Chris Rogers must play in the Ashes series

Over the last two to three years a typical Australian Test innings has generally followed an all too familiar path.

We bat, lose 2-4 wickets before reaching 100 and hope that Michael Clarke and the recently retired Michael Hussey can put together a big partnership and get us to a competitive total.

On a surprising number of occasions they were able to do so, and our top order were able to escape any real criticism.

As long as we had two world class batsmen in good form, and got occasional contributions from Matthew Wade and David Warner, we still looked like a decent side.

Sure we had some weaknesses, but we were covering them up fairly well, with an obvious exception being the last Ashes series.

Tough calls were put off and we felt like we could give underperforming players extended runs in the side to try and find their feet as the team was still doing OK.

Suddenly the unexpected happened.

Out of the blue Michael Hussey announced his retirement and left a Grand Canyon sized hole in our batting line-up.

Suddenly our team was not being carried by two great batsmen, but by one.

When Clarke fails we now fail.

It’s not that the rest of the batting line-up have become worse, they’ve simply been exposed more because the safety net has been greatly reduced.

Clearly our top order isn’t good enough.

David Warner averages a respectable 42 but Ed Cowan and Phil Hughes are averaging 32 and 33 respectively. I’m aware that the days of every player averaging over 50 in Test cricket are long gone, but those two figures are embarrassing.

Ed Cowan in particular has remarkably been given 15 straight Test matches yet his average is somehow managing to head south.

I know he looks like a great type of player to open in Test matches. He looks solid, patient and controlled at the crease, until he gets out for less than 30. Again.

He’d be perfect if it wasn’t for that one tiny weakness of his – scoring runs.

But what can we do? The Sheffield Shield is dominated by fast bowlers and no batsmen are making runs, especially those at the top of the order, right?

Not quite true.

Let’s play a game of “Who am I?”

Currently battling away in front of average crowds of about four people is an opening batsman who is averaging almost 55 in the current Shield season.

What’s more, in a career spanning well over 200 first-class matches he has managed to maintain an average of a touch over 50. On the surface he would seem like the perfect player to try and fix our top order woes.

Except that he’s 35 years old.

For those of you who still haven’t worked out who I’m talking about (shame on you) it’s Victoria’s Chris Rogers.

Those of you who comment regularly in the cricket section on this site may have seen me pushing his case quite a bit over the last few months.

As our top order has staggered and stumbled through the summer, before completely toppling over in India, Rogers has been the only man who has really put his hand up to be a genuine candidate to try and fix the problem.

Well, Shane Watson has put his hand up with his whole “pick me, pick me, I like opening” routine, but Rogers has been doing it the right way – by scoring runs.

Despite this, one argument against Chris Rogers has been made on a consistent basis: “He’s too old. We should be looking to the future.”

Personally I’d rather look to the Ashes.

Despite the fact that we have not one, but two Ashes series in the next nine months, apparently performance doesn’t count if you’re over a certain age.

Apparently it’s more important to build a team that might be alright in 3+ years time instead of picking one with the best chance of winning right now.

That kind of thinking is why the Melbourne Demons are such an AFL powerhouse.

While we should always have an eye on the future I feel that the upcoming nine months are simply too important to throw away.

The youth policy carried some validity when we had a team including Ponting, Hussey and Haddin, and we had upcoming series against New Zealand and the West Indies in which to blood these young players.

But that ship has long since sailed.

The old warriors have all departed, all for different reasons, and we’ve essentially wasted those series.

It’s now time to pick players purely on performance, and when it comes to top order batsmen in this country, they don’t come much better than Rogers.

If he was five or so years younger he would almost certainly be in the team right now.

Even if we decide to axe him after the Sydney Test match and rebuild after that, it will all be worth it if he can help to fix, our top order fragility during this upcoming period, or at least plug a hole there.

Sure, every player eventually reaches an age where they are no longer cut out for top level.

Ricky Ponting probably reached it around 33 or 34, while Mike Hussey still hadn’t reached it when he retired at 37. Rogers’ recent performances would indicate that he is not finished yet.

Of course there is no guarantee that he will succeed.

Many players have played exceptionally well at domestic level but failed to carry that form into the international arena.

We only have to look at this summer, specifically at Ricky Ponting and Aaron Finch to see examples of this.

However when one of our current opening batsmen averages 32 after 15 Tests, we don’t exactly have much to lose.

There’s a phrase used a lot by sport coaches when promoting a very young player into the senior side, “if he’s good enough, he’s old enough.”

In Rogers’ case it should be “if he’s good enough, he’s young enough” and I doubt that anyone can honestly say that he’s not good enough.