Great to watch, but Australia just had a World Cup disaster

By Geoff Lemon / Expert

It may have been a great finish, but Australia have a lot to think about, even if their Eden Park embarrassment was partly disguised by some bowling magic from Mitchell Starc.

Don’t think I’m being a curmudgeon – it was an excellent game to watch, and 150 versus 150 makes for much more compelling viewing than 400 versus abject surrender. But from an Australian team perspective the game was still a disaster.

In the incongruous surrounds of a rugby ground packed with 60,000 hostile New Zealanders, pre-game conversation of massive scores and short boundaries collapsed as quickly as Australia’s batting, the visitors shot out for their lowest first-innings World Cup score of 151.

Tim Southee removed the openers, Daniel Vettori choked up numbers three and four, then Trent Boult cleaned up most of the rest with a return of 5/27. But it wasn’t the unplayable bowling that Southee produced to demolish England earlier in the tournament. The Australians have plenty of reason to look at their own approach.

Aaron Finch was bowled missing a shot that wasn’t there. Shane Watson holed out to midwicket. Glenn Maxwell and Mitchell Marsh chopped on, Michael Clarke and Mitchell Johnson chipped to cover, Mitchell Starc played around a straight one.

Only David Warner and Steve Smith could claim little fault in their dismissals, while Brad Haddin had licence to slog in a last-wicket stand that dragged Australia’s total up from the depths of 106/9.

The collapse was about going too hard too soon, then losing composure when things came undone. Enough talk about short boundaries will see batsmen try to find them, but as cooler heads advised during the lead-up, Eden Park has no history of huge scores.

In 69 matches at the ground, only five innings have topped 300 runs. More important is what happens with the pitch and with the ball, and Saturday’s game offered swing and bounce in plenty.

It was a disastrous return to the side for Michael Clarke, both as a batsman and a captain. I’ve argued previously that it’s hard to make a case for Clarke being in Australia’s best one-day XI. I won’t go over all that again.

But it’s still significant that he’s there by dint of his ambition to captain a World Cup win. I admire and respect Clarke’s achievements, but here preoccupation with his personal legacy has overridden the team’s interest.

He may yet do well in this tournament, and I hope he does, but it won’t legitimise the reason for his presence.

George Bailey, the man Clarke replaced, may not have offered anything more in Saturday’s shambles, but we’ll never know: showing a cool head to rescue the team has been one of Bailey’s specialties.

Clarke’s dismissal today was all rust and no steel: the drive caught at cover must be the softest and most basic cricketing error.

He was rusty in the field too, and the scorecard flatters him.

With Starc swinging the ball and rattling the stumps, having just taken two wickets for four runs across three overs that included the innings dinner break, with Corey Anderson looking extremely shaky, and with 60 runs still required to win, Clarke replaced the bowler with Johnson.

Johnson’s first spell of four overs had gone for 52. Anderson duly collared him for 16.

Clarke then brought on mid-innings filler in Marsh. When Starc finally returned he immediately resumed taking wickets, but New Zealand were within 15 of their target.

In Australia’s innings, McCullum adapted and kept bowling those who were causing the damage. Clarke remained on auto-pilot.

The only upside for Australia is the confidence boost for a quiet bowler who needs to believe in his own ferocity. Although New Zealand’s batsmen attacked throughout, Starc’s ability to land fast swinging yorkers under pressure – three of his wickets were clean bowled – will be important in the games to come.

Australia’s position in the group is not guaranteed. Games against Scotland, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka remain, but one stumble or washout could see the co-host nation finish third, looking at a semi-final rematch back at Eden Park.

Cricket Australia have not deemed New Zealand worthy of a single match since the last World Cup, and even in next season’s schedule have preferred the comatose West Indies for the marquee Boxing Day Test.

The Chappell-Hadlee trophy, which should be contested over a series, was thrown to the winner of Saturday’s game like an extra tyre with a car sale.

Add the selection of a captain who had barely played the format since 2013, and there’s still a chance Australia will be left to rue both counts of complacency.

This article was first published on Wisden India.

The Crowd Says:

2015-03-02T09:46:20+00:00

Broken-hearted Toy

Guest


Seems ridiculous to rest bowlers at all considering the gaps between games and that they really need games under their belt.

2015-03-02T00:33:52+00:00

Bobbo7

Guest


Won both games Dalgety

2015-03-02T00:04:32+00:00

Freighter

Guest


So the 2 games have no resemblance to each other? A batsman hitting century after century at test level shouldn't get a go at a ODI because his Ryobi Cup form is questionable? Really?

2015-03-01T23:51:40+00:00

E-Meter

Guest


But NZ won the game, and deserved to win. They were too good for us.

2015-03-01T23:16:52+00:00

Tinfoil Hat

Guest


Test form for odi selection should be given the same weight as odi form is given when selecting the test team. Using your logic, someone like Finch could end up in the test team. So, no, clarkes selection in the odi squad should not be based on test form.

2015-03-01T22:15:51+00:00

Freighter

Guest


you still haven't really answered by question- Do you not give any credit to someone's test abilities or record when selecting a ODI team?

2015-03-01T22:13:26+00:00

Brian

Guest


Now that they are playing midweek there is talk of resting Starc from the Afghanistan match. I do agree they would have preferred to play Bangladesh but at the same time they cannot always expect schedules to be tailored to their rotation and playing needs. NZ lower middle and lower order din't get to bat against England so had not batted in a game themselves for 11 days as opposed to Australia's 14 days.

2015-03-01T21:42:53+00:00

Peter

Roar Rookie


The schedule isn't strenuous. He's only bowling 10 overs a game. He would probably only have been needed to play 3 games, say. It's not like Xavier Doherty is doing anything more than carry drinks and substitute fielding.

2015-03-01T21:37:17+00:00

Riccardo

Guest


Absolute rubbish. We do however have that chip on our shoulder you are referring to; it's getting lighter though mate.

2015-03-01T21:35:31+00:00

Riccardo

Guest


That's fair Mark. A great win but for the heroics of the other Mitch who was superb.

2015-03-01T21:26:45+00:00

Riccardo

Guest


I agree Debco that the Black Caps will analyse some very poor shot-selection in their debrief. Not that this legitimises your post which is pathetic.

2015-03-01T21:01:33+00:00

The Runt

Guest


Honestly I to could work my butt off but Clarke has avoided one day cricket for the last 2 years and it just maybe that the game has past him by , as I said earlier I hope not but the way he creaks and groans around the park it is like watching a 50 year old play a young mans game, he was our best batsman for a long time but coming off a very short base of work for the last 2 years is it really for Australia's best interest to have him out there. The bloke that has had the team in the past when MC has been out has gotten us back to number 1, and seems to bring out the best in everyone. As a side issue a long look should be had at the blokes that just go hard with the bat with no thought to how the game state is , ie Warner Watson Smith Maxwell all are capable of good stuff but if they dont come off the rest of the team is under pressure. I can hear the squeals from here but dig a little deeper all have not so impressive figures with the bat and the averages are inflated by the odd big score. Bailey is coming off a lean period but still has all of them covered in 2 areas average and amount of 50s the worst being Smith 40 times into bat and only over 50 6 times. The Australians need a thinker in the team someone that looks at the game as a whole not just see ball hit ball and hope.

2015-03-01T16:41:27+00:00

SAVAGE

Guest


An Australian moaning about another country's cricketing crowd? You must be a rare form of ironic. In fact you should be in a laboratory as test case being studied.

2015-03-01T13:57:30+00:00

Dalgety Carrington

Roar Guru


Other than the fact that it's twice now they've "gone too hard" (and twice "there's not too much to read into it").

2015-03-01T13:55:18+00:00

Dalgety Carrington

Roar Guru


Who's to say.

2015-03-01T13:54:11+00:00

Dalgety Carrington

Roar Guru


The momentum was there as Aussie wickets began to fall Spruce, your boys continued to take them, likewise the when your boys started to lose wickets the momentum continued for the bowlers and so batting can feel perilous and false shots ensued. My point, regarding Geoff's point which I'm guessing you didn't follow too closely in your rush to bag the Aussies, was around trying to use a "false shots logic" works on either side.

2015-03-01T13:10:37+00:00

Lano

Roar Guru


So what team would you have picked? You have two fast- medium bowlers and a quick -vs - spinner as options?

2015-03-01T12:11:28+00:00

Harry Jones

Expert


Epic

2015-03-01T11:50:42+00:00

Bigbaz

Guest


Yep, Smiths contribution for this World Cup is underwhelming , but many want him as captain. All in good time!

2015-03-01T11:46:53+00:00

Bigbaz

Guest


So, as a top 3bat, what should his percentage be, 5,10,20 ?

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar