When Shane Watson was ruled out of the 2011/12 summer and Phil Hughes’ form had dipped to an unparalleled low, Australia found itself with a dearth of quality opening batsmen.
David Warner had just cemented his place with a brilliant hundred at Hobart, but who would partner him against India?
Ed Cowan was the man entrusted with the crucial role of opening the batting on Boxing Day. Cowan played a typically dogged innings of 68 from 177 balls and was touted as the perfect defensive foil for the attacking Warner.
Since then, 12 months have passed and Cowan has now played 13 Test matches. He scored his breakthrough test match ton against South Africa at the Gabba to open the Australian summer. But the question lingering on everybody’s lips remains: is Ed Cowan good enough?
Cowan is an old-school operator. He takes the shine off the ball and grinds out runs rather than blasting it with a flashing blade.
He made the move south from New South Wales to Tasmania in 2009 to further his quest for Sheffield Shield cricket. It was here he made an immediate impact and scored 957 runs at an impressive 53.16.
Cowan then ascended quickly to the top of the Australian order.
In patches, Cowan’s efforts thus far have been admirable, at other times somewhat lacking. His running between the wickets has been exposed as lazy and his batting remains one-dimensional.
Cowan has struggled to covert starts into the bigger scores Test cricket demands. His average hovers in the low 30s and he is criticised for his relatively slow scoring rate.
Cowan remains the incumbent in a hotly contested position. His style of play could be perfect at the top of the order if he can lift his game.
Shane Watson has declared he wants his opening spot back and Phil Hughes reincarnation may yet end in a return to the top of the order. Usman Khawaja looks likely to come into the side thus meaning only six spots for batsmen are available. Is Cowan currently among the best six in the country?
Australia faces a tough and challenging year of Test cricket. A formidable tour to India and back-to-back Ashes series will sort out the men from the boys.
The side will need to maintain as much continuity as possible and a settled line-up will go a long way towards Australian success.
Beginning late February, Australia travels to India for four Tests.
The spin-bowlers dream could well be Cowan’s nightmare. His technique is flawed at best when facing slow bowling and the fourth day of the 2013 New Year’s test showed just how scratchy Cowan versus spin can be.
Just Cowan’s luck, India has promised rank turners in response to the nippy Australian wickets that assisted their undoing last summer.
The Ashes follows the India series. The tour to England to retain the urn is the holy grail of Australian cricket and the ultimate test.
It is here where Cowan is expected to be in his element taking on the new ball with his solid defence and soft hands.
He digs in by nature and mere survival at the wicket will play a key role in building innings against the quality English attack. But is that enough and is he the most viable option?
Watson who is vying to take Cowan’s place off him has already experienced success in England, averaging in the low 40s when opening the batting. Watson has a powerful technique, a strong record opening, plays through the ‘V’ and looks very comfortable against fast bowling.
It could therefore be argued that he remains the best option at the top of the order.
I’m all for seeing Australian players succeed. I encourage Cowan and hope he does well. But the initial question remains.
Does Cowan possess the skills, the tools and the ability to make it at the top?
I believe Cowan’s days as a Test cricketer are numbered. He has not taken enough opportunities when they’ve been presented. Cowan’s first-class record is a telling factor.
It was modest when he made his Test debut and very rarely do players go from averaging high 30s in the Sheffield Shield, to averaging 45+ for Australia, what I believe is the benchmark for Test-match batsmen.
I don’t believe Cowan will ever be capable of lifting his game to the standard demanded in the Test arena. Watson should return to the top of the order and partner Warner.
If Cowan is to return to the shield and lift his game to the next level, as I do hope he does, then he will be deservingly discussed in the future. For the time being though, we need a serious team to win the Ashes.
Watson, as enigmatic, self-centred and injury-prone as he may be, is a serious player and I wholeheartedly believe he’s the man for the job.
Twitter @nathankiely1992
Deano
Guest
Khawaja is second best player in shield and Ryobi, that's what the fuss is about.
Deano
Guest
Khawaja desrves selection and i don't buy the crap that his background will wor against him, we have moved past that. Cowan should be dropped and Watson shoud open.
Wilson Flatley
Roar Rookie
How can you leave out Hughes for Cowan? Hughes is likely to stay around for just as many balls, and will score 50% more runs. Also you can't have Watson at 3 when he is not a proven century maker; just setting yourself up for middle order collapse.
Paul
Guest
Marsh isn't good enough for test cricket. When he was first picked it was purely based on potential. His average was less than 40 for WA, yet they wanted him to bat at number 3 in the test side. Marsh has only been recently getting runs in ODIs and 20/20 for WA. Hence should only be selected for ODIs and 20/20 for Australia. I guess the selectors at the moment arebetween a rock and a hard place with selections at the moment due to lack of talent comming through the domestic ranks. Whatever they do don't bring back Marcus North, he is more inconsistent than the current stock market in making runs.
