Australia may have competed strongly in the Test series in India three months ago but they will be vulnerable in the upcoming two-Test series in Bangladesh without key bowlers Mitchell Starc and Steve O’Keefe.
It was a similar away series last winter, against a low-ranked Asian opponent in Sri Lanka, which sent Australia’s Test team into a downward spiral and led to them being embarrassed at home by South Africa.
There is a very real risk that a calamitous performance in Bangladesh could badly destabilise Australia and leave them fragile heading into the Ashes.
On Friday, Australia announced their 13-man squad for the series in Bangladesh in August and September. Missing from it were injured quick Starc and spinner O’Keefe, who must surely have been dropped due to recent off-field disciplinary problems.
National selector Trevor Hohns indicated O’Keefe had been dropped because of poor form. But it would beggar belief if that is the real reason, considering that in March O’Keefe single-handedly engineered Australia’s first Test win in Asia for six years.
O’Keefe took 19 wickets at 23 in that series in India and has a fantastic Test record of 33 wickets at 27. Yet he’s being dropped for a 23-year-old spinner in Agar with a poor first-class bowling average of 40. The selectors are either incompetent or are being untruthful.
Dumping an experienced spinner who has had success in Asia is especially risky when Australia are going to be without Starc, their best paceman on dry pitches. With 33 wickets at an average of 26 from his eight Tests in Asia, the left arm spearhead will leave a yawning gap in the Australian line-up.
The absence of he and O’Keefe will greatly weaken the Australian attack. This series has the potential to badly hinder Australia’s Ashes preparations.
Consider the similarities between last year’s tour of Sri Lanka and the series in Bangladesh. Right now, Australia have good momentum due to a 5-2 win-loss record since being rebuilt following their two crushing losses to the Proteas.
It was the same story when they headed to Sri Lanka – the line-up had been overhauled after their 2015 defeat in England and the new-look team was on a roll, fresh from dominating the Kiwis home-and-away and destroying the Windies.
At that stage, leading into the Sri Lankan series, the Australian team appeared set in stone, with a host of inexperienced players having cemented their places. Joe Burns looked like a long-term opener, averaging a tick under 50 from ten matches.
Middle order batsman Adam Voges was in Bradman territory, averaging 95 from his 15 Tests.
Wicketkeeper Peter Nevill was keeping well and showing signs of improvement with the blade. And first drop Usman Khawaja was in imperious touch, having piled up 713 runs at 102 since being recalled to the Australian team.
Less than a year later none of those four players are incumbents in the Australian team. It was the Sri Lankan series which cost them their spots, either directly or indirectly. Burns and Khawaja struggled so badly they didn’t even survive to the third Test of that series, dropped after floundering at Pallekele and Galle.
(AFP PHOTO / Saeed KHAN)
Voges and Nevill managed to play the whole series but averaged just 19 and eight with the bat respectively. While they managed to keep their spots in the line-up it was clear heading into last summer that their positions were shaky.
The Sri Lankan series left the Australian team in a state of turmoil and the Proteas ruthlessly exploited this fragility. The same fate could meet Australia if they are listless in Bangladesh.
The likes of Matt Renshaw, Peter Handscomb, Glenn Maxwell and Pat Cummins have turned in some quality performances in recent Tests. Each of them looks capable of becoming a long-term member of the side.
But the Sri Lankan series showed us how quickly things could change. A disastrous series in Bangladesh could leave Australia heading in to the Ashes needing to reconsider the positions of a host of players.
Such instability would significantly improve England’s chances in the Ashes. As it stands, Australia are justifiably hot favourites to regain The Urn. In Australian conditions the home side have a quality top five and a far better and more ferocious bowling attack than England.
I may be sounding overly-pessimistic given the impressive way Australia pushed India to the final day of the recent four-Test series before losing 2-1. That effort suggested Australia have made major improvements in their handling of Asian conditions.
There have, however, been so many false dawns in Australian Test cricket over recent years that I can’t confidently back Australia to win in Bangladesh. Away from home Australia remain worryingly reliant on captain Steve Smith. Their attack has been consistently effective on the road but that now has been weakened greatly.
And, bar Smith, they do not have a single batsman who is proven in Tests outside Australia.
The likes of Handscomb, Renshaw and Maxwell are still Test rookies.
Australia’s next best batsmen, after Smith, in Warner and Khawaja both have awful records in Asia. Warner averages just 30 from his 13 Tests in India, Sri Lanka and the UAE, while Khawaja has averaged 19 from his four Tests in Sri Lanka.
Were Smith to have an off series in Sri Lanka, and surely such a form blip must occur at some point, Australia’s batting easily could fall apart on parched Bangladesh pitches against canny tweakers.
Bangladesh are just as strong at home as the very inexperienced Sri Lankan team which destroyed Australia. In their most recent home series Bangladesh drew 1-1 with England.
Bangladesh went achingly close to winning that series 2-0 – in the first Test they were 5-227 needing just 59 runs to triumph before collapsing to lose by 22 runs.
Their spinners dominated the England batsmen, with star left armer Shakib-al-Hasan and off spin prodigy Mehedi Hasan Miraz combining for 31 wickets at an average of 17. The Bangladesh wickets favoured spin so heavily that the hosts, quite incredibly, only got one single wicket via pace bowling across the two Tests.
