With Usman Khawaja’s double failure in the first Test, I’ve seen calls from some for him to be dropped for the second Test because he just seems to have issues he just can’t overcome, while others just can’t see how he could be dropped so quickly while others get so many more chances.
However, with the injury to Josh Hazlewood throws a spanner in the works for some, I am actually thinking that it throws up an interesting possibility.
It’s hard to see Bangladesh throwing up anything but a very similar pitch for the second Test as we’ve seen for the first. It will likely be dry, with nothing for the fast bowlers, and take spin from the first morning.
In those sorts of conditions a bowler like Josh Hazlewood struggles for any real way to meaningfully contribute anyway. If a fast bowler is going to succeed, it’s likely to be through pace and swing, much like Starc did in Sri Lanka.
Pat Cummins is the man for that. Hazlewood, while a fine bowler and definitely wanted for the Ashes, had little impact here and likely wouldn’t have had in the second Test had he played that either. However, he’s been such a key player for Australia that the idea of dropping him, even in conditions that really don’t suit him, is one the selectors are unlikely to ever make.
As such, his injury may be an opportune one. It allows the selectors to make a call they would be unlikely to make otherwise.
That selection is to go in with only one frontline pace bowler in Pat Cummins. For most this would mean the selection of a third frontline spinner, either by selecting Mitcell Swepson or slotting Steve O’Keefe straight in as he’s just been picked to head over there.
However, I would be tempted to go a different route.
(Image: AAP Image/Dan Himbrechts)
In conditions where the spinners bowl such a massive percentage of the overs, if you do pick three frontline spinners, you tend to find the third spinner doesn’t bowl a lot of overs. Just one look at the current Test match shows that Lyon bowled 30 overs to Ashton Agar’s 12.5 in the first innings, and 34 overs to Agar’s 20 in the second. Maxwell bowled just five overs in each innings.
So even between the first two spinners there’s a big discrepancy. Looking at Bangladesh, who picked more frontline spinners and went with only one pace bowler, their top two bowlers bowled 26 and 25 overs respectively, and the next most overs for a bowler was eight
In pace bowling-friendly conditions you don’t get those sorts of discrepancies, but in these conditions you can leave your best spinners on for really long spells and just don’t need to go to third and fourth spin options except for the odd change up.
As such, if faced with similar conditions, as I expect them to be, I’d be tempted to put Hilton Cartwright into the team, but not in place of Usman Khawaja. I’d have him replacing Hazlewood as the only selection change to the team. That gives Australia two frontline spinners to bowl the bulk of the overs; one pace bowler to bowl short, sharp spells and try to get some reverse swing; one spinning all-rounder; and one medium pace all-rounder to bowl a short spell or two hear and there.
That’s really all the bowling attack you need in those conditions because your first two spinners can bowl so many overs – and you don’t need to worry about them being too tired for the next Test as there isn’t another one. You just don’t need as many frontline bowlers.
That would really strengthen the batting line up – Wade at eight, Agar at nine, Cummins at ten becomes a very deep batting line up, and I don’t believe it’s sacrificing the chance of taking 20 wickets at all.
So my line-up for the second Test would be David Warner, Matt Renshaw, Usman Khawaja, Steve Smith, Peter Handscomb, Glenn Maxwell, Hilton Cartwright, Matthew Wade, Ashton Agar, Patt Cummins and Nathan Lyon.
Stephen
Guest
Good points chris but once again the point has to be made that we lost due to our batting and not bowling. Who is a better batsman in all conditions including asia, khawaja hands down. So if we go with 3 spinners and Cummns then we can open the bowling with Cummins and a spinner like the other sub continent teams do so effectively as Hilton's bowling won't have any affect on these pitches. In affect we will give him about 4 overs before bringing a spinner on. So to strengthen the batting we must go wtih khawaja as we need more runs at the top order and he is a man who will sort it out just like warner did and just like Mike Hussey recommended today.
Stephen
Guest
Good points Chris
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
It's a tough call. They are playing a 2 test series. So they don't have the option to go a couple of tests before making changes if needed. Having lost the first test, they must win here. I think that if Cummins had managed to whack 4 more sixes to get the Aussies across the line that might have almost won a reprieve for Usman. But the second test is now a must-win, which means they don't really have the option of giving players more chances unless they really feel that he's been able to work on things in between tests in order to make a difference. In 9 innings in Asia he's got an average of 14 and a top score of 26. No matter how bad a "go" you've been given, that's really, really poor for a top order batsman. And worse than that, he just looks so anxious and panicked at the crease that it almost makes it impossible for him to make good decisions when batting. Comparing to Warner, even that last tour of India, he averaged 24 and got one half-century. That's poor, but it's still significantly better than Usman's record in the sub-continent, all of which has been against weaker teams than India too. So while I like the guy and would like him to get the chance to work things out over there, if the selectors don't take my option (which they won't of course) and add the extra batsman, in a must-win game, they probably need to put sentiment out of the window, and unless something has happened between tests that gives them hope that something has changed in UK and he can make a bit difference, dropping him for Cartwright is probably the call they have to make.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I'm not arguing for dropping Khawaja here, but comparing him to Warner, UK's top score in Asia is just 26, while David Warner has 5 50's and just brought up his second hundred. Warner averages 32 in Asia, Khawaja 14. So Warner's "absolute failures" are actually head and shoulders above Usman. Also, Warner quite early on got that hundred in the UAE which then shows that if he gets it right he can bat in these conditions, so even when he has struggles, there's some hope that he can do well. So far Usman hasn't shown anything to suggest that. And worse, he tends to just look panicked at the crease. I truly believe most of his Asian issues are between the ears. I don't think there's any particular technical issues with his batting that mean he can't bat there, but he just needs to get his head together. It's hard to know what the right thing is to do. They need to win this match, so unless there's something to suggest UK's able to work through his issues, get his head together and bat how he can bat instead of getting twisted up by anxiety, then it's a big risk to play him. But then, it would also seem really harsh to pick him for this test series and then drop him after just one match. (Though, I suppose that's also the nature of 2 test series, you can't give him a couple of tests and then if he's still failing give someone else a go, they need to pick what they believe is the team best able to win this next match, and if that doesn't involve Khawaja, then so be it). It's a tough call though. Khawaja is a monster in Australia. So you'd generally think that he should just about be an automatic pick for the first test of the Ashes. But what if they drop him for Cartwright and he does really well. Do they still do that?
Stephen
Guest
Khawaja is a classy batsman but we never give him a real go in asian conditions. Hussey is spot on for his support for khawaja. Think back to our Golden era we had 1 squad and stuck to it with maybe 2 changes between test and odi. Now we change teams every single game and every single. Keep khawaja and show faith in him like we did for warner when he failed in india
Stephen
Guest
Khawaja should not be dropped and Hussey has come out supporting him too. If Warner can stay persistently with the team with absolute failures why can't Khawaja stay with the team? If Australia will exclude Khawaja from the first xi for the next game, it will help
Brasstax
Guest
England can afford to do it with Bairstow as he is one of their gun batsmen and a certainty. For all of his great start to his career at home and a promising match saving 70 odd in Ranchi Handscomb has failed in 9 out of his last 10 consecutive innings. You can harp all day long on how he looks comfortable at the crease and how confident he looks but the fact is scoring just one fifty in 10 consecutive innings and barely crossing 20 in the other 9 is a disaster for a batman who walks in at the fall of the third wicket.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Chris the problem is I wouldn't trust the ability of the Australians to judge whether a pitch is an uneven track with a par score of say 300 or a similarly dry but flatter track with a par score of 400 - 450. Those pitches can look really similar before offering a surprise once the match starts. Its definitely hard to judge, for example, whether a pitch will offer significant variations in turn and bounce. Even local players/coaches/pundits in Asia sometimes struggle to make this distinction accurately prior to the match. It happens quite regularly that Asian Test surfaces will surprise all and sundry by being more or less amenable to batting than had been assumed.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Possibly, although, the selectors aren't necessarily the sources for the reports, they don't always do what is suggested in the media.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I did say if they brought out similar conditions. Obviously you don't consider dropping a bowler if the pitch is a bit of a road. But if it's clearly going to turn a mile and be hard to bat on from day 1 and only get worse, then there's probably not a lot of danger of having to bowl 150 overs.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
He kept in that on ODI in NZ and it was the one time when people have ever wanted Wade back so the quality of the keeping could improve. But that was just a one-off. Don't know if that's representative of his keeping as a whole. Other than that I've only seen him keep in BBL.
Jake
Guest
Chris Sorry mate but this is a very silly option & extremely risky. It's actually quite surprising that someone who comes across as knowledgable with cricket would suggest this rubbish.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Did you miss the Leeds test Dave?
Craig
Guest
I would say 2. Warner does have a bag full of centuries, you cant discount him even if he's inconsistent.
Simoc
Guest
Handscomb is no better at keeping wickets than Dave Warner or Steve Smith. If you pick a backstop like Handscomb you need a permanent third man or fine leg. Neville proved to be a far better keeper and run scorer than Wade. But the cowardly selectors don't want to admit they stuffed up. Also Handscomb isn't likely to be around for to long in this Australian team stint. With his crap technique he has to be in good form to stay at the crease. He will likely come back to the team in future a far better player.
David a Pom
Guest
Khawaja, Cartwright whoever. They're all terrible. Australia has produced only 1 test standard batsman in the last 5 years. 2-0 coming up and you all know it. And I'm loving it.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
I agree Nudge, playing just 3 bowlers is too risky. Aside from the hypotheticals you listed, what happens if the 2nd Test pitch is much better for batting and Bangladesh make 450, forcing Australia to send down 150 overs with just three frontline bowlers? Playing 3 bowlers would very likely place a greater strain on Cummins and Australia's other 3 best quicks are already out injured, imagine if Cummins went down because of this extra workload and suddenly the Big 4 - Starc, Hazlewood, Cummins and Pattinson - are all injured just 6 weeks before the Ashes. That would be disastrous.
13th Man
Guest
I have to disagree, we have no 'specialist' keepers that are up to the job at present. Whiteman would be my pick but he's injured. Carey and Inglis need more time and it looks like the selectors won't go back to the likes of Neville or Paine. On current form Wade's batting is worse than that of our number 10 Nathan Lyon and he doesn't add anything more with the gloves than what Handscomb would. My point is that Wade clogs up a spot and Handscomb is just as good with the gloves. For team balance it would be great as it would allow Cartwright to play who is in good form with the bat, it strengthens our team and we don't lose anything with the gloves. In recent days Gilchrist and Border have suggested the idea so I would be at least talking to Handscomb and considering the idea. England have done it with Bairstow for a few years and it's allowed Stokes, Ali and Woakes to all have a spot in England's lineup. At the moment there just isn't any very good keeper batsmen out there so i would at least give Handscomb the chance.
13th Man
Guest
Yeah Whiteman is injured What's your thoughts about Handscomb playing as keeper? I read today that Allan Border is in favour of it. To be honest he'd be no worse behind the stumps than Wade is.
Bunney
Roar Rookie
:-) At least