Is Ashton Agar the right choice for Sydney?

By Stephen Vagg / Roar Guru

Ashton Agar has been named in Australia’s 14-man Test squad, indicating he’s among that rarest of Australian cricketers – someone in whom the national selection panel ‘have a keen interest’. Is it the right call?

He’s taken four Sheffield Shield wickets this summer, admittedly from only one game. Steve O’Keefe has taken four in two games, Jon Holland 11 in two, Mitchell Swepson 16 from five, Fawad Ahmed 16 from four and Adam Zampa 14 from four.

We should take a moment to be grateful for the relative depth of Australia’s spin bowling stocks. Ten years ago the cupboard was so bare that Steve Smith and Cameron White got to play Test cricket because of their bowling, but now there are a couple of legitimate contenders for the second spinner spot.

Zampa’s got a decent-ish one day record, but his first class stats – 97 wickets, 34 games, average 45.92 – aren’t that awesome. He’s only 25 and averages 20.83 with the bat. I feel the selectors have put him in the wait-and-see basket.

Fawad Ahmed was once so highly thought of in official circles that his refugee status was fast-tracked and he made the 2015 Ashes squad. His 185 first-class wickets from 57 games at 31.44 is pretty solid, but the powers that be seem to have gone off him – he was even dropped from Victoria last summer.

A first-class batting average of 9.77 doesn’t help – that’s close to Jim Higgs territory – and at age 35 his chances at higher honours seem to be slipping away. Mind you, he’s a spin bowler, and as Bob Holland, Bert Ironmonger, Jack Iverson and Don Blackie showed us, it’s never too late to start at Test level when you’re a spin bowler.

(AFP, Saeed Khan)

Jon Holland has played two Tests and taken 175 first-class wickets from 54 games at 32.16. His recent first-class form has been sensational – he took 50 wickets last summer – and he averages 15.43 with the bat. He was overlooked for India and Bangladesh in favour of O’Keefe, Swepson and Agar and tends to whinge about it, which probably annoys the selectors.

Mitchell Swepson is only 24 and has taken 57 wickets from 19 games at 33.89 – handy figures, particularly from a Queensland leggie. That would’ve got him a Test cap ten years ago. He averages only 12.38 with the bat.

Then there’s Steve O’Keefe. Few cricketers seem more bewilderingly overlooked at the national level than O’Keefe. At times selectors have preferred Agar, Xavier Doherty and Michael Beer to him. Taking Doherty to India in 2013 seemed especially ridiculous then, as it does now. A lot of fans wondered why for a long time, then two alcohol-related incidents gave the impression that maybe other stuff was going on.

O’Keefe has a brilliant first-class record: 250 wickets from 73 games at 24.63 and a batting average of 28.83, plus 35 Test wickets from nine games at 29.40 is also handy, though the Test batting average drops to 9.55.

The Australian selectors have a weird love-hate relationship with O’Keefe. He helped them beat India in India, then was omitted from the squad just three Tests later for form, which didn’t make sense. He was then flown back into the side for the second Test. You really get the sense there’s stuff going on that we’re not privy to.

[latest_videos_strip category=”cricket” name=”Cricket”]

That leaves us with Ashton Agar, who has 125 first-class wickets from 47 games at 38.95 and a batting average of 26.17. From four Tests his batting average goes up to 32.50, and he’s taken nine wickets at 45.55.

I feel Agar got the nod for two reasons. The first is for his batting. With Mitchell Marsh at six, Tim Paine at seven and Jackson Bird at nine, our lower order is looking iffy, and I think our most recent collapse in the fourth Test spooked the selectors.

The second is that Darren Lehmann wants to be proved right. One of his first acts as Australian coach in England in 2013 was to drop Nathan Lyon for Agar, a decision that seemed as dumb then as it does now. Agar responded with a wonderful batting effort that almost took Australia to victory before his bowling was badly found out.

Lehmann wound up looking like a bit of a dill, but if Agar comes back and establishes himself as a Test regular, that decision would be redeemed.

Last summer it felt like Greg Chappell had the dominant voice around the selection table – new players like Matt Renshaw, Peter Handscomb, Billy Stanlake, Mitchell Swepson and Sam Heazlett (remember him?) all felt like very Chappell-style picks in that all were young and four were from Queensland.

It feels this summer that Darren Lehmann has got some of his power back, with Renshaw and Handscomb given the boot, Stanlake and Heazlett being barely heard of and Swepson overlooked while old Lehmann favourites like the Marsh brothers and Agar are back in the side. I could be completely wrong about this, but it’s what it feels like.

(AP Photo/A.M. Ahad)

Agar is an okay spinner. His batting is useful, but an average of 26 is not that of an all-rounder. I don’t think he and Mitchell Marsh complement each other in the way, say, Ben Stokes and Moeen Ali do.

