We are going to learn a lot about where the Australian Test side is at in the next 12 months. Back-to-back tours of India and England are about as tough as it gets.
As we know, we will be missing Ricky Ponting and Mike Hussey, our two most experienced batsmen and two of the ‘elders’ in the dressing room.
Michael Clarke has proven to be not only the premier batsman in the world in 2012 but an attacking and nuanced captain. Regardless, he has the job ahead of him in 2013. He certainly does not have the cattle that the last three captains had at their disposal.
In this and a following article I review how the incumbents and possibles are likely to fre in the next 12 months. I start with the batsmen.
David Warner: It has already been a summer of transformation for Davey Warner. Famous for his brutish six-hitting, he has found a batting rhythm more akin to a Test opener. He will always score near to a run-a-ball but this is something to be celebrated rather than discouraged.
As Mark Taylor pointed out in the Sydney Test, the lofted ‘hoiks’ to cow corner have been replaced with well timed-pushes, and such shots maketh a Test opener. Warner has classic technique through the ‘V’ that will hold him in good stead in 2013.
Ed Cowan: Started the summer so well with his breakthrough century in Adelaide, but in the following five Tests he has failed to cement his spot. Some of Eddie’s old demons refuse to leave his shoulder. He can occupy the crease but too often he gets out in the 30s after having done the tough stuff.
The fact that he is such a counterpoint to Warner has probably played in his favour thus far, but his current Test average of 32.81 will not cut the mustard for long. Part of Shane Watson’s reluctance to bowl again is about his desire to open the batting. This along with the presence of an in-form Phil Hughes at three (a natural opener) will be keeping Cowan up at night. His relatively anchored stance looked awkward against spin in Sydney and no doubt will be tested further in India.
Shane Watson: Watson has announced that he no longer wants to bowl, meaning he has to force his way back into the Test team as a specialist top-order batsman. Despite a purple patch at the top of the order which saw Watto take out the AB medal in 2010 and 2011, he is not a natural Test opener. He is heavy footed and likes to plant his front foot down the wicket. He always looks vulnerable to a good LBW shout.
Take away his bowling and he is a batsman who has averaged 37.02 in 38 Tests. He is also famously injury prone. It is hard to believe that the Watto of two years ago would be struggling to reclaim his place in the Test team in 2013 but that is the case.
Phil Hughes: Hughes did what plenty of other Australian Test batsman have been asked to do. He went back to state cricket and improved himself after being dropped for perceived weaknesses in his technique. Looked more still and composed at the crease, but there was no one in the Sri Lankan bowling line up with the pace or bounce to expose his weaknesses. The fast swing bowling in England will be the genuine Test as to whether this prodigious cutter and square driver is the real deal.
Michael Clarke: 1595 runs at an average of 106.33, no more need be said. Perhaps more importantly shaping up as one of our best attacking captains of the modern era. Was within touching distance of the number one world Test ranking. Will need even more nous in the absence of Ponting and Hussey.
Usman Khawaja: It is a mystery to me why Rob Quiney played the first two Tests against South Africa at number three instead of Khawaja. He was dropped due to scratchy rather than disastrous form, and perceived lack of fielding ability. He has also failed to post really big scores at state level, which former Test aspirants such as Pup Clarke have done. For me, Khawaja should be picked for the first Test in India and every subsequent Test for the next ten years. A player of immense substance. His textbook technique will yield runs if the selectors show patience.
Mathew Wade: Despite a crucial hundred in the second innings in Sydney, Wade remains under considerable pressure. He dropped one in Sydney which hit him in the bread basket. He has a couple of howlers per Test match. Gilchrist changed what we look for in a keeper, but catching is surely the baseline.
Mickey Arthur’s comment about Brad Haddin’s recall to the one-day team being a potential springboard for a full international recall would be increasing Wade’s anxiety levels. In his favour, Wade gives 100 per cent every time he dons the baggy green and you get the sense this garners the respect of his captain and his team mates.
Brad Haddin: Usually when someone is dropped at 35 it is the end of their international career, but there is some life in the old dog yet. This is due to two factors: Wade’s form with the gloves and the retirement of Huss and Punter. When Katich and then Haddin were moved on, the selectors cited their reluctance to carry four guys over 35 into the Ashes. Now we have none, and Haddin’s experience would be a big plus.
