In some ways, it was a good thing Marcus Stoinis wasn’t able to pull off the miracle win at Eden Park in Auckland yesterday.
Australia should’ve had their backside handed to them on a plate, and a most improbable of wins would have given the ballsy but foolish national selection panel reason to crow.
Stoinis deserves praise for his innings, don’t get me wrong. Until the 42nd over of the Australian run chase, it all looked forlorn; a solid red ink in the 80s was on the cards for the Victorian allrounder, but it was highly unlikely it would come in a match Australia won.
Until that point he was going along at a strike rate in the mid-80s.
And then he suddenly launched into Jimmy Neesham, hitting three 6s, getting dropped off the second-last ball and ultimately taking 21 off the over. Just as suddenly, he was in the 90s, and with three wickets in hand, maybe there was life left in this game.
Stoinis made the boundary another nine times, before Josh Hazlewood found himself short of his ground, and Australia fell an agonising seven runs shot of the target.
Along the way, Stoinis brought up his maiden international century, with back-to-back sixes, and in doing so became the first Australian to take three wickets and make a hundred in the same match. Obviously, we all became instant Marcus Stoinis fans.
But it really shouldn’t have been anywhere near this close.
At 6-67, Australia deserved to lose the game by plenty, from which the tour selections would’ve been rightly highlighted, and more vigorously lampooned than had already been the case.
At 6-67, Australian cricket fans had ‘ha, told you so’ locked and loaded. And it would’ve been justified. It still is.
Questions have been appropriately asked whether Cricket Australia were treating this tour seriously, and events leading into the first game don’t help the selectors’ cause.
The decision to rest David Warner from the tour did make some sense. He’d played a fair bit of international cricket in the last few months, and a week off while missing three ODIs actually added up ahead of his departure on a very important Test tour of India.
The decision to rest Usman Khawaja on the same grounds? Whoah, back that one up, chief.
Since the end of the Sydney Test, Khawaja played in only three of the five ODIs against Pakistan, and was left out of the final match of the series in Adelaide, on January 26. From the end of the Test to when the team left for New Zealand, Khawaja had played three days of cricket in 20.
When skipper Steven Smith was ruled out with an ankle injury – remembering that he’d played the same amount of cricket as Warner – that should’ve been the trigger to end Khawaja’s rest right there.
Instead, they opted for a largely unknown young batsman from Queensland. Sam Heazlett may well go on to be a great of the game, but there were plenty of batsmen around the country more deserving of his place on the plane across the ditch.
What made the Heazlett selection worse was his sudden call-up to debut. Matthew Wade was supposed to captain his country for the first time, but he instead tweaked a back injury late on Sunday. He hadn’t recovered in time for the toss on Monday, and Heazlett became Australian ODI player No.220 in the same manner non-playing scorers often end up with a game at the end of a cricket tour – by being there.
With Wade now out, an Australian side already thin on experience was captained by Aaron Finch, a player who a week ago was nervously wondering if he’d earn a recall to the national side at all. And the wicketkeeper was a super-talented young batsman on the most meteoric of rises, but who despite being only a part-timer at first-class level, has now twice kept internationally.
And coming in at No.6 was a potentially very good batsman, but one who hasn’t actually played a domestic one-dayer for his state yet.
So when Heazlett walked to the wicket at 4-48 in the 12th over, after Shaun Marsh had horrendously misjudged a delivery for a player of his age and experience, we shouldn’t have expected a miracle. In truth, it was surprising Stoinis didn’t come out instead.
At that point, I couldn’t help but feel sorry for the likes of Cameron White, who led the runs in the Matador Cup earlier in the summer, or the dozen other players who cracked more than 250 runs for the tournament at averages at least in the 40s.
One of them was Callum Ferguson, who not too long ago was seen as Australia’s next Test No.6. Or Moises Henriques or Joe Burns, who – like White – had carried their solid domestic one-day form forward and scored reasonably heavily in the Big Bash League.
Or especially George Bailey, who finished just outside the top ten run-scorers in the BBL, but who was outscored in ODIs in 2016 by just three other players – and two of them, Warner and Smith, were back in Sydney with their feet up, albeit for different reasons.
The only upside to this is that Heazlett may yet get another game, with Wade no certainty to take his place for the second ODI in Napier on Thursday.
But once Smith was ruled out, Australia needed experience, not a work-experience kid.
And what’s worse, the selectors nearly got away with it.
Jacko
Guest
You do-not play NZ in a domestic comp at all. A team based in NZ is not NZ
Bob
Guest
Why not? The selectors seem to be treating the ODI as a trial team for test cricket with a few big bash stars thrown in for interest. 50 over ODI cricket in Australia is dying- why does nobody want to admit it?
Republican
Guest
.......not so much to do with ranking Jacko but 'familiarity'. Any contest v NZ is akin to a domestic across many sports today which is a pity but is a direct result of NZ being absorbed into our sporting culture at the domestic tier over recent times.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I did see that thread, about "unlucky" players, and to me it confirmed that the selectors have done a pretty good job, because there weren't really any players in that list whose performances really justified selection over those who were picked to play test cricket for Australia.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I don't know Khawaja's absence was so inexplicable. He was looking pretty scratchy in the ODI's he played, so maybe the thought was that with his ODI form right at that moment struggling to warrant selection, it was better to leave him out and get him working towards the Indian tour than to send him to NZ to hope he found some ODI form.
Felix
Guest
Good article Brett, but I have to say I vehemently disagree with your desire to send older, tested and discarded players over to compete in what has been basically a bandaid cash job of a series, put together to appease authorities and media commitments. There is no better series to blood youth in my opinion, it's a cheap 3 hour Jetstar flight with reasonably priced accommodation and some decent bowlers to face once you get there - geez Heazlett probably paid his own transfers! I agree Cameron White was in touch and played well, but he's unlikely to give his country another 70 games. I'm all for the doffing the cap to the future. The real issue is scheduling, but let's save that for Feb 22...
Ross
Guest
Khawaja is a class act who should Be playing one dayers rihht now
Ross
Guest
Khawaja is a class act who should Have played in Adelaide and should be in NZ now, poor decision not to have him playing more one dayers
davSA
Guest
I disagree to a certain extent with your sentiments on youth Brett. Warner and Smith had to be rested . The selectors took a bit of a gamble and from what we see may have uncovered a real gem (Stoinis) . That alone would have made it a worthwhile loss. The Protea's two top performers of late are both 22 years old (De Kock and Rabada) so age should not be a factor. . You do however need quality senior players around them to nurture them through. In the absence of Smith and Warner the exclusion of Khawaja was ...well inexplicable. There I agree.
Jacko
Guest
Yes I think perhaps they HAVE to play the series so use it as a experience. Full team when home but rest a few when away. Mind you i reckon 1 PUP has ensured he gets another shot
Jacko
Guest
I dont agree that pakistan holds more prestige as NZ (3) are ranked 5 places higher in ODIs than Pakistan (8). The big difference is Aus played Pakistan at home but are playing NZ away so Aus seems to put less emphasis on playing away than home, which is understandable
qwetzen
Guest
"How else can they justify the fact that none of the top 18 run scorers in the Matador Cup are in the National ODI squad…" Justification 1: Many internationals were missing. " 2: One side plays all its MC games at home. ie. It's not a level playing field. (Hint: NSO) " 3: It was 3 months ago. Btw... The NSP have *never* had a consistent nexus between performance & selection. Did you see that thread about recent players who were "unlucky" not to get a Baggy Green?
Irie4
Guest
Khawaja played 3 days in 20...!! That surely means he's been dropped as if any professional sportsman needs a rest after that little work then they should go find a new career
Armchair Expert
Guest
Klinger's also stiff, maybe it's age discrimination but his list A average is 48.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
So you seriously think that we should play World Cups every 4 years and in between those world cups no players have played a single ODI? Sure, World Cups will be so much better when all the players playing in them have no real idea how to play ODI's because they never play them! Good logic!
josh
Roar Rookie
Of course it was an old stager in the form of Hazelwood that resulted in Australi's loss. This game you could argue demonstrated why youth should get a chance.
Bfc
Guest
Cameron White has a point...the Selectors are using the National Team like a development squad. How else can they justify the fact that none of the top 18 run scorers in the Matador Cup are in the National ODI squad...? They are not rewarding performances in domestic comps...surely that is where layers should develop, not when selected in the National squad. And resting Warner n Smith might be logical (resting Smith part way through Sri Lanka sure worked out well...!), Khawaja should be playing.
Rob
Guest
I thought Turner and Richardson were strong chances of touring after their BBL performances. Heazlett like Maddison was just a crazy selection. They only work when the players are on fire at the time of selection. I don't understand S.Marsh playing the ODI's. If he is he's opening. Handscombe 3 and Maxwell 4 looking for some time at the crease and practicing building an innings also before India. I don't see Head as a top 3 batsmen. Hazelwood deserved a spell before India. I think the run out was a sign of mental fatigue? Either White or Bailey should have been given a middle order spot. I would honestly have taken M. Marsh before Stoinis but he has taken his opportunity.
Bee bee
Guest
The other side to this argument: Why are Starc and Hazlewood in NZ as they are critical to Our chances in India. A single calamity away from being a roar article lamenting why the selectors are endangering our pace attack with excessive ODI games. Rather than criticise selection maybe criticism should be directed at a ridiculously complex schedule.
Brasstacks
Guest
Scrap the meaningless bilateral and ODI series and T20 series. Makes no sense. Cricket seasons should essential entail home and away test matches. ODIs should be restricted to just the WC once in 4 years and the Champions Trophy once in 2 years. That way, when these tournaments do come around you can be guaranteed of eyeballs since they would be such rare occurrences. No bilateral T20s please. T20s acquire more meaning and interest when multiple teams slug it out rather than 2 or 3 matches played between the same 2 teams. Hence IMHO, T20s should solely comprise of IPL and BBL and the World T20 Cup once every 2 years.