Test XIs we should have picked: 1977 Ashes

By Stephen Vagg / Roar Guru

A while back I did a few articles on touring squads we should have picked in the past – very hardcore nerd stuff, of course, but not without some use, because the past teaches us things we can learn from in the future.

A couple of them touched on tours involving Rod Marsh (1981 Ashes, 1982 tour of Pakistan) and in honour of his passing I thought I’d do another one – the 1977 Ashes.

This was one of the odder Ashes series, being the last official Australian tour before World Series Cricket – indeed, news of that project broke just before the first Test causing much dissension.

It turned out that not only had most (but not all) of the Australian squad signed to play with Kerry Packer, so too had several English players including their own captain, Tony Greig.

The series was not a memorable one for Australia, to put it mildly: we lost 3-0, establishing a tradition for being lousy tourists that existed, basically, until 1989.

(Photo by Ryan Pierse/Getty Images)

I was too young to remember all this happening at the time but when I was a kid I got hold of an old copy of Ashes ‘77, a book on the tour by David Frith and Greg Chappell (they wrote it in tandem).

It was a fascinating read to my young eyes, a mixture of interviews and match reports, with a very ‘ripped from the headlines’ quality: the book was clearly completed very quickly after the Ashes, with all these references to the international careers of players like Greg Chappell and David Hookes basically being over (at the time it was assumed they’d be banned for life).

Australia was very much in a rebuilding phase in 1977, even without World Series Cricket. A number of key players had recently retired, most notably Ian Chappell, but also Ross Edwards, Ian Redpath and I think Ashley Mallett.

This was due to the difficulties of cricketers making a living while also playing the game for not much money, which of course was a prime (if not the prime) cause of WSC.

They also had no Dennis Lillee, who was suffering a back injury. Still, Australia’s thrilling victory over England in the 1977 Centenary Test was a cause of optimism.

The optimism turned out to be misplaced when we lost the Ashes 3-0. This is routinely blamed on the divisions of World Series Cricket (not everyone in the Australian squad was offered a contract).

But it should be pointed out England had to deal with their own issues on that one, a big chunk of their side having signed with WSC: Tony Greig, Bob Woolmer, Dennis Amiss, Derek Underwood, Alan Knott.

And they had Geoff Boycott, whom trouble tends to follow, back in the side after a long absence – so their dressing room wasn’t exactly a spa retreat either.

Is there anything Australia’s selectors could have done differently to help the situation? Could we have won that Ashes?

Let’s look at the squad that was picked:

1. Greg Chappell (captain) – one of the greatest players in the world. Not as good a captain as his brother but few were. Lock selection.

2. Rod Marsh (vice-captain) – one of the greatest wicketkeepers in the world. Lock.

(Photo by S&G/PA Images via Getty Images)

3. Rick McCosker – very consistent performer for Australia since 1974-75 (despite wobbles in 1975-76 when he was replaced briefly by Graham Yallop). Had recently played one of the all-time great innings when he batted in the Centenary Test with a broken jaw. No way he wasn’t being picked.

4. Ian Davis – a selector’s pet who, after many false starts, had his first consistent international summer in 1976-77. Scored a half century in the Centenary Test. Seen as the future.

5. Gary Cosier – had scored some memorable centuries for Australia since his debut in 1975-76. His form tailed off towards the end of the summer (he failed twice in the Centenary Test) and a lot of observers felt he was lucky to get on the plane, but he did have a track record and could bowl a little too.

Cosier wasn’t really rated by the Chappells – he wasn’t offered a contract with World Series Cricket, causing a lot of awkwardness on the tour. WSC signed up several batters not picked for the Ashes, such as Rob Langer, Bruce Laird, Martin Kent and Trevor Chappell.

6. Doug Walters – hadn’t done that well in England in 1968, 1972 or 1975 but had been in brilliant form recently – a scoring a Test double century in New Zealand, for instance – and maybe it would be fourth time lucky. His experience would come in handy with such an inexperienced squad.

7. David Hookes – came out of nowhere, it seemed, in 1976-77 to score five first-class centuries in six innings, got picked for Australia in the Centenary Test and made that wonderful half century. There was no way he wasn’t going to be on that plane.

8. Kim Hughes – had been mentioned as an international prospect since 1975-76, and toured New Zealand with the national side in early 1977. His place in the pecking order had been gazumped by Hookes but he was clearly a player for the future… except in the eyes of Ian Chappell, who didn’t offer him a WSC contract.

