Questions have arisen over the Australian Test bowling line up this summer.
Sides may be taken in the commentary boxes, however, the stark statistic of the four-Test series against India is that the Australian bowling quartet – largely regarded as our best possible and arguably best in the world – were only able to claim one LBW for a four-Test series.
There were eight broken castles although, of those, a couple were chopped on. Cheteshwar Pujara was taken out by one that kept low and Ishant Sharma was all at sea when Starc rattled his pegs.
In Perth, Murali Vijay and KL Rahul were completely exposed, with both bowled in both innings.
In fact, it was Nathan Lyon who claimed the solitary LBW. Ajinkya Rahane was the man – first innings in Melbourne.
Of 62 wickets to fall, that there was only one LBW is surprising.
The contrast to the output of the Indian bowling in interesting.
Firstly, – Australia took 62 wickets. Spin (Lyon) took almost a third (21) of those; of which Lyon claimed one LBW and two bowlings.
In the case of India, there were 20 wickets out of 70 taken by spinners. Of those 20 wickets, there were two LBWs and two bowled – fairly similar.
As far as the quicks are concerned; 40 wickets among the trio of Mitchell Starc, Josh Hazlewood and Pat Cummins Cummins at a ratio of six bowled and no LBWs out of 40 dismissals was a 15 per cent strike rate.
For India, with 50 wickets taken by the quicks, 18 of those were LBW (eight) or bowled (ten). That was a 36 per cent strike rate.
However – even the Indian figures deserve drilling down on. It was Jasprit Bumrah who featured most with six LBWs and six bowled.
Sharma and Mohammed Shami worked well in support, but it was Bumrah who was the ‘x-factor’. He almost always threatened.
I recall Starc getting a head of steam up in the first crack at India in Perth. He’d just removed Pujara (a strangle down leg side) and Rahane came to join Virat Kohli. The scene was set for a key moment and for quality Test cricket – alas – Starc was actually not up to it.
He is not a master of his skillset – in the same way that Mitchell Johnson was a terribly fluky bowler.
Great deliveries can be conjured but, seemingly, not at will – let alone the pressure is rarely able to be sustained.
This was an issue against this season’s opposition. Looking back to 2017-18 and the home Ashes; 89 wickets taken by the Australians saw a total of 25 LBWs and bowlings. 28 per cent.
Ironically, Lyon also took 21 wickets in that five-Test series and nine of those were either LBW (seven) or bowled (two); a slightly better average (29.3 compared to 30.4) but slightly worse strike rate (74.33 against Eng versus 69.2 against India).
Nine of 21 wickets was quite high and certainly so compared to three from 21.
As for the quicks; 66 wickets for the ‘big three’ saw Hazlewood end up with four LBWs and one bowled from 21 wickets, Starc nabbed four LBWs and three bowled from 22 wickets, while Cummins scored two LBWs and two bowlings from his 23 wickets.
In total; ten LBWs and six bowlings from 66 wickets at around 24 per cent.
Australia’s Mitchell Starc celebrates after taking a wicket. (AP Photo/Rick Rycroft)
So what happened this time around? Were India just that more organised in defence, or did Australia err on the short side?
I also queried prior to the series whether the ‘big three’ were entering the series somewhat underdone.
Starc had battled ankle and hamstring issues during 2018, while both Hazlewood and Cummins were dealing with back related issues.
In the case of Hazlewood – his last standout performance was match figures of 8/140 against England last season in Perth.
Since then, a best bowling return of 3/52 in an innings and 5/128 for a match back in Cape Town. In that time, 28 wickets at the unflattering 34.64. He missed the UAE matches. His career average has shifted from 25.6 to 27.1. Is Hazlewood really our opening bowler? Or is he an honest toiler tending to pitch too short if there’s no sideways movement?
Cummins looked the goods through the England series and again in South Africa – including a sterling 9/141 in the final Test in Johannesburg.
