While most Australian sports fans are wrapped up in the traditional winter codes, some of our cricketers are playing for Australia A against India A.
One of those is Phillip Hughes.
In the second unofficial Test that concluded at the Allan Border Field in Brisbane yesterday, he made an unbeaten 100 in the second innings.
It was his 25th first-class ton, taking him to a career aggregate of 8575 runs at 45.6.
Those are good numbers for a batsman of just 25 years of age.
The problem for Hughes is that he has already played 26 Tests for Australia for 1535 run at 32.6 with three hundreds.
The last of those was at Lord’s, 51 weeks ago.
Since then the Australian side has played 11 Tests.
Hughes’ career has combined stellar highs and crushing lows – the latter conspiring to see him dropped from the team on five occasions.
Hughes’ entry to international level was spectacular with innings of 0 and 75 on debut at Johannesburg in February 2009 and knocks of 115 and 160 in his next outing at Durban.
His twin centuries against a Proteas attack that featured Dale Steyn, Morne Morkel, Mkhaya Ntini and Jacques Kallis put him in the history books as the youngest batsman to score centuries in both innings of a Test match.
His future looked incredibly bright.
Yet, after just three more matches he was axed following Australia’s second Ashes Test at Lord’s in July 2009.
To that point he was averaging 52.4, but in the opening two matches of the Ashes series he was made to look all at sea against the short ball, especially when facing Andy Flintoff.
After that axing he was subsequently recalled on four more occasions – the first two of those comebacks lasted just one Test while the next two recalls saw him remain in the side for stints of ten and nine Tests respectively.
Used as an opener in his first 12 matches he was subsequently utilised at numbers three, four and six across his next nine Tests.
Right from day one Hughes was never an orthodox batsman.
Indeed, if you were driving past a club ground in summer and did not know who he was you would likely not consider him a man that had represented his country.
He appears jumpy at the crease and, in the main, his runs come courtesy of sliced shots through point and dashing drives through the covers.
When confronted by short-pitched bowling directed at the body from around the wicket the runs tend to dry up and the ‘keeper and slips are very much in the frame.
There is no doubting the fact that Hughes has talent – three centuries and seven 50s in 26 Tests attest to that.
But his technique to date has led to considerable flat spots and that may be something that will play a factor in his batting for the rest of his career.
It is a matter of whether the selectors will place their faith in him again.
During his most recent 11-match exile Australia has used various batsmen in the top six – Chris Rogers, Shane Watson, David Warner, Usman Khawaja, Michael Clarke, George Bailey, Steve Smith, Shaun Marsh and Alex Doolan.
Heading into Australia’s next Test series – in the UAE against Pakistan in October – Warner, Rogers, Clarke, Smith and Watson appear certain selections.
That leaves just one position in the top six up for grabs.
Khawaja and Bailey have little chance of hopping on the plane.
Doolan – who made an unbeaten 91 in the same innings where Hughes made 100no yesterday – batted in the number three position in Australia’s most recent three-Test series against South Africa.
He didn’t set the world on fire – 186 runs at 31.0 – with a best of 89 on debut at Centurion.
His presence in the current Australia A side clearly shows he is still very much in the selectors’ mind and given that his baptism of fire at Test level was against one of the best pace attacks going around at present he may well be at first drop in the Emirates.
If Hughes is to regain a spot in the side it may well be when Chris Rogers retires.
The pugnacious West Australian-cum-Victorian opener will turn 37 before the Pakistan series with the finish line looming large.
Since being recalled to the Test side he has averaged 40.4 from 13 matches with four centuries.
Currently plundering runs for English county side Middlesex – 934 runs at 58.4 this season – he will definitely open the batting with a rejuvenated Warner against Pakistan.
Rogers is targeting next year’s Ashes series in England as his international swansong.
If his form holds he will get there.
If Doolan fails to nail down the number three spot Hughes may be a chance to replace him.
If not, his exile will last considerably longer.
Either way, if he is recalled for a sixth time he has to cement his spot.
If not, a Test career that started with such promise will peter out.
bearfax
Guest
Seriously though I don't give much thought to List A scores because its a different type of game. It shows what he can do, but its the intense focusing of test cricket where he still has to prove himself, otherwise I would be pressing for Shaun Marsh to play tests. But certainly this match will give him confidence, which I maintain is his main problem these days.
Aransan
Guest
Congratulations. I am sure all Australian cricket followers wish him every success.
bearfax
Guest
Ah Aransan. I'm just basking in the glow of a double century. Is there any more to be said...except I told you so (ooo I like to provoke)
Aransan
Guest
Where are you Bearfax?
Tom from Perth
Guest
Off 150 balls too... there was a few chances but generally speaking he just dominated. First Aussie to do it too. What an effort.
