely rarer now than they were during our heyday
jameswm
Guest
Honestly - I don't think fixing Australian cricket is that hard. 1. Selectors, as you've all said. We need tough, smart hombres, like SWaugh, Taylor, Healy, Border etc. Guys who know what it means to succeed and have had to work hard for it. What did we expect with two beer drinkers (Boon and Merv) and a neverwas (Hilditch)? 2. Coach. Smart and tough. And technically good. Steve Rixon, tick 3. Captain - smart and tough (anyone sense a pattern here?). Ponting was one but not the other. Clarke is possibly the same, but in the reverse order. Katich is the smartest and toughest guy we have. Go figure. Change the selection panel and we're probably still stuck with Clarke, so I hope he hardens up. I wanted Kat as an interim. 4. Picking the right players. Form. Class. Toughness. Team players. Brain power - like not playing the same shot early in your innings that has got you out in 6 of your last 10 test knocks. Consistency. Able to build and withstand pressure. Batting - I do not see Hughes as a long-term answer. Marsh tick. Khawaja 3/4 of a tick. Watson tick. Hussey tick. Clarke 3/4 of a tick, but needs big scores in the first innings more often (or at all). Katich tick - go figure. Ponting has gone from a tick to 3/4 of a tick. If he doesn't start putting big scores together, have a quiet word in his ear. Hughes no - let's see him in tougher conditions against decent quicks, rather than on dustbowls against trundlers. No other obvious ones coming through (except Katich), so he could be safe. Bowling - Copeland tick. Harris tick, while his body allows it. Johnson question mark. Starc and Pattinson, big asterisk (one to watch). Both are big, quick, accurate and move the ball. Siddle 3/4 of a tick. Lyon question mark. Decent, but so is Hauritz. They still haven't worked out what to do with Smith - which is train him as a leg-spinning all-rounder, not a batting one at no.6. He needs constant and skilful bowling tuition, and it's not like we don't have the right person. Wickie - Haddin - I am over how often his recklessness lets the team down. His glovework isn't good enough to save him. Paine is smart, tough and consistent. Such an obvious replacement, and would let the team settle down. Also a genuine long term captaincy option. I think most of this is pretty obvious. There are others to watch like the consistent Tassie all rounders (Butterworth and Faulkner), Maddinson, SOK and others. Bringing them in in the ODIs to see how tough they are and get them used to the environment, is a good idea and has always worked well for us. The saddest thing for me is I reckon I could select and probably coach the team better than Hilditch and Neilsen. Me, an armchair critic.
Lee McDonald
Roar Guru
You are right Lolly, the dire state of some of the other nations also has something to do with where Australia sit in the grand scheme of things. The Aussies aren't that bad but that, at least in part, might be a relative thing.
Lee McDonald
Roar Guru
Thanks The Bush. Put perfectly. Like you just did, I actually numbered my points that should have been the simple Argus review but that was edited out by The Roar editors (which is of course their right to do so). I thought it made a bit more sense with the numbering and it orginally read like this: Along with the series win the Aussies have demonstrated that rather than 40 pages and a few thousand words (at least in the public copy), the Argus Report on Australian Cricket should have been just a few points so as to tweak the running of the Australian team. They are: 1) Get rid of Andrew Hilditch. It doesn’t matter how. Just do it. Leave a horse’s head in his bed. Send anonymous letters to his workplace. Whatever. The end justifies the means. 2) Remove Greg Chappell as a selector. After all, this guy orchestrated the worst moment in Australian cricket, the underarm ball, so his judgement has not always been sound. Also, we hear he has bad breath. 3) Make the captain a selector (My personal assessment of this one is still pending). 4) Have consistency with selection (Derr). 5) Mike Hussey is a superhero. Continue to pick him, forever (come to think of it, now that his sideburns are greying Hussey does look a little like Reed Richards from the Fantastic Four)
Lolly
Guest
It also proves what a small pool the test nations consists of. There just aren't that many quality cricket teams around. The Aussies need to work with their strengths for sure. I hope that Shaun Marsh kicks on from his promising start. He's been a breath of fresh air with his desire to concentrate. (Never, ever, even thought I'd say that about him. It doesn't sound right somehow). And I hope that Lyon and Copeland are not dumped too soon if they don't take bags of wickets as well. Some cohesion would be good.
The Bush
Roar Guru
Funny article, a very good read. It is as you say - all is not lost and things aren't so bad. In fact, the necessary changes are all rather simplde; 1. Three (3) full time professional selectors that have a minimum of Shield/County experience and are not connected to the current playing group; 2. A good coach; 3. Protection and strengthening of Shield Cricket; 4. Consistency in selection; 5. When making changes, choosing based on form and not whatever other random criteria being used before; and 6. Avoiding trying to pick a team to suit a particular mould and instead mould the players at our disposal into the most competative team possible. The days of dominance are over. But as has been clearly shown by winning away against the fourth (4th) best side, we should still be able to compete much more evenly than the home drubbing handed to us by the Poms last summer.