This has been a watershed week for Australian cricket, and hopefully it is more of a beginning than an end to the restructuring that must take place.
The appointment of Darren Lehmann has been roundly applauded. The zeitgeist has been yearning for someone to take charge who believes in nets and matches, and lots of them, as the best way to improve skills and further our players’ understanding of the game.
Lehmann’s ascension to the ranks as head coach of the Australian cricket team is a popular decision. He should now follow it with an unpopular one.
Steve Smith must be in the first Test side at Trent Bridge, and he must be batting in the top six.
Many of our Roar readers will be tempted to stop reading there and head straight for the comments to hurl all sorts of abuse at me. But please, allow me to outline my reasons.
With the addition of Steve Smith to the Ashes squad, ostensibly as cover for Michael Clarke, there are now eight specialist batsmen from which to pick our top six.
David Warner is one of these eight, and he simply can’t be considered after his off-field exploits of recent times, let alone the fact he won’t have played a first class match for over three months. If Lehmann is the sort of strong leader Cricket Australia needs, this won’t even be a discussion point.
Michael Clarke is obviously a given, and we can take it as read he’ll be batting at number four if Lehmann’s tweet from March third is to be enforced (grammar notwithstanding): “Clarke needs to bat four And in a hurry, how many times do some of us have to say the best player in the world has to bat in top 4!”
If Clarke walks out at five in the first Test, then we’ll know for sure where the balance of power in the dressing room truly lies.
Chris Rogers must be opening the batting, and surely would have done so regardless of Warner’s antics. He can’t just be in the squad as back-up, as his vast wealth of experience must be utilised at the top of the order.
This leaves Shane Watson, Ed Cowan, Phil Hughes, Usman Khawaja and Steve Smith fighting over the second opener’s position, first drop, and five and six.
It’s interesting to note Watson will be opening in the tour match against Somerset, while Khawaja has been named at three and Hughes at four. Cowan has been batting solidly at first class level in England without getting a really big score, while the others need time facing the red ball.
I’ve got a feeling Ed will sleep easier if Watson falls cheaply, as big runs as an opener for the latter would make everyone understand exactly how valuable he could be in his favourite position.
I change my mind nightly over who should be in, who should be out, and who should be batting where between those two and Hughes. All three continue to battle their inner demons at the crease, unable to truly conquer them.
I’m firm in the belief Khawaja has the technique and temperament required to succeed at Test level, and needs to be employed for an extended period of time, whether at three or five. His well-publicised relationship with the new coach can only enhance his chances, but tour runs are still required.
When it comes to six, it must be Steven Smith, and it’s hard to believe anyone who watched his sterling performances in India could argue.
We all know about the old Steve Smith, the 21 year old selected before his time after limited first class exposure. He couldn’t have looked more inadequate or out of place as a Test cricketer, either with bat or ball in hand. In fact, he was doing a Glenn Maxwell before being Glenn Maxwell was (un)popular.
We all know what a debacle the Australian tour of India was. A complete farce. Shambolic in every way. With the matches covered exclusively on Foxtel, many Australians wouldn’t have seen a ball bowled in anger, but were furious at the scorecards and match reports coming back our way.
It would be easy to write off the entire tour and everything from it as a disaster. But from the ashes, Steve Smith was the phoenix that rose.
Picked for the third Test after ‘Homework-gate’ decimated the side, he embraced the chance with a resilient 92 in the first innings, second-top score behind Mitch Starc’s magnificent 99. It would stand as the third highest innings by an Australian over the series.
A highly regarded player of spin, his use of his feet to the Indian spinners on the crumbling pitches was still impressive, alongside good decision making and shot selection. It was also noted how at ease he was at the crease, lacking the fear that had overcome many of his teammates by this stage.
In the fourth Test, Smith faced the most balls in each innings for the Aussies, again displaying a maturity previously unseen. With a strike rate of under 35 on both occasions, he surely put to bed any thoughts of his batting impertinence.
For those still not satisfied, let’s look at his recent first class century for Australia A. I can hear the cries now – “It was only against Ireland!”
Well, it was an Ireland that had Australia A at 2/22 when Smith walked to crease. It was an Ireland that had the side 6/139 within 41 overs. It was an Ireland that Smith spent almost four hours defying for his 133.
Australian cricket, now more than ever, is crying out for young men of character. Smith is the youngest batsman on tour, yet is rarely – if ever – the subject of negative press. His recent batting against the red ball has shown he has the stomach for a fight, and the talent to succeed when others are failing.
Cricket Australia has been bold in its actions this week. Let’s hope our batting selections for the first Test follow suit.
