When the Australian Test squad to meet Sri Lanka was named on January 8, Aaron Finch and the Marsh brothers were left out, but the exciting 20-year-old Victorian batsman Will Pucovski was included.
His claims were undeniable as only the ninth player since 1892 to score a Sheffield Shield double century before he turned 21.
Don Bradman heads the illustrious list with 340, the only triple, that he plundered at 20 years and 151 days in 1929.
But the other seven all enjoyed long Test careers as well, with their ages at double ton time – Clem Hill (18 years and 348 days), Doug Walters (19-47), Darren Lehmann (19-281), Ricky Ponting (19-32), Paul Sheahan (20-92), Ian Chappell (20-109) and Norm O’Neill at 20 years and 340 days.
As it was only a two-Test series, there was no point in picking Pucovski in the squad if the selectors weren’t going to play him.
Until NSW batsman Kurtis Patterson, who wasn’t included in the original squad, cracked 157* and 102* for a Cricket Australia XI against Sri Lanka at Hobart in the only warm-up game for the tourists.
Overnight, on January 20, Patterson was included in the squad, and the selectors wouldn’t have done that if he wasn’t going to play.
So Patterson made his Test debut at The Gabba, with the originally selected Pucovski demoted to carrying the drinks bottle when for 12 days he was to wear a baggy green cap for the first time.
But the selectors haven’t finished with dudding Pucovski.
Yesterday, Marcus Stoinis was added to the squad, despite Australia wiping Sri Lanka out in Brisbane by an innings inside three days – only Australia’s second win in the last eight since the ball-tampering saga.
(Photo by Jono Searle – CA/Cricket Australia/Getty Images)
So what spectacular performances has Stoinis turned in since January 8 when he missed out on the original squad?
There’s been no Sheffield Shield since December 10, but he’s had three ODIs against India, and two BBL games for the Stars.
ODI – 47* and 2-66.
ODI – 29 and 1-46.
ODI – 10 and 1-60.
BBL – 70* and 3-19.
BBL – 53 and 3-20.
How did Trevor Hohns, the chairman of selectors, explain Stoinis’ sudden promotion?
“We made the decision to add Marcus to give us flexibility to play an all-rounder in the event the conditions require an extra bowling option in the line-up”.
Not true, that option was there originally when he dropped Mitchell Marsh, but Hohns didn’t see fit to include Stoinis then.
“Marcus has been a consistent performer this season, he has displayed strong all-round form in first-class cricket, and confirmed that form in the Australian ODI series against India”, was Hohns’ follow up explanation.
The hell he did in the latter.
In the Shield until December 10, he has only claimed ten wickets at 25.20, while other pacemen like Scott Boland tops the wicket-takers with 36 at 17.41, Chris Tremain 28 at 23.60. Jhye Richardson 27 at 19.03, that earned him a baggy green, Jackson Bird 27 at 22.74 and Joe Mennie’s 26 at 20.61 are all far better performed than Stoinis.
Let’s go back to January 8, and how Pucovski, Patterson and Stoinis compared with Shield runs this season when the original Australian Test squad for Sri Lanka was named.
Pucovski – 311 at 69.88.
Patterson – 428 at 47.55.
Stoinis – 298 at 42.57.
Yet Pucovski was dudded for his first Test cap by late addition Patterson and will be again be dudded by later addition Stoinis, even though he’s in the all-around status.
It stinks.
jameswm
Roar Guru
Yeah, well the rest of us get that, don't we?
Freddy
Guest
Andrew Flintoff 2005 ashes series
Larry1950
Guest
Stoinis' selection in the test squad indicates form in the big bash is now the criteria for selection with the qualification that name can't be Wade. It's a wonder S Marsh didn't get back in on that century, let's forget he got dropped on 0 & 19 and give him the opportunity to get runs against a struggling Sri Lankan side wracked by injuries. Langer is obviously holding out on the opening role so his favourite Cam Bancroft can walk back in when eligible because he's got some big bash runs. I wonder if the West Indies will drop a few of their side that just beat the poms, maybe they should follow our lead and tinker.
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
I don't think the public has a right to or a need for explanations. No cricketer has a right to Australian selection. It's good for speculative conversation but a public forum is not part of their brief. With you on Garth. My favourite ever cricketer with the purest bowling action of all time. Carried the Oz attack and cast aside when he got close to Richie Benaud's record. Bradman must have been a nasty piece of work.
