Five years since the retirement of its greatest exponent, Australian captains have forgotten how to use spin bowling, and at times seem to forget it exists at all.
Australia have been through an extraordinary number of spinners since Warne’s retirement. Off the top of my head I can think of the following (not in order): Cameron White, Beau Casson, Nathan Hauritz, Michael Beer, Jason Krejza, Stuart MacGill, Xavier Doherty, Bryce McGain. (If you know of any I’ve missed by all means leave a comment below.)
But this fact shows that Australia’s selectors can’t quite get their act together when it comes to spin bowlers. None of them, Hauritz possibly excepted, has been given a fair amount of time to grow into the role. Instead, the search for a spinner has resembled speed dating, with the selectors moving on to the next in the queue (which itself appears arbitrarily assembled), when a bowler has failed to impress instantly.
It causes one to wonder what Shane Warne would have become had this frantic absence of logic been applied to his early career. His 1/150 against India may have been the beginning and the end. He may never have survived to take 3/0 to clean up Sri Lanka, or 7/52 against the West Indies and finally establish himself.
Spinners need to be given time, both in an individual match, and in a series of games. They need to develop confidence, build a place in the team and in the captain’s trust. None of this is being observed at present.
All the best spinners are attacking bowlers. Their different style and ability to perform so many variations make them natural wicket takers. Australia’s spin crisis began when they regressed to using the likes of Hauritz as merely a device to give the fast bowlers a rest or speed up the over rate.
Beau Casson is perhaps the most concerning case of spinner abuse in Australia’s recent history. A left arm chinaman bowler with plenty of enthusiasm, he was pulled out of the ether to bowl for Australia in the last test of the series in the West Indies in 2008.
He recovered from a first innings pasting to take three wickets in the second innings, showing plenty of character to go with his ability. And he was never seen again. By the 2008/2009 Australian summer, he was humiliated by being forced to withdraw from the bowling attack in a Shield game after completely losing control and delivering a series of beamers.
He’s played only a small handful of Shield games in the last couple of years, and is now on the periphery of the New South Wales squad let alone that of Australia. Indeed it could be argued that playing test cricket was the worst thing ever to happen to his career.
Trouble is, nobody seems to have learnt anything. Watching the use of Nathan Lyon in Cape Town showed some worrying, familiar trends. As Australia’s pace bowlers struggled to have any thrust whatsoever on the third day, and the South African target grew nearer, Lyon was finally thrown the ball half an hour before lunch.
In the three overs he was permitted, he bowled with nice shape and flight, encouraging Hashim Amla to attack and beating him in flight more than once. But, having not got a wicket in his three overs, he was replaced by Ryan Harris.
Herein lies the trouble. Australia’s captains do not trust spin bowlers. They do not give them the ball at key moments. When they’re hit for a boundary, they almost instantly push the field back. If they don’t succeed almost instantly, they’re off. Spin bowlers are a risk, but they are a risk worth taking because of the variety they offer. At the moment, Australia seems to define ‘variety’ as having a left arm fast bowler in the side.
Nathan Lyon has clearly got plenty of ability, but needs to be given time to settle and bowl some long spells. Spinners need the patience and trust of their captain, but if Lyon doesn’t get it, he’ll soon be thrown onto the list of Test discards.
Russ
Guest
Ian, I am pretty sure CA can afford another $4-10m. They pull in roughly the same as the ECB and county teams don't cover more than 50% of their costs, with much higher ground payments. The other option is to look at what South Africa have done, and create a 10-12 team amateur f/c competition that is better than grade cricket. But it would be good if our f/c players were getting more playing opportunities too.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
A first class team should cost about $2m to run, without travel costs - thats assuming 15 players, 2 coaches and 3 groundsmen, all costing about $100k each. Given that first class teams draw roughly zero spectators, thats money that has to come straight out of the ACB's bucket.
Schuberto
Guest
I agree with Russ. I have said that we need more first class sides, especially given the fact that many older (and very good players like Bichel and Kasper) played state cricket well into their 30s and keep good players playing 2nd 11. I think 10 sides would be good. You could base a second side in Victoria and base other sides in Canberra, Cairns, Darwin, Newcastle. Australia has had only 6 sides for decades, that's why Bryce McGain played limited first class cricket in his prime. Our next world class spinner is probably stuck in a state 2nd 11 or grade cricket -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
Andyc
Roar Rookie
Cameron Boyce is 'the one' and how he is managed could determine whether Australia again has a test attack reguarly capable of getting 20 wickets. Glad that Trevor Hohns is involved in Queensland cricket and no doubt he will have an impact on Boyce's development, though it was disappointing that recently Boyce was dropped for a game at the WACA. Yes the WACA is a spinners graveyard but Boyce needs all the first class bowling he can get and given conditions in Qld often favour seamers there have been times in the past 18 months that he has hardly be used as opposing teams have struggled to make 200 at the Gabba.
