I’ve checked my article history and it seems that it is time for my annual piece calling for everyone to get their hands off it regarding Usman Khawaja.
The talk of dropping Khawaja for the India tour is frankly ridiculous. It is indicative of a national cricketing discourse that has given up reason and sense for Twitter-esque instant gratification rather than the time and discipline required to build sustainable success.
Let’s start here.
Australia is not going to win in India. This is not up for debate or even in question.
Playing India in India is the toughest assignment in world cricket. We’ve only won once in my lifetime and have to go back to the 1960s for the series win before that.
This Australian side might jag a Test win, but expecting them to topple the world’s no.1 side over the course of a series in their own backyard is like expecting India’s batsmen to land in Australia and dominate a pace line-up comprised Mitch Starc, Josh Hazlewood, James Pattinson and Pat Cummins.
It just isn’t going to happen.
Ravichandran Ashwin and Ravinda Jadeja on their home turf are as deadly a force as Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath were on theirs. In the last two home series (against England and New Zealand) Ashwin took 55 wickets at 24 striking every 50 balls while Jadeja backed him up with 40 wickets at 25, striking every 65 balls.
That is 62 per cent of the wickets to fall across eight Test matches. The last time Australia toured India, Ashwin took 29 wickets at 20 (striking every 50 balls) while Jadeja took 24 wickets at 17 (striking every 48 balls) for a total of 67 per cent of the wickets that fell over four Tests.
These guys are destroyers who know just what to do on the pitches they have grown up playing on.
Australia are going to lose. What the team needs to be doing is looking to improve on their last tour and ensuring that our best batting line-up of Matt Renshaw, David Warner, Usman Khawaja, Steve Smith and Peter Handscomb gets as much experience as possible in unfamiliar conditions while on the tour.
After the Indian series there is no more Test cricket until the summer Ashes at home (unless the Bangladesh tour re-emerges), the selectors need to leave this top five alone to bed down because it has the makings of something very special.
Khawaja himself seems to be the focus of much of the discussion from fans, armchair selectors and so-called experts at the moment. Khawaja is currently the no.11 ranked Test batsman in world cricket. He is the third best of Australia’s batsmen.
Adaptable and capable across all formats, Warner, Khawaja and Smith are the foundation of the batting line-up and should be listed at 2-3-4 in Tests, and at 1-2-3 in ODIs and T20s for the foreseeable future.
Since returning from his knee reconstruction approximately 18 months ago, Khawaja’s scoring has been comfortably keeping pace with the best batsmen in the world.
A Cricket Archive search starting in season 2015 reveals the following across all formats:
SPD Smith 100 matches for 5645 runs @ 55.90
DA Warner 99 matches for 5801 runs @ 50.88
V Kohli 93 matches for 5011 runs @ 60.37
JE Root 80 matches for 4948 runs @ 52.08
UT Khawaja 64 matches for 3613 runs @ 50.89
While I certainly see merit in the selection of Shaun Marsh as the extra batsman in the squad (56 matches for 2899 runs @ 45.29) in these figures, I see none in the dropping of Usman Khawaja from the side.
Much of the commentary centres around Khawaja’s troubles with spin when playing outside Australia. Make no mistake, Khawaja has little trouble with spinners of any stripe playing on conditions he is familiar with in Australia.
It is an amusing aside (bordering on cognitive dissonance) that everyone just accepts that Handscomb “looks comfortable” against spin in Australia and that it will therefore translate to success India, yet remains convinced the same is not applicable to Khawaja.
Cite the Sri Lankan series as evidence of his struggles by all means, however acknowledge that you’re talking about four innings being all the grace one of our best batsmen is being given.
Streaks of four single-digit scores have been weathered by both Smith and Warner in recent times without the axe falling. Rather famously a streak of four ducks in a row was posted in Sri Lanka by Mark Waugh without him being dropped from the national side.
I don’t claim that Khawaja is going to become a dominant batsman on the subcontinent, I do think he has improved since he made his international debut and will continue to improve if he is taken on overseas tours and allowed to play rather than put under pressure for his spot immediately then dropped every time he has a very brief lean period.
Fans, armchair selectors, and so-called ‘experts’ need to extend the full four Test matches of faith and patience to Usman Khawaja and the entire top five batting order because there really aren’t any better players in Australia that aren’t already in the Test side.
Unfortunately Khawaja has been the national selection panel’s scapegoat since his debut and it seems unlikely to change.
Rob
Guest
He was out for a duck to Shamsi? He was out for 97 to Duminy in his first over. Yes he was also dismissed by fast bowlers but he scored a lot of runs of them. In the last Test innings facing Shah Warner, Smith, Handscombe were all scoring at a SR, 150 plus but Khawaja was plodding in comparison. Unfortunately India will play 2 world class spinners on pitches far slower and lower than the fast, flat roads Khawaja is currently belting the fast bowling on. I'm very impressed by Khawaja and his class at playing pace. IMO he still hasn't showed any progress playing slow bowling? He will be a walking wicket in India.
bearfax
Guest
Sometimes he can be very perceptive Tana....sometimes.
Tana Mir
Roar Rookie
Well said Don!
doogs
Guest
I think we need Ronan to step up and write an article about how India will flog us and then we will definitely have a chance haha. Just being cheeky Ronan but your predictions have not been so good.
Don Freo
Guest
You forget to mention that Ussie made 97 before he got out to the spinner. That would suit most teams. It is interesting that he has also been dismissed by pace bowlers too. I wonder where his runs are coming from.
Rob
Guest
Duminy took 1/160 in the recent Test Series. His only wicket? Khawaja in his first over. Shamsi took 2/150 in his 1 Test. Yep, he got Khawaja . Yasir Shah played injured and had a terrible series. Taking 8/672 at an AVG, of 84. His 1st was Khawaja. Even K. Williamson and J. Root get excited bowling to Khawaja. LOL.
Jeffrey Dun
Roar Rookie
"You don’t drop a guy who’s averaging 50 over the last 18 months for not getting a score in four innings." You may not drop a player under those circumstances, but the Australian selectors did drop Khawaja in SL. And they took this rather unusual action because he looked so completely out of his depth that they thought that there was no reasonable expectation that he would score runs in the third test. Usually when a quality batsmen experiences a run of outs it is a combination of bad luck and a slip in form. Selectors stick with them because they back them to rediscover their form and luck. These reasons didn't apply in Khawaja's case. His problems were technical. He couldn't cope with their spinners on their turning pitches, just as he failed to cope with Swann on the dry decks in England years earlier. Khawaja has earned the right to play the first two tests in India. If he has not corrected his technical deficiencies by the third test, I would drop him before the series is gone.
Bob Sims
Guest
You are sooo close! Whiteman at 6, then a batsman who can bowl or a bowler who can bat (Faulkner/Head/Agar or.....sigh.....Maxwell, White or....sigh....M Marsh, then two spinners and two quicks!
Red Kev
Roar Guru
The point is that "the first test" is not enough. Nor is "the first two" that so many seem to be advocating. You don't drop a guy who's averaging 50 over the last 18 months for not getting a score in four innings. If that is actually the policy you want - pass 50 every 4 innings or get dropped - then you need to apply it to everyone, including Stephen Smith and David Warner. Are you really stating as your position that our third best bat shouldn't be allowed to try and find a way to score from no.3 by playing every match? If Khawaja got 4 ducks in a row I still wouldn't say drop him, I would say "so did Mark Waugh, this is the best option we have" and keep him at no.3.
Jeffrey Dun
Roar Rookie
Ben, I think you missed the bit where I said: "I think Khawaja should play in the first test in India because I don’t like dropping in-form batsmen and I hope he does well..... In other words, I think he should be given an opportunity to prove himself against spin. So I'm not really sure what you are taking me to task over.
Don Freo
Guest
Good to see you backtracking from the overarching "unmeasured" comments I challenged you on. Now you are beginning to "measure" with reasons. They are spurious reasons but now it is not the "mock the selectors 'cos everyone does it" tone.
Dogs Boddy
Roar Rookie
M.Marsh - Can't bat at test level. Yes his bowling was very handy, but he is not in our top 10 bowlers in the country and shouldn't have been holding down a place based on "potential" and handy bowling for so long. I like M.Marsh and hope he can work out whatever red ball demons he has running around in his head and make a case to come back. However he should not have stayed so long with that performance. His selection was not a mistake, the mistake was keeping him for too long. Wade - Can't keep at test level, or any level for that matter. Energy and enthusiasm can't make up for that. Otherwise you could give the gloves to just about anyone who can chirp all day. Neville had done nothing to deserve being dropped other than his reluctance to sledge batsmen and shout "nice Gary" all day. This was a very poor decision indeed. Maddinson - Double agree. Mennie - Yes he was a compelling case but not our best seamer. Surely if you are wanting to win tests you pick our best bowlers don't you?? Lyon - Unfortunately agree. He is still the best of a bad bunch, but he is not that good. I may be being harsh, but this is only the last few months. The thing about opinions is that everyone has one and this is mine. I see a lot of people bagging Renshaw and wonder what the hell they are on about.
Dogs Boddy
Roar Rookie
Cause you asked what they got wrong mate, so I told you. I would agree with the two selections that have worked in Renshaw and Handscomb. But there even seems to be wobbles there about playing "untested" batsmen in India. If they drop either of those two you can add it to the list. Mennie may have been bowling well but was not our number one pick for that test. There were a number of quicks who could have been picked above him. That's why he was not continued on with, they realised they made a massive mistake in not picking Bird for starters. You are right in that I don't share the selectors opinion regarding Lyon. Dropping him would not be a howler at all. He can't hold down an end, rarely troubles bastmen of quality and goes for plenty 90% of the time. The only thing he has going for him at the moment is that the crowd seem to have picked him up as some kind of cult figure now, and he is still the best of a bad bunch. I would rather not play a spinner if we don't have one up to standard but I obviously disagree with the selection panel on that point as well. So I can see this as a bad decision then can't I? Isn't that how this works? If I don't agree with you then you can say I am making bad decisions as well. Commenting on opinion pieces will always have different points of view, we could keep this argument going forever because you have said nothing that would change my mind at all.
Tana Mir
Roar Rookie
"He can’t even break into the Vic Shield ." Clearly the system is broken. Check his Shield form for last few seasons and you will get your answer. Despite the limited opportunities he gets in Shield Cricket, he has been very good. And the fact his recent indomitable performances in Sri Lanka when everybody else struggled, despite him coming into games with little form. The only batsman that scares Ashwin helps as well.
Ben Brown
Guest
What so a batsmen can't improve anymore? Khawaja already said he's been working hard on imptoving his technique to spinners. I'm taking his word for it. I think he will show noticeable improvement. How about everyone gets off his back over 4 innings, inclusing where every other batsman in the team failed miserably.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
What has Maxwell done to even make squad? Nothing, zilch, de nada. He can't even break into the Vic Shield .
Cadfael
Roar Guru
How many tests has Marsh played in India? If you said zero, then you are right. He has played two in SL but Sri Lanka is not India. I would leave the top six as they were in the third test. I would ditch Wade and play Whiteman or Nevill.
vrx
Guest
MMarsh - when Aus was no1 ranked test team and Voges averaging 90, we can afford to trial a no.6 with potential. He actually performed okay in Sri Lanka. His key contribution (mostly overlooked) was that as an all-rounder, his excellent bowling allowed Starc and Haze to find their feet as world class bowlers. This selection was not a mistake. Wade - Smith made it clear that the revamp after Hobart gave his team new energy and enthusiasm, highlighting this as a key reason for the team's improvement. Wade may have failed as an experiment but retaining Nevill after Hobart would have been a prime example of a bad selection which you are slating the selectors for. Maddinson - agree Mennie - if you go by recent Shield performance, his case was compelling. I don't think his selection over Bird made an iota of a difference to us getting rolled for 85 either. Lyon - the selectors were ready to dump him but O'Keefe got injured. After that, there is no other spinner in Aus who could have replaced Lyon. In conclusion, I think it's fair to say you were being too harsh.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
The old roars not updating comments for me this arvo.
Don Freo
Guest
The selectors haven't dropped Khawaja. What are you talking about? How about responding to the selections I mentioned? You said you'll "bite" and you didn't even nudge the worm. Wade and Maddinson have been speculative failures...but Handscomb and Renshaw have been speculative successes. Why don't they get a mention? Everyone was calling for Cartwright...and they picked him. 39 is not a bad start. He didn't need to bowl because Lyon did so well. To drop Lyon would be a massive howler. You just have an opinion there...one that the selectors don't share. You say the selectors have pulled some shockers. Retaining Lyon is conservative. Work out which argument you are going to run with. Mennie earned his spot. The selectors didn't bowl for him. Mennie has been a premier bowler in Shield cricket for a few seasons and deserved a go. The selectors responded when he didn't step up. No shocker there.