McCullum should put things right against Australia at the World T20

By Geoff Lemon / Expert

If you’re going to do something as ridiculous with your life as play a hundred Test matches, you would want to mark that milestone with a hundred runs.

When you think about it, that’s over 400 days standing around under various shades of baking sun, with the occasional vest-huddling Arctic breeze to mix things up, being yelled at by masses of drunk human idiocy or ignored by the depressing expanses of empty stands.

Over 400 days of chasing leather, crouching and cramping, walking in with the bowler, running back with the flight, sweating and toiling and aching, before being pounded with missiles once again, and as often as not, returning to a tomblike dressing room without a decent score against your name.

Those are the easy bits, before we start talking about being a bowler.

More cricket:
» The Liebke Ratings: New Zealand vs Australia first Test
» Raw Australian Test team exceeding expectations
» Australian bowlers show the Kiwi attack how it’s done
» Adam Voges, batting ugly but sitting pretty over Bradman
» Watch: Aussies down Kiwis by an innings and 52 runs
» Scorecard: New Zealand vs Australia first Test

Of the 64 men who’ve had the fortitude to reach the 100-Test mark, Colin Cowdrey, Javed Miandad, Gordon Greenidge, Alec Stewart, Inzamam-ul-Haq, Ricky Ponting and Graeme Smith saluted with the bat while doing it.

All of those players have more centuries than Brendon McCullum, so it wasn’t entirely reasonable to expect that he would match their feat. Part of the hype about hundreds is that you can’t just rock up at the quartermaster’s store and put in a request.

But in his landmark Test, with a Wellington crowd behind him and a farewell Test ahead, there was always the idea that McCullum might do something special. His only Test century against Australia was scored at this ground in 2010, and his triple-century against India two summers past.

In the end, McCullum’s tally for the match did involve the numbers 1, 0 and 0. Unfortunately for him, the chronological ordering read 0 and 10. Twice the ball jagged into him, once taking the edge on its way to pad and cordon, the other fuller and trapping him in front during the last over of day three.

Failure against Australia is not new for McCullum. In Tests, his average of 38.07 drops to 24.59 against owners of a baggy green. He has passed 50 only four times in those games, once every 7.00 innings versus a career rate of 4.14. Not only that, but all those scores were made in his second innings in games that were well and truly lost. His ton only delayed a ten-wicket loss.

In One-Day Internationals, the difference is less stark: 30.41 average overall, 28.76 against Australia. Only in 20-over cricket, with the small sample size of five innings, does his record improve, on the back of the unbeaten 116 he scored at his last attempt in 2010. Against Australia, he averages 57 with a strike rate of 156, versus an overall rate of 35.66 at 136.

But of course, McCullum will not be able to add to those five innings at the upcoming World Twenty20, where New Zealand could contribute to knocking out Australia in the group stages. He won’t be there, retiring from all forms after his next Test.

It’s a decision that makes no sense. McCullum made his name and changed his trade on the back of his T20 game. The disappointment of losing that 50-over World Cup final less than a year ago must rankle, and New Zealand are a genuine chance in the shortest form. McCullum remains one of the most destructive batsmen in the world, with a global carnival of destructive batting to start a fortnight after the Christchurch Test.

And yet, that is where he’s decided to call it quits, facing the side against whom his record is worse than any other. It fits with a feeling about the man and his career: a vague feeling of unfinished business.

In ten miracle months through 2014, he fell five runs short of matching Michael Clarke’s feat of four double-centuries in a year. His 195 would have been the fastest double in history if he hadn’t holed out trying to reach it. Of his 11 centuries, one was a triple, two were doubles and two more were above 185.

But to register scores so big and still average under 40 tells a story. He’s shown what he could do, it’s just that mostly he didn’t. He’s had 174 Test innings but made nearly a fifth of his runs in five of them. Two of his 12 calendar years of Test cricket returned averages over 40. It was either curious or telling that Cricinfo’s list of his five great knocks included 97 in a rained-out draw and that 104 against Australia in a flogging.

More important though than McCullum’s individual struggle has been the way his team has folded, faltered, and grown timid against their brasher trans-Tasman rivals.

New Zealand’s wave of adrenaline through to the 2015 World Cup final broke meekly on the Port Phillip shore as they reached Melbourne. They were talked up before the November 2015 Test series, but failed to arrive until its sixth day. They had a Test win and a series draw for the taking in Adelaide, but couldn’t keep their heads after an umpiring error. In Wellington, they did exactly the same, having already slipped as favourites with a first-innings collapse.

McCullum has been feted as a leader and inspirer, and deservedly so. He has made this team as good as it is, and won the respect of many. But alongside the respect and even adoration is a frustration for the sporadic nature of his batting achievements. With one Test to play in that career, he cannot change his ilk or his approach. But his team desperately needs McCullum’s dice to land the right way on his last roll.

This piece was originally published on Wisden India

The Crowd Says:

2016-02-17T12:43:47+00:00

Bobbo7

Guest


NZ were in the final because McCullum teed off from ball one in every game. Had he got Starc away it would have gotten NZ off to a good start and put real belief in NZ for that game after all the MCG is too big rubbish. Why change the style that got them to the final? His style is a gamble and sometimes it doesn't pay off. As a rusted on NZ fan I have no issue with the way McCullum batted in the WC final. He did what he does and it did not come off.