9. Craig Serjeant – only played one season of first-class cricket but did very well, including a century for WA against the touring English side. Made 730 first-class runs at 66 that summer. So raw he wasn’t considered for WSC (he would be offered a contract later but turned it down) but there was a lot of press hype around him, Hookes and Hughes at the time.

10. Richie Robinson (back-up keeper) – superb performer for Victoria over a long period of time, and had a great season with the bat (828 runs at 82.80), which probably pushed him past John Maclean of Queensland. A generally uncontroversial choice, not expected to play any Tests unless Rod Marsh got injured.

11. Jeff Thomson – the fastest bowler in the world, or at least had been prior to his recent injury in a Test against Pakistan. Not as effective on English pitches as Australian ones but had done okay in 1975. With Lillee’s injury, it was a big relief that he was able to play.

(PA Images via Getty Images)

12. Max Walker – a sturdy performer for Australia since 1973, expected to do well on English wickets, though it hadn’t really worked out that way in 1975.

13. Len Pascoe – exciting speedster in the ‘Thommo’ mode. Got in ahead of other candidates like Wayne Clark, Ian Callen and Alan Hurst via an excellent ’76-77 summer.

14. Geoff Dymock – very solid performer for Queensland, had played for Australia on and off since 1973-74 but always seemed to be reluctantly picked. A lot of observers considered him the most surprising selection in the squad but a strong domestic summer saw him get on the plane. Like Cosier, Hughes and Serjeant, not offered a WSC contract.

15. Mick Malone – solid performer for WA, who took 49 first-class wickets at 19 that summer. Expected to do well in England.

16. Kerry O’Keeffe – played for Australia on and off since 1970-71, fighting over the spinners spot with people like Terry Jenner, Ashley Mallett and even once John Watkins. A bit erratic but clearly talented and very handy with the bat. He had done well in New Zealand and played an important, often overlooked, role in Australia winning the Centenary Test.

17. Ray Bright – toured New Zealand with Australia in ’73-74 and ’76-77. Strong domestic performer. I read an old article from 1977 where various experts gave their hypothetical squads and everyone listed O’Keeffe and Bright as the spinners. Their other rivals around this time included Graham Whyte, David Hourn and Jim Higgs.

Who were the notable omissions? Were there any?

Alan Turner had been opener from 1975 until the New Zealand tour, solid rather than spectacular, but his form had dropped away and his omission from the squad wasn’t a huge surprise outside of New South Wales.

What was a surprise is the selectors only took two specialist openers to England – McCosker and Davis. This was a risky move – and indeed it did wind up hurting Australia on the tour.

Spoiler alert, Ian Davis struggled with the bat, forcing Australia to look around to find someone to partner McCosker. The most obvious replacement was Craig Serjeant, who had done well as a makeshift opener in county games – but in the first Test they decided to play Serjeant down the order, drop Cosier, and use Richie Robinson to open (he’d made 70 as an opener in a ODI).

Looking back, if they didn’t want to take Turner they really should have taken Bruce Laird, who made 502 runs at 36 that summer, which isn’t awesome but it’s okay. Also, he’d toured England in 1975. But if they didn’t go with Laird, then they should have had a proper back-up plan in place… and stuck to it.

Graham Yallop had played three Tests for Australia against the West Indies in 1975-76 and done well, but then seemed to drop back in the pecking order.

He’d made 472 first-class runs that summer at 47.20, so looking back he was a little unlucky to miss out to, say, Serjeant, but there wasn’t that much criticism of the decision at the time, at least not outside Victoria.

When the next Ashes came around in 1978-79, Yallop would be the national captain but that’s another story for another time.

(S&G/PA Images via Getty Images)

The most controversial omission from the squad was Gary Gilmour, the spectacularly talented all-rounder who had only recently scored a Test century in New Zealand, and enjoyed enormous success with the ball in England at the 1975 World Cup.

On his day Gilmour was one of the best players in the world – but he was a bowling all-rounder and his form with the ball had dropped away alarmingly. In the Centenary Test, for instance, Chappell only used him for four overs in the second innings as England scored 417.

Still, it was a shock. Noted cricket scribe Ray Robinson called it the biggest selector blunder since omitting Keith Miller on the 1949-50 South African tour. Miller wound up going on that tour but Gilmour had no such luck in 1977.

What makes it even more upsetting is that Gilmour had been bowling all summer with a bone “the size of a five-cent piece” floating around his heel. An injury easily fixed – had only there been decent communication between him and selectors.

Was it a mistake leaving him out?

That’s a tough one, even with the benefit of hindsight – because Gilmour never really recaptured the form of his 1975-76 period. He had his moments during World Series Cricket but they were sporadic and he only played two first-class games after the post-WSC peace treaty.

But I actually do think it was a mistake omitting Gilmour. He had so much talent, plus a decent track record in England, he could bat, and it was an Ashes squad – there were other pace options if he was struggling in tour games.

Anyway here’s the team I think Australia should have chosen, trying not to be too wise after the event:

1. Greg Chappell (c)
2. Rod Marsh (vc)
3. Rick McCosker
4. Ian Davis
5. Gary Cosier
6. Doug Walters
7. David Hookes
8. Kim Hughes
9. Bruce Laird or Graham Yallop (he could open)
10. Richie Robinson (back-up keeper)
11. Jeff Thomson
12. Max Walker
13. Len Pascoe
14. Gary Gilmour
15. Mick Malone
16. Kerry O’Keeffe
17. Ray Bright

Not too different from the side that went.

Do I think my squad would have won the Ashes?

Actually, no.

It wasn’t the selectors’ fault we lost.

The main reason for that was the failure of senior players to step up, particularly Walters (223 Test runs at 25), O’Keeffe (three wickets at 102) and Walker (14 wickets at 39.35). Players who looked like they were going to mature, such as Davis (107 runs at 18), didn’t.

Chappell, Marsh and Thomson did well, if not sensationally. The juniors like Pascoe, Malone and Hookes did fine. It was the other more experienced people that let down Australia.

(Photo by S&G/PA Images via Getty Images)

In hindsight you can see clear selection errors – they should’ve picked Mick Malone over Max Walker and Bright over O’Keeffe, used Kim Hughes from the first Test, and tried Craig Serjeant as opener.

But no one could have really predicted that Walters, O’Keeffe, Davis and Walker would be so disappointing (O’Keeffe and Walker did well in county games), or that Malone would do so well in his one Test, or that Serjeant would never quite live up to his first season in domestic cricket.

And England had some fantastic players – Geoff Boycott returning from self-imposed exile, a debuting Ian Botham, Derek Underwood, Tony Greig, Alan Knott, Bob Willis – and were very skilfully led by Mike Brearley, one of their greatest ever captains. At home they were simply a stronger side against a Lillee-less Australians.

I also think there was a disconnect between the selectors of the squad (Phil Ridings, Sam Loxton and Neil Harvey) and the selectors on tour (Chappell, Marsh and Walters).

The squad selectors rated some players, notably Cosier, Dymock and Hughes, that weren’t held in the same esteem by the tour selectors.

Cosier never seemed seriously considered for a Test spot although his tour game form wasn’t bad (he had a better average than Walters and Davis, for instance). Hughes clearly should’ve been picked early on he was overlooked in favour of Robinson. Dymock never got much of a chance to bowl.

The main lessons I would draw from the 1977 Ashes were as follows:

1. Only pick players in the squad that the tour selectors might actually pick.

2. If a champion player has notably lost form weirdly, always check if there’s a physical reason why they’ve lost form (such as Gilmour).

3. Have a back-up opener plan and stick to it.

I actually don’t think the selectors of the 1977 Ashes did that bad a job. It was the veterans who let them down.

The Crowd Says:

AUTHOR

2022-03-30T06:34:07+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


Incidentally I just finished reading 'Fierce Focus' by Greg Chappell who said he wanted to bring Ian Brayshaw along on the tour. Not sure whose place Brayshaw would've taken (maybe Dymock?) Not sure Brayshaw would've fixed the issues but he was a very good player.

2022-03-12T08:41:35+00:00

sheek

Roar Guru


Stephen, After an excellent series against Pakistan, based on one huge innings, Cosier only scored 37 runs in 5 digs vs NZ & England. He obviously had to go. Gilmour completely lost his mojo, so he had to go also. So for the 1st test, Sergeant & Pascoe would have replaced Cosier & Gilmour, with Thomson replacing Lillee. The only actual change to this was the makeshift opener Robinson for the out of sorts Davis. At another time & place, this might have worked. But the Aussies were distracted by other stuff. I thought GSC’s captaincy in 1976/77 was ordinary. He clearly missed the guiding hand of older brother Ian, while Thommo’s injury then Lillee’s unavailability threw him out of his rythmn. You have to deal with things not always going for you. Chappelli’s leadership through the Caribbean in 1973, then at home & away against NZ in 73/74 was extraordinary. He had to manage 7 different fast bowlers through 11 tests, count ’em – Dell, Dymock, Gilmour, Hammond, Hurst, Lillee, Walker. And he lost Massie after the 72/73 series & Thomson during 72/73. And Colley during the 72 Ashes. So that’s 10 different bowlers in 19 tests 1972-74. Not to mention all the different batsmen who also flowed through. Yet Chappelli found a way to keep winning. No wonder Packer wanted Chappell as his WSC Aussie captain. I think GSC was better post WSC, but never as good as his brother.

