Australia’s 177-run loss at the WACA is, out of all of their recent abominations, the worst of the lot.
The game, perfectly set up on the second afternoon at 0-158, came alive as the Aussies proceeded to lose all ten wickets for 86. From there the Test match was dominated by a touring South African side with a mashed-together attack of three part-timers, a spinner on debut, probably their best ever seamer breaking down mid-match, and a batting line-up missing the world’s best batsman.
For the first two days, the game couldn’t have gone any more to script for the Australians if they had tried. An expert bowling performance on Day 1 had the South Africans reeling at 5-81 before a mini fight-back by Faf Du Plessis, Temba Bavuma and the ultra-impressive Quinton De Kock.
But then David Warner played like David Warner does, wielding a slashing willow in brutal fashion to take the game away from the opposition, getting the scoring rate above three and a half an over. That is the blueprint for the way Australia plays their cricket – aggressive yet calculated with bat and ball, taking the initiative from the opposition quickly, and then burying them never to seize their grip.
It seemed the first Test back on home soil after the 0-3 drubbing in Sri Lanka had brought about normal service resuming halfway through Day 2 of the Test match summer. You simply expected the Australians to take the game beyond doubt in fierce fashion, just like the last home Ashes summer, or the first and third Tests in South Africa the same season.
But then 21-year old firebrand Kagiso Rabada started to swing the ball at pace. Warner went. Philander was unrelenting, and Keshav Maharaj bowled with control and guile beyond that of a man making his Test debut. Soon, Dean Elgar and JP Duminy were set, and the South Africans went all Australian on the Australians.
The left-handed pair battered the tired home side into the ground, and once the declaration came, 539 was always going to be too much despite the valiant efforts of Usman Khawaja and Peter Nevill.
The first innings debacle felt like an all too familiar tale for Australia, yet almost felt scarily different. You half expect a collapse going to India when it’s turning sideways, England where it seams and swings heavily, or in the UAE or Sri Lanka where often a trio of spinners tangle the Australians into submission. But here at the WACA on a good wicket, in a familiar setting, against a weakened attack?
Since the first Ashes Test of last year, Australia’s batting fragilities are as follows – 7-101, 9-145, 7-204, 6-59, 9-203, 10-50, 10-140, 6-149, 8-156, 5-115, 8-116, 6-125, 8-149, 6-73, 8-98, 9-52, 7-122, 9-112, 9-60, 10-86.
Hardly batting performances that scream a nation on the climb, in fact it reeks of the exact opposite. Granted, 15 of the 20 above statistics are from overseas Test matches, but it is still an indictment.
So often, it is selection that people criticize when things go wrong in the Test arena, or players are brought into question. Mitch Marsh, and to a lesser extent Nathan Lyon are victims of this (ridiculous on the behalf of Lyon, a proven performer). But both men have had the difficult task of essentially learning their craft on the go under the Test match spotlight – Lyon debuting in 2011 after only playing state cricket for the first time in 2009, and Marsh made his Test debut after only 38 first class matches. Gone are the days of players battering the door down after years of strong Shield performances.
None of this is an excuse for poor output, but maybe, just maybe, instead of questioning those in the team, maybe it is time to say we’re not actually that good? A heavy loss at home may bring that suggestion closer to people’s minds than they care to imagine.
Andy
Guest
I do think it was a silly run in the context of the game. He knows no one else is in touch and that he needs to score a century for Australia to have any chance and that South Africas are a bowler down so the longer the game goes the better for him and yet he still went for the run. He couldnt have known what did happen but it was still a chance he shouldnt have offered. There is no real excuse for an opener to be run out on day 4 chasing a big total.
Gerrard
Guest
Well done to you guys for a fair and honest opinion without bull, it would have been hard for me to do that.
Geoff from Bruce Stadium
Guest
Unfortunately the Aussies don't appear to have the attitude, technique, discipline and intelligence to bat for long periods of time to save a match. If you go through the top order you would be hard pressed to find anyone with these credentials. Warner is a great player - he motors along in top gear and scores at a frightening pace - but could he bat for 6 hours when required? Even Smith doesn't appear to have the patience for it - and he's the captain and perhaps Australia's best batsman. Khwaja and Nevill tried their best - lasting for four hours each but Voges and the two Marsh boys went missing when the heat was on. Batting for a draw requires great technique, determination and the willingness to forego ego and not be tempted to take risks in order to achieve the objective of living to fight another day. These requirements are missing in the Australian version of how to play cricket.
Andy
Guest
I mostly blame the 'play your natural game' bollocks. That only worked when we had a brilliant team whos natural game was bloody good. Now we dont have any proper test batsmen, even our number 11 wants to score runs and swing the bat. I would love if one game Lehmann just told his players that he wants a draw and they are going to bat for all 5 days and never declare.
Bugs
Guest
The Aussie batsmen in the first innings, Warner and S.Marsh aside, were woeful. It's not just that SA batted better...we had the very best of conditions for batting - day 2 & 3, and we blew it. The ball wasn't hooping around with reverse swing, it was just moving, yet we were completely outdone by it. The following day Starc was generating more prodigious reverse swing than Rabada, but failed to remove Elgar or Duminy. Our weakness has been brutally exposed, and it was denial by Clarke and Co in the commentary team to blame 10-86 (on a benign wicket) on great bowling. Bad batting. Very bad. That's the real story. Hence Rabada with a 2-for and a 5-for got MOTM over Duminy's crucial century - he took wickets on a flat deck
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Spot on Anthony. I think that whole 'go for the win' in chases is actually a cover excuse because they know they can't bat time. None of them are capable of it.
BriainsTrust
Guest
I think its one of the stupidest losses I have ever seen. They key moment was when Steyn was injured, at that point in time, the SOuth African bowlers had one spell left in them, all they had to do was bat for a little while longer and SOuth Africa would have got tired and then it was all over.. To give away a bowled and an lbw to bowlers going around the wicket in Perth, particularly Shaun Marsh dismissal , the only way he was going to get out lbw is to try and hit the ball down the leg side from outside off. Then Smith , saying he was unlucky with DRS, if that ball had straightened a bit more and kept lower he would have been out anyway. WHat was he doing, does he even know the difference between an off spinner and left orthodox. i thought Warner set off on a very smart run, the only way he could have been run out was with a never seen before almost upside down diving throw though kicking the ball at the stumps and fluking a hit would have worked..
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Credit to the SAs I think. The Aussies battled hard in the last innings. Scoring one of their higher 4th innings scores of recent times and soaking up 120 overs. Just a tip for our bowlers, hit the pads. DRS is your friend.
Jimmmy
Guest
Australia don't play Test Cricket. South Africa do. Simple. When South Africa got the big second innings score, we needed to knuckle down and bat for the long haul. . We are just not capable of it. I want to see The Aussies scramble and fight for a draw. Without Steyn and with the wicket playing pretty good for a final day pitch , this was our chance to grind out an unlikely draw. We just don't know how. The Aussies should watch De Villiers and du Plessis from Adelaide 2012. Smith needed to bat like De Villiers in that match. Just play your natural game?? No! No! No! Play the game your team needs you to play.
Anthony Condon
Roar Pro
I think the Australians played pretty well, the South Africans just played better. I think you've hit the nail on the head though: "That is the blueprint for the way Australia plays their cricket – aggressive yet calculated with bat and ball, taking the initiative from the opposition quickly, and then burying them never to seize their grip." That's a fine tactic when you have several batsmen at the top of their game and a tail that can bat almost all the way down. Even if you start to collapse a few will be able to string together a partnership and get the score to something defendable. But Australia don't have several batsmen at the top of their game and a tail that can bat. I think Warner's run out shows the problem with Australian cricket perfectly. With over 500 to get in the fourth innings, and a day and a half left to bat, they were playing for the win. That's just insanity, as all evidence suggests that you're not going to do it, and if you do it will be a miracle. I appreciate David Warner only has one game, and that's to belt it around the ground, but why oh why would you be going for quick singles when what's needed is to last the day out. If you get to Friday lunch 2/300, then you can think about chasing down the win, but with a day and a half left, and more runs to score than you've scored in an innings for a long time, patience is what's needed. That's what South Africa did this test; they played test cricket. The game gets its name from it being a test of all your skills, and patience and intelligence are amongst those skills, and Australia doesn't have either. This "always play for the win" is a hangover from Steve Waugh. The only problem is, he had a team that was always a good chance of doing the unthinkable. If the Aussies had managed to eek out a draw then there would have been two more opportunities to win the series, as it is, now there is only one - winning both the remaining games.
Rob JM
Guest
I disagree, Our bowlers were superb, but the SA batsmen were just better. Yes the first innings collapse was awful but we had some bad luck and faced some good bowling. They fought in the second innings but should have played for a draw from the start. The loss to England in the first test was the most dissapointing in terms of throwing a game away with poor play.