Could Glenn Maxwell be better at the top of the order?

Australian chairman of selectors Trevor Hohns has signalled the need for a more powerful ODI batting line up. Could Glenn Maxwell be in consideration for the number three spot and would he be a more prolific top order player?

It’s been a chastising couple of months for Glenn Maxwell. He has gone from a certain starter in all three cricket formats just six months ago to being dropped from the Test and ODI teams, and copping a little back-handed comment about his training habits from Australian captain Steve Smith on the way out.

This has happened despite having highly influential ex-players like Ricky Ponting firmly in his corner, and producing some dazzling and consistent batting domestically this summer for Victoria and the Stars.

Maxwell finds himself on the outer looking in, despite playing some of the best cricket of his career in the past twelve months, albeit in fits and starts. There was his breakthrough century against India in a high pressure Test in Nagpur, yet just three Tests later he was discarded, despite scores of 38 and 25 not out in his last Test Match, a victory in Bangladesh to square the series.

Maxwell then went back to Victoria and plundered 590 runs in Sheffield Shield cricket at an average of 78. A stunning 278 against New South Wales was backed up with three other half centuries.

In a struggling Melbourne Stars’ team, with just one win from nine games, Maxwell is the fifth leading run scorer in BBL07, with 299 runs at 37, and a strike rate of 154. The selectors obviously told him to go back and pile on the runs and he has largely done that, as well as keeping his mouth shut when the temptation must have been to fire back.

(AAP Image/Rob Blakers)

Of course, in between, his ODI form has tilted off badly since being a key factor in Australia winning the 2015 World Cup on home soil. Maxwell averages around 22 from his last 20 ODIs, which is not good enough for a player of his ability.

He also averages just 26 with the bat from seven Test matches, so it’s not like his spot should be guaranteed. These number are disappointing and while he has to take personal responsibility, would he be better suited up the order?

Last night I watched Maxwell bat at number 3 and blaze a typically cavalier 84 from just 47 balls against the Sydney Sixers, in a relatively meaningless BBL07 game between the sides occupying the last two positions on the table.

However it got me thinking about his future going forward, could Maxwell be more suited in the Top 3 then in the middle order?

The irony was not lost as Australian coach Darren Lehmann, a guest commentator for the night, was made to squirm a little and commentate on Maxwell’s brilliance, with one of his greatest fans, Ponting, right by his side. This after Australia have just been embarrassed at home by England 3-0 in the ODI series, playing a brand of cricket that appeared a little dark ages compared to the visitors.

England, under Eoin Morgan, have won 18 of their past 21 ODI games, and entrust free spirits at the top of the order in Jason Roy and Alex Hales.

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

I think Maxwell is a certainly to return to the ODI side in the mid to long term. With an overall ODI strike rate of 123, and T20 strike rate of 157, there is no more explosive player in the country, and not many more explosive around the world.

Players like Brendon McCullum, Chris Lynn, Chris Gayle and others, all patrol the top of the order. Why? Explosive players like to hit boundaries and go over the top. When is it easiest to hit boundaries and find vast expanses over fielders’ heads in white ball cricket? The answer is obvious – inside the first ten overs in 50 over cricket, or six overs in T20 games, with the fielding restrictions and Powerplay.

You can’t tell me Maxwell hasn’t got at least equal the technique to those tyros at the top. Some perceive a weakness against the short ball but most batsman struggle with 140K/m missiles above the shoulders from time to time.

Maxwell has always been pigeon holed as a middle order player, and has generally only moved up the order out of necessity at times, like his 84 last night with the Stars missing Kevin Pietersen.

In a T20 for Australia, he blazed a remarkable 145 not out from just 65 balls in the absence of Aaron Finch. Maxwell’s lone ODI opening the batting game yielded a score of 51 not out. He batted at Number 3 in amassing all those runs for Victoria this summer in the Sheffield Shield.

He has also had some failures, averaging just 16 from seven T20 Internationals for Australia at first drop.

Could the answer to Australia’s next Number 3, in white ball cricket, be staring them right in the face? I know I have gone for Khawaja at three but I wouldn’t have any problem with Maxwell being given a shot based on the the fact I think he could end up a more impactful player from that position in an Australian ODI side struggling for answers right now.

He might not be the most consistent player at Number 3, however opposition teams would always fear him more than, say, a more circumspect player like Khawaja, Cameron White or Travis Head?

One of the best captains I know said he didn’t always judge a player by their average at the end of the season. He used to say if this player could win him three or four games in a 15-game season he would want him by his side every day of the week.

Even if he came off once every three or four games, that could mean turning the game completely on its head. Forget a few brain fade or bad shots, he wanted match winners. With Steve Smith moving to Number 4, and Hohns signalling Australia need to pick more dynamic players, signalling perhaps a change in philosophy at first drop, the answer seems clear.

Maxwell is often derided for his average of 32 in ODI cricket, however how many times has he come in with less than 20 overs remaining? Remember those latter overs of ODI cricket often involve four or five fielders patrolling the boundary. It’s not an easy time to hit boundaries and clear the ropes, and I think Maxwell sometimes falls into the trap of trying to do too much at a time where it might be best just to chip it around.

Most players in the team are capable of chipping it around so could this actually be the worst time to use a player as powerful and inventive as Maxwell? Some players’ personalities thrive on being out in the contest straight away, the more thinking time they have the worse they get.

(AP Photo/Jon Super)

I think it’s a fair question at the moment, given both the form of the Australian ODI side and the form of Maxwell himself. While it is dangerous to try and copycat teams, England put full faith in guys like Jason Roy and Alex Hales, even if they do flatter to deceive at times at the top of the order.

Indeed both Roy and Hales have loose techniques and were out to soft shots in Sydney, shots that would see Maxwell hung out to dry. However England selectors won’t care if they can prove to be match winners, even once in every four games, like they have over time. I suppose it helps when your team is winning all the time.

With Steve Smith moving to Number 4, I get the feeling the door could be opening for someone like Maxwell, or even potentially guys like Nic Maddinson or D’Arcy Short, to come in and bat at Number 3.

Generally Australia have always liked to have their best batsman there, or most reliable player, but maybe one day cricket is moving away from that.

England certainly have, as you can’t tell me Alex Hales is their best and most reliable player.

However for Australia to get the best out of a player like Maxwell, perhaps he would be more consistent, and more of a threat, moving up the order.