Move on from Brad Haddin and Peter Siddle, and don’t field an all-pace line-up. That would be my advice to the Australian selectors, who tomorrow name the squad for the first Test against India.
Australia are entering an 18-month period during which seven of their core players – Haddin, Siddle, Chris Rogers, Ryan Harris, Mitch Johnson, Michael Clarke and Shane Watson – could well end their international careers.
Due to age, injury problems or declining form, none of that group are guaranteed of playing cricket longer than another year and a half.
As such, Australia will need to make a huge generational change. If they wait too long several of these players will retire or fall off the perch all at once and Australian cricket could plunge into disarray.
We have seen this happen before. Just two years ago, the selectors made the assumption that veteran batsmen Ricky Ponting and Mike Hussey would play on at least until the end of last year’s Ashes tour of England.
Instead, both departed in swift succession in the 2012-13 summer and Australia’s batting line-up was plunged into a crisis. The side promptly went nine Tests without a win during which they made a dizzying array of alterations to the batting unit in a desperate effort to counteract the loss of Ponting and Hussey.
This time there could be even greater upheaval. If Australia nurse all seven of those aforementioned players through to the end of the Ashes next year they could quite possibly face a situation where as many as four or five of them could depart within a matter of months.
That would be a disastrous outcome. Australia have the perfect opportunity to begin the side’s transition given that two of its elder statesmen, Haddin and Siddle, have had awful recent returns and there is a wealth of replacements for either player.
In Siddle’s past 11 Tests he has taken just 24 wickets at the inflated average of 44. He has bowled with accuracy and admirable courage, but he no longer appears to have the penetration required to consistently trouble Test batsmen.
His decline in effectiveness has coincided with a startling drop in pace. The last time Australia played India at home, three summers ago, Siddle intimidated the touring batsmen while regularly nudging his pace close to 150kmh.
But over the past 12 months he has operated mainly in the low 130s and has looked a far less potent bowler, with his returns backing up that perception.
NSW beanpole Josh Hazlewood has been impressive for Australia in the ODIs against South Africa and seems well suited to filling Siddle’s role as the Test side’s stock paceman.
Hazlewood has been rested from the next round of the Shield and, by all reports, is a certainty to be in Australia’s squad for the first Test.
The young right armer should only play at Brisbane, however, if spearhead Harris is ruled unfit. Harris, who is on the comeback from serious knee surgery, was given the choice to be rested from Queensland’s next Shield match but has opted to play to boost his match fitness.
If he comes through that match in good nick he should lead Australia’s attack alongside Johnson, left arm swing bowler Mitchell Starc and spinner Nathan Lyon.
Starc cannot possibly be dropped, yet again, after playing just one Test against Pakistan in the UAE. The 24-year-old has been treated appallingly by the selectors since making his Test debut three years ago.
During that period he has continually been dropped, ‘rested’ or ‘rotated’ after playing just one Test. In the second Test against Pakistan he was far more threatening than Siddle and every bit as impressive as Johnson.
It was a remarkable display given that he had not played a first-class match for 14 months. Since returning from that tour, Starc has snared seven wickets in his sole Shield game, and taken 5-72 across two ODIs against South Africa.
The 196-centimetres quick is bowling just as swiftly as Johnson, regularly pushing the speed gun close to 150kmh. Combine that extreme pace with his late swing and steepling bounce and he represents exactly the type of bowler India’s batsmen would hate to face on a rock-hard Gabba deck.
The man gloving his thunderbolts at Brisbane should not be Haddin but Starc’s NSW teammate Peter Nevill. Like Siddle, Haddin’s recent performances have suggested he is a faded force at Test level. His past five Tests have seen Haddin compile just 71 runs at the miserable average of nine
In South Africa, he was vulnerable against pace. In the UAE he floundered against spin. After keeping neatly last Australian summer, his glove work is also on the decline.
Nevill is renowned for his tidy keeping and is also a wonderfully gifted batsman in the best form of his career. The 29-year-old has made 716 runs at 48 in the Shield since the start of last summer and was also the Blues’ leading runscorer in this year’s One Day Cup.
