Glenn Maxwell should be Australia’s first choice number six Test batsman.
That statement is likely to cause uproar, because Maxwell is perceived to be just a big-hitting, unconventional stroke player – or simply put, he’s “the big show”.
While he can be described as that, it is often forgotten that it requires a lot of natural talent to play those kinds of innings. However, he’s now matured as a cricketer and he has learned to play a controlled innings.
Just looking at his stats, you can tell he can play Test cricket. His career first class batting average is 41.64, which is just below past Australian captain, Mark Taylor’s first-class average of 41.96.
I’m not saying Maxwell is as good as Taylor, I’m just pointing out that he can play red ball cricket.
In more recent times, his first-class record has been even more impressive.
Last summer he made 392 runs at an average of 56. He managed to do this without playing consistent red ball cricket due to his white ball cricket commitments for the national side. This makes his numbers even more noteworthy.
The biggest thing holding Glenn Maxwell back is that he’s perceived as a big-hitting, destructive short format player, whose technique is not suited to the longer format. However, the belief that if you are a big hitter and an aggressive player then you can’t play Test cricket, is wrong.
You just have to look at some of the past greats of Test cricket like Adam Gilchrist, Matthew Hayden, VVS Laxman, Brendon McCullum and Sir Viv Richards, to see that being an aggressive and destructive batsman can be very effective in red ball cricket.
In fact, I believe that Test cricket will be remembered as Glenn Maxwell’s best form of cricket, if he is given enough of a chance.
The aggressive field settings in Test cricket will work in Maxwell’s favour, allowing him to put opposition bowlers to the sword, and manipulate the field to his liking. Much like how David Warner currently takes advantage of aggressive field placements.
In addition to his already exceptional batting ability, he is an all-round cricketer.
He’s a brilliant fielder who you know will always convert the smallest of chances into a wicket through a breath-taking catch or a dazzling run out. He’s also a very under-rated bowler who would be a valuable addition to Australia’s attack, especially in the upcoming tour of India, where his bowling would be a welcome addition.
Glenn Maxwell deserves an extended run in the Australian Test team batting at number six.
He would be considered one of the front-runners for a position in the Test if it wasn’t for the perception that he’s “the big show”. However, his record speaks for itself and he deserves a shot at Test cricket.
mactheblack
Guest
Imagine the team is 95/5 in walks "The Big Show" ...defends the first ball but decides to throw caution to the wind, as is his nature and plays an audacious, if not ridiculous, reverse sweep that misses the mark and is given out LBW!!! I am all for Maxwell as a Test player, but unfortunately that's what can and will happen to him in the Test cauldron, more often than not, that could be selectors' thinking.
Rob JM
Guest
He was selected with an average at 50 originally. Obviously he is short of form but a gritty player at 6 with an explosive player at 7 seems like a better balance.
Rob JM
Guest
Maxwell has played at least two gritty innings where he went on to make a decent score after a top order collapse. He has it in him to play great red ball cricket.
armchair expert
Guest
The other angle is if Lyon has another shocker or 2, on top of his batting Maxwell couldn't do any worse with the ball either.
Pedro the Maroon
Guest
Maxi is not a bad option. When nothing else (ie M Marsh) is working go for the unconventional I say. He is capable of scoring more than 8, is a gun in the ring and can bowl a few overs. But this would require the selectors ot actually do something out of the box / remotely sensible.
AREH
Roar Guru
Surely he can't be far away if he grafts out some more substantial Shield scores...it's so frustrating to even think that he could already have been arguably one of the most important players in the test team. I hold out hope this can still happen; as others have rightly said, his FC numbers and performances are better than people think. Either way you'd have thought he'd be one of the first picked in the squad to go to India...it didn't work last time but he could be a real asset playing there.
AA
Guest
Give him a run
Rob
Guest
Totally agree with Maxwell being a # 6 Test batsman. Top class bowlers hate playing unconventional batsman and if they're aggressive they can turn the moment of a game in a session. They also attract a lot of energy from the opposition because they don't want them to get going. I've been watching Maxwell's scores closely for years and he consistently plays a lone hand against good bowling attacks or on pitches that other batsmen are struggling on. He has been building his average for 18 months now. He looked bad on many of his dismissals because he often shows a lack of respect for the opposition. Guess what the best players all believe they are better than their opponent and in tough situation they are the players who stand up. Did Viv Richards or any of his team mates respect opposition bowlers? Why do batsmen get out in the 90's because they start respecting the bowlers and start scratching around for example. Warner and Khawaja were both dismissed in Perth to nothing balls I'm sick of dear in the head light batsmen scratching around. Because they don't win test matches.
Lancey5times
Guest
We probably said the same thing about Warner and then he got picked and Hobart happened.
DingoGray
Roar Guru
Probably not.... But wouldn't a 20 ball 30-40 be much more value than a Mitch Marsh 40 ball less than 10 innings which seems to be norm for Mitch. I'd take Maxi everyday of the week. His FC average is very reasonable at mid 40's. He's an absolute gun in the field........ Everything is an upgrade....(well ok he can't bowl good medium pace- Maybe Mitch Marsh can replace Siddle and Maxy replace Mitch Marsh)
jamesb
Guest
Can Maxwell play a gritty grinding innings when it's needed? At this stage, I would have to say no.
armchair expert
Guest
If Maxwell had played in Taylor's day his first class batting average would drop by around 10 runs per innings with the longer boundaries and weaker bats they had compared to now.
Pedro the Maroon
Guest
Stop it. #6 = Border, Walters, Waugh, Ponting. These are actual batsmen with averages in the 50 region, not 30. Or the 23 average of Mitchell Marsh. #7 = Gillie and then Haddin (the latter's average was about 35) to a lesser extent. Nevill's four-hour 60 was a good rear guard action but let's not trumpet him a s a #6. He's hardly even a 7.
Patrick Effeney
Editor
Would love to see you proven right Andrew. By all accounts he's not in a great position with his state at the moment, but hopefully that gets resolved soon.
Lancey5times
Guest
I agree. And I won't make many friends by saying this but Mitch Marsh should go back to the Shield and work on his bowling in an effort to come back into the side as the 3rd seamer and bat at 8 (I don't think he's that far away from being able to play this role currently). Now that's a deep batting order with 5 bowlers!
Rob JM
Guest
If Nevill finds form you could even play Maxwell at 7!
correct sometimes
Guest
talk about hand picking stats