2016-02-17T07:17:19+00:00

Paul D

Roar Guru


Well, I knocked one up this arvo. Harvested what I think are the top 5 names. Should be up tomorrow. Some surprising (and not so surprising names) in the list.

2016-02-16T22:48:38+00:00

SP

Guest


Like the look of Tom Latham, Nicholls looked good too. Along with Williamson, Southee, Henry, Boult and Taylor, NZ will be a competitive and dangerous side for some time to come.

2016-02-16T22:33:38+00:00

Bobbo7

Guest


Agree Geoff - the way he played up until the final got NZ there. McCullum only has one way and if he is in for more than 5 overs NZ made a good score

2016-02-16T22:32:03+00:00

Bobbo7

Guest


I think he will deal with it well. What NZ need is for guys like Latham and Nicholls to get up to standard - NZ have done well recently because they've had two gun bats in Williamson and Taylor - NZ sorely missed Taylor in the last Test. You can't rely on guys like Anderson to bat time unfortunately.

AUTHOR

2016-02-16T20:35:37+00:00

Geoff Lemon

Expert


And McCullum got his team to the final, with the momentum and the belief he created. Also with the bat: 50 off 21 balls against Australia when NZ nearly got bowled out for 150, so imagine if they hadn't had his start. And his fifty off 22 balls against South Africa in that massive semifinal chase, that got his team close enough to the asking rate that Elliott was able to get them over the line. Had a brilliant World Cup as a team player.

AUTHOR

2016-02-16T20:33:05+00:00

Geoff Lemon

Expert


I don't think he wasn't up to it, he hit Starc's first ball for six in the pool game at Eden Park. And Johnson's. Easy to say in retrospect that he should have respected Starc - and for the sake of the contest, I wish he had. But I guess he thought he should play the same way that had got his team there, and that was to take down the opponent's best bowlers. He took 25 off an over from Steyn in the semi. It's like when he holed out on 195, and people said he'd thrown away the record for the fastest Test double. But if that wasn't how he played, he would never have been in a position to break it.

AUTHOR

2016-02-16T20:27:11+00:00

Geoff Lemon

Expert


Incredible number, Paul. I didn't have time to do an analysis across all players, but I'd love to read it.

AUTHOR

2016-02-16T20:26:03+00:00

Geoff Lemon

Expert


Haha. No, Jacko, I thought he was brilliant in the shorter forms, just that he underperformed in Test matches. So I'd much rather see him go out captaining a win at the World T20 than making 4 and 15 in a Test match at home. Hopefully he can produce one last big innings this weekend.

2016-02-16T14:35:40+00:00

Paul D

Roar Guru


Yeah - but when he was all, even Bradman wished he could play like that.

2016-02-16T12:35:48+00:00

Richard

Guest


World Cup Final 2015- I will remember him forever as the bunny in the head lights, as opener swinging wildly at the first few unplayable balls from Mitchell Starc, who was on fire in the tournament. That was his moment, he should have known better. He wasn't up to it in the final analysis!

2016-02-16T10:29:09+00:00

Burgs

Guest


Irresponsible batting that let his team down that was- he should have simply tried to see off Starcs first couple of overs when the white ball was swinging, then go for it. He treated the world's best ODI bowler (daylight second) like a park cricketer and got what he deserved. Oh and WQ I remember him slaughtering the poms, that was enjoyable!

2016-02-16T10:28:54+00:00

Burgs

Guest


Irresponsible batting that let his team down that was- he should have simply tried to see off Starcs first couple of overs when the white ball was swinging, then go for it. He treated the world's best ODI bowler (daylight second) like a park cricketer and got what he deserved.

2016-02-16T07:39:52+00:00

AlanKC

Guest


The thing for me, with both Gayle and McCullum, is my disappointment at never having seen either of them when they were really on. I've sat down to watch them at every opportunity and rarely seen much - the peak of my disappointment being the WC final last year.

2016-02-16T07:36:28+00:00

AlanKC

Guest


Ouch, my dad used to talk about McCabe. Didn't realise he was quite so all or nothing though.

2016-02-16T07:35:30+00:00

AlanKC

Guest


You caught me, I trolled through hunderds before I got to him...

2016-02-16T06:47:12+00:00

Paul D

Roar Guru


Stan McCabe played 62 test innings and scored 32.5% of his runs in 5 of them. Anyone else got a better boom-or-bust contender than that? Minimum qualification - 50 innings.

2016-02-16T06:38:37+00:00

jacko

Guest


Im not sure why you want him to keep playing Geoff as from this article it appears you dont think he was very good anyway! He was one of very few test players who made me stop whatever I was doing and just sit and watch him bat. I never watched players like Seywag, Warner, Gilchrist, Botham, Cairns and Richards because of their average but because of the entertainment they gave me as a spectator and while all batsmen have to try to entertain in Odi and T20 matches some take it as their job in tests as well. BMac is never going to be remembered as a great of the game stats wise but he will be as an entertainer. A pity we dont have more.

2016-02-16T06:24:35+00:00

The Bush

Roar Guru


Of course Gayle didn't deliver on his talent. Would anybody honestly think that with Gayles ability, he should average so low in Test Cricket considering the generation he played in.

2016-02-16T06:19:41+00:00

matth

Guest


Are you sure Gayle was the first one you looked at? Because he is the obvious other with a few enormous innings and not much else in his career. Try Ross Taylor

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar