James Faulkner seems to have become a bit less fashionable to name-drop when people are discussing the selection of the Australian Test side.
The man nicknamed ‘The Finisher’ still only has one solitary Test to his name – in the 2013 Ashes – and despite being a regular in the one-day side, is more of a solid contributor than a game changer.
With the excitement lost over the Tasmanian, now no longer a player of future potential, and with the selectors seemingly pigeon-holing him as a one-day specialist, one can be forgiven for coming to the conclusion that Faulkner’s Test ambitions are all but over.
While it makes sense to contend such a theory, a closer look at Faulkner’s Shield record is surprising.
Opening the bowling for Tasmania, he averages 24.24 with the ball – lower than Josh Hazlewood’s first class average – and goes at just 2.93 an over. He’s taken five wickets in an innings five times, and four wickets another seven.
Faulkner’s ability to extract movement off the seam, coupled with his wily left arm action, make him an awkward prospect, particularly in the right conditions. His accuracy means he’s difficult to get away. This is perfect for a third seamer in the Australian line-up, where Faulkner would be playing second-fiddle to Mitchell Starc and Hazlewood, and would be expected to keep an end tight and chime in with the odd wicket.
Further, his bowling is ideally suited to both English – where his seam movement is perfect for the pitches – and Indian conditions – where his accuracy and ability to take pace off the ball would see him go for few runs and pick up wickets, particularly in the lower order.
What sets the 26-year-old apart from other fast bowling contenders, however, is his batting. Faulkner averages 32.67 with the bat in first-class cricket, an elite average for someone who would bat No.8 for Australia. This would take the pressure off Mitchell Starc, boosting his returns with the willow, and allow Australia the flexibility to name another batting allrounder to balance out their team and take the workload off the bowlers.
While he might not be the first name on the selectors’ and fans’ lips, it makes more sense than one might think to select James Faulkner. If he can kick on in the second half of the Sheffield Sheild, he could be a dark horse for next summers Ashes. It wouldn’t be the worst selection gamble.
Matt
Guest
Faulkner will be the last one for me to go to india. He brings the mongrel out in kohli. I heard kohli doesnt have breakfast when faulkner is playing. Coz he likes to make a brunch out of him.
Anindya Dutta
Roar Guru
Faulkner might work for the Ashes but he will be a disaster for the India tour. He is fodder as far as the Indian batsmen are concerned. They lick their lips when he gets the ball, whatever the pitch. Merely as a batsman, I doubt he will make it into the team.
Don Freo
Guest
Whiteman has already struck form again and was averaging in the 30s when he was "out of form". He has never lost form with gloves. Alex Carey is a gun. Doran is on the horizon and the veterans, Hartley and Paine would do well. Nevill should be there now. Whiteman and Carey would be excellent number 6 batsmen. Both began their Shield careers in the top 3 when Ludemann and Triffitt had the keeping positions, Whiteman keeping Bancroft out of the opening position. The only keeper with no chance of being good enough to get a game is the one getting a game.
Rob JM
Guest
We can't even find one capable of batting at 7 at the moment, let alone at 6. Hopefully Whiteman can get his batting form back now his finger is mended.
Don Freo
Guest
Stacks of keepers on the horizon. Aren't you following state cricket?
Rob JM
Guest
With no keeper batsmen on the horizon, the only way Faulker could make it into the team is if we played four quicks on a seaming wicket. If we ever find a spinning no 6 like Maxwell, Head, Turner or maybe in the future Nair then it would be a realistic option. Obviously Mitchell Marsh is also a viable option in that situation. Wildermuth may be even better.
Don Freo
Guest
Who stole my headline? The other day, I stated there was a Mitch Marsh sized hole in the team. Come on James, get an original PR man.
Lancey5times
Roar Rookie
Nice. Very nice
Lancey5times
Roar Rookie
Giving him a run as the allrounder is a long way from what the author is proposing. I agree he is a quality cricketer and an even better competitor but he is not your 3rd seamer. He still needs to spend more time batting in the top 4 in Shield cricket to be considered for the allrounder spot. His best chance is at 7 with a very strong batting keeper and we are a long way from this situation currently. Tremain has 27 wickets at 17 this season and all I mentioned have more wickets than Faulkner and at a better average. Sayers is an unknown yes but his record as a bowler is very impressive and he deserves a chance. Faulkner shouldn't jump the queue just because he has played one test and is therefore a known quantity.
Lancey5times
Roar Rookie
I'm not proposing either of them are in the team
Basil
Guest
Faulkner would be the perfect no7 if Wade had the batting ability of Hanscomb, the keeping ability of Hartley, and he wasn't Matthew Wade.
Swampy
Guest
All better (& there's more as well) - what an embarrassment of riches we must have! We have Starc & Hazlewood who are currently world class - it drops away to good shield bowler after that. Cummins for sure has the speed but is unlikely to play test cricket. Pattinson we know is an excellent wicket taker but is very expensive. Sayers is a complete unknown at test level, Mennie was beyond average - more like a net bowler, Tremain & Rainbird - come on? Rainbird can't even hold down his spot at Shield level. Bit of a stretch. Faulkner is a much better cricketer than you are giving him credit for. I think he should get a run as the all-rounder batting at 7 with Nevill back in at 6 (let's face it - the Wade roll hasn't come up 6's).
Basil
Guest
Faulkner is more of a Test bowler than what Snic Maddinson is a Test bat.
Lancey5times
Guest
Ok, Sayers, Paris, Berendorff, Mennie, Tremain, Rainbird. All these guys and more are better 3rd seamer options than Faulkner. People seem to forget that you require 20 wickets to win a test match. Having bits and pieces cricketers at 6,7,8 isn't a sure fire way to do this
Swampy
Guest
Dumb is putting Cummins and Pattinson in a sentence together that indicates they are capable of playing tests. Then that just leaves Bird. Bird is solid if not spectacular - I can't see why Faulkner couldn't slot in. However he's a much better bat than Starc (who is handy).
Lancey5times
Guest
Yeah with paceman like Starc, Hazlewood, Cummins, Pattinson & Bird we should play Faulkner at 8 as the 3rd seamer. A late contender for the David Lord Award (David Laward) for dumbest article of the year
bill
Roar Rookie
Agree. Faulkner at eight allows for Starc/maxi at 6.