In the last 13 completed Tests, Steve Smith captained the baggy greens for the first eight until he was suspended, when Tim Paine took over.
Smith and coach Darren Lehmann set up a pecking order for their three world class quicks. Mitchell Starc and Josh Hazlewood opened the bowling, leaving Pat Cummins with the first change role around the ninth to 11th over.
And it worked a treat, with Australia regaining the Ashes 4-0.
But the pecking order statistically came out differently.
| Bowler | Overs | Maidens | Runs | Wickets | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pat Cummins | 197.1 | 43 | 567 | 23 | 24.65 |
| Mitch Starc | 162.3 | 32 | 518 | 22 | 23.54 |
| Josh Hazlewood | 190.5 | 49 | 544 | 21 | 25.90 |
No matter, the net result was all that mattered, and it was comprehensive, so there was no reason to change the pecking order in South Africa.
But again, first change number three quick Cummins came out well on top as South Africa cruised to a 3-1 series victory.
| Bowler | Overs | Maidens | Runs | Wickets | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pat Cummins | 155.4 | 32 | 472 | 22 | 21.45 |
| Mitch Starc | 109.2 | 18 | 413 | 12 | 34.41 |
| Josh Hazlewood | 160 | 30 | 471 | 12 | 39.25 |
You would think that with Paine and Justin Langer now at the helm, that the pecking over would change to take on India – the world number one Test nation – nominating Cummins and Starc to open the bowling, with Hazlewood first change.
Pat Cummins. (AAP Image/Julian Smith)
No, that was far too obvious, so Paine and Langer toed the party line.
Was it habit, ignorance, tradition or tunnel vision?
Take your pick.
India won the series 2-1, with Cummins again the leading quick.
| Bowler | Overs | Maidens | Runs | Wickets | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pat Cummins | 145 | 29 | 389 | 14 | 27.78 |
| Mitch Starc | 152.1 | 51 | 398 | 13 | 30.61 |
| Josh Hazlewood | 138.5 | 26 | 449 | 13 | 34.54 |
After two losing series in succession, the pecking order would have to change, especially as Cummins was clearly the leading quick taking into account the last three series:
| Bowler | Overs | Maidens | Runs | Wickets | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pat Cummins | 497.5 | 104 | 1428 | 59 | 24.20 |
| Mitch Starc | 410.4 | 76 | 1380 | 47 | 29.36 |
| Josh Hazlewood | 503 | 130 | 1413 | 46 | 30.72 |
Cummins with 12 more wickets than Starc, 13 more than Hazlewood, and a far better average than both, said it all.
The penny had to drop at the Gabba yesterday against Sri Lanka with Hazlewood out injured. Cummins would have to step up with the new ball, irrespective of the tradition.
Not on your life.
Jhye Richardson not only made his debut by replacing Hazlewood, but stepped straight in Hazlewood’s boots with the new ball, leaving best performed quick Cummins still in the first change role.
True, Richardson bowled superbly well to play a major role with 3-26 in dismissing Sri Lanka for 144.
But Cummins again finished with the best figures of 4-39.
Australia’s best performed quick constantly bowling first change?
Farcical.
anon
Roar Pro
Langer asleep at the wheel again
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Oh dear...straight over the head. Not too sharp?
Barney
Roar Rookie
No, but I think you are...fast food is akin to a ODI...that’s where Starc belongs ATM
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Funny about that. It’s how I know so much about it. Starc may well not be at his best but “pies” are not in his repertoire. A Starc pie could be a hit as fast food. You are mixing up your cliches, BarneyBoy.
Barney
Roar Rookie
Talk about head in sand. Starc is bowling pies and has been for some time, do you even watch cricket?
Dirk K
Guest
I think they should also look at Paine's statistics and compare them to Wade's batting average.
Peter Morse
Guest
Finally............ and it serves secondary purpose, a kick in the arse for Starc.
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Australia's attack has no problem being 'good quality'. This attack is fantastic and even better with Hazlewood.
liquorbox_
Roar Rookie
that depends if the sameness is of good quality, If Richardson could bowl 90 overs a day of swing then that would be awesome. Erratic bowlers often get wickets because the guy at the other end is drying up runs and the bad ball looks like the only scoring opportunity
David Lord
Expert
Quite right Ronan, because there’s no comparison between Cummins bowling first change, and opening, in his last 14 Tests. You can’t say he’s a great first change bowler as against opening, if he hasn’t opened. I can say Cummins would have a far better average if he opened the bowling, but that’s all I can do, it’s a matter of opinion, just like yours. In short, we agree to disagree.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
I agree David but to be fair that still doesn't address the two key reasons I listed above that Australia probably don't open with Cummins.
David Lord
Expert
Ronan, and Prez, Pat Cummins first five Tests over six years, between 18 and 24, were as a raw opening bowler. In his last 14 Tests, including this one, he’s been first change. It’s fair to assume that with all that extra experience, and more reliable physical strength compared to when he started, he would be even better with the new ball.
David Lord
Expert
Not you anymore jameswm. You have the right to comment, I have the right to ignore.
jameswm
Roar Guru
Do you actually read what people write?
Prez
Roar Rookie
Ronan, agree he is effective at 1st change but whats the breakdown between how many times he has opened v first change. Has he opened the bowling enough to make a meaningful comparison?
Harvey Wilson
Roar Rookie
They only look as far as the nose on their faces.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
My main grievance is with Starc getting the new ball and also being considered an absolute 'lock' in the side - based on his form since the Durban test. He was struggling with ankle issues and subsequently missed the Jo'burg test and returned not quite right in the UAE (that both Hazlewood and Cummins missed with dodgy backs.). All 3 were very much underdone coming into the India tests and the results reflect this. As much as Cummins' 14 wickets v India puts him ahead of the other two the reality is that all 3 were largely ineffectual. Only Lyon was getting 'bags' of wickets when it mattered. Cummins' 6-27 in the 2nd innings at Melbourne was the only instance of a quick with more than 3 fer. No 'match winning' performances. Sure in the first innings at Melb as India's batters 'weathered the storm' to put them right on top - perhaps Cummins was unlucky but he sure made up for it in the 2nd innings - that 6-27 was almost embarrassingly fortuitous. For Cummins - outside of that 6-27 (which was an innings where India were largely trying to get that extra 100 odd having opted not to follow Australia on) - Cummins only produced 8-362 (avg 45.25) off 134 overs (SR 100.5). Even with it his SR was only 62.14 (although that better than Hazlewood's 75.5 and Starc 84.55 - from the 2 new ball bowlers against a side with big question marks on their openers!!). So for me - Hazlewood aggravated his back and is out - Starc should be rested and return to shield to rediscover his rhythm - perhaps Richardson and Cummins (so long as his back is okay) - and perhaps Berhendorff or even the permanent 12th man Siddle as first change/into the wind and in partnership with Lyon.
Jero
Roar Rookie
I agree Tony H. As much as Cummins might perform even better with the new ball, he does very well at first change. Certainly Starc needs the new ball or older ball to be most effective. As for Hazlewood and now Richardson taking the second over, that does leave a bit of room for debating whether they each need the new ball to be most effective, and whether it’s wasted on them instead of Cummins. Far too soon to say with Richardson, of course, so he’s effectively removed from the conversation, for now anyway. There’s only one way to find out. Give Cummins the second over, then see how he and Hazlewood/Richardson go coming in at first change. The real question is who the openers face, and which bowlers they would least like to deal with the score at 0/0. I guess that’s at the heart of the point David’s raised. And why there’s a serious argument for Cummins opening.
Prez
Roar Rookie
Don, if I suggested that the best bowler should open, then your point would have validity. But I wrote best pace bowler.
DD
Guest
Thanks for the article and an interesting argument. Agree with comments below suggesting that he's doing well in this role so why change the order though if truth be told. Also I think this data is flawed, as you aren't considering that he gets these wickets when the ball is in the condition he gets it at first drop, meaning that maybe he extracts more from the older ball than others and is therefore best suited to this role. Meanwhile just writing to flag that I think your stats don't add up. Pretty sure you mixed the Starc and Hazelwood stats from the India series the wrong way in your 3-series totals,. Not a huge change but not a fair comparison if the overall data is wrong. Sorry to be picky but if you're trying to use these overly simplistic, narrow set of data as the primary means to back your argument, please make sure you get the numbers right. For example, 32+ 18 + 51 (Starc's maidens) does not equal 76. It equals 101. And the average and total runs scored are also wrong. Wickets still correct.