Just two months ago, Marcus Stoinis left the Allan Border Medal as Australia’s best one day player of the past year.
A deserved winner, the all-rounder shone in a side that won just two games in 12 months. Along with perhaps one or two others, his name was seemingly rubber stamped on the ODI team sheet.
But lacklustre recent form has shone a light on issues that can’t be ignored before a World Cup. Struggles with turning over the strike in the middle overs and a decreasing bowling workload leave it increasingly difficult to see how the all-rounder justifies a position in Australia’s now ultra-competitive XI.
Naturally, eight wins in a row have created a squeeze for spots, compounded by the return of Australia’s two best batsmen. And while he will almost certainly be in the 15-man squad released between now and April 23, his place at number six for Australia at the World Cup is, unlike a few months ago, far from assured.
Stoinis shot to fame with a blistering 146 off 117 against New Zealand in 2017, in just his second ODI. Naturally, interest soared in this new broad-shouldered all-rounder – a prototype physique in the Pat Howard handbook of cricket domination. But this innings skewed perception.
Sure, Stoinis can (to use Howard’s preferred vernacular) ‘hit a long ball’, but only in conducive conditions. That innings created a sense that, in Stoinis, Australia has a like-for-like option alongside Glenn Maxwell in the latter stages of an ODI innings.
But this is not the case, as has been made abundantly clear in recent months.
Now that a bigger sample size has emerged of his batting skill, we naturally see a more accurate picture. After 31 ODI innings, Stoinis strikes at a relatively healthy 93.5 per 100 balls, still well below Maxwell at 122, and even Peter Handscomb at 98.6.
But more worryingly, in his last 13 innings (since the start of the Australian summer) he has struck at just 81.3 for Australia. These are numbers dwarfed by middle-order colleagues in Eoin Morgan, Hardik Pandya, David Miller and Ben Stokes, to name a few.
And you don’t need mere stats to tell the tale. Stoinis is easily cramped at the crease by spinners, and struggles to turn over the strike early in his innings – something noted by several pundits in recent times, and a source of frustration for several readers on this site.
Unlike the aforementioned Maxwell and Handscomb whose fast hands and wrist-oriented approach allows them to manipulate the ball through gaps with (apparent) ease, Stoinis embodies a more heavy-handed approach. He will soak up many dot balls early on, in the hope that he rewards his team later.
(AAP Image/SNPA, Ross Setford)
But that approach is fraught with danger should he fail to go on with things. Opposition captains now know Stoinis’ skillset, and squeeze him early. At the World Cup, Virat Kohli and Morgan can bank on miserly early overs with Stoinis at the crease, especially with the likes of Adil Rashid, Kuldeep Yadav and Yuzvendra Chahal at their disposal.
It is for this reason that respected cricket voice Kerry O’Keefe has now left Stoinis out of his best XI. “If you come in the middle order in those middle overs 11-40 against the good spinners, he has the hitting game late but does he have the rhythm and the rotation to work his way into a hitting situation against the better bowlers?” O’Keefe asked. “Ashton Turner to me is a real finisher, who has got the rhythm.”
Turner may provide a stronger option for Australia at six, his ability to move the innings forward from ball one a real asset. Further, his strength between the wickets turns many singles into twos, and he combines this with a similarly destructive ability as what Stoinis offers.
Stoinis’ bowling will be the thing that keeps him in the side, should selectors opt to do so. Without him, skipper Aaron Finch will likely rely on the remaining ten overs (after four frontline bowlers bowl out) from Glenn Maxwell, or a combination between himself and his Victorian teammate.
But Stoinis’ bowling workload has significantly decreased of late. In the recent India and Pakistan series, he bowled on average just 4.1 overs per innings. This contrasts with an average of 6.3 overs per innings throughout the rest of his career.
Finch and Justin Langer appear to have cooled on the idea of Stoinis as a finisher at the death, too, something that was floated during the Australian summer.
Sure, it would be a risk for Maxwell to assume so many overs with the ball should selectors leave Stoinis out of their preferred World Cup XI. But as Australia (despite recent form) still make up the chasing pack this World Cup, risks need to be taken.
Josh H
Roar Rookie
Well said Paul, the balance of a cricket team is a complex issue, and it's certainly something that teams like England and South Africa have struggled with in recent times (each have played up to 4 all-rounders at a time!). It's really hard to get right. I honestly can't think of a single country in the World Cup that has perfect balance: when you talk of the favourites, England and South Africa have too many all-rounders and sloggers and not enough accumulators; India has too many excellent bowlers to fit into 5 spots but no no.4 or no.5; and New Zealand and Australia have too many accumulators and not enough sloggers. Time will tell how each of the teams go, in any case, it'll sure be interesting
jose
Roar Rookie
Stoinis is no Symonds. He plays lot of dot balls and doesnt rotate strike much. Compared to him, Handscomb is way better in that front. and his bowling is just average. And On flat wickets, it is not going to help much to the team cause i feel.
Cigar Field Sobers
Roar Rookie
He also said only recently that Mitch Marsh has that oft-inferred X Factor and would be a worthy inclusion. Based on what, I have no idea...
Paul
Roar Guru
hi Josh, you've made some excellent comments in the posts I've read, but I think you ended up talking about apples and I2I was talking about oranges! The key to whole Stoinis issue IMO, is all about the skillset you want from your number 6 or 7 and how you want that skillset to be applied. Once that's agreed, you then need to find real comparisons in other teams and I think both you and I2I missed the mark there. In an ideal world, you want a guy who can bat aggressively because this is what's required in the Australian side, now the top order's back in form. This means going at way better than a run a ball, full stop. Stoinis must learn how to hit and learn quickly. The same guy also needs to be able to bowl and in Stoinis case, medium pacers that don't leak more than 6 runs an over. The examples you should be looking at are guys like Ben Stokes, Hardik Pandya, Colin DeGrandhomme, Gerard Neesham & Dwayne Pretorius. All can hit a long ball often and all can bowl tidily. You're 100% right, if we don't have that hitter down the order at either 6 or 7 who can get through some tidy overs, it totally upsets the balance of the team.
Wes P
Roar Rookie
I agree on Carey fully. What's overlooked in all this is that nearly all spots where up for grabs not so long ago. Finch made a stack of runs against a half strength Pakistan. Prior to that his recent record was poor and the ? was being asked. Ditto Khawaja. A lot of weight has been put on those 5 match's! Nonetheless it's interesting discussion and illustrates the difficulty selectors face. I think JL has done OK, he's exposed new talent at international level, kept the teams competitive and encouraged everyone. Which is an achievement that we all would of taken post Sth Africa 12 months ago.
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
I wasn't being condescending, I was merely saying that I didn't fail to understand, but that different opinions come from different experience and interpretation of selection and coaches actions. While Stoinis may be 29 he has played a third of the ODI's that Maxwell has. I don't believe either that the selectors have chosen him for the same role as Maxwell, I believe they are looking for a player between a Dhoni and Tendulkar who can assess the situation and play accordingly as he can anchor 25 overs with the loss of 4 early wickets and maximise the overs remaining, while Maxwell just swings and leaves anywhere from 10 to 110 balls for the bowlers to navigate. In those instances a partnership player at the other end is useful. We will agree to disagree because no opinion is invalid and unless the selectors and coach publicly state that Stoinis and Maxwell are chosen for the same role in the same team, then our opinions will differ.
Josh H
Roar Rookie
No need to be condescending. First of all, Stoinis is 29. 30 in a few months time. He's no where near the start of his career. I think it's fair to say he'll be peaking in the next 12 months or so - that is, if he hasn't peaked already. Your false equivalency with the Tendulkar innings isn't just pertaining to the quality of player, it's also their role in the team. And that's what I feel you're misconstruing the most here. At that point in his career, Tendulkar never batted below 4. Stoinis is an all-rounder who now plays exclusively in the middle order as a pinch-hitter. His job should never be to consolidate at the crease. That's for Smith and S Marsh to do. He and Maxwell are supposed to play shots from ball one, and Stoinis sadly can't do that. His style of play is much better suited to opening or batting 3. Unfortunately, he doesn't have the technique to do so, and there is a logjam of excellent opening candidates better than he is. At the end of the day, we'll probably have to agree to disagree. Stoinis is an extremely talented cricketer, and I would love nothing more than for him to succeed in the world cup. But sadly, his style of batting completely imbalances the team no matter where you bat him, in contrast to Maxwell, who fits in seamlessly no matter where you bat him. That's my point.