Wheats
Guest
The one benifit of having a batsmen like Cowan is in scoring slowly, he a) acts as a foil to the agressors, becoming the rock they can bat around provided he performs and b) is more likely to build partnerships because he hangs around longer than a Watson. I like the order: Cowan Warner Watson Clarke Kwalja and either Hussey or Quiney. Quiney has been the forgotten man after a few failings against lets face it, by far the best bowling attack in the world, a couple of the deliveries he got from Morne Morkel were almost perfect to a left hander. The only issue is since his sacking he seems to have lost his confidence. One thing is for sure the man not to replace him is McDonald, the only thing that bloke was good at was getting sunburnt. Speaking of 'class being permanent' Shaun Marsh is back in the runs... will the selectors give him another shot!? Not many right handers around the country putting up their hand at the moment.
langou
Roar Guru
I like Ed and I think he is doing a good job I would rather have an opener that consistently makes 30-35 than one that makes 100 followed by a duck. He seems like the type that could be very handy on a bowlers pitch with wickets tumbling around him.
matt h
Guest
Yes, but Hayden was averaging close to 60 in the shield for his whole career, which showed that if he could tweak a couple of things he had the talent to suceed. Similar to Phil Hughes in that respect actually. Cowan has never shown that sort of class at comestic level, apart from 1 good season.
matt h
Guest
So they are both no good enough, but do you have an alternative?
Big ideas
Guest
You all forget that our most recent opening batsman (legend) Matty Hayden had a worse record than Ed with the same number of tests. India made Hayden, and Ed has enlisted his help to cement his spot. If he fails in India then so be it, but for now stop trying to second guess these selectors they do know what they are doing.
Waz
Guest
Cowen in't good enough. I agree with Hydos in that is average in domestic cricket wasn't good enough unless he got selected to play for England. His average was 43 or 44 for Tasmania. He should had been higher than that nearing 48 or so. Watson should stick with ODIs, he also isn't good enough for test cricket in being an allrounder. However, ACB have given him way too many chances then most other players with test cricket. Due to the ACB being hellbent in having an "allrounder" in the side from the 2005 Ashes loss with Freddie Flintoff. I would play an extra bowler who can bat at number 7. Plus Watson always breaks down with injuries.
Bayman
Guest
GT, .....but do we really want an opener who makes a quick 35 on the first morning and then gets out an hour before lunch? Red Kev is right about Watson. His sole approach to batting is the front foot lunge which, as often as not, forces him to play round his pads, miss and get lbw or bowled. You criticise Cowan for only scoring "a 50" when he comes off but ignore Watson's conversion rate to centuries (one of which came off a dropped catch on 99). Your question, incidentally, is still valid and Cowan is yet to convince the masses. Watson, however, is not the automatic replacement some think him to be. His best results may have come as an opener but that doesn't mean he is an opener - just that he's crap down the order. I certainly am not interested in glorious thirties from my opener. I want them to bat for time - and the runs will come. It was true a hundred years ago and it's still true today - you cannot make runs watching from the sheds. It's a five day game and while it's thrilling for the crowd to score a quickfire thirty with seven boundaries it is not, contrary to some views, necessarily in the best interests of the team. And that goes double on day one. Cowan may not be the answer - but Watson is definitely not the answer.
Rhys
Guest
True, there have been many dropped with better averages, but there have also been some who have forged lengthy Test careers on the back of similar numbers. Geoff Marsh played 50 Tests for Australia from the mid 80s to early 90s. Average of 33, with a strike rate of 35. Mike Atherton played 115 Tests for England from late 80s to early 00s. Average of 37, with a strike rate of 37.
sittingbison
Guest
you cannot have Watson and an all rounder in the top 6. Watson IS the all rounder, he is not good enough to be classified as a "pure" batsman, this is getting to be a joke culminating with the debacle yesterday
sittingbison
Guest
but its a myth that Cowan takes the shine off the new ball. He gets out almost as early as Warner, he is not Boycott lasting sessions at a time. ANd an average of 30ish is NOT good enough for test cricket, there have been dozens dropped with an average better than his.
sittingbison
Guest
that maxim does not apply after two full years and 12 Tests GT. Every batsman fades, and Watson might be too. He is now 31. He struggles with temperament and concentration, and has a technical deficiency (as Red Kev has pointed out) with plonking his fron pad forward regardless of the balls length and misreading the line - result being abnormally high bowled and LBW.
The Bush
Roar Guru
I doubt Khawaja will get picked, based on the current selection form of the NSP.
TheGenuineTailender
Roar Guru
Quiney, no. Shaun Marsh, no. I'm sick of seeing guys averaging in the 30s at first-class level getting test call ups. If you can't dominate the Shield with the bat, why on earth would you be able to do it in test cricket?
TheGenuineTailender
Roar Guru
But Clarke was a young prodigy, Baily has done the rounds and is yet to produce the sort of first-class record that demands selection. There's a difference.
matt h
Guest
Bailey has shown in the ODI's to date that he could be the sort of player who has that something that makes them test class. Not every top batsman has been picked with a 50+ Shield average behind them (Clarke being the most obvious)
matt h
Guest
At this point I would say that Cowan at the top and Watson in the middle order, or Watson at the top and Bailey in the middle order, would be the safer bet than a 35 year old debutant, even if his last name is Hussey. I think Stephen Finn and Jimmy Anderson would cause him all sorts of trouble with short balls followed up by outswingers to expose older footwork.