The next generation need to play county cricket

Following the retirement of Ricky Ponting, a recent article has highlighted a rather vast talent gap between a crop of batsmen outside the Test team in the year 2000 compared to a similiar crop in 2012.

First Class Averages (courtesy of Fox Sports)

(Outside the Test team in 2000)

Name Age Runs Av
– Michael Bevan 30 19,147 57.31
– Matthew Elliott 29 17,521 47.00
– Michael Di Venuto 27 24,518 46.43
– Brad Hodge 25 18,009 54.84
– Michael Hussey 25 21,583 52.15
– Simon Katich 25 19,667 52.86
– Stuart Law 32 27,080 50.52
– Darren Lehmann 30 25,628 57.59
– Martin Love 26 16,807 49.57
– Damien Martyn 28 14,630 49.25

*Ages as of 2000, runs and first-class averages at career end

(Outside the Test team in 2012)
– George Bailey 30 5586 39.90
– Mark Cosgrove 28 7975 43.34
– Alex Doolan 26 2311 39.16
– Phillip Hughes 23 6783 45.52
– Peter Forrest 26 2467 32.46
– Usman Khawaja 25 4045 43.03
– Shaun Marsh 29 4345 35.61
– Rob Quiney 30 3101 36.48
– Steve Smith 23 2391 41.22
– Cameron White 29 7392 40.17

*Excludes batsman aged 31 or over (Dave Hussey, Michael Klinger, Andrew McDonald, Chris Rogers)

In short, out of ten players who were outside the team in the year 2000, the lowest average at the end of their career was 46.43 (Michael DiVenuto).

Out of the current ‘next best 10’ who are outside the team team, the highest average is 45.52 (Phillip Hughes).

Now, using these stats as a reference is not entirely ideal (the first set of players used their average at retirement, not their average in 2000), but it still draws an accurate enough conclusion: The current generation of Test-fringe batsman are not good enough.

The 3rd XI batting line up proposed by Foxsports features Jamie Cox, Michael DiVenuto, Greg Blewett, Stuart Law, Martin Love and Jimmy Maher.

The late 1990’s and early 2000’s was a time when Michael Bevan could not get a Test, and Michael Hussey was being forced to bide his time in first class cricket. Stuart Law got just one Test, didn’t get out and doesn’t have a Test average!

You could hardly suggest that the current crop of cricketers are truly worthy of being elevated to Test level.

The good people at Fox Sports have identified the statistical concerns, but did not seek to address why. I don’t pretend to suggest that I have the definitive answer, but I believe on the current evidence, the suggestion I am about to promote can be seen as a valid option.

The difference between the old generation and the new generation of batsman is the distinct lack of county cricket being played by the new generation.

Of the lists provided by Fox Sports, each batsman in the ‘2000’s’ list played county cricket for years, improving their game for the chance of a Test cap. The new generation now spend their off season travelling the world in T20 games.

Only three have played more than a season’s worth of county cricket (Hughes, White, Cosgrove).

While many have attributed the rise of T20 leading to more inventive and innovative cricket at the first class level, there have been few if any who would dare suggest it has led to a rise of overall standard of batting in the first class arena.

Quite simply, the best Test batsmen are those who work hard on their game at the first class level, and not the freelance mercenary globetrotting T20 cricketers.

Emerging batsman who wish to succeed at the highest level will need to sacrifice the immediate riches that T20 provides and choose instead to work on their long game.

Phillip Hughes is an example of someone who needed to improve his first class form, and went to England to do so.

It’s not just simply going to England that helps to improve his game. It’s facing different opposition, on different pitches, against swinging balls. It’s not charging down a pitch, launching a ball over a shortened boundary and then throwing the wicket away the next ball.

Shaun Marsh is an example of someone who simply chases the money. Marsh has been playing first class cricket for a decade and yet only has played 76 first class games.

In other words, he has played the vast vast majority of his first class career just for Western Australia on Australian pitches. It’s hardly a way to develop a comprehensive batting game on a variety of pitches.

Instead, he has gone down the T20 path, and will likely never play for Australia again.

Steve Smith was once seen as the answer for the lower order batting spot and a possible spin option. Yet his statistics (not to mention his horrific technique) hardly suggest he is not only ready to return to the Australian team, but even play Test cricket at all?

He is another person who chases the riches of T20.

There are riches to be made in T20, sure. However, no one says you need to sacrifice your best development years by chasing them immediately.

Surely you can completely develop your batting, launch a solid Test career and then go off and play T20 cricket. Most Test cricketers are well sought after, and extremely well paid when they play T20.

The stats above, while not as definitive as they can be, are telling. The current generation are not up to Australian Test grade.

T20 wasn’t played back then, it is now. It’s not the sole answer, but it is an answer to a big problem. County cricket provides a solution to the problem.