Watching the opening instalment of the Australian international season last week – the Twenty20 against South Africa – a couple of things caught my eye.
One was the abomination that is now the Adelaide Oval, an iconic cricket ground now a nondescript multi-purpose bowl. Progress is one thing; crapping all over history is something else entirely.
But that’s by the by, so on to the second – the absence of Glenn Maxwell.
One of the better short-form players around, a man with bags of experience and a strike rate to pay good money for, as many have, yet not required by his national team.
For a few seconds I’ll admit to confusion but only then did it come back to my attention that Maxwell was playing Test cricket in the UAE.
This is not to condemn the schedule, as unsubtly greedy and short-sighted as it is, but offer amazement at the Victorian’s appearance at first drop in Michael Clarke’s XI.
Is Australian state cricket in such a poor condition that this is the best it can do? George Bailey wasn’t the greatest selection in history but he’s like David Boon compared to Maxwell.
Alex Doolan, admittedly, struggled in the first Test against Pakistan but his demotion in favour of a lower-order hacker must have come as a real slap in the face.
The justification for Maxwell’s promotion, that of an indescribable ‘x-factor’ trumping a certain scoring inertia, made little sense on paper and even less in practicality.
In a team that desperately needed to bat for a long time, a flimsy, fly-by-night number three couldn’t have been less suitable and his two frenetic innings showed up the selection as the folly it was.
No nous, no technique, no thought, no plan and, ultimately, no chance.
The Pakistani spinners, as inexperienced as they were, must have been licking their lips once Maxwell’s modus operandi became evident. A couple of lusty blows and, er, that’s it.
Walking wicket may be a touch harsh but if you don’t even attempt to give yourself a chance then you’re in real trouble.
The hyperactive manner of Maxwell’s efforts were either those of a man exceptionally confident in his own ability or with no confidence at all. No doubt the ‘it’s the way he plays’ has been put forward somewhere down the line but pay that no attention.
There is a time and a place to pull the showboating tricks out of the bag and it’s when you’ve got the opposition on their knees not when you have a rather steep hill in front of you.
Batting in Test cricket, as those who do it well will tell you, is about playing the percentages and doing it for all, or a good deal, of the time. Pre-meditation, a big element of Maxwell’s game as it has to be, does not encourage consistent success and it never will.
He is of the modern-day game and that is no crime whatsoever. There are millions of dollars out there to be earned and plenty of scope for such talent to prosper but the five-day game simply isn’t the appropriate theatre.
The x-factor alluded to earlier is often a meaningless sound-bite that can be translated as ‘we can’t really explain the selection’ and this particular episode should be right at the top of the pile.
Shane Warne, if we have to use such criteria, seemingly possessed it but he had the ability to back it up. The same could be said of the likes of Brian Lara and Kevin Pietersen who could dictate terms because their talent was a foundation that could be leant on
Maxwell, in relative terms, is a very good cricketer but Test matches?
Come the upcoming opening skirmish against India at the Gabba he should be nowhere to be seen. It was an experiment that should never again see the light of day.
Alec Swann
Expert
I didn't read it that way so no offence taken. Watson would be my choice even though his record should be better and I've heard good things about Burns without actually seeing him play. Khawaja I'm not so sure about and I'll be amazed if Hughes doesnt get another go at some stage.
Bearfax
Guest
Firstly Alec I was not directing the comments about Warner and Smith being inept earlier at you specifically but rather that it was a generic comment being bandied around. Second, I think Maxwell has a fine technique but he has a tendency to be loose with his defensive work, an issue many of the good one dayers have. Thirdly I agree Maxwell should not have been at 3. I pointed out Smith would make an ideal 3 but the selectors refuse to consider that option at this stage (another blunder in my mind). I was critical of Cowan in the past when he played tests, but I did admire his dogged defensive work. His performances over the past 18 months suggest to me he has learned the lesson about going on with the job, and consequently has pushed his average over the 40 mark in first class cricket. He is one to now be considered for 3 again. And then there's Hughes, who I believe should be given a further chance. Further if Burns continues his recent OK form and Khawaja converts his recent one day performances to first class cricket, they also should be considered. For me Watson is not ideal for opening or first or second drop, despite claims to the contrary. Not sure where that belief originated from but II did a calculation and found that since 2012, he has averaged a little over 33 in those positions in tests.