Doctor Rotcod
Roar Rookie
I can't believe that I'm hearing all this support for the Mitch. I thought he'd been written out of the selectors' and cricket supporters' books entirely
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
Thanks for the lesson Josh. Having played turf cricket at club and representative level for over 30 years, I believe I’ve seen a situation or two in 6 a side, 8 a side, 20, 35, 40, 50 and 60 over, as well as 2,3 and 4 day cricket. I’m well aware of the differences between a Stoinis starting out and a Dhoni with an exceptional career to dissect. I once dissected a Tendular innings for a junior side I was coaching who also believed you can’t let a ball go by. He was 18 after 42 balls faced and 118 off 104. Now you might very well say; you’ve leapt from comparing Stoinis to Dhoni, now Tendulkar, but Tendulkar was 23yo. Will Stoinis be as good as either of those Indians, or any of those other players you mentioned? Who knows; he’s at the start of his career. What we do know though is that a side requires all types of players at elite level and they all play their part at some stage in a tournament. Stoinis has shown enough in his 30 odd games to believe he can accelerate through an innings, clear the fence easily, but importantly, also bat in a partnership. What we also know is the selectors and coaches believe he can play a role in a squad and I for one believe they’re right.
Josh H
Roar Rookie
I don't think you understand that rebuilding an innings in one-day cricket is extremely different to rebuilding an innings in Test matches. Take 20 balls to get going in a Test? Sure, take another 30 more if you have to. But the only ODI player that I am aware of that is able to absorb pressure and rebuild in that way is MS Dhoni, and he's easily one of the most talented batsmen the world has seen. Stoinis isn't in the same ballpark as Dhoni. If you think about the best ODI middle order batsmen in history, the ones who have been in these pressure situations and brought their team back from the brink of collapse, you think of Mike Hussey, Yuvraj Singh, Shiv Chanderpaul and the like. What do they all have in common? Whenever they were rebuilding their team's innings, they never chewed up dot balls; they went about batting by rotating the strike - picking the gaps, running quick singles, etc. This alleviates the pressure on their team. Swallowing dot balls is counter-intuitive and does completely the opposite.
VivGilchrist
Roar Rookie
dB, you’re correct. It’s his lack of singles. If he was looking for singles while getting his eye in, he’d be keeping the scoreboard ticking over, and his partner wouldn’t be getting cold down the other end.
Nudge
Roar Rookie
I’ve just got a slight feeling that Stoinis will not make the squad and M.Marsh will be his replacement
Paul
Roar Guru
I2I, you've made much of Stoinis being the ODI player of the year but the reality is, Australia was pretty horrible throughout the 12 months that he played. How many games did they lose over that same period. Stoinis value in the side rests with him batting at 6 or maybe 7. He cannot bat higher in the order because there are simply too many players better than him covering 1 - 5. There are clear expectations a player in that position will be able to score well over 100 runs per hundred balls and Stoinis has not shown he can do that regularly. In his last 23 innings, since January 2018, he's scored better than a run a ball only 6 times. To put this into perspective, Alex Carey, who is not a noted hitter, has scored faster than a run a ball in 7 of his last 17 innings. I agree Stoinis may have been underbowled because of the conditions in India & the UAE, but that doesn't change the fact that his few overs over game were going for nearly 7 runs each and in conditions which should have suited in Australia, he took 4 wickets while giving up more than a run a ball. On the smaller English grounds against the better sides, he'd go for a helluva lot more. I want this guy in the side because we need an all-rounder to balance the team. Sadly though, the key player is seriously underperforming and doesn't deserve a place on form, cricket award or not.
danno
Guest
Faulkner in ODI has 22 not outs from 52 innings, helps his average, a very good late order 'finisher' at 8. Although M Marsh has been a failure in Tests, he has played well in ODIs batting in top 6 when the ball is doing more.
danno
Guest
If you saw what Ponting said of Carey recently, he will be in the ODI side for a long time. Will play the World Cup.
AREH
Roar Guru
I think we forget easily that M.Marsh has a respectable ODI record and might even add a bit more than Stoinis at present; at least he can go harder earlier.
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
Seems to me there’s a lot of over thinking going on. Have a look back at the last world cup and lead in and see that a team needs different styles of players and they don’t burn hot for the whole tournament. Of course that’s the nature of a team at elite level, picking the desired elements to cover all situations which may arise. Then sometimes on the day the opposition is just simply too good and wins. Even our best ever ODI players didn’t play every game brilliantly, but you’d have to be gutted as the incumbent ODI player of the year and be left out of the squad because of a couple of misses in lead up games, 3 months before hand.
Tom
Guest
Nope, he is Mitch Marsh Lite, just pick the real one.
matth
Roar Guru
But those numbers are skewed. Faulkner, like Stoinis, started great with the bat and then tailed away. By the end Faulkner was having more problem in the death overs than Stoinis has been. So Faulkner a few years ago yes, now not so much.
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
Yeah it is an issue at the moment, but I think we tend to believe these guys have been around for a decade, now we're seeing the BBL & IPL. He's still reasonably inexperienced and if he does the job Langer gives him for the World Cup, we may see some growth.