When Pat Cummins burst onto the Test scene in Johannesburg as a strapping quick who could bowl all day, the world was his oyster with a long and exciting career ahead of him.
At 18 years and 193 days, he was the second youngest baggy green wearer in history behind elegant batsman Ian Craig who debuted against South Africa at the MCG in 1953, at 17 years and 239 days.
But fate stepped in against both of them.
Craig’s severe bout of hepatitis ended his career at 26, but en route he had set records still not broken – the youngest at 16 to represent NSW, the youngest to score a double century at 17, the youngest to play for Australia and his country’s youngest Test captain.
Cummins was struck down with stress fractures and had to fight through 63 months of pain, surgeries, rehab and frustrations before he played his second Test.
That was mighty tough to take after a debut that saw him become the youngest Australian to capture 6-79 against the might of South Africa, the youngest Man-of-the-Match and to hit the winning run in the seven-wicket success.
Cummins opened the bowling in that Test with Mitchell Johnson, and in his comeback Test shared the new ball with Josh Hazlewood against India, at Ranchi.
In those two Tests, Cummins out-bowled his partner, as he did in the two Tests that followed against Bangladesh.
The last Ashes in Australia saw a change in direction that has been sustained ever since.
Mitchell Starc surfaced, and for some unfathomable reason, Pat Cummins was relegated to change bowler status despite being the most successful and the first-choice opening bowler.
The Ashes stats tell the truth:
Cummins – 23 wickets at 24.55
Starc – 22 at 23.54.
Hazlewood – 21 at 25.90.
(AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)
Then it was off to South Africa, where Cummins was to again fill the role of change bowler:
Cummins – 22 at 21.45.
Starc – 12 at 34.41.
Hazlewood – 12 at 39.25.
Further proof surfaced in the recent four-Test series against India:
Cummins – 14 at 27.78.
Hazlewood – 13 at 30.61.
Starc – 13 at 34.53.
Why have the selectors, coach and captain so consistently ignored those facts?
Cummins, in all those examples, should have been first-choice quick, not bridesmaid third.
It’s a fair enough point that left-armer Starc as Cummins’ new-ball partner is coming from a different direction, but Hazlewood was the obvious change bowler.
Hazlewood has been described as the modern-day metronome Glenn McGrath, which is a disservice to the “Pigeon”.
His entire career worked on the “You miss, I hit” theory. Hazlewood has never been so accurate.
If scorers broke dot balls into two categories, those where a shot has been played and no run and those deliveries that passed aimlessly through to the keeper, McGrath had precious few of those, Hazlewood plenty, and a lot more than Cummins.
It stands to reason that Cummins, who is consistently faster and more accurate than Hazlewood, would be even more dangerous with the harder, shinier, new ball.
Hazlewood is out of the picture with stress fractures, so the Sri Lankans are about to face the really dangerous Pat Cummins.
JohnB
Roar Rookie
Small point - a change bowler always used to be someone who wasn't in the side as a bowler and was only good enough to bowl the occasional over to allow the proper bowlers to change ends. A first change bowler on the other hand is a proper bowler selected to bowl third, when the first of the opening bowlers is rested. As to why Cummins has been used as first change - it's a fair question as he's looked consistently the best of the pace bowlers. Maybe they figured Starc had to have the new ball, and they preferred Hazelwood to bowl upwind. Maybe they also thought Hazelwood would get a bit more out of the new ball.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Fair point re Hazlewood, but you cant say the Ashes stats proved Cummins should have been opening the bowling when he didnt open the bowling!. He wouldn’t know a seam position if it socked him in the face, so at least give the ball to bowlers who can occasionally get it to move off the straight.
JamesH
Roar Guru
That's basically my line of thought. It could also just be injury related, I suppose. He's been in and out of the side with back issues. Hard to know.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
It doesn't necessarily suggest control issues. Bowling cross seam because of control issues would generally suggest a bowler is getting lots of swing when bowling seam up but is having trouble getting the ball in the right place with the swing. Usually more of an issue in short from cricket too. But cross seam also has other uses too. It can help get variable bounce depending on whether it hits the seam or not. Plus, when it doesn't land on the seam it can help rough up the part of the ball that it does land on. So, if the ball isn't swinging, and there's no seam movement just by trying to land it on the seam, bowling cross seam is one of the methods used to try and rough the ball up to the end of trying to get it to reverse. With the rubbish balls that Kookaburra produce at the moment, if there is new ball swing at all it's only for a few overs usually, so by the time the first change bowler comes on it's already stopped swinging. The big question is, when he has the new rock, can he stand the seam up and get it swinging? We actually don't know the answer to that, as we haven't seen him with it. I'm hoping the answer to that is yes.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Yeah, hopefully they don't replace Hazlewood with Siddle. Siddle has done nothing at all outside of greentops in England for a few years now. And it's hard not to agree that Hazlewood has actually been less effective in the period of time since his pace has increased. Whether they are related at all or it's just coincidence I don't know. But maybe it's possible that the type of bowler he is, and what he does with the ball, is actually more effective when bowled in the mid-130's than the mid-140's.
Leftwhinge
Guest
Cummins was bowling a large majority of his overs across the seam against India. Not seam up...which to me suggests control issues. Not sure if he will get the new ball. It was his pace and the shorter stuff that got him wickets. I think Hazelwood is still a better bet than starc.
JamesH
Roar Guru
I think Hazlewood has been trying to bowl too fast. He’s picked up a yard of pace in the last couple of years, consistently operating around 140 rather then the 135 he sat on earlier in his career. That might explain why he is seemingly less accurate, gets less movement and is easier to drive than he used to be. Up until (and including) the Ashes he was justifying his new ball position. Now he’s struggling a bit with form and injury so it probably makes sense to take some pressure off him. However, there is a chance (I hope) that Richardson leapfrogs Siddle into the XI. Jhye is a new ball bowler who moves it more than Cummins so it would be interesting to see what role they give him, considering that this is a pretty low-key series.
Tony H
Roar Pro
David agree with most of this except one point. Cummins has actually been consistently slower than Hazlewood over the last 12 months. Perhaps not super relevant, but true nonetheless
Paul
Roar Guru
Is it a given that Cummins will get the new ball, David? If Richardson plays, I'm sure Paine would be tempted to give it to him. He's a tad quicker than Cummins and has a reputation for doing a bit with the new ball. I agree Cummins should be given the chance, but wouldn't be at all surprised of he was the bridesmaid again
David Lord
Expert
paddleman66, your seniority rules comment also applies to Peter Siddle. How could the 34-year-old be resurrected after two years absence for the two Tests against Pakistan in the UAE above Jyhe Richardson (22), and Chris Tremain (27). Siddle took 3-161 in the Pakistan series to average 53.67, but was still selected after an eight-year absence in the three-game ODI series against India where he finished with 2-162, average 81. Despite those figures Siddle’s in the Test squad for Sri Lanka, with Richardson eventually making it on Josh Hazlewood’s injury, but Tremain’s still on the outer. Unfathomable.
John
Guest
Can't wait to see Cummins open the bolwing reckon he will cause serious carnage.
paddleman66
Roar Rookie
Spot on David. I still have the feeling that Oz cricket just don't get it, seniority rules. Same happens when the new batsman is picked, regardless of skill or ability they are made to field at short leg. Until these internal decisions are made on merit not seniority it proves nothing has changed except sledging.
David Lord
Expert
liquorbox, for starters you got one statement right, Pat Cummins doesn’t have to open the bowling to be well regarded. And he isn’t the one complaining about not opening the Test bowling, far from it – I’m the one complaining for the benefit of Australian cricket. More importantly, you miss the major point that Cummins with the new ball will be far more dangerous than coming on in the 10th, 11th, 12th, or whatever over. He is the premier strike bowler to give the team more of a flying start than they have been getting over the last three series. It’s as simple as that.
liquorbox_
Roar Rookie
"Why have the selectors, coach and captain so consistently ignored those facts?" Maybe Cummins is better with an older ball and enjoys having one side of the ball already roughed up, or enjoys not bowling to the opening batsmen? Cummins will do great where ever he is, but some bowlers are mature enough to realise that the "honor" of getting the new ball is not as important as the "honor" of being the best performing bowler in the team. Cummins is a mature player who will likely captain or vice captain the team in the future and knows he does not have to open the bowling to be well regarded.