A three-Test series against a high-class Pakistan bowling attack is a perfect opportunity to analyse Australia’s new batting line-up.
With the tourists’ bowling attack being both skilful in pace and spin, we’ll see the merits of the rejigged Australian top six.
Given the first Test will be played under lights at the Gabba, the ball will likely swing. This plays into a strength of the Pakistan pacemen, and a noted weakness of the Aussie batsmen.
All the focus will be on the youngsters in the Australian line-up, but how the incumbents fare will largely dictate their prospects.
The duo of Steven Smith and David Warner are standouts, but Usman Khawaja looms as the centrepiece after his breathtaking 145 in the third Test against South Africa.
His innings in Adelaide exuded real skill and temperament, but also showed his willingness to take a more leading role in the batting.
If he can continue this form, it will take pressure off Smith and Warner as well as provide more protection for the younger batsmen.
Khawaja is exceptional against pace, but he has a gaping weakness against spin, setting him up for exploitation by Pakistan’s masterful leg-spinner Yasir Shah. The pitches might conceal this weakness, given they offer little support for spin, but the guile and craft of Shah is likely to strip him bare once again.
Matt Renshaw’s measured batting style at the top is just what the team needs, providing the perfect foil for Warner’s attacking flair.
With the likes of Mohammad Amir and Wahab Riaz swinging the ball at real pace, it will be the ultimate challenge for Renshaw.
Though he is a batsman of immense promise, he is still relatively green and far from the finished article, which offers hope and invites doubt.
In the middle order, Peter Handscomb and Nic Maddinson arrive at the Gabba having experienced differing debuts.
Handscomb notched a half-century, while Maddinson got castled for a duck by a brute of a ball from Kagiso Rabada.
The standout with Handscomb was his technique – or lack of it. He often moved back perilously close to his stumps, leaving a glaring gap that was frequently apparent between his bat and pad, and inviting an LBW dismissal.
He is the epitome of the new age ‘eye player’ in the mould of Smith, who forsakes technique in preference of hawk-like vision.
It would be unfair to dismiss him after his efforts in Adelaide, but against high calibre swing, seam, spin and bowling smarts of Pakistan’s bowling, he will need to be superb to succeed.
Maddinson was an unfathomable selection on many points, largely for his lack of merit as well as the snub to a more worthy candidate in Kurtis Patterson.
His selection seems to tap into the selectors’ desire to have an attacking batsman at six who can be a game changer. This is equally curious, given a similar style of player in Travis Head, who has been on the brink of the Test team as well as an incumbent in the ODI side, was overlooked.
Maddinson is destined to fail and be replaced by Shaun Marsh once he is fit.
And as for Smith and Warner, the unhealthy reliance on the duo to carry the batting, looks likely to continue.
Nudge
Guest
?
Tim Holt
Roar Guru
Helps batting on a super highway, lets see how Mr Handscombe goes on a 'test standard' pitch :)
Tim Holt
Roar Guru
You make me laugh Nudge for rather than have the plumbs to comment on this article before the proceedings today and call me out, you have to wait till after the play and then make comment :) If your boys had of failed you would have been watching repeats of the Olympics On Smith, it was interesting recently seeing you diminish Kohli's efforts in Australia by labelling the pitches 'Corporate pitches' but you made no mention that if this was the truth ( which it was-the pitches were deploreable) then consistency would dictate that you also said this : ' Seeing i am putting an asterisk near Kohli's name in this series b/c of the dreadful super highway pitches, then I must put the same Asterix near Smith's performances in the same series.......' Being the ra ra pom pom boy you are, consistency is never going to be in your make up- is it???? :) On the topic of Smith , fine player and even said have gained more respect for him since Hobart, but maintain he is not in the conversation of best in the test game, Root stands alone, and I still see Williamson as a stand out Averages tell a tale but mislead as well
Nudge
Guest
Tim, in regards to the article the other day ( which one batsman would you build a team around) where you said "Steve Smith wouldn't even enter the conversation" just wondering if Smith made 300 tomor, whether you might change your mind? Might try something new ( one of your favourites) and insert smiley face.?. I understand that the difference between Smith's home record and away record is terrible, ( 63 at home 53 away) and "one of your favourites" Williamson's is a heck of a lot better (53 at home and 48 away) (5 difference instead of 10). I also understand that Steve Smith's 1st innings test record of over 80 compared to his 2nd innings of around 33 is despicable, and as we all know test matches are won and set up in the second innings, not the first. ? Anyway if Steve Smith can go on and score 300 tomor his test average might get to around 62 and then surely, with Root's test average of 53, Kohli's 50 and Williamson's 49 he may just be able to enter that conversation. ??
Nudge
Guest
"I think Handscombe will not make the Sydney test, his technique is too flawed" ?
Tim Holt
Roar Guru
I can see the merits of both views on Warner, and i guess I am showing my age ( nearly 65 ) by calling for a more resolute opening pair. i think Khawaja/Renshaw would be very good with S Marsh at 3. Long term, i would look to having Patterson move to three.
Dogs Boddy
Roar Rookie
Yes it's a hot topic for sure. I have been accused of being a Warner hater in the past but it is simply not true. He is a devastating batsman when he gets going, and nobody averages 48 in test cricket without doing something right. Something can be said for having an aggressive opening batsman (Hayden, Slater, etc) but they have to know when to reign it in. This is where David struggles. For me Warner and Khawaja should change spots. Ussie has a cooler head and can bat time when needed. With two calmer openers we have far more chance of starting off with a bit more pressure on the opposition and more chance of wearing out the bowlers a little. Then when a wicket falls we have David ready to come out and take advantage of that. Also he has the experience to come in and take up an opener role should an early wicket fall. Ussie can do this too but is less likely to scare a weary opposition if he came in at 1/100 odd and a day in the field under their belts. It's a personal opinion and how I would have the team if I were running the show. However I am not a world class cricketer and, last time I checked, not the Australian captain. David would be a really good aggressive number 3 bat, but he also does well as an aggressive opener. C'mon the Aussies.
Andrew
Guest
I have to disagree on Warner not opening as his job is to blunt the opposition attack and counter attack the bad balls. No one does this better than Warner and in doing so forces the opposition to adjust which throws them off their game. This has been mentioned many times that Warner is hard to bowl to and yes it doesn't always work for him. However I wouldn't change it for anything.
Don Freo
Guest
I think Warner IS that "brick". He has reliably played long innings for Oz for a while now. The top of the order is where he belongs. I want him to be there whenever the new fast ball is loose. Marsh, Khawaja and Renshaw will leave such a ball early as they establish their innings. Warner punishes them and establishes momentum Australia's way from the start. What we have seen from Davy of recent times is only the beginning. By the end of this series, this wonderful Pakistani attack will be cannon fodder in the posts of many Roarers but it won't be because they are weak...it will be because of how Warner (and his mates) have batted.
Tim Holt
Roar Guru
Thank you for the kind words and agree with all of it. if I had my way, this would be the Aussie top 6: Khawaja, Renshaw S Marsh Smith Warner Patterson I think Warner has incredible figures at the top but he is always suspect when the ball does anything. i would prefer a more resolute top three and move Warner to 5/6 where he can play with more freedom away from the new ball and have a more positive effect on the team. I have not been a fan of Smith until that fabulous innings in Hobart. People will laugh, but its the best innings I have ever saw from Smith, full of such grit, skill and sheer bloodymindedness.I am still cynical about his ability as it is related to his average but that showing made me have greater respect for him. This series will be intriguing, with the most interest for i how Khawaja goes against a very wily spinner in Yasir Shah. Khawaja could be the brick for Australia to rebuild its batting around but if he is exposed once more against spin he becomes a situational entity that can only be played in pace friendly confines
Tim Holt
Roar Guru
I think the key in planning has to be regaining the Ashes. Key in this will be protecting young players from potential torment that could affect them in the Ashes. look at Joe Burns, went to sl on top of being fabulous last year in Oz and in Nz with everyone ordaining him as a '10 year opener'. After getting destroyed in sl he has struggled, key in this for i is the mental blow he took. I would be very cautious, particularly with Renshaw
Andy
Guest
But if they can succeed to some degree India wont effect them too much, unless they have the mental strength of a Johnson. They are meant to fail in India however they are meant to succeed in Australia even if this Pakistan bowling line up is a worthy opponent.
Dogs Boddy
Roar Rookie
I do agree with most of this, great article. Firstly Maddinson looked like a deer in the headlights in Adelaide. I have never seen a batsman at international level play with form as poor as that. It reminded me of a 5th grade player who is afraid of the ball being asked to fill in for someone who was sick in seconds. I don't know if the occasion got to him or not but that was woeful. On the plus side he can't do any worse the second time around, and at least he was about as effective as Mitch Marsh has been. Handscomb was interesting to watch as well, and I would agree with the "all eye little technique" remarks that could so easily describe the majority of our batsmen (Warner and Smith especially). His second showing will be interesting to watch indeed. Renshaw was a standout if only for the way he controlled the game when needed. I think he was batting within himself in the second innings and admitted as much after the game. He said he didn't want to get too carried away and I can respect that. Hopefully he gets in during his next dig and we can see him expand his game enough to keep the doubters at bay. I wouldn't call Dave Warner a standout in our outings against SA. He notched up a pretty handy score in WA on a flat pitch but struggled with everyone else when the ball moved. He is the epitome of an eye player. I hope he can wind it back enough to get himself set before letting loose this time. I have been living in hope of that for a while....... Anyone who has read my thoughts on Dave Warner through various threads in here will know I don't think he should open. 3 yes but not open. I think I will be waiting a long time to see that again as well however......... Khwaja was a standout in Adelaide and if he can bring that game with him we have a great opening partnership, or a fantastic number 3. I will wait and see which Usman comes out to bat. Smith was a standout through the whole summer. Maybe not the results he would have liked but enough grit with the bat to show how much of a class player he is. I he if given the platform to play shots we will be unstoppable., If he is trying to save us after another collapse .... well we all know how that goes. I am really looking forward to this test, and it should be an interesting contest against a formidable Paki attack. If we crumble in a heap I would change out Maddinson in a flash (unless he pulls out that 200 run a ball innings of course) but give the rest another chance. Oh and get rid of Wade and bring back poor Pete Neville, he did nothing wrong.. but that is another discussion for another time. So in the end I am going to say New Dawn My 0.02c
Tim Holt
Roar Guru
Loved Langer and he was better than most gave credit too. Renshaw is potentially very good, and complete in both defence/attack I think he might fail before he succeeds though for i think he has been picked before he is really ready
Don Freo
Guest
What Handscomb does have is the desire to stay in. He values his wicket. That is Travis Head's greatest strength too. Travis Head's desire and refusal to lose reminds me of Allan Border.
Don Freo
Guest
Yes. He batted slowly in the first dig to see the team to stumps. In the second dig, he had forever to get the runs. Why wouldn't he just concentrate on getting the feel for test cricket and not give his wicket away? It is exactly the opportunity any coach would want him to take. Renshaw is not stodgy at all. He is steady and reliable. He is so going to surprise fans who only follow Tests and don't know these guys in Shield cricket. BTW, New Guy, Langer batted slowly and steadily for much of his early career. He became more of a stroke player once his Test place was established.
Don Freo
Guest
He is green. Good get there, Tim.
Tim Holt
Roar Guru
I just think he is not up to it, if they wanted that X-factor, bat M Marsh at 7/8 as a bowling all rounder
Paul D
Roar Guru
That's what he's there for, Smith has said Maddinson can "take a game away from the opposition" - they're looking for him to play that counter-attacking Gilchrist innings when the side is on the back foot. My concern is that his defensive technique is nowhere near good enough for him to survive long enough to do so in all but the flattest of conditions - and if that's the situation he's probably coming in at 4/500 anyway.
Tim Holt
Roar Guru
Whatever reason Maddinson is in the team and you take certainly has merit, it just is a farce LOL, you watch him smash a run a ball 200 now, lol