Queensland’s Chris Hartley and WA’s Sam Whiteman also have claims to take over from Haddin. However, the former is 32 years old at a time when Australia need to build for the future, while Whiteman’s form has been poor in all formats this summer after a blistering 2013-14 Shield campaign.
The last spot in the side up for consideration is the number four role, with skipper Michael Clarke appearing unlikely to play at Brisbane due to his hamstring injury.
Clarke reportedly will be named in Australia’s squad for the Test but it would be a huge risk to rush him back given there is a World Cup and an Ashes tour on the horizon.
Queensland youngster Joe Burns should be drafted in to replace Clarke, with all-rounder Shane Watson batting ahead of him at first drop.
South Australian strokemaker Callum Ferguson seems to be the favourite to take Clarke’s spot if he misses out. Ferguson’s form over the past three seasons would justify such a selection.
Whoever replaces Clarke, however, likely will only be a stop-gap selection who will be jettisoned once the skipper returns. They will essentially be auditioning for a place in the side six to twelve months down the line when the likes of Clarke and Watson may well reach the end of their careers.
Ferguson will be 31 in a year’s time. I have no issue with selecting mature players to begin Test careers on the proviso that they are clearly the best available option and have fantastic career records, like Rogers did when he was picked for last year’s Ashes tour.
Ferguson does not have anywhere near the same pedigree as Rogers, however. Australia would be better served giving an opportunity to a far younger cricketer like Burns who, despite being five years the junior of Ferguson, has a better first-class record.
Ferguson has an average of 39 and has scored a century every eight matches, compared to Burns’ mark of 42 and return of one century every six matches.
The latter has more upside than Ferguson who, even now at the peak of his powers at 30 years old, is not clearly a better player than the blossoming Burns.
The Queenslander has carved 1084 runs at 57 in first-class cricket since the start of last summer. His impressive form has also extended to limited overs cricket, with 385 runs at 55 in 50-over games for Queensland this summer, including a ton against Ireland.
Burns may be opening the batting in the Shield but he has plenty of experience down the order. He started last summer batting at four for Queensland before he was moved to opener midway through the season due to the dearth of options for the Bulls in that slot.
He has spent the majority of his Shield career batting between three and five in the order for Queensland. Compact in defence and blessed with an array of attacking strokes, Burns is a versatile batsmen capable of batting anywhere from one to six.
He drives strongly down the ground and also punishes bowlers who drop short, particularly when he unfurls his viciously powerful pull shot. Burns represents the future. So, too, do Nevill, Starc and Hazlewood. It is time for Australia to move forward.
My team for the first Test
1. David Warner
2. Chris Rogers
3. Shane Watson
4. Joe Burns
5. Steve Smith
6. Mitch Marsh
7. Peter Nevill
8. Mitch Johnson
9. Mitchell Starc
10. Ryan Harris (or Josh Hazlewood if Harris is not fit)
11. Nathan Lyon
Time for youth
Guest
To avoid ending up like the West Indies and with the rise of 20/20; we need a team where most will still be with us for 5 years. So for the Adelaide Test, please find the following: 1 Warner 28 2 Maddinson 23 3 Burns 25 4 Marsh 23 5 Smith 25 6 Wade 28 7 Johnson 33 8 Starc 23 9 Siddle 30 10 Lyon 27 11 Hazelwood 23 12 Faulkner 24 I am sure that most of you would wince at seeing Maddinson there, but in light of what happened, he is the next best option under 26. Siddle should be there until Cummins/Pattinson can slot back in. With Johnson no spring chicken, having them back as soon as possible would be best. We need a core team that can go on for 5 years, so we don't end up in the mess we were after Langer, Martyn, Warne and McGrath left us in the course of a series. Nevill and Hartley are too old and we want a keeper that can go for a lot longer (I am aware that Nevill is only 1-2 years older, but in eight years, he will be 37!) We need to blood the younger players with veterans, then phase them out. Otherwise, as this excellent article suggests, this will happen again. I have been advocating this position since 2002 when Martin Love and others came into the team. Though he was my fav batsman, Steven's mighty ton may have hurt us long term as the selectors lost the courage they showed dropping Healy (remember Gilly's 2nd Test, heck he got 81 on debut) and Mark Waugh. Harris, Haddin and Clarke all have question marks on their fitness and Watson periodically breaks down (52 Matches and still only 36.26!!!!!). With Smith, the NSW Captain, as a potential Test Captain, just making him so and name Wade as his deputy. And please don't put either Clarke or Smith above 5-6. They are natural number 5 batsman like Steve Waugh and Clarke is an absolute failure at 4 (average 30.26 compared to 61.83 at 5 and 48.76 at 6) and Smith averages 54.67 at 5. These natural players of spin and super runners should not bat anywhere but in those 2 spots. Let Burns and Mitchell Marsh bat there, it is better suited for them and better for the team. Warner, our top ranked ICC batsman, averaging 47.47 and rising; could easily provide guidance to the 2 debutants and the untested Marsh (averaging 41 after 2 Tests, with an 87 against Pakistan). Thanks for reading
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
"If we see wholesale retirements after the Ashes so be it". Being flippant about losing a massive chunk of your side in quick succession is why Australia found itself in a massive hole last year, going nine Tests without a win. If they nurse Haddin, Rogers, Harris, Clarke, Watson and Siddle through to the end of the next Ashes, chances are that 4-5 of them will then retire or be dumped in the following six months or so, leaving Australia's side in disarray.
Tim
Guest
Bearfax, consider it a date ;)
Bearfax
Guest
You and I have got to have a deep and meaningful conversation about this Tim. But I would suggest we wait until 2018. Is it a date?
Tim
Guest
By the same token Bearfax, you are automatically assuming that Hughes will overcome his craven deficiencies through 'development'. Without conceding that for all that overcome difficulties, there are many more that do not And, I struggle to remember seeing a player as flawed as Hughes
Bearfax
Guest
Tim I appreciate your examples and what you are saying. But the problem is you are judging a player before he has even got to a stage where the best of his cricket is before him. You could have used the same principle on Hayden, Steve Waugh,, Boone, Border etc all of whom struggled with low averages to start, some worse than Hughes at the same age. Players develop and suggesting because a very few dont reach their potential by the time they are 30+, and therefore that is most likely to apply to Hughes is at best unfair on the kid and on Maxwell.
dan ced
Guest
I disagree. Ferguson and Ludeman.. not quite convinced Burns is ready, though I have my eye on him. Ludeman a better keeper than Neville even if Neville is a better bat. [No redbacks bias contained in this post]
Tim
Guest
Bearfax, by the same token you are basing that a good first class average is full proof in its indication that a player will make it in tests. And I agree, mostly it is, but, like the Ramprakash example, or another in Graeme Hick, it is not as full proof as you think it is. To me Hughes is another example And while I agree it is unwise to write off young players, it is also equally as unwise to persist with ones that you doubt will make it As for you pointing to Hughes's average after his first series, wonderful, but I remember Matthew Sinclair of NZ was similar in his Bradman like run plunder, and was worked out soon after, and disappeared
jamesb
Guest
Just heard on radio, this is the team/squad against India: Warner Rogers Watson Clarke Smith M.Marsh B.Haddin M.Johnson R.Harris P.Siddle N.Lyon J.Hazelwood
Johnny Spina
Guest
How has Watson earned his spot in the test side? Cant bat in tests and bowling is terribubble I love the addition of Burns Gives us at least a sniff to win this test
Bearfax
Guest
Tim I think you are spuriously using a rare example like Ramprakesh to imply a predictable or quite common phenomenon. It isnt. An example or two of outcomes of anything in say a 100 cases that appear similar doesnt make such an outcome likely, only slightly possible. No one can predict such unlikely outcomes surely. Most batsmen will tend to perform close to their first class averages especially by the time they reach their primary years around about 28-36. Records confirm that. Some will take longer in their development than others but that's all part of maturing. Its most unusual when they are ten runs less or more than their first class average. That's why I think your argument about Hughes and now Maxwell is based on a fragile assumption. They MIGHT end up like Ramprakesh. Probabilities suggest strongly