Uninterrupted view from the soapbox

By Brett McKay / Expert

It’s been a big week for cricket-related soapbox manufacturers around the country, with every man and his dog wanting to have their say on the ills of the Australian cricket team.

And there have been plenty of topics to lecture on to anyone who’ll listen and especially those who won’t.

A one-day series, which started with so much promise in Melbourne ten days ago, has quickly fallen away in subsequent outings in Adelaide, Brisbane, and Sydney, leaving only a crumbling rubble of a batting order and a genuine fear of what may result on the subcontinent and in the Old Dart.

We shall not be moved
Like the staunchest, most stubborn of trade unionists, once the ball started swinging in Brisbane and again in Sydney, the collective front feet of the Australian batsmen set down camp on the popping crease and would not move for anything.

The result? At least 6/20 in Brisbane last Friday, and I’d argue it claimed another 5/35 in Sydney on Sunday.

After he started the series with a superb debut century, Phil Hughes has been given the Chris Martin yips all over again, with Nuwan Kulasekara twice getting him with balls pitching on leg stump and moving away from him, taking the nick on the way.

If you saw those two replays alongside that horror New Zealand Test series from 2011/12, you’d rightly question what exactly Hughes has changed in his approach.

On Sunday afternoon, David Warner and George Bailey had a proper battle on their hands to see off the twin-swing threats of Kulasekara and Lasith Malinga.

Bailey’s first four deliveries at the crease were unplayable ‘jaffas’ from Malinga, deliveries that Bradman himself might’ve had trouble getting willow on.

The swinging ball ends all footwork, and no footwork means a procession of ugly dismissals.

But why does the moving ball scare Australian batsmen so much? And why, with this generation of Australian cricketers to come though the age and state ranks with specialist batting and bowling coaches all the way, can very few bowlers make the Kookaburra swing, and even fewer batsmen score runs or bat for any length of time against it?

This isn’t just an Argus Report-type of issue to be touched on and summarised; the ability to bowl and face a swinging cricket ball in Australia is fast heading the way of leg spin bowling and the dodo. It’s a genuine concern in the game in this country that simply must be addressed.

Roller-coaster squad sizes
I touched on this late last week in detailing the logistical week of Queensland quick, Ben Cutting, and once again, the selectors have continued to dumbfound with the yo-yo nature of the squad size.

What started as a squad of 13 for the first match in Melbourne became 15 in Adelaide, when Cutting and South Australian seamer Kane Richardson were added. That 15 became 12 for the third match in Brisbane, and with five players dropped to allow for the return of others from the garden and the physio’s table.

Cutting was added to the Brisbane squad up until the coin-toss, whereby he quickly jumped on a plane to head for Perth and claim a Big Bash League title with the Brisbane Heat.

However, while Two and a Half Men repeats filled the gap of what was supposed to be the evening session of that match, Jackson Bird was added to the squad for Sydney.

Still following? 13 became 15, which was lopped back to 12, swelled to 13, became 12 again for a night, and was back to 13 for Sunday’s game.

And guess what? Cutting flew from Perth straight to Hobart to link up with the side for tomorrow’s game at Bellerive. But Bird was left behind in Sydney.

I think that’s still 13, but I ran out of fingers two paragraphs back…

Rotation is in, so make it work
Among the numerous elements of stupidity in all this squad business was the fact that only five genuine batsmen, along with Matthew Wade and two alleged all-rounders, were and are the extent of the batting order for the last three matches.

Even if they wanted to, they couldn’t have dropped/rested/rotated a batsman after the debacle in Brisbane, because to do so would’ve meant replacing him with Glenn Maxwell.

If this ‘informed player management’ is to be taken seriously, surely the squad needs to carry at least one extra batsman. Hell, even if it’s not to be taken seriously, then the extra batsman in the squad at the very least brings some accountability for the poorer dismissals.

Rest and rotate blokes as may or may not be required, but a poorly constructed squad should never be an excuse for not making form-related changes.

10 + all-rounder = 10
How many more sub-par performances from run-of-the-mill state all-rounders will it take for the selectors and the ‘all teams need an all-rounder’ types to finally end this unhealthy obsession? And to think all last week I was suggesting that Moises Henriques brought more to the Australian team than Maxwell.