Australia will surely face similar dustbowls if their tour goes ahead. That could play into their hands, as it did at Pune against India. Or it could cause their batting to unravel. Once again, a huge weight would rest on the shoulders of Smith.
The tour of Bangladesh shapes as a potential minefield. A wrong step and Australia’s Ashes hopes could be wounded.
Australia’s squad for Tour of Bangladesh
Steve Smith (c)
David Warner (vc)
Ashton Agar
Hilton Cartwright
Patrick Cummins
Peter Handscomb
Josh Hazlewood
Usman Khawaja
Nathan Lyon
Glenn Maxwell
James Pattinson
Matthew Renshaw
Matthew Wade
Tigerbill44
Roar Guru
I am worried about the amount of actual cricket we are going to see. In 2015, SA played two tests here in July-August. The first test at Chittagong was nicely poised after 3 days ,but rain stopped any further play. the 2nd test at Dhaka saw less than 100 overs. According to the calendars, the rainy season here starts in mid June and finishes in Mid August. Actually it starts from early June and lasts till September. In worst scenario it lasts till mid October.
Armchair Expert
Guest
Lyon's had plenty of 53+ test bowling averages over 3 test matches (without a proceeding man of the match) and retained his test place.
qwetzen
Guest
What is?
qwetzen
Guest
St Helens are going to appeal Barbas' suspension. Go to Foxsports news.
Brasstax
Guest
A couple of months back I had commented on one of the articles questioning the logic behind scheduling such a tricky tour ahead of the Ashes. I got savaged by a lot of fellow Roarers for perceived negative attitude. Now you have written a whole article Ronan.
Garry White
Roar Pro
or good form.. depending on how you look at it!
Julian King
Roar Guru
I take Hohns' comments, but SOK's behaviour was so obviously a factor in his non-selection. Given he probably won't be around for the next India tour, they've decided to cut him off.
Giri Subramanian
Roar Guru
Not turning the ball too much for Subcontinent conditions is not a bad thing. On turning pitches you don't want to turn the ball too much, it just has to turn enough. Some thing lots of overseas spinners do not realise causing them to keep beating the bat but not pick enough wickets. The reason when India had that great batting line up, people like Michael Clarke, Nicky Boje ran through the line up when Murali and Shane Warne struggled a lot.
Ouch
Guest
Maybe it was the 12 wickets he took?
George
Guest
Performances outside of Australia mean nothing, right? Anyway, both Pattinson and Wood are just as likely to be injured for the Ashes.
George
Guest
Those guys are better than No's 6 and 7 probably.
matth
Guest
There have been at least 3 incidents, the last one was just the worst. So he is a serial offender.
Paul D
Roar Guru
Okiedokie
Rellum
Roar Guru
I get that having extra batting cover is nice, but it is only a real consideration as our top 6 aren't good enough to rely on to consistently get good scores to bowl too. If you have a quality top 6 then you can really focus on who will take wickets for you, or help the other guys take wickets.
bearfax
Guest
No. I wont have that Alan. He is the Messiah and a naughty boy
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Considering we are talking about Agar replacing O'Keefe, I don't think the quip about him not turning it much is really valid, as I'm pretty sure he puts more spin on the ball than O'Keefe rather than less.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Mike, Pattinson is playing in the same division as England's big weapon for this Ashes, Mark Wood, who has averaged 69 with the ball in that same division. Pattinson is also playing in the same team as England Test bowlers Broad and Ball, who are averaging 20 and 24 compared to Pattinson's average of 10.
qwetzen
Guest
But going back to Hohns' reason given for dropping O'Keefe; Guess what O'Keefe's bowling average was in his last three Tests? It was 53.1. (Odd that Ronan didn't mention it). So Hohns' reason given is actually perfectly valid and to state that O'Keefe was; "...surely have been dropped due to recent off-field disciplinary problems." is patent nonsense.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I get the idea that bowlers should be picked on bowling not batting, but having a team with basically 3 #11's in the team compared to having strong tail end batting can make a massive difference. A few years back when Australia had a really strong tail, we used to regularly see matches where Australia scored a lot more runs than the opposition even though both sides were on similar scores at 5-down. If you have 2 teams 5-200 and one is bowled out for 280 and the other goes on to make 450, then you could say it's worth picking bowlers who may be slightly weaker with the ball to bring about those extra runs from the tail. If it was a situation where Lyon was being replaced and we were looking for a new #1 spinner, then I don't think batting would come into it much, but when your top spinner is already your #11 and you are looking for a second spinner for the team, it's probably going to affect your thinking that one of the possible options could be a quality #8 and score some runs for you, and the other one is significantly worse than your current #11. Especially when there's no guarantee that the one who's a worse bat will actually do any better when they get to test cricket. Which is where Holland's poor showing in Sri Lanka comes back to bite him.
Rellum
Roar Guru
If CA had just said SOK is not available for selection until he is available for NSW that would not be double dipping. They would be respecting the punishment handed out within their own organization. Even if you consider NSW separate to CA then it would be similar to Barba's suspension, with the English Super League respecting the suspension.