AUTHOR

2022-03-10T23:47:26+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


In fairness, I think the one who should've played over Walker was Mick Malone. A very good bowler. Though I do love Dymock. First class stats for the tour https://cricketarchive.com/CricketIreland/Events/Australia_in_British_Isles_1977/f_Australians_Bowling.html Dymock 13 wickets at 31, Walker 53 wickets at 22, Pascoe 41 wickets at 22, Malone 32 wickets at 26 Based on first class stats and experience you can't really blame them for going for Thommo, Pascoe and Walker Just for whatever reason Walker didn't do that well at test level. Same for spinners - O'Keefe took 36 FC wickets at 29 and Bright 39 at 20. Bright's figures were better but O'Keefe didn't do horribly in tour games, just the tests. I've sometimes wondered if Australia wouldn't have just been better off using their Centenary Test side with Thommo for Lillee, i.e. 1) Davis 2) McCosker 3) Chappell 4) Cosier 5) Walters 6) Hookes 7) Marsh 8) Gilmour 9) O'Keefe 10) Walker 11) Thommo You have deeper batting plus Cosier's bowling

2022-03-10T05:05:44+00:00

Tempo

Roar Rookie


Reckon MacGill could have played any of the last 4 tests. After Lords, the wickets were all fairly dry if I remember correctly - hence Warne's success and England's reliance on reverse swing. With our pace bowlers largely ineffective after McGrath's injury and spinning wickets, think they could have been braver with him (realistically he wouldn't have been called up for the second test given they won the first).

2022-03-09T03:13:17+00:00

sheek

Roar Guru


Kavla, Your middle paragraph nails it. If the Chappells didn't like you, you were gone. Still crazy though. I find it difficult to comprehend Chappelli was willing to give up his #3 spot. That still doesn't make sense to me.

2022-03-09T03:08:43+00:00

sheek

Roar Guru


Clear as Mud, I do think the Chappells rated Dymock as an honest toiler. But they already had their honest toiler in Walker, who was also a better bowler. And as a left armer, they preferred the unpredictable brilliance of Gilmour. It's not that they didn't rate Dymock, but others had better claims at the time. But he was a beauty for Queensland.

2022-03-08T23:09:50+00:00

Kalva

Roar Rookie


Ironically if you listen to Ian Chappell, as we all have, he will say that he always batted at number 3 once he was established. It's rare for a middle order batsman to debut at number 3 in a Test...even if you bat at number 3 at first class level, the step up to Test level usually requires a period of settling in first.

2022-03-08T22:35:22+00:00

Clear as mud

Guest


and wouldn't it have been nice for the spare batter in the squad to get a game when he was in form and 3 or 4 in the team were desperately not? old fashioned, I know

2022-03-08T22:30:06+00:00

Clear as mud

Guest


poor old Dymock, never got close to the Test team in conditions that should have suited him really. not really rated by either Chappell, even the adopted Queenslander - but the selectors kept rolling him up. and then one killer summer where he hopefully shut them both up and quits sort of the Yallop of bowling, I guess. (the guys who did the lifting in the year Thommo and Lillee were both out - 73-4 - it's a funny story of collective almost... even Walker, tho he debuted the season before... Dell, Dymock, Hurst, Gilmour)

AUTHOR

2022-03-08T18:50:43+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


This was stated also in Graham Yallop's book "Lambs to the Slaughter". Yallop replaced McCosker who was batting at three... so they figured "well he can bat at three then". To be fair, Yallop batted at three for Victoria. I don't think Yallop was divisive so much as he just struggled being captain.

AUTHOR

2022-03-08T18:50:14+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


I agree you need a back up. You don't necessarily need a specialist, but I think you need someone who has done the job in the past and can step in to the role if need be.