otherwise.. Both Hughes and Maxwell are still young and we've seen consistently how players at that age have a tendency for rashness and lack of consistency that disappears by the time they hit 30. I feel judging the final product on how they have performed in developmental periods (especially when they are amongst the best statistically performed) is surely exceedingly harsh. And surely we are not going to make the mistakes made with Bevan, Hodges, Hayden (should have been selected earlier again), Love, Siddons etc. I realise some had strong players in the test team ahead of them, but for reasons, often relating to impressions, rather than solid facts, they were never given substantial chances at test cricket yet were top class first class players, some better than the test incumbents. I hope we're not going to make the same errors of judgement and prematurely asses Hughes and Maxwell based on flaws being addressed in their developmental phase while ignoring it with others because of the occasional attractive score. Mitch Marsh is the flavour of the day and seen as the great hope after one good test. Hughes was averaging 92.5 after his first two tests with 2 centuries and a 75 and finished the three test series averaging 71. I know all the reasons given about how they bowled to him. But two facts. The South Africans had probably the best fast bowling battery around at that time, and no matter whether Hughes was found out of not, he showed what skill he has. And he did it as a raw kid at 21 not 23 as per Marsh or 30 as per his brother. You dont score so consistently in a series unless you have something special there. The issue is addressing the flaws and he is young enough to do that. Once he's done that he could be anything. Shaun Marsh could have been a star but never seemed to learn from his mistakes and his first class averages show that. Hughes is showing in first class cricket that he is learning.as is Maxwell.
blanco
Guest
@Sideline- Starc is too erratic, needs more time in the shield . Difficult to pick Starc above the likes of Hazlewood, Siddle , Harris or Johnson. Starc isn't in the best 3 fast men for Australia. I"d also argue that he isn't in the two best left arm seamers from Australia( as far as First Class).He is a a very good short form bowler n nothing more.
Tim Holt
Roar Guru
Bearfax, I cannot fathom Maxwell in tests, and you can say that he was encouraged to play his natural game at 3, but, when one comes out in a situation dictating one dig in, and attempts a reverse sweep to the 2nd ball he faces.....No, that is just absurd, and if it was on Lehmann's prompting, i think we all need to question whether Boof has lost the plot. M Marsh was an absurd selection, like Maxwell, both selected on the evidence shown in games that have no relevance to test cricket. But, he showed an ability against Pakistan, and though he could be a Henriques flash in the pan he deserves at the very least a spot in Brissy to prove if it was just a fluke, or evidence that he is able. Keep in mind there were huge tabs on him in his youth As for stats never lying as you declare in your support of hughes, well sorry, but you are wrong, as I showed you with the example of Mark Ramprakash. I agree with you over Khawaja, he has been mistreated, and if he plays well in the Shield match this week, I would be so tempted to insert him at 5 in Brissy, and toss Watson. But, I fear it would leave the team too inexperienced. In closing, all our debates underline is how paper thin Australia's test batting stocks are- as symbolised in the team with how many are passengers on the bus, and the non existent depth
Raytah
Guest
Nice Article Ronan but I respectfully disagree. I think its probably safe to say that no player in the selection pool does not intend to play in the Ashes next year and therefore age would not really come into my selections as this would be the relevant horizon. If we see wholesale retirements after the Ashes so be it but Australian selectors could do a lot worse then give young batsmen a chance to build a strong first class pedigree before throwing them into international test cricket. Encouraging Australian batsmen to get long form subcontinent and english county exposure before they play international cricket is incredibly important as well. We have many promising young batsmen in particular who need to be ripened before picked. My team picked is what I perceive to be the best XI, with one eye on next years Ashes: Rogers Warner Watson Clarke/(Khwaja) Smith Marsh M Haddin Johnson Starc Harris Lyon Hughes, S Marsh, Pattinson, Cummins would be next in line.