Maxwell? No. Steve Smith? No. Henriques? No. Nathan Coulter-Nile, John Hastings, James Faulkner? No, no, and no. They’re all the same. They’ll make no difference.

Australia currently has one decent all-rounder, and he is looking to cut one of the strings in his bow. In limited overs cricket, Shane Watson is one of the best players in the world when fully fit, and that’s where the search for an all-rounder should start and stop.

If the all-rounder adds little to the balance and the performance of the team, then just pick six bats and four bowlers, please. The multi skilled Matthew Wade fills the last spot nicely, and if handy runs come from the unheralded likes of Mitchell Starc and Xavier Doherty – as has been the case – then that’s a bonus cherry on top.

Picking an all-rounder for the sake of finding another all-rounder before the next World Cup is simply not working currently, because the all-rounders picked thus far haven’t been up to the task.

None of the three used so far have added to the batting and bowling, in fact they’ve actually shortened both areas.

If Watson is fit enough to bowl again in 12 or 18 months’ time, then he’s the all-rounder. If he’s not, then don’t worry about it.

You might not win a World Cup without an all-rounder, but you definitely won’t win one with an all-rounder that adds nothing to the side.

The Crowd Says:

2013-01-23T13:28:10+00:00

Matt h

Guest


Don't forget Ian Harvey, Simon O'Donnell

2013-01-23T13:16:52+00:00

Matt h

Guest


That is an insult to Stuart McGill

2013-01-23T02:41:07+00:00

astro

Guest


Every starting pitcher is rotated in baseball due to the fact that they pitch non stop for over half the game! If bowlers delivered 100 deliveries in a row, then rotation would be common place, but they are rested throughout games. And for the record, Rivera as a closer would pitch in the majority of games (as he only pitches 1 or 2 innings per game). As for Henry and the ABs, if the ABs were consistently losing or had been thrashed at the hands of the rugby equivalnet of Sri Lanka in the same fashion as Australia, then rotation wouldn't be an issue as he wouldn't have a job!

2013-01-22T10:49:25+00:00

Beardan

Roar Guru


Pat Howard must come under pressure. He is coming up with ridiculous slogan style terms to justify his position. Here is an idea Pat, pick the best 11 players to play for Australia. It sort of has been done for the last 130 years.

2013-01-22T09:30:09+00:00

MadMonk

Guest


Brett, I think that is ODI's, if you don't have an allrounder, your either one bowler light or one batter light. I agree with your hardline position on allrounder with test cricket, your top 4 bowlers must take wickets. In ODI's if your 5th 10 overs are weak, modern batsmen will look to climb all over them.

2013-01-22T06:33:19+00:00

Thevietnamwaugh

Guest


Good article Brett, love the bit about the squad size changing by including different bowlers/all rounders despite our batting woes against quality swing bowling. I'd like to see Warner, Finch, Clarke, the Ussi bloke, Hussey, Bailey, followed by Wade and the bowlers. Pup, Finchy ( surprisingly got wickets in BBL ) and Hussey to cough up for 10 overs, and just maybe we'd have at least a recognized batsmen to bat with the tail resulting in higher totals. Kawaja needs to get some more game time so he's ready to go in tests, and I still think Finch can play the cherry even though he's only getting runs against the white knacker at the moment.

AUTHOR

2013-01-22T06:00:40+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


Don't spend too much time on it, Jason, it's just a curiosity thing. Of course, if you do happen to find an answer, drop me a ine via the Contact section on bmcsport.com.au ;-)

2013-01-22T05:26:33+00:00

mickywoolyams

Guest


Its not just the current selectors that have persisted with allrounders who didnt perform in either discipline. There are only a handful who were/are genuine allrounders in the last 20 years (Steve Waugh, Symonds, Watson). Think of all the others who have been tried (Brendan Julian, Shane Lee, Cameron White, all the guys mentioned in this article and a few more). The fact is that palyers highly capable at both are very rare. Currently there is no-one demanding to be picked as an all rounder (even Watson as he would rather bat only), so just pick 6 batsmen, Wade, the four best bowlers, and hope that Hussey, Clark, Warner and the rest can make up 10 overs.

