Batting is all about taking risks, especially if players want to score runs.
In white-ball cricket, the emphasis is very much on scoring as many runs as quickly as possible, hence the need for attacking batsmen. It’s quite acceptable for players to take far more risks in these forms of the game, given the short duration of the innings.
Teams will still have players who are considered “steady” white ball batsmen, such as Joe Root and Steve Smith, but all teams want ultra-aggressive players, who are more than happy to take huge risks to score runs.
Glenn Maxwell is the obvious ultra-high risk batsman in the Australian lineup and his efforts in England over the past few weeks typify what we’ve come to expect from him.
His innings across the three T20s have yielded scores of 1, 26 and 6, then followed this up with 77, 1 and a man-of-the-match 108 in the three ODIs.
A further record he managed in the last ODI was to be the fastest man to 3000 runs against the number of balls he’s faced. In other words, he scores very quickly, which is merely confirmation of something we all knew anyway.
He also scores a lot of runs, something that is all too often forgotten.
His series scores highlight one of the key traits of an ultra-high risk cricketer. As a rule, it’s either boom or bust. When Maxwell’s on song, he can tear any attack to shreds in the space of a few overs.
When he’s not on song, he’s likely to get out cheaply and often get out to shots that cause huge complaint from the media and the public.
He’s often criticized for costing his side games because he lacked patience or played a terrible shot to get out – but he keeps getting picked.
Jason Roy is another batsman who takes outrageous risks. He was close to being England’s best bat in the World Cup last year, with only two innings at a run rate under 100, yet in 2020 ODI’s, he’s only made scores of 24, 0, 1, 3, 21 and a first-ball duck.
He too has got out to shots that many would describe as appalling. That slash to a wide ball from Mitchell Starc in the third ODI was an example of that.
As mentioned, both of these guys continue to be chosen for their respective nations, despite what appears to be indifferent form or really inconsistent scores. It stands to reason the English and Australian selectors are applying a different set of rules when it comes to their selections.
Why is it then, that the media and the public have such a hard time accepting the type of cricketers that they are?
Ultra-high risk players can create massive moods swings. When they come in to bat, there are huge expectation about what they might do. If they get going, they will play outrageous shots and play these sorts of shots often, keeping the excitement and adrenaline levels sky-high.
That’s the boom.
The bust is when they get out, often having faced only a few deliveries and when they do, it’s often to a shot best described as forgettable.
This is when that huge expectation turns to deep despair and many start the blame game, suggesting they played irresponsibly. No, they didn’t. They batted exactly the same way as they normally would but simply didn’t execute correctly.
These are the sorts of players who have few concerns for the state of the game. Jason Roy, opening the innings, slapped the first ball then faced straight to backward point. Out for a golden duck.
Glenn Maxwell played a shot best described as a hoick and only managed a top edge to short third man and was out. In real terms, it was a terrible shot given Australia still had to score another 18 runs off 16 balls, but he’d scored 108 off 90 balls and Australia won the match.
(Photo by Harry Trump-ICC/ICC via Getty Images)
He’d also played another hoick off the third ball he faced and managed to belt Jofra Archer for six. What if that shot had not come off and he was caught? He’d have been out for one and Australia would have most likely lost this match by plenty.
The point is, this is the way these types of players bat. When it comes off, it’s simply wonderful to watch, but when it doesn’t, it’s often very ugly. They’re either being praised as world-beaters or chastised as players who cost their team games.
Should we expected them to change their approach, perhaps become more conservative or play more defensively if the match situation appears to demand it?
That would probably mean a complete change in mindset as well as a thorough examination of their techniques. Both would both be seriously difficult to alter as they are so strongly linked.
In the examples of Maxwell and Roy, they’ve made careers batting with abandon and have built techniques to maximise their ability to hit anything, anywhere, anytime. One only has to look at the Glenn Maxwell “hitters” stance to see this is not a player who is going to be able to defend too often.
Neither player has outstanding first-class numbers, averaging below 40, but each has a strike rate in excess of 70. Again, this suggests they are great at attack but all too often fail. This is not a bad thing, it’s simply the way they play.
It should be far easier for us armchair critics to change our expectations of ultra-high risk players. We need to accept, acknowledge and enjoy the great innings they will create, but not be overly critical of their failures when they occur.
Yes, they will deeply disappoint us from time to time, but the pleasure they often give to us is equally immense.
Maxwell's crazy batting have a time and place, and No.7 probably is a really good spot for him, but the people who defend him from every bad innings he plays are delusional, him throwing his wicket away when we needed a steady head to guide us to victory has cost us countless games. An average of 33 speaks volumes.
Sgt Pepperoni
Roar Rookie
Well Gilchrist openned and played in another age but he was the WK so runs were a bonus. That's why he was a lock, if he bowled cheap off spinners he might not have had such a good run in the side How many times did we wait with bated breath for Gilly only for him to throw it away and get out cheaply?
Sgt Pepperoni
Roar Rookie
I agree Ben. The 'thrashers will be thrashers' argument is about as robust as boys will be boys. Cricket is a game of knowing when to attack and when to defend, when to accelerate and when to consolidate. To give a select few a free pass is ridiculous. Maxwell may win us games but he loses plenty too Give me balanced accumulators equipped qith technique over thrashers any day
So everytime Maxwell fails it's the rest of the batting lineups fault for not giving him enough of a 'licence to play his way' ??? If you're in the team as a batsman, and barring a total top 5 collapse, you bare some responsibility for the final scorecard. In the third ODI Maxwell actually pulled his head in and played a proper batsmans innings, not the 'hack every ball for 6' type that you keep frothing over that Maxwell should be able to play literally every innings. HE has to be adaptable, no one is immune to criticism, so maybe get it out of your head that he will always be able to just swing from ball one and get a quickfire 40 off 25 and job done, often he will be coming in under the pump and will have to put away crazy shots to see the team to a winning total
No one should be judged on one innings, but Maxwell is suspect A when looking at batsman who play monumentally stupid shots to get out at the wrong times. He's consistently done it throughout his career, kind of like both Marsh's in Test cricket. They always tease us but rarely live up to the hype. How many times has Maxwell come in on a rock solid platform of 3-200 in the 30-35th over and thrown it away to bury our chances of a victory/get a big score. I like Maxwell, but someone needs to call out his braindead cricket when he plays it. Hopefully this series is the start of a great 3-4 years for him, but he could quite easily sink back to mediocrity after showing us glimpses of brilliance like in 2016/2017/2018/2019
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Some will say Javed Miandad, others Zaheer Abbas and some may even say Mohammad Yusuf and I totally respect anyone's opinion, especially Pakistanis themselves, but for mine, big Inzy was Pakistan's greatest batsman, not by much mind you compared to those others mentioned. Saeed Anwar was their greatest opener.
Paul
Roar Guru
It's sad in one respect that Finch a) hasn't been given a chance to bat down the order in Tests and b) that his international career will likely end in a couple years thanks to Father Time. He's really grown into the skippers role as you say and who knows what kind of Test captain he might have been if selectors had chosen him to bat where he feels most comfortable in red ball cricket - down the order.
The Late News
Roar Rookie
Maxi is a wonderful player! Sure he looks ugly now and then...but he will win you far more matches than not. Very handy with the ball too! And a totally brilliant fielder.
Peter Farrar
Roar Pro
Yes, fair question Paul. Feel like there has been some recent acknowledgement of how Finch has grown into that captaincy role too. I'm interested in how his career progresses from here.
Once Upon a Time on the Roar
Roar Guru
Two nights ago was a freakish innings and you simply never expect to win games from the position they were in when Maxy and Carey joined forces. 2 for 240 chasing 340 with 10 overs to go and Warner, Finch, Smith and Labu all get past 50 and one of them is nearing a ton … well they are the games we do expect to win, and it’s a 70 from 40 balls that Maxy needs to deliver in such a situation. How often does he do it? I would prefer him to be more reliable in that second afore described situation, and then I would never berate him had he failed in the situation two nights ago.
Jon Richardson
Roar Pro
Good points Paul. I think while we have to be realistic about how he gets out sometimes, we can also hope that he can still find some improvement in shot selection and reduce the number of times he gets out to poor shots as opposed to just taking risks.
Sgt Pepperoni
Roar Rookie
Poor old Ed Cowan, fancy bringing him into this. Prince of the Nurdlers!
Jero
Roar Rookie
Yes indeed. He's got plenty to be pleased with. I still hope to see some fine red ball knocks in his years ahead. Kudos to a great cricketer.
Dexter The Hamster
Roar Rookie
Agree. However if you are Mark Hamill, you are probably happy being Luke Skywalker, regardless of how much you want to play McBeth, and get kudos for being a great actor.
Paul
Roar Guru
spot on Joshua. This series has been the perfect example of your point. He got out cheaply a week ago to a typical Maxwell shot and people were jumping all over him. He then got that century and people are trying to outdo each other with platitudes. As you suggest, he's the sort of bloke who shouldn't be judged on one innings. Thankfully Langer and co look at his larger body of work and not just one knock.
Jero
Roar Rookie
All true. As much as his short form career has been entertaining, without trawling through all his innings only a few significant innings in the style of Bevan and Hussey come to mind. This is from someone who's never watched an IPL game in his life. I reckon he'll savour that Shield 278 and Test 104 when he looks back on it all. Though maybe that's just me showing my age.
Patrick
Roar Pro
Your right about 2018. He probably should have played the Perth Ashes Test over Mitch Marsh in December 2017 on the back of his 278 (I know Marsh did well in the end). Then he got flown to Johannesburg to carry drinks after the ball tampering, before being messed around for the UAE series, where he was overlooked for a bits and pieces player (at the time) in Labuschagne.
Jero
Roar Rookie
I share the same sentiment, but I think not getting that shot in 2018 pretty much killed off any realistic chance of an eighth Test. The selectors will keep looking for the future in younger players, and the all rounder slot always goes to a seamer/batsman in domestic Test Series. And that's not even taking into account all the obvious obstacles like lack of red ball opportunities and perceptions about him as a white ball specialist. Wade had to fight very hard for that slot too.
Patrick
Roar Pro
Fantastic summary. I think a FC average of 39.81 is pretty solid- there aren’t that many current Australians who average more, and even then most are only slightly ahead: Steve Smith (57.95), Daniel Solway (55.33 but only 7 matches), David Warner (49.13), Cameron Green (43.84), Chris Lynn (43.53, although we can give up on his FC career), Marnus Labuschagne (43.15), Will Pucovski (42.24), Usman Khawaja (41.96), Kurtis Patterson (41.09), Matthew Wade (41.01), Shaun Marsh (40.96), Nic Maddinson (40.33), Joe Burns (40.33). His Shield average across the last five seasons (45.47) is also right up there, behind only: Smith (56.38), Chris Hartley (56, but 14 not outs and no longer available anyway), S Marsh (52.93), Pucovski (51.35), Ed Cowan (49.05, now retired), Wade (48.08), and Marcus Harris (47.47). (min 20 innings) Unless I’ve missed anything, he ranks 14th for FC average and 8th for last 5 years, but if you take out Solway and Lynn, consider the limited sample size of Green and Pucovski, the age of Shaun Marsh, and the retirements of Hartley and Cowan, then he should probably rank a bit higher. I’d like to see him get another chance at Test level. Perhaps when the Bangladesh tour is rescheduled, they could drop Wade for Maxwell, rather than a quick for Swepson?
Jero
Roar Rookie
I agree, Dexter. He’s obviously not the only cricketer playing predominantly white ball cricket, but I struggle to think of anyone else where the difference in white ball innings compared to red ball innings is so wide over a considerably long career. Particularly in respect of how few first class matches he’s played domestically across nine seasons to date. There are probably stats on it, I bet he’s right up there. I understand he hates the “Big Show” moniker. There’s got to be a downside to always having to perform in the blitzkrieg role, as per your typecast. Especially when it thwarts your main career ambition.