Don Freo
Guest
Ummm...Nah! Too much of a struggling NSW and Qld in that lot. Interesting languaging of Ferguson's age for next year at 31. Last week he was only 29. Which sounds better? Pick him now and he could have played 15 tests by the time he is 31.
Bearfax
Guest
Tim, firstly Maxwell. He's had a worse selection arrangement than even Khawaja, who was crucified. Remember he has played only three tests and that in a brace in India and one recently when he was selected as No 3 and then according to him told to go and play his natural game, ergo swing the bat as No 3, a position he never bats at.. And he did score 37 in the first innings. They'll give so-so batsmen up to 20 innings in a row, but this kid has never been give a serious chance. I think he's worked hard to get his game more consistent and his average in first class cricket of 40.74. But I think, like warner had initially, a reputation as a one day player and like Bevan, who ended up with the best first class average in Australia for the past 50-60 years, he has been pigeonholed. He deserves a serious chance. They're going to stick with Marsh despite a very average batting average, but Maxwell aged 26 with one of the best averages is being ignored. As for Hughes, also just turning 26, I've said my piece often enough and maintain he is one of the three or four batsmen we have at present and a future test star. Stats dont lie and as Border pointed out, a player who can score big like that at first class level will do the same at test level if persisted with. Its almost 18 months since he was dropped yet he has the best first class average over the past two years of anyone. Carters, like Khawaja probably need to still prove themselves a bit more. But they are streets ahead of some of the batsmen they have been selecting. Pick them and given them a run for a while. It seems to me the selectors, except for some family favourites, are not prepared to risk the younger generation much, despite better averages.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Nick what would you be saying about Burns if his scores for this season were 191, 98, 0, 7, 183 and 22? You see, you arbitrarily subtracted 177 runs from his season total and asked us to re-judge him based on that. I did the opposite just to underline the folly of such an exercise.
The Magic Man
Guest
Hughes is an opener... that's it. Stop stuffing around. He is not a 5 or a 4 and I wouldn't feed his fragility to the lions at 3. He has a tremendous 1st class record at opener but he needs to wait for Rogers as I still have the blind guy just ahead. Warner is a lock and has a great combo with Rogers. Watson is a no brainer at 3. Clarke is out... his back is cactus and it's placed a time bomb on his hammy. As a result Steve Smith can bat where he likes. Joe Burns is next cab for me. In great form for 2 years and an overall average above 40... if you can't average 40 in Shield you're not a test bat. Easy decision here over Ferguson. Mitch Marsh gets picked on incumbency but I'm not sold on him. I hope he makes me a believer. Haddin... gee in the last 12 months his form with the bat has dropped like a meteor. Now he's returning from injury and hasn't had a solid net sesh or time in the middle. I'm concerned. I'm teetering on punting him for Neville. I want to win Tests now not bask in hero worship of past deeds. Hads at 57 has dramas... If Clarke was fit I'd punt him and there's no way I'd pick him if he's not 100%. Johnson and Starc should be certs. Peter Siddle should be gone... you can never carry a bowler. I remember Gillespie when the team carried him like a dead carcass in his final England tour, it will only get worse for Sids. Harris or Hazelwood are tossing for the 10 position. Impressed with Josh... maybe save Harris for the 2nd Test if he's not quite ready. Lyon has a super Gabba record and keeps his spot ahead of the eternally unlucky OKeefe and Boyce on that alone. Simples!
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
You don't bat your keeper at #3 in tests. Coming out after keeping for a day and a half and having to throw the pads straight on isn't a good idea.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Agreed. Also, there was a lot of talk in the last Ashes tour of England about picking Bird over Starc because Starc couldn't keep it tight, but if you looked at the stats for all the tour games that were played, Starc actually had a better economy rate. He is currently bowling with good form, good rhythm, good pace, and doesn't bowl any more bad balls than any other bowler. It would be a really tough call to leave him out I think.