The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Opinion

Australia sucked in by myth of spin friendly SCG

7th December, 2019
Advertisement
Autoplay in... 6 (Cancel)
Up Next No more videos! Playlist is empty -
Replay
Cancel
Next
Expert
7th December, 2019
74
4137 Reads

In Australia’s last five Tests at the SCG their spinners have averaged nearly 40 with the ball. So why are Australia already talking about playing two spinners in Sydney against New Zealand?

The myth of the spin-friendly SCG continues to influence Australia’s strategies, with chairman of selectors Trevor Hohns and captain Tim Paine both flagging the possibility of fielding a two-pronged spin attack against the Kiwis.

Yet in those past five Tests at the SCG not once have Australia’s frontline spin options averaged less than 30, even against a woeful West Indies batting line-up four years ago.

These are the combined returns of Australia’s specialist spinners in each of the last five Tests at the SCG:

  • 2019 against India: 4-178
  • 2018 against England: 4-140
  • 2017 against Pakistan: 9-318
  • 2016 against West Indies: 6-183
  • 2015 against India: 4-233

It would be interesting to know whether Australia’s No. 1 slow bowler, Nathan Lyon, agrees with the prevailing narrative that the SCG is great for spinners. I would imagine he does not, based on his awful first-class record at that ground. Lyon averages 50 at the SCG from 12 matches, which makes it his worst first-class venue among all the main grounds in Australia.

Nathan Lyon after being hit for six

(AP Photo/Jon Super)

The SCG is also his equal-worst Test venue in Australia, alongside the WACA, averaging 48 from his eight Tests in Sydney.

Advertisement

Rather than being defined as spin-friendly, the best description for the SCG based on recent Tests is ‘flat’. Last year India piled up 622, the year before Australia churned out 649, the previous summer Australia made 538, the year prior David Warner was 122* from 103 balls when the match was abandoned, and the year before that Australia made 572 and India replied with 475.

That sounds like an absolute road to me. And Australia’s biggest weapon on roads, the key reason why they are so dangerous on flat pitches, is their dynamic pace attack.

So I wonder again: why is the Australian think tank considering two spinners for the SCG? It would make more sense if Australia had an elite spinner waiting in reserve. But they don’t. Steve O’Keefe is a fine bowler, yet he hasn’t played a Test in more than two years and appears to be on the outer due to off-field indiscretions. Beyond O’Keefe the cupboard is barer than Lyon’s scalp.

Sports opinion delivered daily 

   

Victorian left-armer Jon Holland has a terrific Sheffield Shield record but has looked patently out of his depth in Tests, with nine wickets at 64 from four matches. Holland’s last stint in the Test team was so poor that he was outbowled in the UAE last year by part-time leggie Marnus Labuschagne.

Ashton Agar, meanwhile, did a very good job in his last Test stint, taking seven wickets at 23 in Bangladesh two years ago. But he’s had a horror Shield season so far, with just three wickets at 136 from four matches. It would be madness for him to be vaulted into the Test team amid such a deep form slump.

Advertisement

The only other realistic option is inconsistent leg spinner Mitchell Swepson. The Queenslander’s best is very good, perhaps even good enough for Test cricket. The problem is that the gap between Swepson’s best and worst is yawning, and he far too frequently flits back and forth between good balls and bad balls, fine spells and awful ones, impressive matches and disappointing performances.

If he were given an SCG Test debut, Swepson would have the skill to challenge the Kiwi batsmen and have an impact on the Test. The problem is that he just as easily could go into long-hop and full-toss mode and end up with 1-140 from 30 overs. The 26-year-old is simply not ready for Test cricket. First, he needs to prove that he can perform consistently in the Shield.

While Swepson has had a good start to this season, with ten wickets at 21, in the 18 months prior to that he averaged 42 in first-class cricket.

All of this only makes the talk of Australia playing two spinners even more bizarre. Not to mention that, outside of India, New Zealand arguably play spin better than any other Test team. In Tom Latham, Kane Williamson, Ross Taylor and BJ Watling they have four fine players of spin. I imagine the Kiwis would be delighted if they arrive in Sydney to see Australia playing only two fast bowlers.

Pat Cummins and Josh Hazlewood both have excellent Test and first-class records at the SCG and should be automatic picks at that ground. Mitchell Starc’s record in Sydney is less impressive, but if he were to be omitted, it should not be for the likes of Holland, Agar or Swepson.

Instead, Australia should pick gifted quick James Pattinson or take the chance to offer a Test debut to in-form swing bowler Michael Neser. Until another quality spinner emerges in Shield cricket, Australia should forget about playing two spinners anywhere but in Asia.

Advertisement

Ignore the spin-friendly SCG myth.

close