RobboQlderin Vic
Guest
1 - Rogers 2 - Watson 3 - Kwahaja 4 - Clarke 5 - Hughes 6 - Smith 7 - Haddin 8 - Pattison 9 - Starc 10 - Harris 11 - Bird/Lyon I am a real fan of the gritty style batsman like Cowan ala Katich but he his failure to covert starts to big scores is something that will hurt the side going from 1 or 2 down for 80-100 to 3 down is not what is required to build the big totals required in Test matches. I accept there will be opposing opinions to this as seing of the new ball is a vital role of the opener but given that English conditions are more conducive to reverse swing more so than with the new ball, a free scoring opener could prove to be more valuable. Rogers is a diven given his knowledge of the conditions and the mountain of runs he has compiled over a long period. Watson's average of 45 is acceptable as an opener and he can get on top of the English attack helping to win the mental battle. Kwaja has compiled runs in the Somerset match and performed comsistently in Shield cricket. He does appear to have the class required for Test match batting and deserves an extended chance. Clarke has to bat at 4. His bowling should not be underated as he can bowl with control. Hughes has scored so many centuries at a young age that can't be ignored. He now has the right mentor to allow him to play freely which makes me disregard his Indian tour as he was batting for survival which is not his game. Swann is a great off spinner but even though there may be dry pitches, they will mot be the dust bowls served up by the Indians. Smith has shown a change in temperement and put runs on the board. I was not a big fan when he was first chosen as his shot selection was poor at times and lacked consistency. His leg break bowling will come in handy I have only put haddin in because of his experience in such a young side. he is capable of scoring quick runs and these can be vital batting with the tail.I will not forget the shot he played against South Africa when we were 5-15, totally irresponsible and he does at times not show the grit required when we are in trouble. As for his keeping, I think people forget that his reliabilty was less than those of his predessors. I can recall many rued chances last time India toured to Australia and the last time we toured India. At times, I thought we could have used a long stop. Wade did not keep well in India but would there be more challenging conditions anywhere. He does have room for improvement but I don't believe he is anymore a liabilty than Haddin in this department.His bating is adaptable to conditions where he can knuckle down when required and also lift the run rate. I don't think he is in the top 8 batsman on tour though. We left our best 2 keepers at home in the form of Tim Paine and Chris Hartley. Okay 2 controversial bowling selections. Siddle is a lion hearted performer but dos not take a lot of wickets. I accept arguments about this and at times can make vital breakthroughs though he seems to bowl a lot of overs before he gets that wicket. Pattison is our spearhead and will put the wind up the Poms. He has the fear factor. Harris can destroy sides and given that there is likely to be a bit in the wickets for quicks and overcast condition to help swing, he is someone that can assist in a big way of helping bowl them out twice.His injuries are a concern but that hole can be plugged by Watson if it happens during the game. When he is fit, to me he should be one of the 1st picked. Starc offers the variety of left arm bowling and can swing the ball. His spells can be inconsistent but when he hits rhythm, he usually gets a bunch of poles. Depending on conditions, I would only play Lyon if it was a real spin friendly deck. He is not a bowler who worries many batsman and the role of a spinner could be filled by Clarke and Smith. The Windies played four quicks with resounding success. No respite for the batsman whatsoever. Bird has such control and is so remeniscint of McGrath/Alderman style of bowler that he has impressed me in his short time in the team.He makes scoring difficult and dot balls will bring wickets in good bowling Partnerships. A big fan of the horses for courses mentality of selections. We can win the Ashes, I have no doubts at all. The English batting can be fragile at times. Anderson is going great guns but can be seen out. A lot of inconsistency in the rest of their attack. Swann bowls well and may get a bagful in some Tests but won't be the equivalent of what India did to us. Warney always maintains, if the pitch seams, the pitch spins. Our seamers should have the same advantage as Swann. Lehman was the perfect choice as coach, just the tonic we needed to settle the unrest.
Bearfax
Guest
Hi Thombani. You're obviously a fan of Smith and Ferguson and both have good qualities. But I understand with Watson and Clarke already assured of their spots and now Faulkner coming into the picture, that neither of them will have a chance to get into the first few tests. Of the two though, I think you're spot on with Smith. At 24 and averaging 41 at first class level, and especially given his recent century over there and reasonable performance against India, he has to be close to selection and I suspect by the end of the ten matches being played against England he may well have entrenched himself in the Australian test side. He's definitely a talented player worthy of test selection. Ferguson I'm afraid is not of that standard in my opinion. He's nearing 29 years old and has a first class batting average of 36. That kind of an average at Smith's age would be encouraging. But he's approaching the peak of his career and has an average less than even Cowan. I cant see him getting a guernsey now and I suspect many other aspiring young batsman will soon leave him in the wake. Good first class cricketer in my opinion but not a test quality batsman.
nachos supreme
Guest
just read that Lehmann has just announced that Watson will open.
Thobani
Guest
Smith and ferguson in d middle order!
Thobani
Guest
Dat young man and C Ferguson were suppose to be the regulars of both the test and 1 day teams. They are the best middle order batsman Australia needs rite now!