Frankie Hughes
Guest
Phillip Hughes smashed 202* today in the quadrangular A team series today. Yeah the kid's got talent
Bearfax
Roar Guru
ChrisB you are right. Stats aren't everything. But what other independent factors can you consider. Most other factors come down to personal opinions. Stats aren't opinion, they are just a record of a players performance so they must surely be the dominant consideration in determining a payers worth. Not completely I'll grant you and even delving too deeply into stats can be confusing. But a players performance by way of scoring is surely the key to determining his or her worth. You raised the issue of Geoff Marsh and his comparable figures citing the claim that he was against better bowlers. Again that's opinion and is unprovable and undemonstrable. The fact is that Marsh was lucky to have a strong batting line up around him, while Hughes was almost expected to be the top bat himself. Marsh certainly played against an awesome West Indies side but Australia only played them in 19 of the 93 innings Marsh was playing tests. In fact, he was playing against a fairly weak England side, India and Pakistan were not anywhere near their peak and there was no South Africa. But taking it a step further, Marsh was playing test cricket during his best years, his thirties. Hughes is still only 25. Yet their averages are almost identical, Marsh 33.18, Hughes 32.61. Mind you Hughes has scored 3 centuries in 49 innings. Marsh could manage only 4 in 93 innings. And then there's their first class average. Marsh 39.97, Hughes 45.61....and remember Marsh was playing a lot of cricket in his 30s. Hughes is a much better batsman than Geoff Marsh ever was and the stats suggest that. But one batsman is looked upon with respect and the other as just a good first class batsmen. Again personal opinions.
ChrisB
Guest
Lies, damn lies and statistics. They're a guide, not the be all and end all. They're used too freely by many on here and often without context For example your dig at Geoff Marsh. Given the era of pace bowling he had to open in (and some of the pitches compared to now), you'd probably add 7-8 to his average. He stayed around a bit too long, was a very useful player as the side developed from the 80s horrors - again a context worth remembering, rather than slavishly quoting endless stats
ChrisB
Guest
A bit of a romanticised view of the past there. Granted, a lot more batting depth then, but my abiding memory of him in tests (apart from that incredible run of 7-8 tests as Warne's spin twin) was struggling an against the lifting ball. I'm sure he would have overcome it in time, but so may Hughes And it was easier to come into that side than the struggling team of recent years
Lionel Lang
Guest
High class bowlers??? There is daylight between the likes of Harris, Pattinson, Siddle, Johnson and then the bowlers Hughes would face in a shield match.
Simoc
Guest
So far top test bowlers have now worked out Hughes and Khawaja, which is what test cricket is all about. Hughes is a very ordinary looking bat but with great determination. Khawaja is classy but slow on his feet early and seems to get tied down easily at test level. It took Hayden a stack of runs to get another crack at test level and he made the most of it when given the chance. It is up to these two to do the same.
Steele
Guest
Bevan was an absolute gun and would of proven that eventually if persevered with. Unfortunately for him the depth back then was amazing. I feel Hughes will prove himself eventually if given more time. I certainly don't think Doolan is the answer. Time will tell, but his record at age 28 is very mediocre.
Andy_Roo
Roar Guru
Australia's dilemma with the opening spots and the number three spot in recent years stems entirely from the persistent use of Shane Watson in those positions. I don't blame Watson, he has done his best and made a couple of good scores but ultimately he was kept in the top order for too long. He was never good enough. Rogers should have been in the side a few years ago and his stability would have allowed AUS to develop other top order players around him. Hughes had his chances and Khawaja could have been given more time to cement his spot. On Hughes his performance against SA is over-rated. The SA bowlers used the wrong tactics, ENG sorted him out quickly and good bowlers have worked him out too easily ever since. He has talent but has a poor technique. Whilst every batsman has a natural technique they need some coaching early on to get the basics right. Hughes didn't get this good early coaching and you can see this in his poor running between the wickets and his ordinary fielding too. I don't think he will play for AUS again.
Chris Love
Roar Guru
That first dropping was criminal and no doubt set the demons in place for his latter stints in the baggy green. After that debut tour Against South Africa to be dropped after two? Tests in England with two of those innings culled due to dubious umpiring(one was a shocker) was a dreadful call. Had he been shown half the faith that we've given Watson I am sure he would have got through that period a much better test cricketer and a certain first drop concreted in. If it's a 50/50 call for the UAE I say pick and stick with Hughes.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Well that SL 3rd test pitch is a road. Some mighty big scores are racked up there.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Mitch Marsh was going at 2.17 and took a wicket in his 12 overs. Sayers went at 2.8 and took 5 wickets. Seriously if you are going to claim things to cheerlead for a particular player at least check the scorecards.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Well, talking of spin bowlers, Amit Mishra wasn't bowled on that last day, I'm not sure whether he was injured but he was their main spin bowler for that match so it was a surprise.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Hooray, someone who recognised the folly of giving Swann a bunch of left-handers. Almost as silly as giving MJ them :)
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Except that as the article has said, he HAS played more than five consecutive tests on two occasions. Says a lot that even with our dodgy batting line-up, he's never nailed a spot. He has widened his range of shots immensely over the past few years, and god knows, you have to admire his discipline, so hopefully he'll manage to eradicate that squared up, nicking issue that he has still going on.
Quitwhinging
Guest
so his third test ton in Sri Lanka where spin is a massive factor was a flat pitch? makes sense