If Mitchell Starc misses out on the first Test against India next month, it will mark the eighth time he has been dropped – and he has only played 13 Tests.
Since debuting in December 2011, Starc’s Test career with respect to the number of matches he has played each time he was recalled before being omitted reads like this: 2, 2, 2, 3, 1, 1, 1.
If he is axed for the Gabba Test it will see each of his past four Test reincarnations lasting just one match.
With this continued dropping, do we actually know whether or not he is a Test bowler?
In his 13 appearances he has claimed 43 wickets at 35.3.
What would those figures look like if he had have been given the opportunity to string a series of matches together?
It remains a great imponderable and Starc is not alone in that regard.
The track record of late has not augured well for men who have debuted beneath the baggy green.
Of the last 24 players to debut at Test level, many have had an extremely fleeting time in the sun.
Some, like Pat Cummins, James Pattinson and Jackson Bird have been cruelled by injuries while many others have been cut down by the selectors.
Spinners Xavier Doherty (4 Tests), Ashton Agar (2) and Michael Beer (2) were given little time to settle.
Peter George, James Faulkner and John Hastings were each given one Test. Rob Quiney got two and Trent Copeland and Moises Henriques three each.
Others, like Starc, have been faced with a revolving door.
Phil Hughes is a classic case.
Despite innings of 0, 75, 115 and 160 in his first two Tests he was on the outer after playing just another three.
His exile lasted seven matches before he was recalled and since that time his run of Tests before being dropped again has been: 1, 1, 10, 9.
That adds up to 26 Tests having been dropped five times.
Have we learned definitively whether or not he is a Test batsman?
Usman Khawaja is another who has been given opportunities – nine Tests in all but he has never been given any more than three in succession.
After George Bailey’s five Tests against England last summer produced an average of 26.1, Alex Doolan took his place in a reordered batting line-up.
His maiden Test series was against the highly rated Proteas in South Africa.
Across the three Tests, Doolan averaged 31 with a top score of 89 – not too shabby first-up at number three against an attack that boasted Dale Steyn, Morne Morkel and Vernon Philander.
Heading into the recent series in the UAE he was the only Australian batsman to score a century in the solitary first-class lead-in match.
His two innings in the opening Test a week later at Dubai produced just five runs and he was dropped for the second Test at Abu Dhabi. He was bizarrely replaced at number three by Glenn Maxwell – who played his third Test, having played one each time previously before being dropped.
Did Doolan deserve another chance?
Steven O’Keefe has long been supported by many readers here on The Roar.
He made his Test at Abu Dhabi against a highly proficient Pakistan team when it comes to playing spin.
He returned figures of 2-107 and 2-112 off a marathon 57 overs. In contrast, Nathan Lyon took 2-220 off 55 overs.
Yet many former players have gone so far as saying that O’Keefe may never play another Test – and that is despite a first-class record of 137 wickets at 25.4.
It is worth remembering that one of the more intriguing starts to a great Test career was that of the great Shane Warne.
He made his Test debut having captured just 26 first-class wickets and only 15 of those had been claimed on Australian soil. Only fellow leg-spinner John Watkins with 10 first-class scalps before his Test debut in 1973 had taken less wickets that Warne had in the preceding 100 years before wearing the baggy green.
In his maiden Test Warne returned figures of 1-150.
That was followed by a return 0-78 in his second Test.
After four Tests he had claimed 4-386.
And, he went on to claim 708 wickets at 25.4 through 145 Tests.
So, the question is have the selectors got it wrong with respect to many of the players they have selected in recent years, or have those players simply not been given enough time to bed themselves down at Test level?
None perhaps were ever going to compile records like a Warne, Ponting or McGrath but how many of them were given a real opportunity to build a career of note?
Frank
Guest
Hughes deserves his chance, consistent at shield and hes a f**king beast.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
He hasn't been dropped five times. He's covered for injury a couple of times but that's not the same as being dropped. Far out, the myths that get propagatedon this board do my head in.
JohnB
Guest
Actual test average M Hayden v WI 96/7 - 35.4 (0 & 5 Melb, 125 Adelaide, 0 & 47 Perth). cf claimed average 49.85. (Johnno no doubt exaggerates how bad the ton was, but it was considered scratchy at the time and it did benefit from 3 chances and a catch off a no ball per Cricinfo). Test average M Hayden before 2000/1 tour to India - 13 games, 22 innings, 0 NO, 536 runs, av 24.3, 1 hundred, 2 fifties. Number of times M Hayden dropped before 2000/1 tour to India - actually really only 1. He played his first test in 93/4 as an injury replacement - the player he replaced came back for the next game, but even if he hadn't, Hayden broke his hand in that game and couldn't play the next. He then played the 3 games v WI in 96/7, and the next 3 in SA (failing badly). Then dropped until the final test v NZ at the end of 99/2000. Australia did not tour anywhere that winter, and Hayden played all 5 tests the next summer against a moderate WI, before going on the India tour in 2000/1, from which he never looked back. It was however not a certainty he would even make that tour given his performance, and there was nothing at the time to suggest he should have been picked more than he had been up to that point. Sorry if this counts as revisionism.