Matt F
Guest
As I said Kev, I was speaking generally not Khawaja specific. Warner's discipline issues are an exceptional circumstance and he should have been sent home. His form is irrevant to this
Brett McKay
Expert
Read below john, seriously, it's about ten posts down...
Amith
Guest
I am sure this topic will not be relevant once UTK does well in the ashes, can't wait.
ChrisB
Guest
Good to see a discussion on Smith turn to everyone's favourite topic
Amith
Guest
Agree completely bush, Khawaja should have had a good chance at number 3 and he would have made it his position, hopefully under boof he can get a real shot at that position where boof has seen him excel for the Bulls
John Edgar
Guest
Brett you are banging on about this relationship again, any comments on Hughes close relationship with Clarke, we might as well have that discussion if this keeps getting repeated.
John Edgar
Guest
I would go for UTK over him any day of th week.
Brett McKay
Expert
Kev, I was really going to unload on "It doesn’t matter if the next in line isn’t scoring a mountain of runs and banging on the door", but I keep forgetting about the Warner situation, and I certainly agree he can't hold his spot. So my only thought now is that I'm genuinely not sure who is next in line. Sentimentally, it probably is Khawaja, but that's debatable on current tour form. And Lehmann is already talking about blokes in current form being piicked. John, if you've read even just one of my comments here today, you'd know that "you seem to be on the Khawaja bandwagon because boof is his state coach" is simply not true. Likewise, you seem to have it in your mind that I'm an unabashed Hughes fan, when I was calling for him to be dropped in India. Keep this in mind for your future misinterpretation of my comments...
Red Kev
Guest
No Matt F that is not the case. Warner should not be in the side, he does not deserve to be there, period. It is irrelevant if the next best player is a hack I could bowl out, Warner shouldn't be in a baggygreen. With regards to runs scoring, if you have two players roughly the same and you've lost six tests in a row with the one playing and the other sitting out, what is the harm trying the other? None. As for Khawaja - his indifferent form is still on par with Hughes' and Cowan's indifferent form and exceeds Watson's.
Matt F
Roar Guru
Kev - Not quite true. You can only drop someone if there is someone worthy of replacing them. Dropping someone who isn't making runs and replacing them with someone else who isn't making runs doesn't make sense. The replacement doesn't have to be averaging 50+ but they have to be doing better than those currently in the side. I should point out that I'm speaking more in general terms here and not specifically about Khawaja. Thommo - Why bring up Hughes? He hardly helps your case. Phil Hughes was one of the standouts in the last Shield season and forced his way back into the team because he made stacks of runs. Haddin and Rogers have also forced their way back into the national squad due to making lots of runs. Khawaja had a reasonable season, but it wasn't a stand out season. Based on form and runs, Hughes deserved a call-up over Khawaja last summer. I'd like to see Khawaja get a decent go as I rate his talent but his performances aren't standing out from the pack. They're reasonable but not much better than Steve Smith's, if at all. His "A" form also hasn't been inspiring and, as Brett says, you can't blame that on mismanagement as Lehmann was the coach. Hopefully he can make some runs in the tour matches and force his way in. I believe that he has the talent, and he's not exactly up against much at the moment. A couple of 50's would probably be enough depending on how others do.
Amith
Guest
Well said Praveen and John Edgar
Aakash bhat
Guest
I want them to pick him but if they were to pick him in the ist test then he will play today against somerset which i believe is not happening.
The Bush
Roar Guru
What do you do Ryan? For me the major weakness is at three. We seem to usually have plenty of openers and as much as people laugh about Cowan and pursue Warner with anger, they are actually far from the worst opening pair in international cricket. When you consider Clarke at 4/5 and that we have only now just lost Hussey, the lower order has also looked after itself. Where we have been horrible since Ponting lost the plot is at three and it is such a pivotal position in the lineup. When I was growing up we were always tought that essentially your best batsman comes in at first drop - hasn't been the case for Australia for about five (5) years... In any event, it's hard to feel sorry for this lot. The selectors have basically forced this upon themselves. It seems quite a known thing that Mr Clarke wasn't going to bat that high and they did nothing to groom a replacement for Ponting. Instead of stuffing around with five (5) bowlers and bit=part all rounders, Khawaja should have played fifteen (15) tests by now and you'd at least not be throwing a rookie (or mentally fragile child) to the wolves...
Thommo
Guest
too early to make such a judgement I feel Merv. His international return was very good, with test runs vs Sri Lanka and back to back ODI hundreds in his first two matches. His form in India was a disaster, but he wasn't alone there. Those conditions are so foreign it was almost a different sport and should be ignored to a large degree when considering suitability for this series.
Praveen
Guest
John Edgar is absolutely nail it, give khawaja half te chances give to others, so tired of folks talking him down when he hasn't played yet, Hughes is very close to Clarke but no mention there, give khawaja fair go