The lead story on Cricket Australia’s digital platform on Friday morning read: “Baggy green bat-off: How the hopefuls fared“.
Assessing Thursday’s play in the Sheffield Shield, the piece focused on the batsmen (‘hopefuls’) it saw as contending for top-six positions in Australia’s Test side, which Justin Langer has said is ‘very open’ at present. Strong performances in the Shield could give rise to a new ‘bolter’ – a term now tiresomely synonymous with October.
The heightened focus on individual rather than team exploits at domestic level, however, tells a deeper story – one where the Sheffield Shield is now treated as mere testing grounds for international cricket and where winning is just a by-product of a greater purpose.
Shane Warne lamented the shift in an interview this week.
“The foundation of Australian cricket has always been grassroots cricket, club cricket and Sheffield Shield cricket. To me, I think Cricket Australia at the moment are devaluing Shield cricket,” he said.
Writing on behalf of the player’s association in Fairfax papers on Friday, Shane Watson reminisced about the days where the Shield was “the envy of world cricket”, and how it produced “Australian-ready players”.
Recent years, however, has seen reckless scheduling, an all-in-one-basket focus on young cricketers, rule tinkering, substitutions and workload management that has caused across the board frustration.
“Shield cricket has been tossed aside. And we see the results in the national team,” Watson wrote of one player’s submission to the long-awaited Longstaff review, due for release on Monday.
Shane Watson: never shy of being involved in a review. (AP Photo/Alastair Grant)
This players’ submission isn’t a nostalgic cry, desperate for a return to the good old days of the Shield, when punters would enter the gates for the final session and teams were stacked with Test players. There’s an equivocal understanding that times have changed.
Their submission, rather, seeks a return to the days where state cricket wasn’t rendered a stepping stone for the select few that actually go on to play for their country. A return to a respected domestic competition.
So how did Cricket Australia get into a position where it devalued the very competition that produced its best players for years on end? And more importantly, why?
Gideon Haigh’s recently released book, Crossing the Line, a seminal work on how Australian cricket got to where it is today, claims it largely started in 2012. Cricket Australia was, prior to this time, run at the behest of the state associations, with state delegates making up the board.
Its move to a streamlined, centralised board of independent directors in 2012 represented a marked change. While the move has been an undoubted commercial success – the recent $1.2 billion TV rights deal a testament to this – the quality of the Shield has been a key victim.
Since 2012, no longer has the board held state delegates who could protect the importance of the Shield. No longer does it have directors who might stand up to disastrous BBL-obsessed scheduling or to high-performance units that dictate Mitchell Starc may only bowl nine overs per day, rendering its competitiveness down to a glorified practice match.
Haigh describes the old executive system as one “replete with checks and balances, sometimes to the point of inertia, but with a robust collective purpose”. Changes were introduced slowly and steadily, to the benefit of the competition.
(AAP Image/Daniel Pockett)
The appointment of Pat Howard in late 2011 is perhaps the single most detrimental figure in the devaluing of Sheffield Shield cricket in Australia. Along with Greg Chappell, the pair have become obsessive with young talent, and nurturing them through the ‘pathways’ of ‘high performance’.
“Talent is like fruit. If you don’t pick it when it’s ripe, it’s likely to go off,” Chappell is said to use as his dictum. Their prevailing view is that the Shield is a stage that can be expedited, even bypassed, on the way to Australian selection. Steve Smith played just ten Shield games before his Australian debut. David Warner played none. They are the success stories of Australian cricket and what domestic players should strive towards (insert irony here).
PONIs (players of national interest) are the ones, in Howard’s eyes, who matter. The ones who are both below 25 and can bowl over 145 clicks or monster a length-ball over the cover fence. Mike Hussey, as one anonymous respondent within Cricket Australia ranks told Haigh, “would never have succeeded”.
The impact on the Shield means that states are further pressured to play youngsters before they are ready, with the view that they may eventually play for Australia. This ‘gifting’ of games has a flow-on effect: those older who pose no future international credibility will be cast aside. See: Ed Cowan, Mark Cosgrove, Clint McKay.
Yes, these players may not have had an international future, but their experience and brilliant first-class record make those around and against them better. Without them, the competition suffers.
The Shield has also been confined to the bookends of the season to the detriment of development. This season it will take a two-and-a-half-month hiatus while the now extended Big Bash takes centre stage over the summer months. Two and a half months without a red ball thrown in anger. This presents a huge problem for those who don’t specialise in the shortest format. Those without a BBL contract will spend December to February resigned to club cricket as a result of scheduling.
Watson concluded on Friday by stressing that the players want and expect change, which should be enacted with haste.
“The reason why this all seems so simple is because it is,” he said.
“I just have my fingers crossed that things shift sooner rather than later.”
Jeansyjive
Roar Rookie
You watch the wickets served out for the India test series. Will be roads
Gus O
Guest
Shield cricket also misses retiring Australian players coming back to play one or more seasons of state cricket before they fully retire. The pay rates for international cricketers and makes it financially wise to play on for Australia until they are spent, but state cricket misses the experienced internationals helping to mentor state players and state leaders/team culture. I appreciate the comments about the different pitches, remember when Australian tennis gave up grass courts? How does a young bowler like Pope transition from 2 day club cricket to 5 day test cricket without playing longer format matches on a variety of pitches and conditions? How does Australia have “home field advantage” if we dont have players experienced in playing long form cricket on these characteristic state pitches and conditions? I remember when English County cricket as the gold standard model. T20 may be the money maker, but it compromises test cricket performance. What has cheapened the Shield is that the international calendar is so relentlessly full that the national players rarely or never play for their State team. Even when available, in recent times CA has imposed enforced rest and not allowed them to play. If there is no window for Shield cricket to take priority and our international players never appear, and the fast track to better pay is to become a T20 flat track slogger... gee whiz, I just can’t understand why Shield cricket isn’t what it used to be or why we are struggling to find bona fide test batsmen with patience and match awareness who place a high value on their wicket... it is so confusing, no? And yes, India manages it... but they have over a billion in population and don’t have to compete for athletes against the major footy codes, and their major population centres are not all next to beautiful beaches where swimming and surfing are far more attractive that standing all day in the hot sun.
Wise Old Elf
Guest
Just put Ian Chappell in charge. He would sort everything out in 6 months.
pakistanstar
Guest
I guess they play a final and hand a trophy just for the fun of it then? We're in the dire situation with our test team now because CA have been treating the Shield as a development competition for far too long.
JamesH
Roar Guru
Even if you're right, it's currently a lousy player factory. Why would CA treat its test player factory as a cut-rate competition? Why would it take steps which blatantly undermine the integrity of that competition if it's the only source of cricketers for the test team? The Shield wasn't attracting big crowds at the turn of the century when it was chock full of test-ready talent. The only thing that has changed is CA's attitude towards it. Partly because they are prioritising their money-maker, the BBL (which is somewhat understandable), and partly because they erroneously think their youth talent pathways will produce test cricketers without significant focus on the Shield. Nothing prepares players for tests like competing against hardened first class cricketers. You can have all the coaching and mentoring you want in the Centre for Excellence but it's no substitute for facing down an angry Chris Tremain while Cameron White stands in the slips informing you just how much you're s***ting yourself.
Tock
Guest
Thanks David I hope/wish you are wrong, but guess I will have to make do with Cricket Australia's live web coverage, which is a hell of a lot better than nothing. At least it is a step in the right direction.
Wise Old Elf
Guest
It was run down by numerous Australian administrators by over playing the limited over game to death literally. Where is the World Series Cup from the summer program now. BBL is potentially a short term thing. Lets just see if BBL stays the course. If the match rigging claims on Al Jazeera turn out to be true I could see BBL die.
Brendon the 1st
Roar Rookie
Hallelujah, I didn't know he'd quit. Could be an new golden age for Aust test cricket.
David Schout
Expert
Cheers Tock and absolutely it can, but it won't. Big Bash is the money-spinner for CA now, and given they've increased fixtures this season, it's hard to see it moving back. I think there's an acceptance that it will now bookend the season (fixturing-wise) but what players want to see is its return to a bona fide competition, treated with respect and without tinkering/'player management'.
David Schout
Expert
What a little legend your son is! Agree re: smaller grounds, too.
qwetzen
Roar Rookie
Speaking of no promotion of the Shield. Last season I noticed that ABC tv's evening news did not feature a single Shield score until the final. Poor effort that.
qwetzen
Roar Rookie
Correct DF. I loaded up the cricket.australia site the other day and as soon as the WA game appeared there was a well pitched up ball from a med being taken on the rise by the keeper. Far better to watch than the tedium served up in so many other places. It'll be interesting to see how the latest concrete'n'plastic coliseum plays.
Tock
Guest
Best article on this topic I have read for some time. There seems to be this weird acceptance that the shield can never be what it was, We have seen in many sports that if it gets regular coverage and promotion that they thrive. There is a chicken and egg issue here but I believe that aus cricket has it in its power to achieve this. For years on foxtel sport there has been a huge need for content that people will watch and I cant believe that the shield could not fill part of that gap at minimum cost. Especially if test players are on show and selections are up for grabs with an upcoming tour and the games are well promoted.
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Brilliant pitch at the WACA this week. Plenty in it for the quicks and the good batsmen got value for shots with a magnificent outfield.
pedrax
Roar Rookie
Great article, but I wonder if the cost to Australia is negated by the same treatment of domestic 4-day cricket in other countries (e.g. England)? The crowds may be poor, but perhaps there is increasing interest. I just put my 8 year old son to bed after having him pester me to have the Sheffield Shield streaming all afternoon and evening (thanks to WA time zone). Having the cricket freely available online is a massive boost for maintaining interest. The JLT Cup coverage was superb this year online. One thing I'd like to see is domestic cricket at smaller grounds. The JLT Cup was great at St Kilda, but I can't see myself taking my children to the MCG for domestic cricket. Great caption to the Watto pic BTW!
bigbaz
Roar Guru
Many young cricket fans FFS, the shield has always been about producing test players and hasn’t produced crowds of any note probably since the 30s
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
It seems no one disagrees. Shield cricket simply must be undiluted. Fixture around it. ODI and International T20 must be ranked below Test cricket as a priority. Those guys in Pakistan now should be good but next rung down players; Siddle, Fawad, Peirson, Abbott, Copeland, Kane Richardson, Beau Webster... Potential Test players and big ODI players should be playing Shield and JLT ODD domestic games, Just fantastic to see Pat Howard go. All of Australia is unanimous on that one.
JOHN ALLAN
Guest
Test players hardly play any Shield matches so the State players aren't testing themselves against the best. A few years ago James Sutherland threatened to dock Shield teams points if wickets favoured the bowlers too much & games finished too early as a result. So we developed flat track bullies at home however fail overseas. Wonder why?
qwetzen
Roar Rookie
Agree David. Putting business creatures on sporting boards is in the same category as declaring that an inner-city tunnel or an inner-city light rail will be profitable, doomed to fail. And a point for those who are noisily slurping on the whinge du jour of batters with low SS averages: The time of the year when the batsmen in this country traditionally boosted their averages has now been exclusively devoted to the Big Bore.
Paul
Roar Guru
really good point James. I remember years ago listening to some guys debating how the Vics would go in Sydney against Bobby Holland on the turning SCG pitch and how SA would go on the lightening quick WACA. We're no chance to develop rounded cricketers unless we bring some of these characteristics back into the pitches