Brett McKay
Expert
that is true, there may well be EU restrictions in place for the County 1st XIs, but there certainly wouldn't be anything stopping these guys playing within these counties. Steve Smith, for eg, played a handful of games for the Hampshire 2nds a few seasons back, on the back of some decent League performances; that's more what I was meaning..
Russ
Guest
Brett, actually there is, now. Without an EU passport a player must have represented his nation in a certain number of games to get a work permit. Hence McDonald has been forced to leave Leicestershire for next season, and it affects several other players as well. Playing county is great, but I don't think we can rely on it. I understand the "fabric-of-the-game" perspective, but as long as it was restricted to between innings (no designated-hitters) I think we'd get used to it very quickly. As a good example, Tasmania could swap Bird (young quick on debut) for Krejza in their current game, if they thought it was worthwhile. That's good for batsmen too, having to play spin from both ends.
Brett McKay
Expert
Russ, just leaving the changing-the-fabric-of-the-game for the moment, there would be nothing stopping fringe state spinners playing a county season or two. Maybe that's something CA could actively encourage. I do take your point though, the limited opportunities certainly increase the presure on young spinners to be a success immediately..
Russ
Guest
Well, I've said this before, but one of the biggest problem for spinners in Australia is that there just aren't enough opportunities. One spinner per side means 6 spinners in Australia, NSW have 5 of Australia's post-Warne test spinners alone, so how can any one of those develop against decent batting? Compare that to Swann, who could coast for several years while learning his art in first class cricket because there are 18 counties. In Australia he'd have returned to grade cricket and left the game. As well as more sides (8 for preference) I think CA should genuinely think about allowing 2-3 substitutes in Shield games, between the 2nd and 3rd innings. It would give two benefits: one, it means a reduced work-load young for quicks who could be subbed at half-way, and two, it means a spinner (or two) can be brought in to attack in the second innings without the burden of fulfilling a defensive role on unforgiving tracks (though teams might certainly play a defensive spinner in the first innings).
Bayman
Guest
Perhaps the problem is that these days nobody has any patience any more. Kids can't possibly wait a couple of years before being given their own car, tv, iphone, ipod, stereo, pc, hair gel etc. They must have it all now. No wonder the call them "i"phones and "i"pods! Batsman can't settle in any more, they've got to be "asserting" themselves and making a blazing 20 before retiring to the sheds. Bowlers can't work on a batsman any more. The quicks need to blast everybody out (Brett Lee at 150 kph and gun-barrell straight). Captains seem to think fast bowlers must be a better option for no other reason than the ball gets down the other end that much quicker. A fast game is a good game. Modern cricket may well be seen as more "entertaining" but that's partly because the standards have dropped - and that's partly because of the lack of patience. Captains today understand winning and losing because there's usually some financial incentive. Unfortunately, many of them do not really understand the game or the skills required. Ponting, for example, was forever chasing the ball with his field. One boundary and the gap was plugged. No matter it was a false shot and unlikely to be repeated in the near future. Bowlers were forever defending their position when they should have been attacking. And could have been if the field was better placed. Clarke, at least, supports his bowlers better than Ponting ever did. Spinners need time and patience. And support. If the spinner just cannot bowl then change the spinner (although we may be entitled to ask how he got chosen in the first place). If he can bowl but is not being used very well then change the captain. Of the cricket team of spinners chosen since Warne we may never know how many could not bowl and how many were cruelled by their skipper. For the moment, let's just stick with Lyon and see what develops. That, and let's just assume we will not see the likes of Warne again in our lifetime. It will make the transistion that much easier.
Adam Ludeke
Roar Pro
I hope Steve Smith develops his bowling, at times he looks good but it's mostly rubbish. If he could get some consistency he'd be useful at 7 or 8 in the test team coupled with his batting.
Brett McKay
Expert
MC, the concerning thing for me is that the structures in place in the pathways to Shield and Test cricket are neither helpful for young spinners or their captains. The age championships now include as many 20 and 50 over games as they do two day games. And even then, while two days is plenty of time for batsmen to build innings, it doesn't really give spinners much of a chance for extended spells. Once they get into the Futures League, which is supposed to encourage results and the use of spinners, the second innings is essentially a 35 over game with 9 blokes on the fence. Spinners might be taking wickets, but catches at long-on and deep mid-wicket aren't really what they need. No wonder there's no standouts in the Shield, or why Nathan Lyon is No.11 since SKW. (btw, you left Brad Hogg off your list) And captains are way too reactive, from junior and grade cricket up. As soon as young spinner concedes a boundary - never mind that he might have actually beaten the batsman in flight and the boundary came through a thick edge over point or third man - Skip drops long-on and deep mid-wicket straight back. Any spinner that doesn't produce Warne-like economy in his first 18 balls doesn't get a fourth over. And this is even before we start getting into the quality of the pitches played on these days...