The concerns for Cummins relate only to this series and his preparation. He also missed the UAE Tests. Was he ready for this series or was it wishful thinking?
14 wickets at 27.8 is okay, however, apart from his 6/27 in the second at Melbourne, the rest of the time he looked barely more than a trundler producing eight wickets at 45.
Is it unfair to exclude the 6/27? I think not – it was an inconsequential innings India used to rest their bowlers – and many of Cummins’ wickets were short and down leg side.
I suggest he was somewhat flattered on the day and most certainly allows a far too flattering series overview. I expect he’ll come good but I was dubious that he was right to go for two sets of back-to-back Tests.
And then there is Starc. He ripped it up in Durban back in March with a match return of 9/109. Since then, he’s had ankle and hammy issues. He missed Johannesburg but did tour the UAE.
Over this timeframe, he has 20 wickets at 46.5, while his career average has also jumped from 26.9 to 28.9.
So, is it acceptable that our new ball bowlers are so badly under-performing?
In some cases they get limited break time between first and second innings due to a dismal batting display. However, for both the Melbourne and Sydney Tests, they had first crack and fell short both times.
It seems clear that the bowlers are tired – even after the break between Perth and Melbourne.
What accountability is put back on the selectors? Perhaps we needed someone to bowl the Peter Siddle line and length – the top of off stump, which appeared to work so well for Bumrah.
We actually had such a guy as a permanent 12th man.
dat
Roar Rookie
I think, how well India's bowling unit have been performing of late is best reflected by the recent cricinfo article by andrew fidel fernando. South africa undoubtedly are the masters at home,but only india has the bowling unit, which has a better away record than at home from 2016 onwards, while being 2nd to just south africa in overall avg. (i would think it be very similar had he looked from 2015 onwards cause thats when virat became the capt,and the bowling unit started to shine more). They are more versatile and adaptable to conditions than any other bowling unit right now,provided they get the selection right. Picking kuldeep to be a 2nd spinner on a damp lords pitch,dropping bhuvi right after he wrecked sa's batting in the 1st test,not picking the right number of spinners (none in the 2nd test vs aust and 1 in two tests where eng picked 2 spinners),selecting umesh yadav in general ,outside Asian conditions all suggest they do end up making some bizarre choices at times,which they need to work on.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
Well - 'I told you so' regarding underdone quicks - and Hazlewood was clearly not right, was managed through, tired/faded and now in on the outer again. Yep - great thinking selectors!!!
Rob
Guest
They bowled short and wide to often. They did the same in the UAE and Abbas schooled them. Saker is clueless IMO. They totally miss read the slowness and flatness of MCG and Sydney. India attacked the stumps and bowled tighter lines more consistently. They bowled with the same tactic to every Indian batsmen? Clueless.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
#dat The key issue I feel is the adapting to conditions (and opponent). India looked to have by far the better plans, strategy and execution in the 4 tests just played out. Australia didn't seem to set themselves up at all well for Melbourne and Sydney - but - all the focus was on the batting.....which perhaps didn't pay enough credit to India 'outplaying' Australia in their own backyard.
dat
Roar Rookie
I think something else needs to be added here, when considering the South African pace attack.If we are purely talking about their skill on helpful tracks in south africa or in england and if we are also considering steyn at his prime, then there is no argument they have the best pace attack in the world. But what about in other conditions ? Just recently on their sub continental tour of sri lanka their pacer's stats are rabada- av 23,steyn- avg 89, ngidi -avg 63 and philander -38. (A year before in 2017 India's weakest pacer of their current lot-umesh yadav returned from that series avg 35 in lanka ,while shami avg 17.) Olivier even though he had an exceptional series vs Pakistan took 18-19 of his wickets using the same ploy which this article was critical of when it came to Australia's bowling,pretty sure both starc and cummins would have made a killing themselves vs the Pakistani batsmen,given they were the 2 quickest bowlers of 2018. Of their bowling attack Rabada right now is on top of the world,and is the best pacer in the world in the longest format.But the rest of the attack all have issues.Philander is literally their first choice drop for a spinner in Asia. Olivier is still untested away from home and in tougher conditions same could be said of Ngidi. While with Steyn i am not too sure he is back at his best(or will be at this stage of his career) he clocked above 145 just 3 times in the last test and his length all through out the series was a bit here and there most of the time.Obviously you saw flashes of the old steyn here and there but he also got smoked for 21 boundaries by babar alone(unlike rabada who stated he was a bit tired after the fixtures of 2018 for drop of his pace and not hitting his best,steyn can't claim the same) . I do believe last year was india's year when it came to best pace attack as they went on establishing themselves across conditions and also due to the numerous records they produced during the same time period.(whether they can continue on like South Africa or Australia have is another thing entirely) But i would say given the fact that south Africa plays a large chunk of their matches on helpful conditions,seeing their overall numbers appear better than the rest shouldn't be that surprising,i would expect the same had it been with Australia or most competent pace attacks around the world.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
#Clyde "Arguably". Yes - not saying that I would argue that assertion. However I've heard others argue it. That's why I slipped it in there. To me - they clearly are not the best bowling line up in the world. Starc is too inconsistent. Hazlewood is a very poor mans McGrath and lacks tricks. Cummins looks the best of this batch but was clearly under done for this series and his output highlights that. As indicated, his 6-27 didn't excite me as it was for want of a better term - 'out of context'. Lyon - Australia's "GOAT" - is a top class off-spinner but it's always going to be hard to be a match winner in Australia plying that trade. #JamesH You asked "When was the last time an Australian bowler had something like that to work with at home?" I'd suggest Perth at the new stadium delivered a juicy track.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
#BA Sports The irony I suppose for Lyon was that his strike rate was up in this series and his per test returns were up (both compared to the home Ashes v England) - yes he faded by Sydney however - one can argue that the dubious partnership bowling from the other end didn't help or that Lyon might have bowled differently in Melbourne - Lyon to me can hold his head reasonably high. Agreed on the lack of stump to stump bowling. It seems Australia had decided to be 'mean', try to intimidate a little bit too much. There were times when I felt the wickets should have been challenged far more than the helmet!! Ironically there too - my main recollection of the series is poor Harris getting whacked on the helmet repeatedly.
BA Sports
Roar Guru
Agree. It is a an approach that would work against Australia at the moment given our batsman's impatience and inability to leave the ball, but the Indian's showed what Test batting is supposed to look like and could leave ball's outside off and wait for the bad ball. The other concerning element is the bowlers and leadership group seem completely incapable of seeing the problem and/or changing plans when they were not working. Side note: Munro, not sure what the irony was as it relates to Lyon's figures?
JamesH
Roar Guru
While I agree that SA's pace attack is the best in the world (with Aus and India fighting for second), you have to factor in the nature of the home pitches. Australian pitches in recent years have generally lacked any pace and bounce, which are the weapons our own pacemen developed their games around in their formative years. On the other hand, SA have had several recent home series (excluding the one against Australia, which was presumably deliberate) in the last couple of years where the decks have been bowler's paradises. Just look at what they served up when India toured last summer. When was the last time an Australian bowler had something like that to work with at home?
Clyde
Guest
Arguably the best bowling attack in the world Munro? Let’s see test bowling averages here; Starc 28.91, Cummings 24.51, Hazelwood 27.14 and Siddle 30.28. That is not even close to world class or best in the world. This is right here; Steyn 22.81, Philander 21.71, Rabada 21.35, Olivier 18.19 and Ngidi 19.53
Kopa Shamsu
Guest
The reason why they are not getting LBWs is because they are bowling outside off instead of stump to stump. And you can't trap a proper seasoned test batsman outside off like pujara. The others were more or less fell for it. This is one of the biggest weakness in Australian cricket,bowlers are growing up learning to bowl outside off to batsman who are used to score slashing outside off stump and get brutally exposed when ball moves even a little bit.