Dadiggle
Guest
I really feel for Australians. As a South African I and most of my countryman exactly know how you feel at the current moment and the frustration that the light of the end of tunnel seems to get further and further. We went through it in the 90's early 2000's. But this feeling in sense of pride we currently experiencing Australians experienced in the golden era 90's//2000. But what has changed. Asked most South African fans that and they would not be able to really tell you. I believe its our pitches and being less batsman friendly have helped a lot. Batsman have to work for runs and the cream rise to the top. In ten years we have created good batting depth for ourselves just like Australia did back in their golden era. But to see if that is a factor one got to ask how was the pitches back in those days compared to now?
Jake
Guest
No Siddle, no Pattinson in your team along with shifting Warner has really highlighted your lack of knowledge in terms of team selections, Stick to rapping, Slim.
matt h
Guest
.. and Michelle Clark
matt h
Guest
I agree with eminem (scarey but true) re Maxwell not being a good option as second spinner in India. He is average at this point and as an off spinner provides no variety compared to Lyon. But then the question is who would be a viable second spinner? I've got nothing I'm afraid.
matt h
Guest
I would have Burns or Bailey bracketed for 6. Burns is probably not ready but I think Bailey could be the steady hand we need
matt h
Guest
This argument has been going on since the "dawn of time". I don;t mean just the two of you, but in general :-). Yes you need 20 wickets to win a match, but in my experience the 4th fast bowler tends to be under used anyway. And given our brittle batting line up (remember no Hussey, no Ponting, Little experience in England. Clarke is our only experienced batsmen. Cowan...Hughes...Khawaja, all rookies) I believe the area needing shoring up is our batting, not our bowling. If you look at all rounders in world cricket they fall into two categories: 1. Gee I wish we had them - Kallis, Al Hasan or 2. why would you play them, they can;t bat or bowl well enough to make a difference - James Franklin. I believe all potential allrounders in Australia, barring a fit Watson (which is not an option) would be in category 2.
The Dish
Guest
I'm glad someone brough up how poor Haddin's keeping up to the stumps was in the first one-dayer. It has been infuriating hearing about his 'good' performance with the gloves. It seems as though everyone was blinded by the catch he took. I also agree about the reactions (or lack of) from the commentary team when he made the errors. There was one instance where Haddin dropped a catch up to the stumps and the only thing the commentators said about it was that the batsman nearly edged the ball onto the wickets. The only good that has come out of Haddin's return to the team has been his hamstring injury, which will hopefully keep him out of the india tour.
Baggy_Green
Guest
Guys ... i have a strong suspicion that George Bailey is gonna be in that test lineup for India ...to be fair to the guy he has a good FC record, has shown a matured head in international arena and a good enough player of spin...also he shows good "leadership" skills which the NSP talk about so much...
Bearfax
Guest
Great retort Brumby Rob. You're obviously one with a good sense of humour
Rob from Brumby Country
Guest
It was infuriating, to say the least!
Bearfax
Guest
Yes Brumby Rob. I can see that was necessary because everyone was mispronouncing the name in print. Must have been irritating for you.
Bearfax
Guest
You're quite right Brumby Rob. Hauiritz didnt bowl at 42.5 average in tests. I inadvertently switched the figures. He bowled at 42.5 at first class level and 35 at test level. My apologies to Nathan and to you Rob for the unintended deception. However I dont think the argument that I was making loses any of its impact with those figures, do you?
Rob from Brumby Country
Guest
While we're on the subject, let's do pronunciation too... The H in Henriques name is silent! You should be pronouncing it "Enriques"! "Enriques" like "Enrique Iglesias". But with an s at the end. And the 's' should sound more like a 'z'. Practise with me. MOSES EN-REEK-EZ! MOSES EN-REEK-EZ!
Rob from Brumby Country
Guest
Nathan Hauritz most certainly did not average over 40 in Test cricket!! Check your stats again!
Rob from Brumby Country
Guest
em, why bother with an all-rounder if he's just going to get ducks and none-fors? If he's not one of the best batsmen or bowlers in the country, then leave him in Shield cricket...
Rob from Brumby Country
Guest
em, if you're at the stage where the best four bowlers in the country can't get a wicket, a part time med/offie is probably not going to be able to do the job either. The all-rounder can have a place in the team, but he isn't selected by dint of sheer versatility; he must always, ALWAYS be able to answer 'yes' to at least one of the following questions: 1) Are you among the best five bowlers in the country? 2) Are you among the best six batsmen in the country? If he can't say 'yes' to either, then don't bother selecting him. And with all due respect to Henriques, he is neither a top-six bat nor a top-five bowler. Next!
DCO
Guest
Solid Bearfax. See my top order further on. Similar thinking, and agree that Joe Burns is worth a look.
