The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Time to take playing all three formats off the international radar

David Warner and James Faulkner helped Australia to victory in the ODI against NZ. (AP Photo/Rob Griffith)
Roar Guru
31st October, 2016
4

A simple solution to player burnout? You don’t play all three formats at international level.

Maybe I am in the minority, but I don’t mind International T20 games. I also enjoy One Day Internationals, even the “meaningless series” matches. Test cricket always holds a place in my calendar, including how to get live scores while I’m at work. But there have also been many talks of player burnout, and the difficulties of switching formats.

Today, I have the solution. Just tell players they aren’t playing all three formats at international level.

The solution I am proposing is simple. As an international player, you either play Test match and/or ODIs. Or you play ODIs and/or T20s. Quite simple. If you are touring India as a batsman in the Test team, you aren’t thinking about the T20 highways where a Stick Cricket technique is required.

Going through the classes of players you have in cricket, this means that at all times there are two wicketkeepers for Australia. This can take the form of Test keeper (Neville) and ODI/T20 Keeper (Wade), or have the Test and ODI keeper and a rookie keeper or even a batsman with gloves as the T20 keeper. It allows a pathway to the Test spot, cutting their teeth on the T20 and ODI circuit first.

For the bowlers, the equation is much the same. Either be a specialist in one form of the game, or have transferable skills between two of them.

Nathan Lyon is a good spin bowler, his stats show that at Test level. Yet he can’t get a run in ODIs or T20s, which in this format works to the selectors mantra, they can give Cam Boyce or another spinner that role.

The quick men can also spread out between Test only (Siddle), Test/ODI (Starc), ODI/T20 (Tye) for example. This way they aren’t burning out.

Advertisement

Batsman get the same treatment. Yes there can be an argument that the excitement machine David Warner should be in every side. But at 30 years old, I would rather protect the body from workload by giving up the slogging of T20 for the slogging of ODIs.

Steve Smith doesn’t even seem to take to T20s, with a batting average of 21.55 at International T20 level. Give the fringe players these spots to not necessarily develop their batting skills, but their maturity in learning how to adjust to being on tour (such as India).

The all rounders in the Test squad has always been a bit of a problem child, and even this idea won’t really fix that. That can be solved by just putting a bowler in, and tell the batsman to score runs. Or put a batsman in, and not select a bowler who’s carrying an injury.

But for the ODI and T20 squads, a bits and pieces bowler-batsman is what you need. A tight bowler who might not take many wickets but won’t go for worse than six an over is valuable in new age short form.

And fearless bowlers who get given a bat and told, just swing the thing have a place in short form, especially T20 where mistakes (see edges) go for four and well placed cricket shots only get singles.

Overall, expanding the squads will also allow for some continuity in the T20 team and by extension the ODI squad outside of the World Cup. As ODI series now get slotted in to timeslots for contractual reasons and seemingly randomly outside of major tournaments, having a core group of players who play T20 and ODI will allow a team to be built. And when they ‘graduate’ to the Test team, there will be another player ready to take their place.

The landscape has changed, with Big Bash and IPL being a feature in the domestic market. Why not capitalise on it, and make Test-ODI-T20I-T20D a pathway rather than just sticking to the old methods because that’s what we’ve always done?

Advertisement
close