This year has been superb for the Australian Test cricket team. A dominant display against the dormant and despised Poms was taken to even higher highs with a remarkable last-gasp series win against world number one South Africa.
The likes of Chris Rogers, David Warner, Steve Smith, Brad Haddin, Ryan Harris and Mitchell Johnson have proven how good they are since late 2013. But the question is; how long will the Aussies’ current dominance last for?
Right now the Aussies are the in-form team in the Test arena, with a unique yet effective mix of younger stars and wily veterans combining like two marvelous Starburst snakes at once.
Opposition teams haven’t been able to handle the mix of the skiddy Harris and nasty Johnson opening the bowling, or the curious and subdued Rogers mixed with the outspoken yet highly skilled menace that is Warner opening the batting.
The only problems in those combos are the age factors; only Warner is under the age of 30, with Rogers being 36, Johnson 32 and Harris 34. Hearing that is like hearing the chicken nuggets you ate the other day were from McDonalds; not helpful.
The older generation of Rogers, Shane Watson, Michael Clarke, Haddin, Peter Siddle, Johnson and Harris may have helped to develop Smith, Warner and Nathan Lyon, but those eight 30-plus warriors won’t have many years left in them, except maybe for Clarke.
Siddle is already skating on thin ice, with James Pattinson replacing him in South Africa, as well as Pat Cummins, Josh Hazlewood, Mitchell Starc, Ben Cutting and Jackson Bird waiting in the wings to snare the other pace spots.
When batsmen like Rogers and Watson go, will Alex Doolan and Shaun Marsh be able to step in as efficiently as they did in South Africa? Probably not. Will any wicket keeper live up to Haddin after his departure? Hell no. No new keeper/batsman can come in and save batting collapses several times during an Ashes series and take remarkable catches into their mid-30’s like Haddin is doing.
I’m going to part with all Test teams’ average ages based on their line-up in their most recently played Tests.
Respect it Australia, it’ll be gone before we all know it.
Australia:
Rogers – 36, Warner – 27, Doolan – 28, Clarke – 33, Smith – 24, Watson – 32, Haddin – 36, Johnson – 32, Harris – 34, Pattinson – 23, Lyon – 26.
Bangladesh:
Iquarterbackal – 25, Rahman – 25, Kayes – 27, Haque – 22, Al-Hasan – 27, Rahim – 25, N. Hossain – 22, Mahmudullah – 27, Gazi – 22, A. Hossain – 24, Razzak – 31.
England:
Cook – 29, Carberry – 33, Bell – 32, Pietersen – 33, Balance – 24, Stokes – 22, Bairstow – 24, Borthwick – 23, Broad – 27, Anderson – 31, Rankin – 29.
India:
Dhawan – 28, Vijay – 30, Pujara – 26, I. Sharma – 25, Kohli – 25, R.Sharma – 26, Rahane – 25, Dhoni – 32, Jadeja – 25, Khan – 35, Shami – 24.
New Zealand:
Fulton – 35, Rutherford – 24, Williamson – 23, Latham – 22, McCullum – 32, Anderson – 23, Watling – 28, Neesham – 23, Southee – 25, Wagner – 28, Boult – 24.
Pakistan:
Manzoor – 27, Shehzad – 22, Ali – 29, Y. Khan – 36, Ul-Haq – 39, Shafiq – 28, Ahmed – 26, Rehman – 34, Talha – 25, Ajmal – 36, J. Khan – 24.
South Africa:
Smith – 33, Petersen – 33, Elgar – 26, Amla – 31, de Villiers – 30, du Plessis – 29, Duminy – 30, Philander – 29, Abbott – 26, Steyn – 30, Morkel – 29.
Sri Lanka:
Karunaratne – 25, Silva – 27, Sangakkara – 36, Jayawardene – 36, Chandimal – 24, Matthews – 26, Vithanage – 23, Perera – 31, Mendis – 29, Lakmal – 27, Pradeep – 27.
West Indies:
Brathwaite – 21, Powell – 24, Edwards – 29, Samuels – 33, Chanderpaul – 39, Deonarine – 30, Ramdin – 29, Sammy – 30, Narine – 25, Permaul – 24, Best – 32.
Team —- Average age
Australia —- 30 years old
Bangladesh —- 25 years old
England —- 28 years old
India —- 27 years old
New Zealand —- 26 years old
Pakistan —- 30 years old
South Africa —- 29.5 years old
Sri Lanka —- 28 years old
West Indies —- 29 years old
Matthew Buxton
Roar Pro
Even thought we're ranked number 1 i still think South Africa are the best. They've lost 1 series in 5 years (given to the Aussies recently), have the best bowler in the world, and in my opinion the best player in the world in AB De Villiers. There batting lineup is supurb and there bowling attack is world class. While Australia are dominating at the moment and did recently beat SA, i still believe South Africa are the best.
Bearfax
Guest
Aaarrrggghhh. Shouts Chen!!!. Finch as a test player? No Warner? Finch as an ODI player is fine. But at the same age as Warner, Finch has a First Class average of 27.5. Warner has a FC average a shade under 50. Even Maddinson with a FC average of 37 is far superior to Finch. Sorry but unless a miracle happens, Finch will never be a test player and Warner will be first batsman chosen when Clarke retires.
Shouts Chen
Guest
This is for 2016 My future team for Tests: Aaron Finch, Phil Hughes, Jordan Silk, Matt Wade (captain + wicketkeeper), Steve Smith Chris Lynn, Jackson Bird, James Muirhead, Ashton Agar, Ben Cutting, James Faulkner. Reserves: James Pattinson, Jon Holland, Sam Whiteman, Nick Maddinson For ODIS: Aaron Finch, David Warner, Jordan Silk, Matt Wade (captain + wicketkeeper), Daniel Hughes, Glenn Maxwell, James Faulkner, Ben Cutting, Nathan Lyon, James Muirhead, Kane Richardson Reserves: Sean Abbott, Sam Whiteman, Josh Hazlewood, Jon Holland For T20s: Aaron Finch, Joe Burns, Jon Wells, Dan Hughes, Chris Lynn, Matt Wade (captain + wicketkeeper), Glenn Maxwell, Ben Cutting, Mitch Marsh, James Muirhead, Ashton Agar. Reserves: Jordan Silk, Sam Whiteman, Mitch Starc, Clive Rose.
bucko
Guest
Yeah, I would agree entirely except for Bailey in ODI's. Needs to go. Swap him for Steve smith and swap Lyon for O'keefe in tests and its all good. Faulkner also needs centuries and more pace in his bowling to be good enough for Australia in tests. But Peter Neville would be my next test keeper. Henriques should be the next all rounder when Watto goes. Good couple of teams. Burns in for Cosgrove/Silk. Only changes.
Bearfax
Guest
I recall almost identical comments being made about Smith less than 2 years ago. I remember Warner being dismissed as a prospect at about the same time. Maddinson is a kid full of potential, but rash and inexperienced at this stage. Happens to most young batsmen. Give him time to work on his game. Doesnt happen over night and mistakes being made will continue to be made while he develops. I suspect you'll start to see signs of it over season by season. Remember like Silk, he is only 22 and few batsmen are consistent and near flawless at that age.
Vish
Guest
Dominance is not jus abt a couple of series its abt atleast five to six years of beating the top three teams away from home. V need to monitor our youngsters properly Nic Maddinson looks a joke in the first two matches of IPL. He was asked to open chasing small targets . He cant pull and he cant defend a yorker. And he is considered a future opener for Australia. Not to mention his miserable fielding both in the slips and in the deep.He has to value his wicket more. He has Virat Kohli to learn from but am doubting his ambitions
DubbleBubble
Guest
Been a little since I seen Khawaja's name on The Roar. I admit to being a former fan of his but I think he will be Australia's Ramprakash.
xavialonso
Guest
You're right about Warner, Smith and Johnson. They could reach legend status if they work seriously at it for the next four-five years. I have to admit that steve smith has come a long long way. I never pegged him to be a reliable batsman. He is the bright star amongst the young aussie bats. Warner and Smith can carry this Aus team into the future after Clarkie goes.
TheCunningLinguistic
Guest
There is a distinct possibility that 2-3 others could become legends before they finish, but it would require some seriously sustained performance. I'm talking about Warner, Smith and possibly Johnson.
xavialonso
Guest
I wouldn't call two test wins as a sign of dominance. The Steve Waugh captained Aus side with greats like Haydos, Langer, Warne, Gilly, and McGrath, that was dominance. It had legends that dominated the test cricket scene for years not for just two tests. This current Aus side has one legend in it, the captain Michael Clarke. All the other 10 players are good, but you cant call them legends by any stretch. In any case, Aus cricket doesn't have the world class talent to continue a period of sustained dominance and will quickly be back in the doldrums this year or the next.
Professor Rosseforp
Guest
"But the question is; how long will the Aussies’ current dominance last for?" -- or, having run it through the sub-editor, "But the question is: how long will the Aussies’ current dominance last?".
Cadfael
Roar Guru
We had one great season and this does not spell dominance. If we keep these results up for the next few years, then that is a dominant performance.
Simoc
Guest
The so called dominance is related to one Mitchell Johnson being in career best form and skittling the opposition when we win. The rest is even as before.
Deep Thinker
Guest
Two good series is not a domination. It is really one dominant series, and one close win. Lets not carried away. In terms of Australia's long term prospects, based on young talent coming throw (which I define as under 30) Bowling is fine All rounders - fine. Keeping is a problem - nobody with sustained performance demanding selection. Spinning - ok. Batting - in trouble. Hughes and Lynn are the only ones putting there hands up. Nobody averaging over 50.
Dizzy Tangles
Guest
We had a good summer, and have no doubt improved as a team but it's a bit too early to call us dominant. We need to keep winning for another year or 2 before that word can be used.
Sean Mortell
Roar Guru
Oh gosh that is a definite auto-correction!!
Ryan Ranger
Roar Rookie
Also Sean, did the device you posted this article on auto-correct Iqbal? Or has that cricketer changed his name to Iquarterbackal?!
Ryan Ranger
Roar Rookie
I'm not sure if we're exactly dominating, nor am I sure how long the good times will last. When the likes of the underperforming Shaun Marsh gets a national call-up, it shows the selectors have doubts over the current crop of Shield cricketers. Remember when the Haydens, Lehmanns, Langers etc would score well in excess of 1000 runs in a season? Nowadays, a 700-800 run season (complete with TWO centuries) is considered a "good season". I think the bowling stocks aren't too bad (though the constant stream of injuries remains is a worry), but batting and wicketkeeping depth remains a concern.
Bearfax
Guest
Pretty good side James. Thanks for reminding me about Cummins. I want to see how he fares over a season before adding him to the equation. Same with Sandhu. Both outstanding potential but yet to see them over a distance. Cant see Clarke lasting out. Faulkner I left out because of Maxwell. Trouble is I think we've got a number of real quicks coming through and Faulkner may struggle to get in
The Barry
Roar Guru
Australia have won two series back to back. Prior to that we were beaten 3-0 and 4-0. They played bloody well in those two series but I don't think that means we're dominating test cricket. If that's dominance what do you call the Windies from 80-95 or Australia from 95 - 05 ? It's been a long time between drinks if we think two test series is dominance.