I think it’s dangerous to pick spinners because of their batting, because judging them becomes tricky. What if they don’t take any wickets but score runs? Personally I would have gone with Holland, who has been in great form, or O’Keefe, who has proven himself at international level and who in Bangladesh seemed to have Smith’s support more than Agar.

I hate the feeling that Australian players seem to be divided into two categories: the special ones, like Agar, and the others, like Holland – and the others always have to do twice as well to get a go.

But I don’t think picking Agar over either Holland or O’Keefe is a major mistake. Agar’s bowling record is okay, and as long as he’s the second spinner, not the main one, I think we’ll be alright.

I think far more long-term damage will be done by persisting with Mitch Marsh at six. I fully acknowledge the magnificence of his innings of 181 in Perth and his incredible fighting knock of 29 off 166 balls in Melbourne, but first-class averages of 31 exist for a reason, and his bowling in the last two Tests has been very underwhelming.

But, anyway, welcome back, Ashton, Best of luck.

The Crowd Says:

AUTHOR

2018-01-01T22:51:38+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


I feel the biggest strength of Smith's captaincy is his own skill as a batsman. How was his captaincy? I didn't see enough of the games. I completely agree with you about his lack of faith in part timers - the selectors need to check with Smith first before they pick bowlers and ask if he'd bowl Agar. Not sure what happened in Bangladesh.

2018-01-01T06:33:30+00:00

A keeper

Guest


Im a big fan of Smithy as batsman and captain (strange how his captaincy isn't getting mentioned with the 3 nil win) but one thing that pisses me off is his refusal to bowl certain players. There is no point picking Agar if Smith cant see the merit a nd won't bowl him. Smith and the selectors need to get onto the same page.

AUTHOR

2018-01-01T03:32:37+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


First class batting average of 38 is pretty good... 11 wickets from 28 games less impressive. The new Maxwell?

AUTHOR

2018-01-01T03:31:15+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


There are times when I wish selectors would just go off stats. I'd genuinely like to see how that would go compared to selectors and their guts. Personally, I'd like to see Agar develop in the Sheffield Shield a bit more - it's a good comp, it's only going to make him a better bowler. But anyway we'll see... Re: looking to the future... Spinners can get better as they get older - I feel O'Keefe and Holland could be viable candidates to play in India, but feel the selectors don't seem to think so. Still, we're a lot better off than when the choices were Michael Beer, Doherty or Haurtiz.

AUTHOR

2018-01-01T03:28:57+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


I feel the same about last season too Steve - after losing four tests in a row i felt that Lehmann pushed for Ferguson and Mennie... then when the team lost again Greg Chappell came in and pushed for his people. Now Lehmann's pushing back. Those two feel like the "alphas" in that selection room... but we'll never know for sure until someone writes their memoirs about it.

2018-01-01T01:50:03+00:00

Steve Squires

Roar Rookie


I know most of your comment was tongue in cheek, but if the selectors don't go with their gut feel once in a while, then you may as well just have a computer program pick the team based on stats alone... Agar's age would definitely be a factor that puts him ahead of O'Keefe and Holland in the selectors' minds. This is close to being a dead rubber (as much as any Ashes game is), and the selectors see Agar as a 5-10 year Test player and a future allrounder. Looking at his bowling stats from when he was 19 hardly seems fair. His performance in Bangladesh, 7 wickets at 23, was pretty encouraging, and he still made some runs there (65 at 32.5). Whereas O'Keefe (33) might have a couple of years left (but I would have still picked him for this Test) and Holland, well, he hasn't shone at Test level in the subcontinent, he's 30, a true number 11 batsman, and not great in the field either. So my preferred order would have been: 1. SOK (just), 2. Agar, 3. Swepson, 4. Zampa, 5. Holland. But I can totally understand the selectors going for the man who's 9 years younger in a match we don't have to win.

2018-01-01T01:40:24+00:00

Steve Squires

Roar Rookie


Yeah, so it's not just the Darren Lehmann factor; it's the Justin Langer factor, virtually an unofficial selector, influencing the WA players' selection. Not saying those WA players haven't been in form, but there's guys in equally good form from all over the place (Maxwell, Burns, Holland etc), and Langer definitely is highly influential thanks to his success as WA/Scorchers coach. I have almost no doubt he will be Australia's next Test/all-format coach after the 2019 Ashes, and I think he wants his guys in the team now so they've got 18 months under their belt before the next Ashes. If Lehmann was to look after SA boys (which he doesn't at all and nor should he), then Sayers, Ferguson, and Head would have all have played 3 or 4 Tests each by now, or at least been picked in squads a bit more often. Perhaps Lehmann tried it on with Hobart last year when Mennie and Ferguson both came in, but they didn't do well at all, so they're in the bad books.

