Here’s my question to the Australian cricket selectors: Why is Glenn Maxwell not in the Test squad?
This is not just my question, but one from millions of Australian cricket fans all over the world. Maxwell is often harshly criticised for playing some of the most outrageous cricket shots in short formats of the game for Australia.
Are these criticisms reasonable? Perhaps they are, in the shorter formats of the game.
Due to the way he has played in the shorter formats, many fans and it seems, even selectors believe that Maxwell is not suited for Test cricket. Here are the facts: Maxwell’s first-class batting average of 41.10 is higher than every Australian cricket player in the current squad besides Usman Khawaja.
Maxwell hasn’t played a single Test match in Australia. He has played seven Test matches in the sub-continent where he has been asked to bat in a number of different positions with no consistent opportunities to showcase his ability.
Maxwell proved his worth by scoring a century in India, proven to be one of the toughest conditions to bat for Australian cricketers. He is also one of the best fielders in the world.
Justin Langer, the Australian cricket coach, hinted at the return of all-rounder Mitchell Marsh for the Boxing Day Test replacing Peter Handscomb, labelling the need for a fifth bowler at the MCG pitch.
Fair enough too, the MCG likely does require a fifth bowling option if we look at the history.
However, is Mitchell Marsh the best option? His bowling average despite playing 35 Test matches is 42.45. If we look at Maxwell’s, it is 42.62 from just seven matches. Maxwell can bowl just as well.
In cricket, with more experience, you expect players to improve their performances. Mitchell Marsh has been given 35 opportunities to prove his worth and is often labelled as someone with ‘great potential’, which we haven’t seen. He averages just 26.08 with the bat in Test cricket.
Meanwhile, Glenn Maxwell, whose batting average trumps Marsh’s with more than 10 in first-class cricket, has been given zero opportunities to play Test cricket in Australia.
We all know the job of selectors is not easy. It is a tough job and it is impossible to make everyone happy.
However, I must ask selectors one question: Why is Maxwell not in the Test squad?
The issue of not picking Glenn Maxwell for Test Cricket seems more like a lack of foresight from our selectors rather than his ability to perform, and it is very frustrating to see that as an Australian cricket fan.
Dart
Guest
7 tests is not a big enough sample size. Even if it was, all of those games are on the subcontinent and it would compare favourably to others.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Some seem happy to discount GM as a serious red ball batsman. Clearly, they conveniently dismiss his test hundred in India, despite it being a mature, measured and responsible innings. I am prepared to give Maxwell the benefit of the doubt regarding his new approach to red ball cricket, requesting an elevation to first drop for VIC and solid performances since. How he hasn't played some home tests is mindboggling, given how low our red ball batting stocks are at present. Finch, averaging 35 with more technical faults against the moving ball than most club players, gets a spot and is picked to bat out of position at opening. We are that desperate! Yet, somehow, picking Maxwell is seen as more risky?? What the...
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Well done. Why didn't you note that 80 runs at 13.33 were from tests Maxwell played four and five years ago? Maxwell averaged 37 upon his recall, including a test hundred in India. Apparently not good enough for Maxwell to be in the mix, although Handscomb can average 15.33 since last summer's Ashes, including some home tests, and still be in the mix. The coach and selectors need to hang their heads in shame when fronting our bowling attack. Some of the batting selections have been downright insulting.
Paul2
Guest
@Adam Bagnall OK. Maxwell's First class average is 41.10. That's higher than everyone in the current Test squad other than Usman Khawaja.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Surely, form from four and five years ago isn't as relevant as more recent results. You had best dismiss M Marsh's one good series last summer as well then because he is lightyears from that form. Or was it just a pedestrian English attack on flat pitches that helped him make some runs? I could also point out that M Marsh didn't play at the Gabba or the day/night pink ball test which offered the bowlers the most assistance. Yet, even with all this in his favour Mitch Marsh doesn't average 26 in tests. In fact, since his career defining series, on that back of all that confidence, he has averaged 16.07... It shouldn't even be open to debate. Cummins averages 17.30 in that period and makes the bowlers earn his wicket. Starc 14.06. Lyon 16.75. Hazlewood 13.28. Paine 32.5. S Marsh 18.66. Those comparisons are compelling. Happy to help you with them :)
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
If only Maxwell's Indian test hundred had earned him a home test series against that poor English attack on last summers pitches... Then the Maxwell debate would be done. Instead we keep trying Mitch Marsh, although by your standards, even with the distinct advantage of home tests, should never play another test. For the record, that seems the fairer of the two judgements.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
So you will write off Maxwell without him playing a test on home soil? I m interested in your thoughts on Mitch Marsh.
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Maxwell quickly made it clear pretty that he disliked "the BIG SHOW" tag, but the Neanderthals in the commentary box loved it. I suppose that's GM's fault, is it? Anyway, on a positive not, how mentally strong is Pat Cummins? He is an absolute inspiration. The negative - Our selectors should be ashamed for not giving the bowlers the batting support they deserve. It was also going to be tough without Smith and Warner (Bancroft... who cares) against a very good Indian bowling attack. Selectors don't help by picking players out of their depth and even batting them out of position in one very obvious case. Sheer lunacy!
John Erichsen
Roar Guru
Glenn Maxwell isn't despite a test hundred in India, yet Aaron Finch is because he scored some runs against mediocre county bowlers.... Hmmmmm
Naz
Roar Rookie
Maxwell was given 7 opportunities, all overseas. The four tests that I included above were from 2017. The 3 he played before that were back in 2014. All of those Tests were overseas. Don't forget, Mitch Marsh also has an average of 26 and he has played 35 Test matches.
Naz
Roar Rookie
It doesn't matter whether it's long way off Test cricket or not. It is the only closest thing to Test cricket and players are selected to Test cricket based off their first-class cricket record. How else do they get picked, Adam? He hasn't had a single opportunity in Australia. Players who have good first-class cricket record need to be picked and Maxwell is one of them and he is far better than most of our cricketers in Test XI. That's my standards.
Adam Bagnall
Roar Guru
Maxwell has a career average of 26. If you are going to compare, do it right, not pick and choose series that Maxwell played ok in
Adam Bagnall
Roar Guru
Reflective, maybe but Shield cricket is still a long way off Test cricket. Maxwell clearly can't take his game to the next level. Sorry but averaging 26 with the bar and 42 with the ball doesn't cut it for me. perhaps you have different standards
Adam Bagnall
Roar Guru
But only 26 in Tests. I did read the article but also did my own research.
Steve
Guest
I agree, he is clearly in the top 6 batsmen Australia has without Warner and Smith. If Head and Finch are in the team, there is no excuse for not picking Maxwell. Even with him included, this would have to be the weakest top 7 the Australian test team has ever had.
Naz
Roar Rookie
Really, Pedro? His batting average in India series was 39.75, and 33.33 in the series against Bangladesh both in 2017 (total of 4 Test matches). That is a better batting average than Travis Head (4 Test matches) 35.62 and Aaron Finch (4 Test matches) 33.37. Not to mention, much much better than Mitch Marsh's career batting average of 26.08 despite playing 35 Test matches and also better than his brother Shaun whose career average is just 34.82. As outlined in my article, he hasn't played a single Test match in Australia. He more than deserves a spot in the Test XI.
Pedro The Fisherman
Roar Rookie
Maxwell's batting average of less than 27 after 7 tests warrants him never playing Test match cricket for Australia again.
Pedro The Fisherman
Roar Rookie
Yawn! That should endear him to the selectors. Sue? Sounds like the modern malaise - it is always someone else's fault that someone is not good enough!
Chris Love
Roar Guru
Time to sack the selectors then.
Naz
Roar Rookie
Therein lies the irony, Adam. People seem to believe Maxwell is only good for T20s and ODIs because of the way he plays in those formats. It’s not that people think Maxwell is good for Test cricket because of the way he plays in T20 and ODIs. His first-class (which is a format reflective of Test cricket) batting average is 41.10. That in itself justifies his selection in the current Test XI where the only player with higher first-class batting average is Khawaja.