2013-01-22T05:18:12+00:00

Jason

Guest


OK. I'll look it up if I can find some time.

AUTHOR

2013-01-22T05:05:36+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


Cheers Monk. I do take your point about the fifth bowler, and I agree it's worth looking at Henriques/Faulkner/Cutting, etc over the next 6 games. I'll even throw John Hastings in that mix too, despite mentioning him in the article. That said, my only worry about your "gives you strong bowling and a tail that may well wag" is that I don't believe you should ever be relying on bowlers to make runs. The margin for error is too great. 5 bowlers and Wade at 6 could just as easily turn 5/150 into 8/300 as it could be all out 160. And I suppose, to reiterate your first point, this is why the 5th bowler debate has been going for as long as it has...

AUTHOR

2013-01-22T04:53:45+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


I'll give you Symonds, but I don't think Steve Waugh bowled much in his last ten years. And Gilly mentioned in the initial point, so no.. ;-)

2013-01-22T04:50:20+00:00

Blackie

Guest


With regard to the Hughes dismissal at the SCG the other night it was simply the best ball bowled in the match. It did not swing but pitched on leg and seamed like an off break. Hughes eye is so good that he tried to adjust and nicked it.There was no swing involved. It is unlikely that any other leftie would have even touched it. His dismissal at the Gabba was due to late swing. The dismissals to Martin in the NZ series were simply to angled deliveries where he was caught in two minds. he is leaving those balls better. He has to stick with the plan of hitting the ball back to the leg side when angled at off stump from over the wicket thus presenting the full face of the bat. It is good to see him getting his confidence back because he is a run scorer. The start of his demise was in the 2009 Ashes Tour when he was back stabbed by Watson who talked himself up as an opener. Watson's comments in his book to the effect that Hughes was spooked by Harmison when he batted against him on a dodgy track in a preliminary match at New Road, Worcester were scandalous. Hughes took the bull by the horns and played county cricket at you guessed it, New Road to improve against the moving ball. Whilst Hughes appears to be secure for now Watson has now turned his guns on Cowan.

2013-01-22T04:31:52+00:00

MadMonk

Guest


Brett good article. The fith bowler has been one of the eternal ODI debates going back to Aust using Greg Chappell, Kepler Wessels, AB in the role. With an extra fielder in the circle I think you do need a genuine 5th bowler. A list of Johnson, Cutting, Star, McKay Doherty gives you strong bowling and a tail that may well wag. The real test for the fith bowler is how many they go for in their 10 overs. We are yet to see SL bat 50 overs so I think the jury is still out. If a bowler can go for less than 5 an over and average over 20 he can bat 7. In my view it is worth looking at Henriques and Faulker over the next 6 ODI's to see if they are a prospect.

2013-01-22T04:12:28+00:00

Dan Ced

Guest


NO COWAN NO! Worst Aussie batter since Glen Mcgrath.

2013-01-22T04:00:06+00:00

Jason

Guest


Does Gilly count? How about Symonds? Or Steve Waugh?

AUTHOR

2013-01-22T03:54:33+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


I have to ask the question now, how many of those 45 Test included what we would loosely describe as an allrounder??

2013-01-22T03:46:33+00:00

Brian

Guest


I think the selectors are looking for another Andrew Symonds. I remember that in the year before he stepped up to help Australia win the 2003 World Cup he was terrible. Of course we don't know what they are looking for because we don't even know he is being rotated. To me by the 2015 World Cup Pattinson could make a good all-rounder but is he available, injured, rested who knows.

2013-01-22T03:42:07+00:00

Jason

Guest


The biggest recovery was the match where Pidge and Dizzy got 50s against NZ. We were 5/222, ended up with 585 with tons from Clarke and Gilly as well. Next best was the Monkeygate test.

AUTHOR

2013-01-22T03:23:22+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


Wow, thanks Jason. I wasn't thinking it would be anywhere near that high...

AUTHOR

2013-01-22T03:21:39+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


even less so Long Time Retired First Class Cricketers Who I Never Fully Rated In The First Place....

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar