When a team uses two part-time spinners inside the first 13 overs of an ODI innings, something has gone very, very wrong. That was just what happened yesterday as a result of curious selections in the Australian ODI team.
Australia bizarrely went into the second ODI against England with only three frontline bowlers, two of whom were rookies – 21-year-old Jhye Richardson making his debut, and 31-year-old Andrew Tye in just his second match.
Leg spinner Adam Zampa was dropped and replaced not by another spinner, nor by a paceman, but instead by a specialist batsman in Cameron White. Spin has become increasingly important in limited overs cricket in recent years, so much so that England yesterday bowled 24 overs of spin at the Gabba, a pitch historically the domain of pace bowlers.
In spite of this obvious global trend, Australia have continued to show a lack of respect for the role of spinners in white ball cricket. This culminated in the extraordinary sight yesterday of part-time offie Travis Head trundling to the crease after just six overs of England’s innings as Australia tried to defend a well-below-par total of 270.
The English batsman gleefully exploited this situation. Two of Head’s first four balls were hammered to the boundary and he bled 24 runs from his first three overs.
[latest_videos_strip category=”cricket” name=”Cricket”]
If Alex Hales and Jonny Bairstow were disappointed when Head was taken off, they needn’t have been because another rank spinner was into the attack one over later. In 442 games of professional cricket, across all three formats, Aaron Finch has taken just 19 wickets.
Yet here he was, just 12 overs into the England innings, bowling to two set batsmen. The likes of Zampa, Nathan Lyon and Ashton Agar must have been wincing as they watched from afar while Finch rolled out his nude deliveries.
What made this all even more gobsmacking is that, despite stacking their side with batsmen, Australia once again were exposed for the lack of flexibility in their ODI batting strategies.
Seemingly spooked by England’s ultra-aggressive batting unit, Australia fielded their longest batting line-up in recent memory.
So deep was Australia’s batting that at seven and eight they had two players who open for their States in 50-over cricket in White and ‘keeper-batsman Alex Carey.
The makeup of Australia’s XI suggested they intended to copy England’s batting strategy of attacking throughout the whole innings, as opposed to their usual approach of having lengthy periods of consolidation in between bursts of scoring.
At 1-91 after 15 overs Australia looked perfectly placed to pursue such an aggressive ploy. It wasn’t to be. In the following 24 overs, Australia scored just 107 runs at a dawdling strike rate of 4.45 runs per over.
To someone who didn’t watch the match, that equation would suggest Australia’s innings fell apart during that period, that they must have lost a cluster of wickets.
In reality they only lost two wickets in that time. So over the space of 24 overs, Australia made 2-107 on a very flat deck against an England attack which is solid, at best. Incredibly, harmless off spinner Moeen Ali and part time tweaker Joe Root were allowed to wheel down 14 overs for just 62 runs.
(AFP PHOTO / IAN KINGTON)
Australia needed to target England’s spinners in this match, after being too cautious against them in the first ODI. Yet they barely played a shot in anger across Moeen and Root’s 14 overs.
When Root trapped Steve Smith LBW, Australia were 2-110 off 19.4 overs and the run rate had dipped to 5.6 runs per over. It was clear one of the Australian batsmen needed to take on the English bowlers at this point, either the set batsman Aaron Finch or the incoming batsman.
On that pitch, against that English batting line-up, Australia’s threadbare attack was always going to struggle to defend anything less than 340, so risks needed to be taken.
Australia sent out at number four Travis Head, a young batsman who prefers to build an innings. At this stage they needed to either tell Finch to up the ante, or send out a more powerful hitter than Head and hand him that task.
What actually occurred was that Finch played the anchor role while first Head and then Mitch Marsh looked to work the ball around.
What, exactly, is the point of picking an extremely deep batting line-up if you’re going to bat conservatively? The obvious strategy across the first 35 to 40 overs was to always have one batsman accumulating and one going after the bowlers.
Instead Australia batted within themselves all the way up to the final ten overs by which time even a total of 300 was all but out of reach. And even 300 was never going to be enough on a road against a powerful batting side when you’ve only got three frontline bowlers and are using two part timers inside the first 13 overs.
Australia were a mess last night. A hot mess.
Nudge
Guest
Agree James, smith's bowling changes and tactics were spot on during the ashes. His leadership with the bat was also phenomenal.
JamesH
Roar Guru
Love Paine but I agree. Paine is handy at the top when the ball comes onto the bat because he has good timing and a wide array of shots. But he doesn’t have the muscle to find the boundary often enough at the death. He tried his heart out last night but still couldn’t crack run-a-ball.
JamesH
Roar Guru
He probably only had compromising pics of Rod Marsh tho. No good now.
JamesH
Roar Guru
Neither of them were particularly impressive. Both are very defensive minded. At least Root tried a few different tactics in the first couple of tests when it became apparent that his bowling attack had zero penetration.
JamesH
Roar Guru
Because he has captained a number of times in Smith’s absence, as has Finch. Both have shown themselves to be far more tactical and proactive with field placing and bowling changes. Smith is an unbelievable test batsman, a solid ODI/T20I batsman and an average captain. And I wish the 9 commentary team would stop going on about what a great fielder he is. For all the blinders he takes, he just drops too many catches.
qwetzen
Guest
Well he's certainly more attacking than Smith, Root & Craddock will attest to that, but that's off the field. How do you know so about on the field?
Stuckbetweenindopak
Roar Rookie
I agree, michael clarke was very innovative and aggressive, and he made things happen clearly was a distinctive fact about his captaincy
DavSA
Guest
The cancellation of that A tour was a big big loss to both countries Bakkies. Still pi...es me off.
DavSA
Guest
Tired or sick and tired Tony. I wonder.
1st&10
Guest
Yes!! Cummins will be a top class bowling all rounder
PeteB
Guest
Well guess what. Australia lost and Finch only made 62 at a strike rate of 116. Surely he has to be the first player dropped !
DavSA
Guest
Yup Geoff , I have always however looked at limited overs cricket as being ...well .. chewing gum. ( Apologies FAF) . But sometimes with a pretty delightful flavour. As a result I don't place too much angst on outcomes . I do however love the entertainment. I grew up as a cricketer as do all of us world wide playing limited overs in school. Only when I got to do military service post high school did I get to play my very first 2 day game. My point is that the shortened format of cricket is woven onto all of our cricketing DNA and while it is still about I expect all international outfits including my own team to take it as seriously as possible . But I suspect you and I are on the same page there.
13th Man
Guest
I rate Stoinis highly but I rate Short and Marsh even more highly. I think Marsh is the perfect number 3 in ODI cricket. Has a few different gears to either keep going or if need be settle the side. Khawaja is another option for 3. In the end it depends on whether you want the extra seamer or spinner that decides whether you play Stoinis or Short.
ThugbyFan
Guest
George, T.Head was brought into the ODI to shaft G.Maxwell re: personal animosity between Maxi and the captain and manager. No other reason! One could ask why were Simon Katich and Brad Hodge shafted from the test side? Same answer!
ThugbyFan
Guest
Nair banned for 3 months because of suspect bowling action. Barely played any FC or 50-over cricket and you want him in an International side? Above players such as N.Lyon and A.Agar (I think BOTH these blokes should be in the side) or leggies like Cam Boyce, A.Zampa and the forgotten Fawad Ahmed. Surely you jest! Other jesters such as El Loco (living up to his name) say A.Finch should be dropped because the poor man has only scored 3 centuries in his last 3 ODI but not at 30 runs/over (500%). I always thought good planning for ODI was one bloke stays in and accumulates at a reasonable clip (>90%) while the other batsmen flog the bowlers or hold the line depending on the game situation. But above all, 3-4 good partnerships are a must. White, Head, Stoinis and Tye, bye bye! Bring in U.Khawaja at #3 so S.Smith goes back to #4, A.Agar or M.Short bat at #6 and also bowl left-arm offbreaks/legspin, 3 quicks from M.Starc, J.Hazelwood, P.Cummins, J.Richardson and C.Tremain and batting at #11 and sending everyone in a spin is N.Lyon. I thought of A.Zampa but he doesn't bowl aggressively enough for a leggie, he bowls to keep a lowish run/over number (perhaps on captain's orders). This side has 3 quality quick bowlers, 2 quality spinners and a reserve medium pacer (M.Marsh) with six good batsmen followed by T.Paine or A.Carey, then 2-3 fair clubbers to get the runs. Now you have a decent ODI team, not the tripe served up at the MCC and Gabba. Even the side named in Sydney is a poor unbalanced team. An improvement but still poor.
Paul D
Roar Guru
Not sure if someone already said this but I do find it baffling in the extreme Smith has a phobia about picking & bowling Maxwell but will happily let Head sling down a bunch of pies and bat like someone suffering advanced Parkinsons
Jake
Guest
Steve Waugh has the highest winning percentage as Aus captain (minimum 15 tests) of all time with Ponting 3rd. Your comment that his attacking fields sometimes did not work is the weirdest comment I have ever heard.
Clear Release
Guest
Peter exactly I hope for Finch's sake that was the case because if it wasn't he may have held his place in the side for the short term, but if i was a selector i'd be waiting for him to get a couple of low scores and punt him. Very selfish mediocre innings. fans will rave about a hundred but the more astute will see his innings for what they were. However if he was under instruction, then my word do they not understand modern cricket.
Clear Release
Guest
Mark Taylor was not one of the boys. He was a good listener and extremely astute. Everyone that knows him raves about him. Waugh was much more a lead by example kind a guy, and he was attacking in his field settings, which did not always work, but credit to him. Most people either would die for him or attest respected him. For me Ponting is under-rated as a skipper. Most of his tactics were correct he just had an ageing side and then when the big 3 retired he had an average test side. Everybody respected him. As i said clarke was also okay tactically but there are too many people who don't like him for him to have been a good enough man manger to be someone to aspire too. A lot of people have no time for him. Warner would be worse. A happy side is going to be a winning side. Smith has more of the qualities of the first 3, and for me is the only person to skipper the side.
Peter
Roar Rookie
Reckon the problem is the team strategy rather than Finch. Their plan was probably to 'build an innings around someone' and it ended up being Finch in both games. Maybe their plan should have been for him to keep attacking like Roy did. Or alternatively they needed more attacking batsmen around him while he was being the backbone.