AUTHOR

2018-01-01T01:00:11+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


:)

2017-12-31T11:22:30+00:00

Doctor Rotcod

Guest


Just bowl Ashton Turner

2017-12-31T11:21:57+00:00

Doctor Rotcod

Guest


The selectors may believe that an energetic 24 year old in the field trumps Holland and O'Keefe or that they haven't had a player starting with A for some time. Adam Zampa may have to wait a while He may be bowling brilliantly in the nets and is also an all-round nice young man. Or,the selectors have a gut feel about him Or,the ball's coming out nicely Who knows?

AUTHOR

2017-12-31T08:35:07+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


Interesting that so many spinners are returning from injury. Who's watching their workloads :) WA players seem to be the flavour of the month at the moment around the selection table (Bancroft, the Marshes, Agar)... last year was Queensland...

2017-12-31T08:24:44+00:00

paul

Guest


To date, Agar's played in 4 Tests, taken 9 wickets at more than 45 including one game where he took 5 wickets on a pitch very favourable to spinners. In the other 3 games, he took 4 wickets which is not a great return for a Test bowler. It is for a Shield level bowler, which is where I think he rates. In time, he might get better but his figures this year aren't great, nor are his first class figures. He'd do well to play overseas to refine his craft, but as it stands, he's a spinner who relies on his batting to be considered for selection

AUTHOR

2017-12-31T06:40:00+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


I'm not sure you could really argue it would be harsh to overlook Agar - he's just come back from injury, he hasn't set the world on fire. He's never had O'Keefe's consistency. But it's not a shocker like in 2013.

2017-12-31T06:23:12+00:00

Keggas

Guest


Agar was the second option in Bangladesh and O'Keefe and Holland haven't exactly knocked the door down this season to unseat him. Okeefe only has 4 wickets in two shield games and in the last shield game before the break Holland and Agar played in the same game and had virtually identical match figures Agar 50 overs 4 wickets for 119 Holland 52 overs 4 wickets for 102 Given these factors and the fact that none of the young leggies ( Swepson etc ) are up to test cricket then it was probably a pretty short selection meeting. Either that or it is just a massive Cricket Australia conspiracy to try and stop the Scorchers winning another title !

AUTHOR

2017-12-31T06:19:51+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


I've got this feeling Smith doesn't fully believe in Agar - at least not as much as O'Keefe. In the first test in Bangladesh he bowled well, took 3-46... but was only used for 12 overs compared to Lyon's 30 (and the pacemen had about 15 each). In the second innings he bowled 20 to Lyon's 34. In the second test O'Keefe was rushed back into the side, Swepson was overlooked. Agar was used a lot more in the first innings - bowled the same overs as O'Keefe and Cummins but a lot less than Lyon. In the second innings Lyon bowled 33 overs, O'Keefe 22 and Agar only 5. Completely get why Smith would bowl Lyon more than Agar... but, based on that, I feel Smith would prefer O'Keefe in the side. Just a guess - but the second test in Bangladesh was confusing.

2017-12-31T06:01:18+00:00

Ronan O'Connell

Expert


Paul you say Agar "isn't up to Test standard" yet in Australia's last Test series in Bangladesh he took 7 wickets at 23 and bowled well.

2017-12-31T05:47:38+00:00

BurgyGreen

Guest


It's worth remembering that Agar was the second spinner in Bangladesh and did pretty well. Under those circumstances, picking someone else would be a bit harsh. Agar's Shield bowling record is also skewed by the fact that he has to play most of his games at the WACA. I'm sure his batting also comes into it.

AUTHOR

2017-12-31T05:30:30+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


Agree. Sometimes when it comes to selections, the figures are roughly similar, or there's not that much difference, so you can sympathise with the selectors - they have to make a tough decision. But sometimes the gap between players is so huge, it becomes ridiculous - I'm thinking Lyon being overlooked for Doherty and Agar in 2013, and O'Keefe being overlooked for Doherty in 2013. It becomes kind of uncomfortable to watch. Hopefully Holland has a great second half of the season to keep his name in front of the selectors.

2017-12-31T02:44:52+00:00

Paul

Roar Guru


fair enough, we are relatively okay in the spin department. The point you've highlighted about Holland and O'Keefe shows something that's been endemic in Australian cricket for at least 100 years - the pettiness of the selectors. In normal society, if a person does something wrong, they generally pay a price through the legal system and that's it. If a cricketer upsets a selector or another senior cricket bureaucrat, their entire career could be ruined. The sad part is, the cricketer has often done something really bad, like whinge about non-selection (Holland), so they haven't even broken the law. In years gone by, players who were Catholic were treated as second class citizens by those in power, most of whom were Masons. Surely it's time people in power are called out about these antics. It's hurt way too many players

AUTHOR

2017-12-31T00:32:32+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


I did say "relative depth" - compared to that post-Warner/Magill period where there was no one around. I think both Holland and O'Keefe are good back ups for Lyons but agree with you - they've done something to annoy someone.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar