With question marks remaining over their top six, Australia could rue picking the out-of-form Peter Handscomb as their sole back-up batsman for the four-Test series in South Africa, which starts tomorrow.
There is a strong chance the Aussies may need to make a change to their batting line-up at some point during that series given South Africa is a difficult place for batting and the Proteas have a supreme attack.
Only captain Steve Smith and vice-captain David Warner would be guaranteed of avoiding the axe if they made a string of low scores to start this series, which makes the back-up batting slot especially crucial.
They would have been better placed picking a reserve batsman who was in great touch and sending Handscomb back to the Sheffield Shield to correct the muddled technique England picked apart.
Handscomb was dropped for the third Ashes Test after a sequence of strange and ugly knocks at Brisbane and Adelaide. By his final innings of that series, Handscomb looked lost. He wandered all over the crease, almost trod on his stumps several times, and repeatedly tried to shovel the ball across the line against the swing from way outside off stump.
It was the single most curious innings played by an Australian Test batsman in recent memory, and one which suggested Handscomb had lost faith in his technique.
[latest_videos_strip category=”cricket” name=”Cricket”]
Since then, he’s not proven he’s regained touch – unlike, for example, Matt Renshaw who was dumped for the first Ashes Test due to a form trough and is now churning out runs for Queensland.
That’s not entirely Handscomb’s fault, given he’s only played two first-class matches in three months since he was dropped, making scores of 0, 114*, 0 and 5. Is one good knock among three failures enough to warrant a recall?
The latter two of those failures came in Australia’s sole warm-up match, this past week against South Africa A in Benoni. What was more concerning than his lack of runs in that match were the unsightly ways in which Handscomb was dismissed.
In the first innings the Victorian planted his front foot on the line of middle stump and then aimed a wildly optimistic drive at a delivery which was almost a metre outside off stump, squirting a catch to backward point.
In the second dig, Handscomb got himself into a bizarre position as he chopped a wide delivery from paceman Duane Olivier back on to his stumps. His front foot was outside the line of leg stump, and his back foot almost outside off stump, leaving him wide open and very deep in his crease when Olivier released the ball.
For an out-of-form batsman to get out in the same match while using two greatly-different batting techniques is a major concern. Handscomb appears no closer to settling on a batting strategy, which is a serious problem for Australia given he may well be needed to come into the XI during this monumental series.
Peter Handscomb plays a square drive. (AAP Image/David Crosling)
Australia have gambled by sticking with Cameron Bancroft after the opener’s defensive technique was exposed by a struggling English attack on dead decks in the Ashes. Bancroft faces a much more difficult task this next month as South Africa is statistically the hardest country in the world for Test openers and the Proteas have an extraordinary pace unit.
Vernon Philander, in particular, shapes as a nightmare match-up for Bancroft with his ability to land delivery after delivery on a perfect length on or just outside off stump. If Bancroft struggles in the first two Tests of this series Australia will strongly consider shifting Shaun Marsh up the order to face the new ball, as he does in the Shield.
That would leave the tourists with no option but to lob Handscomb into a searing Test series while he is in the midst of trying to decode his own game. This would be a ridiculous scenario.
With 649 runs at 65 in the Shield this summer, Glenn Maxwell would have been fa ar better option.
As it is, Australia must hope their top six stands up in difficult conditions against an elite attack or they’ll have to call upon a batsman who doesn’t look ready to play Test cricket.
Bearfax
Roar Guru
James, I used Waugh as one example. But there are many if you look. Geoff Marsh went through a period of 18 innings like Renshaw and averaged 22. His test average was 33. David Boone's first 18 innings averaged 24. Neither were dropped or dropped as I recall it during their career. Renshaw's average at test level average after 18 innings, 36.6. Even looking at Bancroft's test averages after 9 innings is only 23. Where is the parity.
Taffy
Guest
Bancroft is just as useless how many chances does he get?
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Sometimes the "one rule for one player and another for the other" is because of the type of player and the role they play in the side. Replying to a comment referring to Renshaw with a Steve Waugh comparison is just silly. Steve Waugh started test cricket batting at seven and moved up the order after his 11th test when he had lifted his batting average to 40+. He had also taken 18 wickets @ 33.6 in this time. Renshaw is an opener who doesn't bowl. Scoring runs and protecting the stroke players from the new ball is his entire purpose. Mitch Marsh didn't eventually click. He was dropped, went back to Shield Cricket working on improving his technique and found success upon being recalled. Marsh is actually an example of the opposite of what you suggest.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Apart from Maxwell, only Smith, Clarke, Watson and North have scored test centuries in India since 2009. It is a significant milestone and so many are far too quick to dismiss it. It should have easily been enough to justify playing in the next home test series.
Me
Guest
Bob Pacey - Well spotted. The question is does he want to kill the fish or just tag and release ?
Broken-hearted Toy
Guest
Why would they pick another seamer with Mitch Marsh in the team? It's the batting that needs strengthening. You can hardly pull in an utter rabbit like Sayers when he's not even in the first line bowling attack at the expense of a batsman.
Mick Jeffrey
Roar Rookie
Trust me on this, it's not an easy flight travelling from Perth or Sydney to Johannesburg and commuting from there, even if he's in first or business class.
RogerTA
Roar Rookie
Are the selectors and coach so worried about Maharaj that they felt the need for a similar (maybe) net bowler? Sad if so.
Bob Pacey
Guest
I'll just note the last two words in Pedro's name boys...
Bob Pacey
Guest
And yet so many people raged against M Clarke because he wouldn't bat at 3?
Bob Pacey
Guest
And Boof and Smith mysteriously disappear while on a sojourn on the veldt ?
David
Guest
Brian, that makes more sense than everything else here - not sure anyone can argue what our best 11 is (maybe Renshaw for Bancroft but Matt wasn't in form when it counted). Richardson is there to bowl in the nets and for his personal development, Sayers if one of the quicks breaks down, Holland to bowl in the nets and Handscomb in case someone in the top 6 breaks a finger or pulls a hammy the day before the test. Even if Maxwell was there, he wouldn't play ahead of M Marsh who averaged over 100 against England. So, he'd likely be running the drinks most of the series - a sure way to rub his nose into the dirt. Much better to leave Maxy behind to play the last 5 shield games.
JD St George
Roar Pro
Thank you so much for bringing up that stat Ronan. The selectors could never have predicted how good he was going to go after the BBL break with that sort of form line.
Fergus
Roar Rookie
I agree with your statement on maxwell but not Renshaw. Renshaw had been woefully out of form ever since the tour of india and he had a horrid shield campaign, his axing was deserved. If he went in to the ashes with that sort of form and performed accordingly who knows what damage it would do to his confidence. The big bash provided him with an opportunity to work on his game and time away from the limelight and it's already paying dividends, there's every chance that if he had played the ashes he'd still be in a form slump now. I agree however that he is the best young opener going around right now, though whether he's the best opener in the comp is debatable.
Patrick
Roar Pro
Personally I have no problem with Handscomb's technique. The problem I have is that he didn't seem confident in it, particularly during the Adelaide test. He was honestly all over the place, and in my opinion had to be dropped. He doesn't need to make significant changes, but needs to go back to what worked well last year. Maxwell was certainly unlucky, and could quite easily have been selected ahead of Mitch Marsh had the third test not been played at the WACA, where the selectors wanted an extra quick.
Paul davies
Guest
Ok, Handscomb and Renshaw came to the rescue of a misfiring Oz team and suddenly we forget them??? Come on everyone let’s get behind these two talented kids and encourage them. I enjoy watching both of them for completely different reasons. Both are world class let’s give them the opportunity,
jameswm
Guest
You mean if he gets to play against them? That's doubtful.
jameswm
Guest
OK now you've freaked me out...
Chris Love
Roar Guru
Here’s the problem I have with the criticism of Handscomb’s technique. All the so called experts are looking at a very unorthodox technique and attributing it to a so called form slump. Similar rumblings were about when Smith returned to the test side. Stuff like “walking across his stumps like that, he’s a walking LBW candidate” etc etc. Smith shut everyone up real quick and is currently in a vein of form that sees him the best batsman since Bradman. I personally have reservations about how long Smith’s technique will hold him in this form, especially when he gets into his 30’s where we’ve seen greats go through form slumps and come out the other side because they’ve trusted a proven technique. That is neither here nor there because currently he’s going great guns. Yet with Handscomb, we have a similarly unorthodox technique but he prospered against South Africa and Pakistan on Australian wickets which are very similar to South African wickets. He had a leaner patch in India and Bangladesh but still managed a 72* against India which shows he was adapting to the conditions in his first tour and an 82 in Bangladesh. He comes back to Australia and is dropped after 3 poor innings while still averaging 47. He’s replaced by M Marsh ahead of an absolute road at the WACCA and MCG where you’d have been brave to put money on Handscomb not rebounding. He didn’t get that chance. It was a travesty for Maxwell not to have been given the next shot back into the side and I would agree that current form should see him first back in. But let’s be a bit more patient with Handscombs technique before we write it off.
Sridhar Shelat
Guest
Handscomb with his primarily backfoot technique is going to be a sitting duck against Philander and Rabada