The post-domination era of Australian cricket has reeked of desperation and a lust for quick fixes from the outgoing selection panel. It’s been reminiscent of so called expert judges trying to pick their next Australian Idol.
The search for the next overnight superstar may have found its way into mainstream culture via hack talent shows and reality (not really) TV, but this is a game where results do the talking, not one’s potential to one day get results.
Take for example young tear away Patrick Cummins, already a household name on our shores. Any keen observer will no doubt agree that Cummins has barrels of ability. He bowls with genuine pace and has a strong physique, but his nine first class wickets have not come cheaply, nor has his body proven itself to handle the rigors of test cricket.
He has starred in T20 and deserved his selection in that form, where a maximum four over workload can be better managed and batsmen are taking more risks.
Simply put, Cummins needs at least a full season of Shield cricket under his belt both to gain the physical and mental skills needed to thrive at the highest level. He needs to bowl to the likes of Chris Rogers and Michael Klinger week in week out, and show that he is good enough to trouble and dismiss the finest opening bats in the land before higher honours are deserving.
In contrast, players like James Pattinson, Mitchell Starc and James Faulkner are also young, but have taken considerably more first class wickets with at least two years of bowling under their belts. They could feel aggrieved that they have slid down the pecking order, particularly Pattinson, who was next in line as recently as the Sri Lankan tour.
At the end of the day numbers do the talking, and in years past the likes of Kasprowicz, Bichel and MacGill needed to churn out season after season of wickets in order to deserve their shot. It shouldn’t be any different today.
The same could be said for the batting line up, though this is a slightly different beast as physical stamina and stress on the body is not on par with what the hurlers endure. Still though, consistent results need to be rewarded, not potential. I’m sure the new selection panel members are hoping the likes of Callum Ferguson and Aaron Finch improve what have been lean starts to the their season, for ours is a team desperate for new blood.
Spectators used to quip that it was harder to get into the test team than out of it. This no longer applies. Our state cricketers have the chance to stand up and be counted more than ever, for almost every position in the current side is within reach.
Bradman-esque numbers are not required.Merely proof that a long innings can be crafted with some element of workload for the scoreboard attendants.
Test cricket cannot be the audition stage where players get a “yes from me” or a “no thanks” or even a “touchdown” from the judging panel. This is why we have a strong domestic competition.
Let’s start using it for what it was designed for.
M_Campbell23
Roar Guru
When Cricket Australia stops lusting after the big bucks inventing teams out of nothing in the Big Bash League and goes back to paying attention to the Shield, then it can become a competition with some depth and potential to develop players. At the moment all they seem interested in creating is a bunch of cash hungry yahoos with little respect for their wicket or the game more broadly. Australia's priorities are evident in the results.
Bayman
Guest
Fisher, I agree with you on a couple of points. One, I'm surprised Butterworth hasn't got more recognition (I saw him beat NSW on his own in a Shield game a season or so back) and, two, I've no idea why Brett Lee is even thought of in the shorter game. Surely Australian cricket no longer gets any benefit at all from playing Lee.
Fisher Price
Guest
Yeah, the likes of Cutting, Faulkner and maybe Butterworth (Henriques also seems to be improving) should ideally be blooded in ODIs. But they'll more than likely be held back while the selectors trot out Siddle, Johnson, McKay etc and inexplicably retain Lee - heck even McDonald gets ignored.
Lolly
Guest
I stand corrected. Or sit. I'd rather see Cutting in long format. He's not really impressed in List A so far, but having been injured he hasn't really played that many. He appears to bat like Andre Adams does at Notts, just comes out swinging and is reasonably successful at it. The problem for a lot of our players is that if they get injured, they miss a lot of cricket and there isn't that many first class games going anyway. Some of these guys have been around a long time but their experience is fairly limited if they've had a season off for any reason. Faulkner was going to be on the Aus A tour to Zim/SA but he got glandular fever. I'd really like to see what he can do. I've only been able to watch him a couple of times, but he's got a very nice bowling action, very high arm.
Russ
Guest
The problem with making these sorts of comparisons, or even comparisons with Shield players generally, is that it is too few games to say much of anything. There is a roughly 25% chance that after 5 or 6 innings a player who would average 30 (given an infinite number of innings) will average more than one who would average 50. Even over the course of a full Shield season (13+ or so innings) you can only be 85-90% certain who is the better player. Given the difference between young test prospects and middle-of-the-road Shield players is a lot less than 20 runs per innings, looking at recent averages is, at best, fraught. Which is the problem I have with Adam's original premise. By the time you can obviously tell someone is a genuinely good player they'll be well into their career. They just don't play often enough to be able to select without a degree of intuition. Which is why, if you hunt back through almost every player selected, their record prior to selection is either middling to good, or briefly, unsustainably good. Plus, if you think about it, all players are selected on potential.
Brett McKay
Expert
Adam, thought I better look it up.. Leading Shield run-scorers (from CricInfo): Davis (WA) 451 @ 56.37 - 2 100s, 2 50s Voges (WA) 443 @ 63.28 - 1 100, 3 50s Cooper (SA) 401 @ 100.25 - 1 100, 2 50s Quiney (Vic) 321 @ 45.85 - 1 100, 2 50s Forrest (Qld) 284 @ 71.00 - 1 100, 0 50s
Brett McKay
Expert
Mattay, it wouldn't, no. Dirk Nannes played a T20WC for the Netherlands and was in Australian colours months later. The ICC allows players from Test-eligible countries to play for Associate countries for which they also qualify (eg, John Davison playing for Canada), but once they've played for their Test-eligible nation, they can't then go back. So Cooper can keep playing for the Netherlands right up until he first plays for Australia..
Mattay
Guest
Tom Cooper has actually played in the ODI World Cup for Netherlands. Would this preclude him from gaining a baggy green? Regardless, though his recent scores have been very good, prior to the 200 his previous highest score was in the 60's I believe.
Adam Ludeke
Roar Pro
Ferguson 83 runs at 16 so far this year. Poor return for such a talent.
Adam Ludeke
Roar Pro
Hi Lolly, As Brett mentioned I'm comparing like for like in this case. Cutting is a few years older but he's certainly an improved cricketer with both bat and ball. I think he, along with Faulkner and Mitch Marsh could feature for Australia this season in the one dayers.
Brett McKay
Expert
Lolly, I suggest you read that paragraph again - Adam is comparing those three bowlers to Pat Cummins on the point of age and what they've already done in First Class cricket, not on current form..
Lolly
Guest
"James Pattinson, Mitchell Starc and James Faulkner" - the only one in form is Pattinson and he's hardly up in the leading bowlers. What about Cutting? Do the writers of the articles even bother checking the form book?
chaos
Guest
Voges over 400 as well.
jameswm
Guest
Hard to argue with this, esp where the one time Cummins bowled a lot (Shield final) his body took a while to recover. No shame in that considering his age, but his workload needs to be gradually increased. I'd say playing all the one-dayers and T20s, but with Shield games, resting from one if you have two back to back. And please, please, someone make sure he keeps his outswinger. I'm paranoid after what's happened with Mitch, and even Doug the Rug. someone (eg McGrath) teach him about patience and working batsmen out. Hopefully he'll do it himself one day, but not all bowlers are as smart as a Pigeon or a Warnie.
Brett McKay
Expert
amd I knew making a statement like my last one would quickly be debunked too: (Fairfax press, today) "[Liam] Davis hit 11 fours and batted for 10 minutes short of five hours in scoring his second century of the Shield season. The 27-year-old has made 451 runs at 56.38 in four games." Interesting you mention Ferguson - I think he might actually be going backwards at the moment, and a decent argument would exist for Tom Cooper having overtaken him as the most like Croweater to take the next step...
Adam Ludeke
Roar Pro
You're right, Brett. and it's such a shame, given that now is really the time when a state player can fast track their way into the test team with consistent performances. Warner and Khawaja have done well and deserve to be next in line, but I reckon guys like Ferguson and Finch really need to take it up a notch.
Adam Ludeke
Roar Pro
I agree that Shaun Marsh has been lucky, but at least he had a lot of ODIs under his belt and had a pretty good record in those before getting a baggy green. I put Ferguson in the same category, massive talent, but he has underachieved in first class cricket to date.
Brett McKay
Expert
Some good points here Adam. I made the point yesterday about the state batsman, that again, no-one is really banging down the door. Cowan, Warner, Cooper, Wade, and a few others have made scores of note, but no-one is stringing them together. I've not seen the stats, but I can't imagine there'd be too many Shield bats north of 400 runs for the season at the moment...
Chris
Guest
The problem is that the incumbents (Johnson, Siddle, etc) are not performing. And haven't performed well for quite some time. So its natural for pundits to start looking around for options. I agree that there are a couple of players who may well end up having long, successful Test careers, but they need to prove themselves over at least a season of Shield cricket first. I'm thinking specifically of Dave Warner and Patrick Cummins. It would be a shame to risk their long-term success searching for short term solutions.
Justin
Guest
Agree with this totally. I also think Shaun Marsh has been mighty lucky (though he has batted well) to be in the Test team. His first class record is decidedly average compared to Usman for instance.