Alec Swann
Expert
Bearfax Warner and Smith are good comparisons. The difference with Warner is that for all the talk of him being just a hitter, he had a pretty solid technique to fall back on. As for Smith, I commented on here at some stage that he was nowhere near a Test batsman but I don't mind admitting I was wrong on that count. There's just more to batting at three than Maxwell can offer. In a strong side he could perhaps do a job at six or seven but first wicket down is plain bonkers
Alec Swann
Expert
Johnno I hadn't thought of Greg Matthews while writing the article but if it was a choice between Matthews in his prime and Maxwell I'd got for the former every time. In Test terms it wouldn't even be a contest.
Alec Swann
Expert
Spruce I'll admit that my view on the Adelaide Oval is taken on a purely aesthetic basis. It's just not for me. My mum and dad have watched a Test there and said that the facilities are fantastic so I'll take their, and others', word for it. And I'm haven't really incorporating the Australian Rules factor so perhaps not the most balanced of comments!
Shortfineleg
Guest
Warner was never as lax as Maxi. Never.
Dizzy Tangles
Guest
A lot of people said Warner would always be nothing but a short format slogger though he seemed to listen to his critics and adjust his game. If Maxwell does the same, he may well turn out ok too
Spooky
Guest
I Laughed out loud then remembered it to be correct, then started to feel depressed, I think rhe selectors were having a laugh
Spooky
Guest
?
Bearfax
Guest
I remember almost exactly the same comments being made about Warner and Smith, Alec. I think Maxwell has improved significantly since his earlier slap dash style excited the one dayers. But two things occurred in the latest test that I believe were selection mistakes. Firstly Maxwell has played almost all of his career at no 5 or 6. He has been working hard to improve his consistency and has got his average into the 40s in first class cricket. Why then put him at 3, a position that needs someone like a Smith to batten down the hatches. That's not Maxwell's style...yet. He's good at 5 and 6 so why was he selected at 3. And further, according to him, he was told to go out and enjoy himself ergo play your swashbuckling style. That was exactly what Australia didnt want. Mind you he did score 37 in the first innings second test and if we are going to commend Marsh for his 27 in the first test, surely that's at least as good. Put Maxwell at 5 or 6 and I suspect we will see a much more successful result.
olm8matt
Guest
I'm from Adelaide, and didn't want it to change. But the new ground IS a huge improvement. only thing i disagree with is the use of a drop-in pitch.
twodogs
Guest
Maxwell has all the shots. He also has great ability. Unfortunately getting talked up too much is a curse. The big show doesn't necessarily mean big runs or wickets it just means 'show' and could be a big show in getting out! Best thing to happen to GM would be to lose the tag. He's quite a good player.
matth
Guest
I know I'm going to cop it for this, but Maxwell has a better first class average than Doolan. Scary but true. Probably says more about how Doolan got picked in the first place.
matth
Guest
To be fair number 3 was actually a step down. In his last test inning in India he opened!
Don Freo
Guest
He tied a Test match with his bowling...and one very excited umpire!
Jacob York
Roar Rookie
i believe alex doolan has way more test potential. unless maxwell ever learns to hone his skills and use them at the right place and time, like in the article above he will only ever be a short form cricketer. people need to drop the nickname too. it puts too much pressure on him, being the 'big show'
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
It was strange, to say the least, that the chairman of selectors said prior to the series that Maxwell was extremely fortunate to be in the squad, then suddenly they picked him to bat at three. I am more optimistic than most about Maxwell's potential as a Test player down the line but playing him at first drop ahead of a specialist batsman was crazy.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Matthews was actually a very good Test player. His bowling was never up to Test standard but he was a very effective and determined batsman. He made nearly 2000 runs at an average of 41 in an era when any average over 40 was very good.
Kurt S
Roar Pro
The coach has made statements to the press over the last 12 months that he needs Maxwell to step up. Currently Maxwell simply doesn't appear to respect or value his wicket. That may not be the case. I can still remember Mark Waugh being tagged in a similar manner at the start of his test career with some of the press claiming he didn't value his wicket. Waugh made the game look so effortless to the observer, that when he failed, it looked like he never made an effort in the first place. With Maxwell, there is certainly talent. Whether he can learn patience, to pick his moment, to judge the balance of a game, and to dig deep for an ugly 40 runs off 190 balls to save a test with wickets falling around him is yet to be determined. Maybe the selectors / coach will run out of patience before Maxwell acquires and applies those skills. A few seasons ago, Warner and Steve Smith were in the same position. Warner came of age in Hobart with that great innings a few seasons ago. Steve Smith has just continued to improve out of sight as a test player. Whoever has been mentoring and guiding Steve Smith's attitude has done an amazing job. Maybe they might try to have a word in Maxwell's ear before it is too late.
Shortfineleg
Guest
You do that. In your alternative universe. There are 2 chances of it happening in this universe.