Larry1950
Guest
We may disagree of the dockers chances Don Freo but I'm with you on this one, how do they drop anyone from a team that wins outright in 8 sessions? I was there to see Starc give Paine leg side fielding practice on Saturday arvo but surely even Mitch is safe on this result. Resting players from a test match, especially when there are ashes spots at stake, is just not on. Renshaw must have spilled the drinks over the first three days & the selectors want to see if Stoinis has a steadier hand, that's the only explanation unless Warnie has ground them down. Shades of a fully fit Graham McKenzie being rested against India 50 odd years back because he was too quick & might have hurt them. Never did get the selectors to justify that one so don't hold your breath waiting to get an explanation for the recent changes of heart.
Simoc
Guest
Given the quality of our selectors we should expect Renshaw to come back into the team immediately following his solid 45 in the BBL against a stronger attack than SL could muster. He also bowled a couple of overs of something so that elevates him to allrounder status. We shouldn't expect to much from Stoinus. Like Cameron White he comes good once in a blue moon, and that carries him through. He could prove me wrong but he doesn't look to be test quality. Ability yes, brain no.
JamesH
Roar Guru
No David, he's there because Canberra's pitch is likely to be a lot flatter and the selectors want the option of picking an allrounder. From Hohns: "We made the decision to add Marcus to give us the flexibility to play an allrounder in the event the conditions require an extra bowling option in the line-up". Your scenario would weaken the bowling, which is the opposite of what they want to achieve. If they were going to rest Starc then they would play an actual bowler (e.g. Tremain).
Cadfael
Roar Guru
That is it. They weren't allrounders, they were bartsmen who could bowl a few over when needed. We do not have any allrounders.
David Lord
Expert
jameswm, this is the very last time I reply to you. Shake your head as much as you like, but the selectors have already shown this summer they haven’t the strength of their convictions, and make decisions on the run. Late addition Kurtis Patterson leap-frogging original selection Will Pucovski was step one, and the later addition of Marcus Stoinis will be the second with Mitchell Starc a shadow of his normal self, bowling all over the shop, The World Cup, and the Ashes, are far more important than a training run against Sri Lanka, so a Starc rest would be in Australia’s best interest in the bigger picture. I don’t agree with Stoinis’ selection, he hasn’t the concentration span to be a Test cricketer, but he’s there for a reason which could only be to fill in for a rested Starc.
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Still not up to scratch on that front. You are advertising your limitations. I'd suggest you try your hand at talking cricket. You haven't tried that yet. What have you got to say?
Matt H
Roar Guru
And both Waugh boys were very good part timers if 10 overs were needed.
DP Schaefer
Roar Rookie
A cricket team needs and all rounder - if they are good enough. The team above that you mention contained 2 of the best bowlers we have ever had and the other two were right up there. 'Covering over the cracks' so to speak. And by the way, Gilchrist was good enough to bat 6 and should have.
jameswm
Roar Guru
Stoinis to replace Starc David. Are you serious? I just shake my head sometimes...
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Doesn't this idiot, Hohns, realise that we do not have any allrounders? We have bits and pieces players who do well in T20 and one dayers. Watson was our last allrounder and then only until injuries took their toll. We need six batsmen, a keeper and four bowlers and if one of those batsmen selected can bowl, well and good.
Admiral Ackbar
Guest
David, please correct me if I'm wrong, but since at least 2005 I think there's been an obsession with Australia having an all-rounder in the Test team, why is that? In the good old days (1999-2004) the test team usually looked something like this: J Langer M Hayden R Ponting D Martyn S Waugh M Waugh A Gilchrist S Warne B Lee J Gillespie G McGrath 12th man: A Bichel Not one true "all-rounder" amongst them! What's changed?
Barney
Roar Rookie
Sledge? That wasn’t a sledge, I actually think you have little to no idea what you are talking about regarding cricket
JamesH
Roar Guru
But those teams are not in keeping with the original squad, David. Burns and Renshaw were in the original squad and Patterson wasn’t. Yet Patterson has leapfrogged both of them into your side. They are just the ones being ‘dudded’ instead of Pucovski. And the selectors have brought Stoinis in as an all rounder to be a potential fifth bowling option. Trading him for Starc weakens the bowling attack, which is the exact opposite of what the selectors are trying to do. If Stoinis actually plays then he’ll bat top six and offer an extra bowling option in addition to the four frontline bowlers. That’s why it’s pointless comparing him to pure batsmen or pure bowlers.
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Don’t make them. I’m Dutch (when it suits me). You didn’t respond at all to your ‘Pucovic’ thing.
AREH
Roar Guru
I'd still be baffled if Stoinis actually gets picked. The Canberra pitch may be hard, but gee you'd think a combination of Head and Labuachagne would suffice as a fifth bowling option; especially given the ease with which this batting lineup was rolled at the Gabba.
David Lord
Expert
Just did, never seen you admit yours.