DCO
Guest
What evidence do you have that Pattinson is not the real deal and Cummins is. Firstly, their first class records suggest differently and secondly, Pattinson has done it more than once at test level...
DCO
Guest
Eminen, respect for putting a team forward for criticism and comments. With that said you can't be serious about having six current NSW players and three former NSW players? I'll give you Jackson Bird, he has been brilliant, but his FC performances demanded selection. If Watson bowls you don't need Henriques. Even if Watson doesn't bowl you don't need Henriques, he isn't test quality and his FC record needs to improve before he is considered. I'm surprise you didn't put Steve Smith in there as well. And Warner at six - he has been very good at the top so why move him down to six. Was that your way of fitting in another NSW player? Cummins - Cummins firstly has to tell us what grass looks like again. Then he needs to actually play some cricket, improve his first class record, and prove that it wasn't a one hit wonder and also that he still has everything after all the injuries and operations. How you can't have Siddle or Pattinson given what they have proven is a little astounding. It's a shame James Faulkner is deemed to slow for test cricket (I wonder if the Australian selectors see the same in Vernon Philander). He is left-armer that is more restrictive in terms of economy of bowling and his first class performances over the last three years demand selection like Jackson Bird. Overall, James Faulkner is only 22, has played 30 FC matches for 107 wickets at 22.82. That's nothing short of brilliant. Personally I would pick him, but Starc and MJ have done enough this summer to continue being picked.
DCO
Guest
Good Topic Joe. I'm going to look specifically towards what matters most, the Ashes. Yes, things will happen in India, but based on the current: Opener candidates: Warner, Cowan (incumbents), Watson, Hughes. I think Warner's record as an opener at both test and FC level are very good. IMO he has a good technique and I have no problems with the way he bats. He can take games away from the opposition. Hughes has been good since his return. The big trial will be the Ashes and the moving ball at pace. Cowan's record is below par, but those that say he does a good job at the taking the shine off the ball have a valid point. However, Shane Watson's record as an opener at test level suggests he is better at that. I think Watson's bowling at his peak is underrated, I think it is effective as John Hasting's in honesty. Shame about his body. Three and Four candidates: Hughes, Clarke (incumbents), Khawaja, Watson, D Hussey: Hughes and Watson see above. Clarke no commentary needed. Hussey for the experience alone. Khawaja has a good FC record, did not deliver or fail during his short test opportunity, and has mad runs for QLD this year. He even looks more assured in the BBL with what seems like a wider arrange of strokes, which suggests he should be next in line. Joe Burns, no write ups and not in the national spotlight being outside of Sydney media's attention but his FC is very solid; 23 matches with 4 centuries at 42.28. Not to dissimilar to Khawaja's based on ratio of matches played. He also scored vital runs at the business end of last year's shield season, so can make runs in big games (at FC level anyway) Five and Six candidates: Hussey, Wade (incumbents), any of the listed candidates for three and four (except Hughes) plus Maxwell and Ronald McDonald. Hussey has retired and I think Wade will go back to seven, as hopefully the selectors will have grown some Beckhams, minus the golden bit, by then. Maxwell, simply because he has been earmarked by the NSP as player of enormous potential. McDonald, more because of his value as a team bowler, if can make an early comeback from the hamstring and play some first class cricket. His FC batting record over the last two years (when he has played) has been excellent with a fantastic strike rate. I think selectors like his experience, and they remember his importance in the series win in South Africa a couple of years back. He compliments Johnson and/or Starc (both of whom the selectors like). As with most left-armers they are attacking wicket takers, and their style tends to give up runs. England will find it hard to see off Johnson if McDonald is at the other end bowling wicket to wicket given up less than two an over. Having to play shots of Johnson can be dangerous. Plus if McDonald can bowl 15+ overs in the middle of the innings he will relieve some stress on the injury prone bowlers. Note: Incumbents based on last test. Personally if I was a selector, which I'm clearly not but this is what the Roar is all about right? Assuming Watson isn't bowling. If he changes his mind he would be the all-rounder at six. I think a seam bowling all-rounder will be crucial for the Ashes. 1. Warner 2. Hughes 3. Khawaja 4. D. Hussey or Joe Burns (If Hussey makes runs to finish off the season take his experience, if not go with the talented Burns) 5. Clarke (why change a good thing at 5) 6. McDonald (if he returns early. If not then Joe Burns, with Hussey's experience at four. Other than Watson and McDonald there are no all-rounders who are seamers that are good enough, so why pick one for the same of ticking a box).