2022-03-08T13:30:08+00:00

Kalva

Roar Rookie


According to Adrian McGregor’s authorized biography of Greg Chappell it happened. What’s more, the selector was incensed that a youngster was being sent in at number 3….Greg’s response was they wanted a more experienced player like McCosker to be picked for number 3 and instead, got this guy so that’s it. Remember this was an authorized biography! Those guys were absolutely ruthless and destructive if they didn’t like you. I’ve often wondered what the careers of Hughes and Hookes would have been like if their relationships with the Chappell mafia and the board were reversed.

2022-03-08T10:28:24+00:00

sheek

Roar Guru


Kavla, I’m aware of Chappelli’s antipathy to Yallop, but they “made” him bat at #3????? Like, they moved Chappelli away from his favourite position (test average 50.94 at #3) to see Yallop fail? This sounds like cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face. Chappelli was much less effective when he moved down to #4, so I have to say that if this is true, it’s one of the dumbest things I’ve heard the Chappell brothers do. I’ve never understood, until you made this claim, why Yallop batted ahead of the Chappell brothers. It made no sense at all. If the story is true, it’s one of the dumbest things I’ve heard. Yallop was an odd, divisive personality, it seems. He was originally chosen as vice-captain to Hughes for the Rebel tours of South Africa. But he became so disinterested he was sacked as vc, & replaced by Dyson.

2022-03-08T10:22:18+00:00

sheek

Roar Guru


Stephen, Yes, Thomson should have toured in 1981 as 5th fast bowler & 17th player. Walters & Yardley should both have also toured. When GSC pulls out, the team required the experience of Walters. He may have just pulled it altogether on his 5th tour. Yardley should have toured in place of Beard. I can understand the selectors picking Bright despite his ordinary domestic form. He was probably a safer bet on English wickets than his state team mate Higgs. I reckon Trevor Chappell took Walters spot. He & Walters, & the unavailable GSC, were the only batsmen who could also bowl reasonable medium pace, among the top 10-12 batsmen in the country. Apart from Border's slow leftarmers, none of the other batsmen bowled. It was a shame Kent did his back in, I thought he never realised his potential. I would also have preferred Wright to Rixon.

2022-03-08T10:14:49+00:00

Kalva

Roar Rookie


It was a private series…they had the right to pick their mates…just don’t say that only the best were selected. What’s more, the consequences were to last for a generation. We have all read about the problems Hughes had but even before WSC, when Graeme Yallop was first picked in 1975-76, the Chappell mafia were so incensed that they made him bat at number 3…ahead of Ian Chappell! This was from Greg Chappell’s biography from the 1980s. Even now, the dislike Ian Chappell has for Yallop is so blatant…I saw for the first time he was more modified when it came to Kim Hughes last week while talking about Rod Marsh’s company.

2022-03-08T10:09:44+00:00

Kalva

Roar Rookie


Not picking a 3rd opener for any tour, let alone a 4 month tour of England makes absolutely no sense!

2022-03-08T10:08:35+00:00

Kalva

Roar Rookie


According to Tony Greig, that was from Boycott’s memory!

AUTHOR

2022-03-08T08:14:04+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


From memory I think Boycott was asked but turned it down.

AUTHOR

2022-03-08T08:12:53+00:00

Stephen Vagg

Roar Guru


Agree on 1981 I wrote this piece about it earlier https://www.theroar.com.au/2021/07/26/test-xis-we-should-have-had-1981-ashes/

2022-03-07T23:51:07+00:00

sheek

Roar Guru


Kavla, I don't have a problem with Chappelli picking his mates, or family, for WSC. It happens all the time in life. In any case, he had to make sure he picked the best players he could otherwise his neck was on the line. There was a feeling at the time that Trevor Chappell was on the cusp of becoming a very good player. He had outshone his older brothers at schoolboy level, so it was known he had talent. But as it turned out, he lacked the mental mongrel of his older brothers. Obviously, Cosier & Dymock, the two test proven players on the 77 tour not selected for WSC, were considered supernumerary to requirements. It's instructive that Dymock's best years, 1978/79, came late in his career, when he was 33-34. Sergeant & Hughes were just starting out, & the Aussies in WSC had plenty of other options. I think the one player who should have resisted WSC was Hookes, who became an excellent player of pace, but never overcame his technical weakness against spin. The only quality spinner in WSC was Underwood, so Hookes missed that critical development. Hughes, Border & Yallop, by contrast, all went to India in 1979 & developed their skills against spin. But for Hookes, playing with his heroes was an opportunity too good to give up.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar