Pace star Mitchell Starc says he was told in no uncertain terms to harden up earlier in his career, revealing former Australia coach Tim Nielsen warned him against complaining about too many niggles.
Starc (354 wickets) needs just two more scalps to overtake the great Dennis Lillee and shoot into outright fourth spot for the most Test wickets taken by an Australian.
That feat is set to be achieved during the second Test against New Zealand in Christchurch, starting Friday.
Starc, with 88 Tests, 121 ODIs and 60 T20Is to his name, has become one of the country’s most durable fast bowlers.
He has spent large parts of his career playing through pain, most recently during Australia’s ODI World Cup-winning campaign in India last year.
But the 34-year-old wasn’t always renowned as being tough as nails, and it almost cost him opportunities at the top level earlier in his calling.
Mitchell Starc (Photo by Matt King-ICC/ICC via Getty Images)
It was only after realising the difference between good and bad pain that Starc was able to thrive.
“I remember early doors – it would have been my first or second tour – I was still learning what all those pains were,” said Starc, who is about to play his seventh straight Test of the southern hemisphere summer.
“Obviously the reports get around from physios to coaches, and I sort of got told to harden the ‘F’ up a little bit.
“Timmy Nielsen probably made me aware of that early doors, there’s plenty of times you need to be honest with the medical staff but other times you’ve got to know when to push through things.”
Starc said Nielsen’s advice helped spark a journey in which he was able to understand his body better.
“I was still learning how to bowl and what my body was telling me,” Starc said.
“I was still going through all those developing pains and what not, and my body adapting to things and it was like, ‘your name’s always down as you have this sore, that sore,’ – there’s good pain and bad pain.
“That probably pushed me a long way to working that out a bit quicker, and not having to say when everything was sore.”
Starc said it would be cool to pass Lillee’s mark of 354 Test scalps.
But his No.1 focus is on helping Australia beat the Black Caps to claim a 2-0 series win.
“It’s something to reflect on if I get that far,” Starc said of Lillee’s mark.
“I’ve never really been about those numbers – it’s cool, it’s humbling, it means I’m old and I’ve played a little bit of cricket.
“But we love the Test wins, so that’s front of mind first and foremost.”
NZ will be without Devon Conway (thumb) and Will O’Rourke (hamstring) for the second Test.
Uncapped quick Ben Sears has been called up, but a farewell outing for retired paceman Neil Wagner has already been ruled out
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Not sure what your point is. Lillee’s average was still way better.
Marcus
Roar Rookie
18 fewer tests than Starc yes, but Lillee bowed 1200 more balls than Starc in those 18 less tests.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
So you admit you called me “stupid” for that entirely illogical reason? And said I was sledging? And you write offensively all the time. And say it’s stupid to compare people 80 years ago when you’ve written stuff comparing people like Trumper, Bradman and Waugh. But I was worried that you might double down, because I recalled that you told us you had been involved in teaching. I do fear for our education system sometimes. But of course Glenn McGrath was a better batsman than Mark Waugh. His average tells you nothing.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
But that’s the clear message being hammered again and again simply by giving ranked lists. These are the ONLY ranked lists they give, especially on TV coverage - wickets, runs or numbers of centuries - and there is never the slightest caveat like X played a lot more matches than Y, or A had a much worse average than B, or DB isn’t even on the list but was twice as effective than most of these guys in the opportunities he did have over 20 years.
Marcus
Roar Rookie
Don't forgot that Lillee also took 24w @ 20.08 in 4 "tests" against the Rest of the World in 71/72. So including those and WSC is true tests numbers are 88 tests, 446 wickets @ 24.16. That would have given him the record until at least 1999.
The Knightwatchmen who say Nii
Roar Rookie
Oh Dave …. You couldn’t have picked a more unsuitable target for those so-called ‘sledges’. Firstly, I am highly literate, in, not only my English mother tongue (also former TESOL teacher in fact), but also two other languages, German and Indonesian. Secondly, in Year 12 maths, in a cohort of around 100 students, I wagged around 50% of classes, and still came 3rd for the year at Awards night. Thirdly, and finally, you are not the person who should be calling out people for having ‘no statistical thinking’, given you start and finish every assessment of batsmen by quoting what ‘he averages’. Perhaps you should have been a little clearer in what you meant, but, it sure came across to this extremely highly mathematical and linguistic functioning journeyman in a certain way, as per my previous reply.
matth
Roar Guru
I’d add Steyn to the mix as well
matth
Roar Guru
No one is saying Starc’s better, just that he will have more career wickets
Gamechanger
Roar Rookie
Correct. Thanks for pointing that out. I guess the 254 just showed the class of batsman Lillee was bowling to, in Sobers. That innings I remember . He had an incredible eye, so often thrashing the ball through the covers and point without moving his feet. Had the privilege of seeing him live at the SCG in 1968. He scored an effortless 50odd. Incredible timing.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Nice one. Actually I agree you can’t go past Thommo at his best 2-3 years. I was more boringly focusing on long careers.
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
I go Thommo for the plutonian energy that he cracked like lightening. Marshall because of his determined militancy. And if there's anyone left the cross between a Cheetah and a Gazelle can take wickets that no batsman can explain. The only flaw in my attack is what the heck would Warnie do?
BigGordon
Roar Rookie
The commentators, media, etc are promoting this view that a record can only be a record if they beat someone, eg the various lists of player batting, bowling and fielding achievements. Like most things that come from the mouths of commentators, it makes no sense, yet they persist in thinking it's somehow important. The only thing it does is start arguments and diminishes the achievements of some very talented cricketers.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Good call. I’d lump for Marshall, R Hadlee and either Ambrose or Wasim Akram, but happy to include Dennis or McGrath. Hadlee looking at his best ten years which were pretty unbelievable, mostly in his 30s.
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
Lillee was undeniable. He's in my 2nd best World XI. (Thommo, Marshall, Holding- I have strong reasons why those 3) Starc maybe 5th or 6th.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Can also add Dennis’s 24 wickets at 20 against an equally good Rest of the World team in unofficial Tests in 1971-72. 87 wickets in all with the WSC Supertests. Dennis didn’t do quite as well in WSC in terms of averages as the Windies and SA quicks and Imran but played more games than most and bowled against generally tougher batting lineups than those who played the Australian team. http://howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/WSC/BowlingAverages.asp
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
V true Gordon but it gives a very misleading impression to kids or relative newcomers to the game who probably assume that the commentators and pundits are actually applying critical thinking and logical standards. Would be better if they just said 300, 400 or 500 wickets or whatever is a great milestone, but never say and he’s passed Lillee or Bradman, certainly not without noting it is a completely unfair comparison.
BigGordon
Roar Rookie
No, but they reckon Cook must have been at least as good as Bradman, seeing they gave him a knighthood 12 months after he played his last Test. :happy:
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
CA actually recognised the WSC stats in a separate category a few years ago, though not included in Test stats. https://www.cricket.com.au/news/3267780 Dennis didn’t do quite as well in the averages as the top Windies and South African bowlers (Le Roux and Procter) and Imran Khan although the batters he was up against were a bit better than the Australian lineup those guys played many of their games against. http://howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/WSC/BowlingAverages.asp .
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Stokes said so! Though why not, if he’s in your team. Of course we don’t hear them say Alistair Cook was a 50 better than Bradman thanks to scoring 50% more Test runs in an eight year shorter career.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
But it doesn’t even reflect relative longevity . As I note above, Lindwall played Tests for two years longer than Starc, didn’t miss many through injury, and actually played a lot more cricket over the years of his Test career. But he played 28 fewer Tests and as a result took about 130 fewer wickets. As you say, it’s a great feat to take that many wickets with a very healthy average over a long period. But these lists always a suggest a comparison that is completely misleading, especially to people who are relatively new to the game. Particularly as it’s the one stat they always highlight. US baseball understands stats so much better. Most seasons have exactly the same number of games. But it changed to more games around 1960. When Roger Maris beat Babe Ruth’s season home runs record of 60 in 1961 some people suggested his new record should be 61 with an asterisk as his feat was in a 162 game season while Ruth hit his in a 154 game season. They even made a film about it called 61*. A bit unfair but reflects a better grasp of numbers than cricket media and commentators.