With the failings in Sri Lanka trumped by the collapse in Perth last week, compounded by yesterday’s Hobart disaster, many cricket followers and fans are left bewildered.
How can this team fall so far, so fast? Weren’t we ranked number one in Test cricket only a few months ago?
Yet now, if a team innings can last two sessions, it’s time to celebrate. Debate will continue about what is wrong with cricket in Australia and possible solutions. Today, we focus on just one small aspect of our current predicament. Fringe Test players…
Pat Howard, the High Performance Manager, believes we have plenty of talent coming through, citing the opinion of CA’s National Talent Manager Greg Chappell, following the National Under 17’s titles. Boy, isn’t that good news!
A list of 11 batsmen pushing for Test selection can be found on Cricket Australia’s website, consisting of seven specialist batsmen and four all-rounders. George Bailey (40), Cameron Bancroft (37), Peter Handscomb (38), Travis Head (33), Jake Lehmann (49), Nic Maddinson (38) and Kurtis Patterson (42) are the specialist batsmen and some of our problems are revealed in this list.
Only Lehmann and Patterson average 40 or more in First Class cricket. When the four batting all-rounders are listed, its more of the same. Agar (27), Maxwell (42), Henriques (31) and Stoinos (38).
The lack of quality young red ball batsmen is perfectly illustrated in the averages of our best prospects. How else can we have players like Chris Rogers, Adam Voges and Shaun Marsh, in their mid thirties still with the opportunity to cement their places in our Test team?
Experience isn’t a burden and age shouldn’t be as important a number as runs scored, but it does tell the story. The fact that George Bailey makes this list speaks for itself. He is 34, doesn’t average 40 and yet is still one to be watched.
Why invest in an elder statesmen with such an average average? Chris Rogers? Completely different. He averaged 50 and had years of experience in English conditions. Adam Voges? Not as sound a selection but experience and his mid-40s average had logic and for 12 months he performed exceptionally well.
Shaun Marsh? Hardly makes sense unless we are playing in Sri Lanka. 16 years of First Class cricket to average 38 and still be a strong contender for a Test spot. If that doesn’t ring warning bells, what will?
Our all-rounder obsession, perhaps? Shane Watson was bagged from pillar to post for not delivering with the bat often enough and yet it’s taken 20 Tests of ordinary performances from Mitch Marsh to see him dropped from the side.
The reality that batting all-rounders with FC averages less than 35 can even be on the radar is part of the reason Australia has had more ’10 for less than 100′ batting collapses in the last five years, than any other Test-playing nation.
Our selectors, Pat Howard, Steve Smith can talk it up all they like, but these numbers paint a picture and it isn’t pretty. Coach Darren Lehmann, averaged mid 50s in First Class cricket and played only 27 Tests.
Surely he knows how much First Class runs should matter for Test selections? He should do. He made over 20000 of them before getting his baggy green. If a mid-30s First Class average is the future of Australian Test top six selection, something is wrong. Something is very, very wrong.
Don Freo
Guest
Number one in the world before that. We toured Sri Lanka with a limited squad... Perth was not that bad...one dud day. If Smith had not been fired or Marsh had not been the victim of a dud DRS, there is the 150 runs shortfall. Hardly a collapse. That leaves Tassie. We collapsed there. Common denominator at Tassie? No Marshes. Strangely, no Shaun in Sri Lanka and Mitch was our second best batsman there. John, panic is not a useful response. Just look at the situation and be realistic. If we play Sri Lanka with any of our best 15 or 16, we win...as we would with SA.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Sri Lanka and Perth are your five dud tests. There are plenty of others to choose from, if you have eyes to see.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
I don't believe we expect dominance. We just don't accept that regular 10/stuff all batting collapses are the best we can do.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Hey CT. I am not convinced our opinions differ that much. I strongly support the selection of younger players unless the senior player's performance are significantly higher, as they were in the cases of Mike Hussey and more recently, Chris Rogers. The point I am making is that something in the pathways and processes into test cricket do little to set our players, young and experienced alike, up to be successful. If our best current state players cant average 45-50 on the batting friendly pitches directed by CA since 2013, its hard to expect success on test pitches in a variety on differing conditions experienced around the test playing countries. Setting a benchmark for test batting selection and making the Baggy Green of greater worth and requiring more work maybe a start, instead of gifting them to players with a FC average of 28. Our batting is soft, technically and mentally and I can't see how making test caps easy to get can encourage toughness. The sad thing I saw when I read the Cricket Australian article is that most of these 11 don't have the performances to warrant selection in any decent test side. I remember not that ling ago, when we could field a very competitive second test team and match it with many teams in most conditions. Players like Ferguson and Shaun Marsh, with moderate first class careers shouldn't be in the mix as our high performance practices and pathways should be dong a better job with younger players, imo. The fact that they are, reveals some problems. The Argus Review has been acted upon but its questionable if the actions taken missed the mark completely or just grazed the rim of the target. Certainly wasn't in the colours.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Your first sentence is obviously missing the phrase 'as long as test pitches are prepared to be flat roads to inhibit sideways movement", at the end. There is a list of "10 for ??' batting collapses that suggest all is not fine with our test prospects. the sad part is they are becoming more regular and now this virus has infected us at home. It isn't about putting the boot in, but rather about realizing that there are significant issues hindering our best young cricketers from reaching the level of success they could. Existing practices and processes need to be reviewed and maybe then, CA would be setting up players for success. At present, the concern isn't from getting beaten but rather the lack of fight, heart or soul present in Aussie cricket.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Don't bag the numbers just because you don't get their context in the article. The numbers in cricket has forever been the measure of player quality. Of course, there is always a context that needs to considered. The context of these current numbers is that in the past 3 years shield pitches have been prepared so batsmen can prosper. It was an attempt, after the 2013 Indian tour fiasco, to expose our domestic batsmen to more spin. The trade-off is that drier pitches don't seem around and shield runs are inflated as a result. Current batsmen averaging 40 on these pitches wouldn't even make state teams if they played as recent as 20 years ago. That's the problem and what CA need to look at addressing. I certainly agree about the Bancroft/Cowan style opener, Smith at four and Burns at five, although I do rate Khawaja as a more suited first drop than anyone else in the side. Your comment about this silly modern concept that six batsmen can bat anywhere is correct and harms us greatly by not respecting the importance of the specific roles.
Don Freo
Guest
5 years? You are talking about different players. Who, in this present team, would you blame for collapses 2, 3, 4 or 5 years ago? Get excited. There are great possibilities in the near future. Grumpiness never achieved anything.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
My list was taken from an article on CA's website. I agree Cam White is another that could be added to that list but his 40 average does point to the reality that selectors would be better to choose the younger player, already matching his performances and with greater chance on improvement.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
11 "10 for less than 100" collapses in the past five years suggest being concerned should not be dismissed as a fair weather fan. Some of us actually believe out cricketers are capable of much more if CA don't hamstring them. Current selection practices and High Performance processes simply are not working and are, in fact, setting players up for failure, rather than success.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Research and current participation figures don't align with your family experience.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
We also need to remember that the shield pitches since 2013 favour batsmen as part of Cricket Australia policy. Recent form needs to count higher but we need to mindful of the batting strips currently being played on. The edict from CA was their attempt to expose shield batsmen to more and better spin bowling after the Indian tour debacle. Drier on day one may bring spinners into the game but it does lessen the impact of quick bowlers on the first day.
Don Freo
Guest
I think Mitch will be retained. His batting has been better than Burns, Voges and Ferguson. This Test provided a bit of context. Maxi has been unreliable of recent times. Fragile when WA needed resilience. I think you have to loosen your grip and let him go, Dan. We all have to help the elderly from their pedestals eventually.
dan ced
Guest
I fear Maddinson would struggle. When he's very good, when he's bad he's horrid.. I'm getting shitty at people mentioning Bailey again when Klinger has a better average in all forms. I've mostly given up on Klinger getting the nod :'( wah. Patterson is probably the in form, not injured, middle order guy who I think should next get a game. Burns and Ferguson will still play next test, I don't think they will bring Mitch Marsh back in. Nevill's fighting 60* in Perth has saved him even though he got no runs in Hobart. Sayers to come in for Mennie?
dan ced
Guest
Heazlett and Renshaw are injured I think, otherwise I'd throw Renshaw in the ring to open.. or Harris, if we are selecting youth. If we are going for experience then it should be Klinger. Cartwright is my replacement for Mitch Marsh, looks excting with the bat and gets wickets. ==>Klinger Warner Khawaja Smith Ferguson Patterson Nevill O'Keefe Starc Hazelwood Sayers (Cartwright)<== Burns and Voges proven flaky, Ferg gets one more shot, Lyon currently a pointless player, Sayers can do more with the ball (Philander style).
Don Freo
Guest
In what way is such selection, " arrogance"?
Matthew H
Guest
Jake Lehmann's numbers actually look pretty good, as do Handscomb's. The way Khawaja and Burns have been treated by the selectors really sums up a few issues IMO. There seems to have been a 'need' for a few older selections which were justified at the time (rogers for example) and I know there are some unlucky blokes out there (Lehmann was one for years), possibly Klinger, Hayden was ignored for a while too. I really think the blame lies squarely with CA and the selectors. The younger guys they have picked and stuck with are Smith and Warner, and no-one is calling for their axing. The instability created by selectors with the rest of the batting order, the wicket keeper, all-rounder and at least a couple of bowling positions is ridiculous. Warner, Smith and Lyon are pretty much the only blokes we knew would be incumbent. Perhaps the selectors thought by picking 'experienced' blokes we could get 'results'. I find the arrogance of thinking experience in our domestic first class competition equal to experience at international level astounding. Let's also realise that if we trudge around the field for 120+ overs every fielding innings we will have lesser batting numbers. I think now, unless Hazlewood and Starc become world beaters (or we miracle another bowler), we will have bad results for a while possibly including farcical moments if the selectors keep chopping and changing.
Baggy_Green
Guest
Mitch Marsh is a different case Bugs - ever since Ashes 2005 the selectors have been obsessed with having a Flintoff in the team. They saw that Mitch can hit a bit and bowl a bit and put him in blindly. Poor guy would have benefited from 2-3 shield seasons and then we really would have had an "all-rounder" of note He did not have the data\experience that would have backed his selection. The other guys I mentioned have had some Shield experience now especially Banc Handscomb Maddo and Patters. Also they have shown good form and made some runs and tons in the last 2-3 Shield seasons now. But the selectors somehow only want to pick 30+ batsmen for the test side !!!
Don Freo
Guest
What's the lol about? That's weird! The Sheffield Shield product is the best around. It's where CA resources should go. Where do you think our Test cricketers come from, Sean? TV reality shows?
Simoc
Guest
I guess John is a little shallow on experience in life. We live now , not 10 years ago, 5 years ago or 2 years ago. Your stats numbers are typical of the wannabe useless writers on blogs who quote stats because they don't understand what they are watching. The selectors are ex test cricketers (though that shouldn't be a pre-requisite) and should try and pick consistently on form and experience and mostly they do. The players being selected are the best available or close to it. But I reckon they are mostly out of position because it has been deemed that they should be able to bat anywhere. Dumb as. Warner is an opener, Burns is a number 5, Khawaja best at 4 as is Smith, Voges I reckon could bat 3 but good at 5 or 6 etc We need another solid opener like (the old) Cowan or (the young) Bancroft to settle in with Warner. Maxwell needs a go at 6. Whatever you can't buy confidence, and that is what is missing in the batting at present.
Ozibatla
Guest
What goes on with these selections of guys for a few test matches then thrown onto the scrap heap. Poor Mennie, i feel hes awaiting the same fate. Agar, Bailey, Maxwell, Holland, Bird, Doolan, Faulkner etc. I wonder what they think of how they were treated?