Australia’s loss to India in last night’s third ODI shouldn’t obscure the huge improvement they’ve made in this format, thanks in part to career resurgences from Adam Zampa and Glenn Maxwell.
Two years ago Australia was a basketcase in this format. They had a horrendous run in ODIs in 2017 and 2018, marked by a lack of respect for white ball bi-lateral series under former coach Darren Lehmann and the 12-month bans to Steve Smith and David Warner.
But since early 2019 Australia have made a dramatic turnaround, with a 20-10 win-loss record in their past 30 matches. That includes away series wins in England, India and the UAE, as well as home series victories against India and New Zealand.
What makes that recent run even more impressive is their commanding 11-6 record against the top three ranked ODI teams – England, India and New Zealand. Australia are beating the best teams and beating them often.
England remain the benchmark in this format, of that there’s no doubt. But Australia have greatly narrowed the once yawning gap between them and the world’s number one ODI side.
Australia’s only blatant weakness is the lack of a consistent all-rounder, with Marcus Stoinis having struggled in ODIs for more than two years and Mitch Marsh injured too often.
Otherwise, Australia are impressive from top to bottom. They have a colossal opening pair in David Warner and Aaron Finch, who average 56 and 53 respectively in ODIs since the start of 2019.
At first drop, Steve Smith has morphed into a more dangerous ODI batsman since returning from his ban, averaging 50 at a swift strike rate of 97.
Behind him, Test star Marnus Labuschagne is showing signs he can become a white ball fixture, averaging 39 in his brief career. In the middle order Alex Carey has a career average of 36 with the bat, a fantastic return for a gloveman, and has been neat behind the stumps.
Steve Smith put on a masterclass against India. (Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)
Then there’s Glenn Maxwell, who has been in blazing ODI form and is well suited to batting at seven. Since the start of last year, Maxwell has made 988 runs at 41, with an astonishing strike rate of 136. The all-rounder hasn’t just been dynamic but also consistent, reaching 40 in no less than 12 of his 28 innings.
He is the perfect batsman to follow an Aussie top six that’s consistently providing him a fine platform from which to wield his unique brand of mayhem.
Again last night he had a big influence as he thumped 59 from just 38 balls to bring Australia to within reach of victory. By batting him at seven, Australia are creating clearer match scenarios for Maxwell. He is at his best when allowed to attack the bowlers from ball one.
What Maxwell’s strongest critics have long ignored is that he offers Australia a balance in their line-up that can be provided by no other domestic batsman.
Every good ODI side needs at least one middle order strokemaker capable of consistently scoring at a scorching rate. India have six-blasting Hardik Pandya, England have several such players, including champion keeper-batsman Jos Buttler.
Maxwell’s chaotic contributions the past two years have greatly enhanced an Australian batting line-up that at times can be too one-paced.
Meanwhile, Zampa has had a similar impact. Australia are now a far more well-rounded bowling side due to the leg spinner’s vast improvement.
In Zampa’s last 25 ODIs he’s averaged 28 with the ball and, most importantly, has made a lot of middle over breakthroughs.
In an era when ODI batting line-ups can wreak havoc in the final 10-15 overs, thanks to their T20 hitting skills, bowling attacks are hugely vulnerable if they don’t make inroads in the middle overs.
This was a giant problem for Australia in 2017 and 2018 as Zampa floundered. Now, however, he’s become a major wicket taking threat, averaging 1.9 wickets per match in his last 25 outings.
Crucially, Zampa has excelled against the world’s two strongest ODI batting units, England and India, taking 29 wickets at 23 in that time. What makes that effort even more significant is Zampa had been slaughtered by those same two teams prior to that period, with 10 wickets at 60 from 11 matches.
Banishing this hoodoo in such emphatic fashion is an indicator of Zampa’s mental strength. He was pivotal in Australia’s upset 2-1 ODI series win against England in the UK in September with 10 wickets at 14.
That rousing series victory against the ODI top dogs has now been followed immediately by a comprehensive series win against India.
If Australia can follow this up by beating New Zealand at home next month that would be a hat trick of wins against the current number one, two and three ranked sides.
Such results would have been unthinkable two years ago. Australia deserve great credit for hauling themselves out of a crevasse to once again become a quality ODI team.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I don't know about that. Curtly Ambrose and Joel Garner both did pretty well in England. I don't know that it's a case of being shorter is better over there. Curtly was just awesome everywhere, his worst country was Pakistan where he averaged 25! Joel Garner averaged 25 in Australia and 16 in England. I think the big advantage height is for a fast bowler is variation of bounce. The higher the release point, the more the total bounce changes from the same length change. The taller bowler changing their length by a certain amount will have a bigger change in the height the ball is when it reaches the batsman than a shorter bowler. So the shorter bowlers length needs to change more to get the same variation of height passing the batsman. What that means is that the shorter the bowler, the easier it can be for the batsman to pick up the length. So shorter bowlers can't utilize bounce as well as taller bowlers, not just because they get less, but because they need to change their length more to the the same variation in bounce. I believe that's probably the big reason why, overall, top fast bowlers tend to be reasonably tall. However, there certainly are conditions where shorter, skiddier fast bowlers can have an advantage. And I think a pitch where the ball can sort of "stick" in the pitch a bit is one of them. The taller you are the more it's likely to "stick", so the shorter bowler who can skid the ball more and have it stick less can get the ball to hurry the batsmen a lot more easily than the taller fast bowler in those conditions.
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
I remember seeing Australia v India at the 'G a few years back and Pattinson and Siddle were bowling in tandem. I felt Siddle was the harder to play - - I suspect because of the slightly skiddier outcome that more often threatens the stumps. This was what we had in England........we'd forgotten the lesson of the West Indies and Australia in England. Our greatest success in my time was Terry Alderman (1.87m). He was able to attack the stumps and get LBW's. Pete Siddle at 1.83m. The West Indies - I look back to that 1984 era and Malcolm Marshall tended to be the most successful of the Windies attack in England. And yep - - in Australia - - our tall quicks generally feast on inexperienced batters who aren't familiar with the higher bounce.
Christo the Daddyo
Roar Rookie
Note my use of the word ‘consistently’.
Patrick
Roar Pro
True, but my point was more that Starc has hardly had the 'horrendous decline' you speak of- his World Cup alone speaks to that, as do his number relative to his teammates.
Patrick
Roar Pro
Yes, you are correct. On Statsguru, you can find stats for games involving certain players. Here are the numbers: Matches involving Starc since Langer took over: Runs per wicket: 35.27 Runs per over: 5.79 Matches involving Cummins since Langer took over: RPW: 34.95 RPO: 5.73 Matches involving Hazlewood since Langer took over: RPW: 35.6 RPO: 5.64 So yes, all three have been above average by comparison to those they have played with and against. It's hardly surprising though- you would expect frontline bowlers to be above average, and the fifth and sixth bowlers to be below.
Insult_2_Injury
Roar Rookie
Huh? "it's not rubbish if it's true". What's the true part? How do you claim a truth for a hypothetical?
Rob
Guest
His best has come under pressure. Both with Victoria in trouble and Australia under pressure. He has brain snaps when the pressure isn’t really on or when people are in his ear telling him how to play.
Rob
Guest
Maxwell should bat no lower than 5. Complete waste if he only gets less than 50 balls.
Steele
Roar Rookie
Wade is not a bits and pieces player anymore. He has been terrific ever since he ditched the gloves. Evaluate his performances since he made that decision. And he has been great in the short formats lately. No problem with Agar, just too many quasi all rounder’s and not enough specialists. If you are to rest Starc and Cummins, I’d like to see one of those guys replaced with a good pace bowler, like Pattinson and if fit def JRich. It looked toothless.
Steele
Roar Rookie
Agree Chris, the selectors do want a pace bowling all rounder, however his F/C average as a batsman has been enough for the like’s of Head and Wade to get picked and many others. His bowling and fielding is a pretty big bonus, while his batting is rare. What world team doesn’t have him in their middle order? Marsh has an average of 38 with the ball. Always selected on potential. Green’s earning his cap.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Mitch never really earned his spot, his first class results weren't good enough, they more picked him on the hope that he looked like the sort of player they wanted. But the fact is that, more often than not, the selectors value a pace bowling allrounder a lot more than a spin bowling allrounder. And Lyon being the main spinner really doesn't help Maxwell. If our main spinner was a Leggie, then picking an off-spinning batting allrounder might have more appeal when the main spinner is also an offie.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
It would be interesting to compare those averages to the average scores of the games they played in. Because this period of time has relatively coincided with a bit of a jump in overall ODI scoring, where 350+ scores are becoming much more the norm. I suspect that if an average ODI score jumps significantly, then bowlers averages are going to jump significantly too. But no, I’m not going to do the leg work on that one!
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Allrounder rankings are funny things. Outside the "genuine" allrounders, of which there are few, they tend to just fill up with bowlers who are handy with the bat, because bowlers all get more chance to bat than most batsmen who are handy with the ball will get to bowl. Broad, somehow, is currently #10 on the allrounder ranking. I don't think it would be unreasonable to think of someone like Labushagne as more of an allrounder than him, but because bowlers bat more than batsmen bowl, the rankings will rarely reflect that. Unless you are bowling enough to be averaging at least a couple of wickets per match, you probably aren't even going to get a look in on the rankings. Which is funny, because often, when we are talking about wanting an allrounder in the side, more often than not we are thinking a batting allrounder who will bat in the top-6 as their primary skill with bowling more as a bonus, precisely the sort of player who the rankings are biased against.
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Wade is not an option with the ball, Mike. Have you seen him bowl?
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Bowled trying to dig out a yorker.
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Why would you think that about Agar?
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Wade is a bits and pieces player. A struggling keeper who tried his hand a batting. Mind you, that wasn't your point. Pattinson is nowhere near as good a soin bowler as Agar. Surely you are not complaining about Agar's performance. You miss your own point.
Naughty's Headband
Roar Rookie
From a pure hand-eye coordination perspective I reckon he's the best.
Naughty's Headband
Roar Rookie
Umm, they were banned for 12 months...
maverick
Roar Rookie
I would say :"Always injured"