Ross Fleming
Roar Rookie
Khawaja has also got to be one of those most harshly treated but i thiink that had more to do with Arthur, now that he is gone i expect the classy left hander to be given a good go
Bearfax
Guest
I feel like a broken record Don. I keep saying things but I keep having to repeat them. Are you falling in love with my comments. Is this a prelude to e-dating. I've always said that averages need to be seen in the context of age, experience and year to year variations. I would not have expected Warne to have his later outstanding averages any more than Mitch Marsh, with his at this stage mediocre batting average. Warne and Jeff Thomson were 22 when they started test cricket. Rod Marsh was 23. Mitch Johnson was 26. And Peter Taylor already had his good averages when he started test cricket at 31. As I've ALWAYS said Don. Stats need to be seen in the context of such things as age, otherwise you would never risk a bright young star in test cricket. But they have to be ready surely and therefore their stats have to be, for their age, significant. For example I would not pick Boyce at this stage because his average wicket taking is just not up to a competitive level for test cricket. But he'll improve and in a year or two the assessment would likely be different. I would still pick the players with the best averages for test cricket, but introducing younger players, especially when there is little else available or as a taste, and they are performing for their age brilliantly, seems logical. Now Don. Settle down because I think we need a little advice giving. Should I send you a CD on this so you wont forget what is said again. You are only my age and surely too young yet to be having memory problems. If you're having problems I understand ginkgo biloba is pretty good. Then there's Haperzine A or even ginsing Of course just plain Omega 3 and Vitamin E are effective....though I cant seem to remember why?
Bearfax
Guest
Don, do I have to spoon feed you every time. Ho hum, snicker snicker. Stats in such sports as cricket Sheffield Shield operate as the most independent means of fairly comparing players. They arent adulterated because they are just figures taken. Of course how you interpret them introduces bias but if a batsman scores so many runs over several seasons at a particular average or a bowler does the same, they are just records of results giving the most accurate means of comparing players in that competition available. Of course as I've said repeatedly, true comparisons require closer noting of those figures such as age, experience, year to year variations and yes absences due to injury or representative requirements. For example Shane Watson's recent first class averages are almost entirely based on his test appearances because he has played a total of half a Shield game in the last three seasons prior to the present season. But ordinarily such factors, such as injury surely need to be not given too much weight because it then becomes bias. Injury may affect aggregate scoring but not generally averages because players should be fit when actually playing and therefore the only factor would be match fitness. For example I know you would say Shaun Marsh has been injured a lot. That will affect aggregate and number of matches played but not average. Otherwise how do you explain that Marsh has a 36 first class average while both Watson and Lynn, who also have had extensive injuries,( Watson more so than Marsh), have first class averages over 43.. Such stats arent biased in a significant sense. How they are interpreted can be. And any other means of interpreting a players worth is based on bias.
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Mitchell Johnson was ICC Player of the Year around 2009, he's not a good example to compare with someone like Hayden.
Armchair Expert
Guest
Getit right Don, O'Keefe missed a shield game last season and played the last few with a dislocated right shoulder.
Armchair Expert
Guest
Correct Johnno, Hayden was also bowled early in that innings by a ball that was called a no ball which replays showed wasn't a no ball
Tim Holt
Roar Guru
Thank you for the reply Tom/Jason, I think he could be an Ashes wildcard :)
Jason Gillespie
Guest
If Harris is fit and they leave Siddle out then I believe the 4 quicks in the 12 would be Johnson, Harris, Starc and Hazlewood. Assuming M Marsh plays as 4th seamer then I would have no hesitation in having Starc playing.
Sam
Roar Rookie
Agree with the article, though it seems to overlook instances where players have been filling for injured guys, ie Hastings' one test. Another example of the baffling selection criteria was Shaun Marsh in South Africa. Debateable whether he should have picked, makes a great hundred, fails in the next match and then gets dropped! Huh?
Dalgety Carrington
Roar Guru
It was the manner in which Hughes got out as much as anything. Same ball, same shot after flailing around for a scratchy handful.
Dalgety Carrington
Roar Guru
Oh yeah, because there was nothing keeping him out of the team…pull! woosh bang!! bang!!…anyone else for some clay selector shooting...
Don Freo
Guest
Like Warnie? DKL? Jeff Thomson? Picked long before their FC averages looked healthy. That's what is meant by adulterated. But then again, they weren't trained by rocket scientists. Warnie, you're a failure. Rod Marsh, you're a failure. Peter Taylor, you're a failure. Mitch Johnson, you're a failure.
Don Freo
Guest
Oh Bear! Are you saying that the way many of you use statistics is not adulterated? Maybe adolescenterated...or childerated... SOKcult members use statistics that should be X-rated.
Don Freo
Guest
Any reason why?...a crush is a crush.
Don Freo
Guest
He was never the best performed...he was the highest wicket taker...and he was only that because he played all the games. Others missed because they were playing for Australia or out injured. 41 wickets is not a startling return for 10 games.
deccas
Guest
Starc took 7 so is hardly out of form. Behrendorf could push him for his spot but starc bowled well in the uae and should keep his spot for now.
Bearfax
Guest
Poking the Bear is always fraught with danger Tom. One must always accept where the Bear sits, lest hunger be stirred for fresh meat. Of course the Bear is always ready to defend its territory and is too pragmatic to be stirred by mere appearances. If the selected prey doesnt have a healthy weight of substance, it aint worth the pursuit