Australia are resurrecting the T20 careers of Steve Smith and Pat Cummins ahead of next year’s World Cup.
Australia yesterday announced a 14-man squad for the two upcoming series against Sri Lanka and Pakistan, which start 18 days from now, with the most notable omissions being D’Arcy Short and Marcus Stoinis.
Smith and Cummins, meanwhile, were surprise inclusions, Smith having not played an international T20 in more than three years, while Cummins has played just six across the past five years.
Their selections represent a clear change in strategy one year out from the T20 World Cup, which will be held Down Under.
Smith’s last T20 was in early 2016 and his last BBL appearance was more than five years ago. He has, however, been a fixture in the IPL, averaging 37 at a strike rate of 129.
Yet there are genuine questions about his value, having scored at just 7.16 runs per over across his past two IPL seasons. As a point of comparison, David Warner scored at 8.6 runs per over across those same two seasons.
Meanwhile, over the past two years, top-order stars Aaron Finch and Glenn Maxwell have scored at 10.3 and 9.0 runs per over respectively.
Perhaps, then, the selectors feel the rapid scoring rates of Warner, Finch and Maxwell allows room for Smith to anchor the innings.
Smith doesn’t have the ability to blast boundaries from ball one. As he has worked to reduce risk from his play in Tests, helping him dominate that format, he has become a less dynamic white-ball batsman. He does, however, have 12 months to hone his T20 skills for the World Cup.
Given his enormous ability and incredible dedication, maybe he can use that time to take his short-format batting to another level.
(AAP Image/Dan Peled)
The same goes for Cummins. The logic seems to be that if he is an elite bowler in Tests and ODIs, then why can’t he replicate that in T20s?
Although he has barely played T20 cricket for Australia, his career record is impressive: 25 wickets at 21 with a frugal economy rate of 6.98 runs per over.
During his six-year absence from Test cricket due to constant injuries, T20 became Cummins’s main format because of its lesser physical demands. He now has a one-year run at the shortest format to push his case for World Cup selection.
Stoinis and Short both have had major setbacks in their pursuit of a World Cup berth, having been mainstays of the Aussie side over the past two years.
Stoinis’ axing is a wise move considering his batting average of 15 at a slow strike rate and a bowling average of 35 at a high economy rate.
That leaves Maxwell as Australia’s only batting all-rounder in the squad. Yet in his last 20 T20s, Maxwell has bowled less than one over per match on average. It seems unlikely Australia will want to have to get a full complement of four overs from him every match.
Instead, they will likely bat Ashton Agar at seven to give the side five strong bowling options, with Maxwell as back-up.
(Robert Cianflone/Getty Images)
Realistically, this top six is strong enough that the No.7 will rarely have to do much with the blade. Agar is sufficiently talented to chip in with cameos when needed and during 13 matches in the T20 side last year his left-arm orthodox spin went at just 6.97 runs per over.
Agar is far from the finished article and is not a big wicket-taker, but he is worth investing in because of the balance he could add if he finds his feet.
Having Agar at seven would allow for two frontline spinners as well as three specialist quicks. Australia named five fast bowlers in this squad – Cummins, Mitchell Starc, Billy Stanlake, Andrew Tye and Kane Richardson.
Starc at his best is a dominant T20 bowler. Stanlake and Tye, meanwhile, have been good over the past two years.
Richardson is an odd choice. The other Richardson – Jhye – is a much more talented and multi-faceted short-form cricketer. Kane was the leading wicket-taker in the BBL last summer but has played 31 limited-overs internationals for Australia without ever really looking like he belongs. James Faulkner or Jhye Richardson would have been better options.
Australia’s squad against Sri Lanka and Pakistan
Aaron Finch (c), Ashton Agar, Alex Carey, Pat Cummins, Glenn Maxwell, Ben McDermott, Kane Richardson, Steve Smith, Billy Stanlake, Mitchell Starc, Ashton Turner, Andrew Tye, David Warner, Adam Zampa.
Australia’s best line-up
- Aaron Finch
- David Warner
- Steve Smith
- Glenn Maxwell
- Ashton Turner
- Alex Carey (wicketkeeper)
- Ashton Agar
- Mitchell Starc
- Billy Stanlake
- Andrew Tye
- Adam Zampa
Brian
Guest
I agree but given the cash in T20 and Australia hosting the World Cup you can hardly blame Smith for trying. Albeit he's already got millions from those Koala Pillows.
dungerBob
Roar Rookie
I wouldn't have Smith in my T20 side. Long format cricket there's none better but the shorter the format the more he seems to struggle. He's just not a free swinging, big hitting bash boy. I'm concerned that he might lose his test match mojo if he changes his game to suite T20. He may be able to do it, he's a talented man, but I'm just not sure it's worth the risk.
Mashrur
Roar Rookie
Pat Cummins over Billy Stanlake anyday for me. Billy is inconsistent. With cummo u get consistency with a cheap economy
Mashrur
Roar Rookie
Mate this is hilarious. how can u say that he is an old school early peak kind of a bowler and won't last past 30? He hasn't reached 30 yet and ur saying these kind of things already. Its too early to say that. And if anything then he's got better chances than anyone to play like johnson or harris even past 30. Reason? Coz he is one of the best athletes in the world and he has evidently reduced his pace a lil bit for a long lasting career and that has worked really well for him over the last few years coz he hasn't been injured at all. What do u mean by there r better bowlers than him in odi's and t20? Name me one bowler who's better than him in the shorter formats apart from M starc? Pat cummins is literally the second best bowler in limited overs Cricket in Australia after m starc. He is currently ranked no.3 in the icc odi Rankings(u don't get this if ur not one of the best in odi's). And still ur saying that there r better bowlers than him in the shorter formats.
Brian
Guest
Not sure about the batting. Warner and Finch did well at the World Cup when taking their time. Smith excelled in the semi against England but struggled with hitting from ball one. This XI leaves too much 6 hitting to Maxi. From memory we have failed at quite a number of T20 World Cups with good Test players.
astro
Roar Rookie
Are we sure that the best approach to T20s is having someone like Smith "to anchor the innings"? Do T20 innings need an "anchor"?
I'm thinking might not have the shelf life of someone like Hazelwood, Anderson, Broad etc. He's 26, at his very peak right now, pretty much can't bowl any better/be any luckier than he has been the last 12 months. He seems like the old school, peak very early but isn't a Johnson/Mcgrath/Harris type who hangs around and playing their best cricket in their 30s. Also his workloads are a lot, eventually his body will falter, playing 5 tests back to back all the time is going to cause wear and tear. And I honestly think there are better T20i and ODI bowlers than him, so why don't we just let play tests as a specialist, otherwise he'll be cooked by 30
Big Daddy
Guest
Have to agree with the headline. Apart from these 2 the rest is a lottery. The risk we run is burning these two out, particularly Cummins. A lot of player's in and out of form.
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
KANE Richardson is in for the same reason Wade was in the Test side. Selectors are rewarding performers from a tier down. That's the way it should be.
BurgyGreen
Guest
Have to say though I wish a lot of these guys were playing Shield cricket, especially the Test incumbents. Do we really need our Test guns to play this series? I get that we're prepping for the World T20 but sometimes I wonder what the point is considering the format is such a lottery anyway.
BurgyGreen
Guest
Basically agree with this XI (even to the point of leaving out my favourite young talent, McDermott) except that I would have Cummins rather than Stanlake. I feel like Starc and Stanlake play similar roles as tearaway strike weapons, whereas Cummins can offer a bit more control. I would only ever pick one of Starc and Stanlake. Dropping Stoinis was an important move. Mitch Marsh might feel a little hard done by but as you say, Agar at 7 will do nicely if the top 6 fire. If you're relying on your number 7 to make runs in a T20 you're probably not going to win anyway.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Perhaps Cummins won't play all 6x T20s, but those matches almost immediately followed by 5 Tests in 6 weeks is yet again another big workload on top of the back to back and compressed WC/Ashes. I'm assuming a few days after the Sydney Test he'll be hopping on the plane to India for the ODIs. I really hope CA doesn't grind Cummins into the ground. Not sure how much Shield cricket he will fit in before the First Test. Perhaps he doesn't need it, but even if he did, it would probably be a step too far.
Rubbish Surf 69
Roar Rookie
You have to fit Patty Cummins into the best XI don't you? I guess the question real question is who does he replace? I definitely think you only want three full-time quicks. It's probably more of a horses for courses, and who's in the best immediate form for each match with the three you selected plus Cummins.