Australia has a Marnus Labuschagne problem.
Many of the issues facing the team’s currently misfiring batting order can be traced back to the form of the man sitting in the most crucial spot of all.
Where once a steady supply of runs from numbers three and four could be relied upon to recover from early wickets and shield the middle order from both the new ball and a fired-up bowling attack sniffing scalps, Labuschagne’s woes are now deeply impacting both – and with Australia’s line-up in a state of flux following David Warner’s retirement, it could scarcely have come at a worse time.
It’s no surprise that, against fresher bowlers, a newer ball and in higher-pressure situations, Travis Head’s spectacular post-2021/22 Ashes displays have become fewer and farther between; ditto runs from the previously reliable Alex Carey at number seven.
It wouldn’t be fair to put the blame on Labuschagne for that; he is only responsible for his own performance at the crease. But with an average of 32.5 since blitzing the West Indies for three centuries in four innings in late 2022, a man whose average reached Steve Smithian proportions at its apex is now contributing barely more than half what he used to.
Suddenly, it’s Labuschagne in the selectorial hot seat, especially now that both Smith and Green have embedded themselves in their new spots with a pair of gutsy (Smith) and classy (Green) innings on Day 1 of the first Test against New Zealand, and Warner has ridden off into that good night.
The idiosyncrasies that were once charming when the Queenslander was accompanying them with bucketloads of runs – the flourishing leaves, the cry of ‘No run!’, the despair whenever dismissed – are now sources of further derision.
All the same, for Australia to turn their back on Labuschagne now would be the height of idiocy, for numerous reasons.
Primarily, this one – no matter how much luck he inevitably had during his golden run with dropped catches, missed stumpings and botched run outs, no one averages 60 in Test cricket across four years without being exceptionally gifted and remarkably diligent.
Adam Voges was an Australian Test player for barely 18 months, allowing his average of 61.87 to stand as a perfect reminder of the imperfections of statistics; for more than twice that period, Labuschagne was even more spectacularly prolific.
To replace a player with that kind of record, even if it has noticeably declined in recent times, would require serious first-class numbers to justify it: yet the only Sheffield Shield batter who has scored to that extent is Cameron Bancroft, who appears, for now, to have had his cards marked.
It’s also worth noting that, while an average of 32.5 is not Test standard, it’s also only a sizeable drop-off by Labuschagne’s own lofty standards.
A batter averaging in the low 40s – a perfectly respectable Test figure – suddenly dropping to the same zone is rarely faced with equal scrutiny to what Labuschagne is now dealing with: Usman Khawaja had a similar lean patch between late 2016 and mid-2019, and his spot at number three was seldom ever in real jeopardy.
Marnus Labuschagne. (Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)
What punted Khawaja from the side in the end? Only the arrival of Labuschagne in the 2019 Ashes, who was able to prove beyond all doubt a better alternative for that role by virtue of a dominant County Cricket stint and the seizing of his Test chance as concussion substitute for Smith.
That call was one backed up by all available evidence, and not a gut feel decision, which dropping Labuschagne now for a fresh face would indubitably be.
The ‘home-track bully’ tag also doesn’t pass much muster either beyond the stats: second behind Smith for significance with the bat in the 2019 Ashes, with daylight in third, he scored a century on a turning pitch in Galle in 2022, while he made key contributions in all three Tests against Pakistan earlier that same year.
His one score of note, home or away, since December 2022 was an Ashes-saving ton against England in the fourth Test which allowed the Manchester rain time to intervene and rescue Australia from certain doom.
Labuschagne’s greatest problem throughout that series, incidentally, wasn’t one of form, but of capitalising on starts. In four out of six Tests in England, including the World Test Championship final, he had at least one score of 30, but regularly found a way to throw his innings away once set, with his second-highest score of the series behind his ton 51.
He made three 50s in the home summer just gone, all against Pakistan, and while he never looked the Labuschagne of old, he found a way to score runs at reasonable amounts.
Other players have found the going far tougher, for far longer, in less successful sides, and not paid the price with their spot: Mark Taylor famously was little more than a specialist captain for 18 torrid months in the late 1990s, while Michael Hussey’s timeline was eerily similar to Labuschagne’s now – a remarkable start to Test life, followed by years of his swollen average normalising amid a prolonged slump in form.
Both Taylor and Hussey made good on the selectors’ faith, finishing their careers with form reminiscent of them at their best: Hussey, notably, averaged above 50 in the last two years of his Test career, retiring well and truly on top.
For both, form was just one innings away, with Taylor rediscovering his touch with a memorable century in defeat to begin the 1997 Ashes, while Hussey’s death-defying 195 in the first Ashes Test of 2010/11 was a rare highlight on a miserable summer in which he was far and away the standout bat.
Labuschagne is 29, the second-youngest player in Australia’s XI. Along with Green, he will be the bedrock of the top order long after Smith, Khawaja and Mitchell Marsh especially have said their goodbyes. He will be an asset for another half a decade and more if and when he can turn it around.
Batters of his calibre don’t grow on trees, and even the fact everyone acknowledges his form is a far cry from what it used to be is the proof.
There is no Marnus 2.0 biding his time at first-class level who has earned the chance at usurping him as he did to Khawaja. Any replacement will, at best, fall comfortably short of the 60 average Labuschagne posted at his peak, and at worst, do little more than the low 30 mark he is currently providing.
No doubt his form will need to pick up, and soon: the amount of credits he built up with his three brilliant years between 2019 and 2022 was considerable, but there will come a point, most likely soon with home series against India and England on the horizon, when they run dry.
But Australian cricket can afford to give Labuschagne every possible chance to turn it around; actually, they can’t afford not to.
Woody
Roar Rookie
Logic? They gave that idea away a long time ago
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
No matches after this test. I reckon they won’t drop Marnus and therefore, logically, Head and Carey are safe.
Doctor Rotcod
Roar Rookie
Look at all the players in the Shield who are getting good scores, taking wickets,fielding well. Every side has standouts from this end of the season. Shows what a good run against decent opposition on a variety of grounds will do for confidence, eye/hand skills,fitness and durability. The three best sides, Tasmania, Victoria and WA are solid teams with deep batting, good bowlers and handy to very handy fielders. Victoria gave Pakistan a hard match after all.
Panthers
Roar Rookie
Despite his fielding. You wouldn’t seriously pick Labuschagne in any white ball games now. He’s just a free wicket to just about any opposition bowling attack. Just about anyone else is better than him right now. It’s much the same in red ball cricket. Here come Labuschagne, should be another wicket within a few minutes. Is Australia’s batting line up good enough to mostly carry him, often Smith , Head etc? Nope … We seriously need some more top bowling all rounders. So the lower order can continue to carry the batsmen.
qwetzen
Roar Rookie
Quite how you could produce that piece without once mentioning the prolonged slump of Warner is curious.
Phillip
Roar Rookie
This article somewhat aged poorly
Steele
Roar Rookie
Exactly, he’s got a single game left, then it’s footy season anyway.
The Bush
Roar Guru
Interestingly, Kohli's away and home records are about as disparate as Kane's; Kohli only averages 42 away from home. But where Kohli's record comes up better than Williamson's is because he averages 54 in Australia with an amazing six centuries and 49 in South Africa with a further two centuries. His away record is brought down by some strangely low averages in certain places; West Indies he 'only' averages 44 and he averages 14 in Bangladesh (only three tests). The real weakness in Kohli's record is England; 17 tests and an average of 33. But even then, Kohli can at least point to an epic away tour in 2018 when he scored two centuries and three fifties (at the peak of his powers). Williamson has no equivalent away tour against a big team to point to. As you say, I put Williamson at the back of the pack re Tests for the Fab 4.
Khun Phil
Roar Rookie
Yes,they sent Green to shield and look at the result!
Tempo
Roar Rookie
After Kane's duck today, he averages under 40 against Australia, India and England and over 60 against every other opponent. Whilst he has the second best test average of the 'Fab 4', that (and the huge discrepancy between his home and away records) makes him the fourth best of the four in my opinion (but still a great of test cricket). I think you need to be careful in disregarding runs against certain opponents, but I think its right to dig deeper into players records to see how they've gone against the best opposition.
Tempo
Roar Rookie
After the NZ series Australia doesn't play another test match until November. I'd suggest that's more than enough time for him to work on his technique and fix the problems which have crept into his game.
Tufanooo
Roar Rookie
Very astute analysis Bush. Especially that second last paragraph.
Tufanooo
Roar Rookie
I agree. But he is payed a big salary by CA. I can understand the logic of CA wanting him to play for the team that they are principally paying him to play for instead of the shield. But that's not to diminish your point. It stands.
Steele
Roar Rookie
I’d you are really out of touch and you have a good replacement, then there is nothing wrong it. Bancroft is the only domestic player that warrants a go, he could open and Smith can play at first drop. Other than that, I don’t see many other options, I’m certainly not replacing Labs with Renshaw. Therefore he survives until next Summer. Hopefully he finds some touch in FC cricket between now and then.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Thedre are problems with the top order. Marnus is out of form but Smith has not been great either as an opener. Yes, he scored a 90 against the Windies but his other scores as an opener haven't been great. Nothing will happen this series, the selectors will keep the status quo. But changes need to happen in the future. Three of our bowlerts are wqell into their 30s with Cummins being 30. Smith and Uzzi are well into their 30s as well. Playing Smith as an opener was a mistake. Players with a few years in front of them would have been a better choice. This would have been the perfect time to give a couple of our young quicks a start.
Woody
Roar Rookie
They won't ditch Marnus, in the same way they wouldn't drop Warner. Head and Carey are in the cross-hairs though. No matter that Carey is by far and away the best keeper, the push for Inglis will never diminish.
The Bush
Roar Guru
You're probably right about his tour of India and again, I don't think we have enough data yet to make a call on him one way or the other. I actually have no issue with a first drop who averages in the low 40s at test level; it's the hardest place to bat and in theory someone averaging that should still be a big contributor to the team. He doesn't need to be the next Smith. I'm also conscious that at 30, he's in his peak years, so we really should be trying to get the best out of him; no point recalling him a few years from now. But we are going to need him to contribute more than he has in the last two years in the sense of big centuries. Without the consistency of Smith, and now Khawaja over the last few years, everyone in the line up is going to need to step up at different points if we're to keep winning. This is especially so when two of your batsmen are very mercurial (Head and Marsh). Then again, perhaps Green will shoulder that load and we won't need all that much out of Labs anyway.
JamesH
Roar Guru
I don't necessarily disagree with all of your points, but I think you're underplaying his efforts in India. The first 3 pitches they served up there were exceptionally difficult for batting - only once did a team score more than 270 - and he managed to scratch out at least one meaningful contribution in each game, to be our second leading runscorer behind Khawaja. I suspect if we'd been served up better decks, he would have got more value for his grind.
The Bush
Roar Guru
The problem with the ‘if you take out’ argument is that you need to apply it to any other batter you’re comparing him to. I agree that it's a problematic approach to assessing a batsman, but there are occasions where it tells us a story, especially when someone doesn't have a ten year career to fall back on. In my opinion, taking that approach to his performances since 2022, removing the Windies, is very instructive as it tells us that other than beating up a team that didn't deserve test status, his performances over the last two years at least haven't been that great. One of the things I was hoping to also point out is that the statement that he averaged over 60 across four years was a very misleading statement. The reality is that almost all batters score more runs against weaker teams and at home. If you pick apart Kane Williamson’s record you’ll probably see something along those lines, yet he’s acknowledged as elite. You're right, picking apart players careers does show these sorts of things. And it's good that you named Williamson because he's a classic case of this. From 16 tests in India and England he has only two centuries and averages 33 and 30. If it wasn't for his decent returns in Australia, 2 centuries and an average of 42, you'd really want to bring him down. Marnus averages 40 in India, 39 in England and 50 in Sri Lanka (albeit the latter is from only 3 innings). The problem with quoting his India average is that it gives the impression that he has played some good innings there to average 40. But in reality he only scored a single fifty in the series and his average was inflated by two not outs. In reality, we don't have enough data to make a call on him overall. My exercise was simply dissecting how things have gone over his still somewhat short career and in my opinion, we're talking about a guy who had a great purple patch, rode his luck across another summer and a half and has then been pretty mediocre outside of a single beat up of a poor team. But to be clear, that doesn't mean I think he's kept out the next Bradman and shouldn't have been persisted with. Since Clarke’s retirement, is there an Auatralian whose name isn’t Steve Smith who has comparable numbers? The answer of course is no and this is why I haven't been calling for him to be dropped and I'm only calling for him to be left out next summer if he doesn't perform and someone else does.
JamesH
Roar Guru
The problem with the 'if you take out' argument is that you need to apply it to any other batter you're comparing him to. The reality is that almost all batters score more runs against weaker teams and at home. If you pick apart Kane Williamson's record you'll probably see something along those lines, yet he's acknowledged as elite. The ones who consistently perform strongly against the best opponents in the toughest conditions are as rare as hens' teeth. Marnus averages 40 in India, 39 in England and 50 in Sri Lanka (albeit the latter is from only 3 innings). Since Clarke's retirement, is there an Auatralian whose name isn't Steve Smith who has comparable numbers? In fact, ignoring his single innings so far in NZ, he really only has underwhelming away averages in Pakistan (34) and the UAE, and that UAE series was in 2018 before he had really got his career underway. He's yet to tour RSA, WI or Bangladesh, due mainly to COVID and selective scheduling. Also, while I'm not a big fan of the 'eye test' when it comes to cricketers, from what I've seen of his dismissals he's getting himself out a lot, rather than routinely being found out technically by good deliveries. That suggests his issue is one of confidence and a scrambled mindset, rather than his actual ability being significantly lower than initially thought. I agree that there has to be a limit to the faith the selectors show in him, but gee, any replacement would want to grab the opportunity quickly.