II still can’t work out what was the bigger surprise; Glenn Maxwell making a maiden Test century or Steve Smith scoring another one.
Perhaps it’s the former as seeing a player who, on his initial forays into the five-day game couldn’t have resembled a fish out of water any more if he’d tried, actually show what he could be all about was enough to take even the most seasoned watcher aback.
Maybe it’s the latter, as seeing a player who on his initial forays into the five-day game looked a bizarre selection grind remorselessly on towards all-time greatness can’t help but elicit even a small element of bewilderment.
In Smith’s case this is too cynical as the time for amazement has long since sailed into the sunset.
A fraction over 5000 Test runs and 19 centuries in a relatively meagre number of appearances, and with the power to add and then some, are figures nobody should sniff at.
These are the performances of a player who, unless something drastic occurs, will go down in the history books as warranting the company of the likes of Greg Chappell, Allan Border and Steve Waugh.
Over-egging the pudding? You may think so but a few years ago not even the most devoted Smith fan would’ve predicted anything like what has achieved – and if they say they did then their nose will start growing – so why shouldn’t he be mentioned in such exalted company if he continues?
It really isn’t how but how many and if he does have glaring weaknesses, nobody seems able to exploit them.
But enough about, as my Roar colleague Ronan O’Connell described the other day, the world’s foremost Test batsman, and on to Maxwell.
Whether by design, good fortune or something else, the Victorian, in a couple of hours of disciplined application, made a mockery of the persistent selection of Mitchell Marsh.
Your number six has to score runs and that is what Maxwell did in Ranchi. In fact, whether or not his bowling is up to it and come the return to home soil he won’t be needed to bowl anyway, if you can’t fulfil your primary purpose then you shouldn’t be there in the first place. So that’s the first boxed ticked.
Another, unless he reverts back to the old type of putting maverick tendencies before pragmatism, is the silencing of the naysayers.
There’s no shying away from previously held views here as Maxwell’s previous incarnation as a white-clothed Australian representative bore nothing that resembled logical thinking.
We’re getting thumped; what can we do? Pick a man who promises neither results, dependability or, rather important for cricket in Asian conditions, adherence to the task in hand.
Well, consider my pessimism to be put firmly in its place.
Prior to the series it was mentioned that India in India could be the time for Maxwell to come of age.
This was based on nothing more substantial than a hunch that he was, if nothing else, as well equipped as any of his touring colleagues for what lay ahead. No science, no evidence and not much else. A bit left-field and with an unapologetic air of sarcasm.
As it’s turned out, left-field sometimes is as straight down the line as it comes and sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
Whisper it quietly, or shout it from the rooftops if that is what you would rather, but a middle order woe – a question: when was the last significant contribution from an Australian number six? – could well have been solved.
Wonders never cease.
Perry Bridge
Guest
#John Erichsen Remember that Maxwell's first 3 innings in tests were at #8, #8 and #7. He wasn't in the side as a disciplined top 6 batsman. He was the #1 spinner seemingly that tour - for those 2 tests (took 7 fer at about 27 or so - ironic he couldn't get a bowl yesterday - for more than 2 overs at a time). Those first 2 tests were in India - well - we've seen Indian conditions again - tail enders don't generally thrive if they just try to survive. Mitch Starc came off in the first test with a 50 and tonking 6s. He could've skied the first slog and got out embarrassingly. Risk and reward. Sometimes - Maxwell will come off and sometimes he'll fail frustratingly. But just don't judge him on that. Let alone what anyone was thinking about giving him a go at #3. His greatest burden has been the white ball specialising that has severely reduced his red ball cricket in recent summers and has stifled his development and muted his red ball claims.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
"It was a gut feel and hunches he was a wreckless player without discipline and a short form specialist that prevented him from being selected" That's not really true, is it? Maxwell, at age 24, was selected for test cricket despite the hunches about his recklessness and lack of discipline at the crease. His approach to batting in those four test innings did more to condemn him to 20 and 50 over games only, then any hunch or gut feel ever could. Even another test, this time in 2014 against Pakistan, did little apart from further highlighting Glenn's long format demons. Roll on to 2017 and the self-confessed more mature and responsible Maxwell is still in the mix for selection. Partly due to his shorter format performances, his brilliant fielding and a solid First Class batting average, Maxwell gets another chance at test level and makes the most of it. There was never anything logical or evidence based reason for Mitch Marsh's test selection. Certainly not if he is going to bat at six. His FC average was 24 when he debuted for Australia. To put it plain and simple- He just wasn't good enough and despite a couple of impressive scores in his first few test innings (an 87 and three other scores of 40+ in his first 6 test innings had his test average at 40.83), I doubt even Mitch truly believed he belonged in the test side at that stage of his career. That grim reality quickly hit home and Marsh made just one further score over 35 in the following 29 test innings. There is plenty of time for an improved Mitch Marsh to find success at test level but his next test selection must come on the weight of domestic red ball runs. For now, Glenn has the stage and hopefully continues to reinvent himself in the five day format.
Bakkies
Guest
Maxwell is in his late 20s he needs to tell people that he is a batsman. The biggest problem with Smith was that he didn't know why he was in the team. Whether it was as an aspiring leggie who could bat, batsman who could bowl (see Moeen Ali) or just a bloke who was good to have around the dressing room. From reading articles of his time as an aspiring Cricketer it was stated that Smith had exceptional talent. It could have gone to waste had he gone down the same path. Maxwell needs to address this for his own sake as his support staff aren't helping him.
Andrew Young
Roar Guru
Certainly come of age. EXCELLENT piece
Dasilva
Guest
I think you have it the wrong way round. Statistically Maxwell who has a first class average around 40 and has scored centuries for Victoria under pressure after batting collapse statistically should have been playing for Australia above other players. It was gut feel and hunches that he was a wreckless player without discipline and a short form specialist that prevented him from being selected Mitchell marsh on the other hand was based purely on hunch, gut feel selection
Bplol
Guest
The pitches that marsh played on in India may have been tougher. But all those home summer tests were the same if not easier and he still failed.
Linphoma
Guest
First dig batting heroics aside I have the feeling the second act will be decisive in determining how we judge this Australian touring side. Oh to roll them under 450! Oh to be 200 up at close of play tonight! How much more of this can these sides dish out to each other? This is pure, ferocious cricket the likes we rarely see these days.
Big Daddy
Guest
Now all we have to do is get rid of the other marsh and get khawaja back in. But if we win this test they will most likely keep him in side.
BurgyGreen
Guest
Still a tougher pitch than the nine Australian ones that Marsh couldn't buy a run on.
Steele
Guest
To be fair, Marsh has batted terribly wherever he's played. Maxy only gets picked on difficult tours. Hasn't had the luxury of a home series yet.
qwetzen
Guest
Fair go. I'm as pleased for Maxwell as the next person, a lot more if the next person is David Lord, but it's unfair to write that Maxwell; "...made a mockery of the persistent selection of Mitchell Marsh." when the quality of the pitches the two have batted on has varied so enormously.
Simoc
Guest
The Maxwell innings wouldn't surprise Victorians. He has played similar great innings for them under pressure. But not recently. He has the ability to be a great test player as he demonstrated, if he can stay sensible at the crease.
TonyJ
Guest
Funnily enough, Smith was the last number 6 to score a test century some 3 years ago!