It seemed a matter of time before David Warner mastered ODIs – a format he always appeared tailor made to dominate.
From the day Warner crashed onto the big stage with a blazing T20 debut against South Africa in 2009, Australian fans have been waiting him for to conquer 50-over cricket. They had to hang on for seven years.
It’s not that he was a passenger in ODIs in the meantime, rather that he was merely a good player instead of the great one his talented suggested he could become. First he became an elite T20 player, then he ascended to star status in the Test format, and now, finally, he’s an ODI heavyweight.
The opener has cracked an incredible seven tons in his past 22 matches, amid a giant haul of 1383 runs at 66. Further underlining his ballistic batting in this time is his scorching strike rate of 106.
Prior to this golden period, Warner owned a middling average of 35 and was striking at 89. Neither of those figures matched up with his raw talent and suitability to the format.
For years Warner seemed trapped between two approaches. His instinct was to try to bully the bowlers from the first over. When he followed his gut he would compile the occasional spectacular knock but was consistently inconsistent.
In search of reliable returns he tried to fight his instincts and become a dourer batsman. This didn’t work either.
This year he’s belatedly managed to synthesise these strategies. When the match situation is favourable, Warner can still get off to a blazing start.
When it isn’t, due to wickets falling around him or quality bowling restricting his scoring, he has learned to pick off singles and twos and bide his time until the game opens up.
In short, he’s become a far more adaptable batsman. Warner highlighted this on Friday as he compiled perhaps the finest ton of his ODI career.
With Australia reduced to 2-11 and later 4-73 the vice captain was required to play within himself. He needed to steer his side out of this perilous situation.
In years gone by Warner struggled to find the right balance between attack and defence in such circumstances. Not anymore. He was content to cruise to his half century off 61 balls before upping the ante.
With young all-rounder Travis Head struggling to keep the scoreboard ticking along, Warner took it upon himself to put pressure on the Kiwi bowlers.
His second 50 came from just 33 balls. Yet he wasn’t chancing his arm – Warner managed to impose himself on the New Zealand attack without undue risk. This was the kind of calm, calculated acceleration we’ve grown accustomed to seeing from the two best ODI batsmen in the world – India’s Virat Kohli and South Africa’s AB de Villiers.
Over the past year Warner has consistently produced the kind of effortlessly-destructive knocks for which Kohli and de Villiers are renowned. While he has some way to go to match either of them in the ODI format, he is riding a steep upward curve.
Warner single-handedly won Australia the match on Friday. Without his input Australia may have struggled to push far beyond 150. It was Warner’s seventh ODI ton this year alone. Right now, he is unstoppable.
Don Freo
Guest
Brasstacks, aren't you the one calling for Warner to be left out of the Aussie ODI side because he is not good enough?
Aransan
Guest
Good observations.
Aransan
Guest
70 in tests and 60 in ODIs, I think Smith has that ability. His current averages are very good, I just believe they could be better.
davSA
Guest
David Warner has come of age. He is surely one of if not the foremost opener in todays game. Very destructive . But a slightly different tack... He seems to have really matured as a person. Clearly from the bits we see on TV he is a doting father and family man. I believe he has also laid off the beers and subsequent controversies he previously got involved in. This might just have impacted positively on his game. The opposition really respect and fear him. Just look at the reactions if they get him out cheaply.
spruce moose
Guest
He averages 57 in tests in mid 40's in ODI's. What are you expecting from Smith!?
matth
Guest
It's his ability to push a single or a two, coupled with his great speed between wickets that has been the difference. Once he realised that he didn't need to hit every ball as hard as he can, the runs have flowed. He is up there in the top 5 or so in the world now for ODI's.
Hoy
Roar Guru
Has anyone seen the Grey Nic Warner Kaboom at a shop? Bugger me, that thing is a thick piece of wood. The edge on that bit of gear is thicker than some of the bat faces in the old kit bag back in the 90s...
jameswm
Roar Guru
Maybe Khawaja? He is clearly the 3rd best batsman in the country, and has done very well in Matador Cup for 2 seasons. It's a no brainer if you ask me. Khawaja, Warner and Smith as top 3. Pretty imposing top order. Head is doing well, Bailey probably on the way out, SMarsh and Maxwell around there, Mitch Marsh hit and miss.
bearfax
Guest
Not disputing what you guys are saying. I'm really just looking at the ODI in the same manner as looking at test cricket. Bring in the young players. Finch and Bailey I think have had their time. Time for Maxwell and maybe Khawaja. I'm OK with Head and Mitch Marsh with Wade to lock up the first seven spots followed by Starc. Khawaja is now at a stage where his reliability has improved and as a foil for Warner would be ideal as has been seen before. Maxwell adds that X factor to the team down the order. Warner, Khawaja, Smith, Head, Mitch Marsh, Maxwell and Wade looks a pretty healthy side to me.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
It's amazing how often Warner has played a dominant innings, seemingly untroubled, playing like he's on a road against a pretty ordinary attack while the batsmen up the other end look like they are batting on a greentop against a world class attack. It was pretty poor that the other Aussie batsmen weren't able to feed him more of the strike though. Batting through the innings when he's batting beautifully and everyone else is struggling he needed to be fed more strike. 128 balls for Warner to score 156 when the rest of the team faced 174 balls for just 108 (including sundries). Head, Bailey and Wade in particular all needed to just find some way to get off strike and get Warner to have more of the strike, rather than taking up so much more of the strike themselves.
The Bush
Roar Guru
I was definitely one who didn't think much of Warner's ODI exploits until this year. He always seemed a bit of a passenger, with so few centuries (one of which involved smacking around Afghanistan). But geez, he's turned it around. Strange it took this long, as ODI cricket always seemed perhaps to be the form he would be most suited to play (after we witnessed his exploits in Hobart in 2011).
The Bush
Roar Guru
I kind of agree with Nudge here bearfax - why shouldn't an ODI team rely on one of it's openers and it's number three to be the dominant players? I think in the circumstances of the first two games, Head, Wade and Marsh all did well. No one really did anything bar Warner in the third, but then neither did a single NZD batsman either. Finch's form is worrying and I personally think we should move on from Bailey, but it's hard to see them doing that before the Champions Trophy.
Ozibatla
Guest
I recon the really good players dont ever want to concede that certain conditions or countries dont suit their style. Hopefully Warner can amend his average showings in the UK, sub continent, west indies etc in the coming years because if nothing else, it is a testament to dedication. I remember playing against him in under age national carnivals and he was this tailend hack who could hit a long ball and bowl some good leg spin. How times have changed
Aransan
Guest
I did try to make this a reply to Don.
Aransan
Guest
From Wikipedia: On Lindrum's second tour of England, in late 1930, Donald Bradman and other members of the touring Australian cricket team, would sometimes attend Lindrum's matches at Thurston Hall, London. As an indication of the esteem in which Lindrum was held, the critic Neville Cardus referred to Bradman as "the Lindrum of cricket". Following his death, cricketing legend Sir Donald Bradman wrote to Lindrum's niece, Dolly Lindrum: "In my opinion he was not only the greatest billiards player who ever lived, but he was also the most modest of great champions." Changing the rules didn't affect Lindrum's dominance in billiards, and changing the bat won't affect Warner's dominance in cricket.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Everyone has conditions that suit them and others that don't. Warner finding success in India will be high on his "to do" list, just as test runs in England are on Virat Kohli's.
Aransan
Guest
The point is that Warner wouldn't have been given the opportunity in previous eras. Given the opportunity, bats and boundaries wouldn't come into it. In Smith and Warner Australia has two of the most talented batsmen in the world and, given the chance, would have flourished in any era. I think Smith still has some way to go to match his performances with his ability.
Don Freo
Guest
Lindrum's bat was always too thin. Must be an in between.
Visakhan
Roar Rookie
Warner is ultimately the first of a new breed, who rose to prominence from the T20 game(without playing first class game LOL); having played his cricket pretty much this decade; would be interesting to see how he would have gone in previous eras, with less thicker bats and longer boundaries! Nevertheless a fantastic aggressive player who has shown in this series his maturity and ability to bat under pressure and construct an innings
twodogs
Guest
Doing ads for TVs indicate he is great ?