“And as a leader, he has been brilliant.”

I like Paine. I think he should probably retain his captaincy for this series. He should be given another shot.

But seriously, who are they trying to kid? Warnie will be spitting out his cornflakes reading this. A few international commentators will be joining him.

A more sober assessment would be nice. But if there is a clever reason for saying this, I hope it has the desired effect.

But herein lies the problem. We are loading quite a bit up on Starc, but we are ignoring the failures of Lyon. Surely, it is the combination of both these bowlers’ failures that cost us, not just that of Mitch Starc?

Career wise, Starc has far better stats than Lyon (average and strike rate). Series wise, same applies. And in the last series, Lyon was the worst performer of all our front line bowlers by a long way. In the 4th day in Sydney you would have expected him to weave his magic. Sadly this wasn’t to be, and the quicks had to work harder with a short turnaround before the next test.

Also we have Cameron Green. Underbowled, yes. But not a single wicket to his name. Paine showed zero confidence in him in the last innings at the Gabba.

I’m fine with being critical of Starc. But he shouldn’t be unduly singled out. Criticisms should be placed in their proper context, and the failures of others shouldn’t be lumped onto one person, even if the latter has some flak coming his way.

The definition of racism must have changed lately.

By ‘help’ I assume you mean ‘reeducation.’ What a shame there are no places you can go to get this kind of help – at least the USSR and China had camps for this sort of thing.

Thanks for the feedback. But in my view, we attacked the body because we couldn’t swing the ball and had no penetration pitching it up. In Sydney the side was criticised for resorting to the short ball too late. In Brisbane, it was too early. Either pitched up or short, we weren’t doing the job.

I think a lot of what you said actually is not in conflict with what I am saying. We lack depth and we are in trouble when we come up against a team that applies itself and has decent talent – which is quite a few test teams.

As for ‘gave it their best shot’ – I hope we did the same!

Pujura played well and they did rally around him. But that was not the strongest Indian batting line up on our shores, and they were never really tested because, as I mentioned elsewhere, we weren’t moving the ball and hitting the cracks. In any event, any victory worth celebrating is one against adversity, against quality opposition. If we can’t win because net bowlers are getting a rare gig and trying hard, and sub-continent teams can bat out the last 3/4 sessions of a test match and only lose a few wickets because a couple of people were bolting down (India would not have been 7 down if they weren’t going for the win) then we are in big trouble in my honest opinion. Most test nations have young players trying to score a place and skilled players who are resilient.

As for NZ, saw them play recently. I don’t think they will be fearing us now, especially if we play on their turf. They are a top quality side nowadays and deserve the no 1 ranking. I am not at all confident we could beat them on current form.

Your first point was good but I don’t quite agree with the last one. Neil Wagner is every bit as inclined to target batsmens’ body than any of our bowlers.

Warnie likes McDermott. He is definitely a chance.

For mine, we need to look not only at the team but also the coaching team. One of the biggest disappointments was that our bowlers were GBS just about throughout and India’s inexperienced bowlers got so much more movement than we did, especially in the air. If this happens once or twice you can say you got a dud kookaburra. Throughout virtually the entire series, however, and you can only conclude that our team is struggling with wrist position and/or bowling tactics. I believe Troy Cooley is the bowling coach – could be wrong. If he is, I hope he recalls what he did in the leadup to the 2005 ashes and tries to replicate it. Bowling fast but GBS is simply not enough to get good test quality batting sides out. If this continues and Lyon’s form doesn’t improve, we are going to be in heaps of trouble when we play on slower pitches.

This applies to Starc. He is a completely different bowler when he swings the ball. Is he in bad form, or is it no coincidence that none of his bowling partners are swinging it either?

And we should learn a trick or two from India. They brought back the old fashioned type of leg cutter and executed it well. Not much point relying on the seam of these emasculated kookaburras to do the work by themselves. Pat Cummin’s off cutter is about the only type of ball that got anything approaching regular movement from our quicks.

Green has potential, but I am not entirely convinced. Showed absolutely no penetration with the ball. If you haven’t taken a single wicket in an entire series your batting should be judged by the standards of a full time batsmen, because you are not contributing as an all rounder, but as a batsman who can bowl a few overs (a grand total of 3 in the last innings). On that metric his average maybe just passes.

India did take more wickets than Australia over the series.

If they bowled on the 5th day in Sydney and Brisbane I imagine the gat would have been even greater.

Except India’s bowlers got the bowl to swing using the old skill of keeping the seam upright. They got the ball to cut using the old method of shifting your wrist after altering your finger positioning, not just hoping the ball will hit the scrambled seam and deviate.

India’s bowlers seemed to have less problems with the pitch being flat, and a few of them were net bowlers never in serious contention for test selection. Were Australia batting on the last day of those test matches (Sydney and Brisbane) I am almost certain we wouldn’t be talking about how easy those pitches were to bat on.

“Does it really matter, it’s a country with how many more players than Australia?”

That line used to be trotted out by the Kiwis to excuse their mediocrity – before they started to believe they can win tournaments against larger nations and played like they could. India’s population never bothered us before, and we used to beat its top team.

Absolutely spot on.

5 homes series losses in 10 years is not questionable. Pretty much the worst ever. It says everything. And at the end of the day win/loss is one of the most important stats of all.

A loss of historical significance at what is historically our most secure venue against an Indian B side without key batsman and a third choice bowling line is also not questionable. Humiliation is a subjective sentiment, but take away pride and sentiment and elite sport means absolutely nothing.

The thing about stats is that if you want to know where a team is going, you have to weigh the recent stats more heavily than the historical ones. When Richie Richardson’s team lost at home to the Aussies under Mark Taylor, not only was the former wrong to compare the historic performance of his formerly great side to belittle the quality of an up-and-comer, but that defeat marked the end of the era, and the denialism of the Windies was the catalyst of the rapid fall of West Indian cricket that saw them go from world beaters to easy beats in the matter of a few years. No one should underestimate the gravity and potential impact of this humiliation. Australia’s self belief is broken and there will no longer be a single team in world cricket that fears this Australian side. Everyone now knows where our weaknesses lie.

I don’t know about you, but as an Australian, a team of Indian benchwarmers and net-bowlers beating a virtual full strength Australia at the historically impenetrable fortress GABBA, and wrapping up an Australian home series to boot, is a sign that things are pretty dire.

Yeah, words like ‘really good’ are subjective. But I don’t see how they apply when a B team (with a C team bowling line up) from a country who has won here once in the entirety of cricketing history beats a virtually full strength local side in conditions favourable to the latter.

Going back to those net bowlers, it can’t escape notice that virtually every one of them extracted more lateral movement from the kookaburra than our bowlers. We were GBS the whole series. Given our quick’s only remaining assets were pace and bounce, if they could barely get past first/second test lower order batsmen on the paciest and bounciest wicket in the entire world (maybe save the new stadium in Perth), where on earth are they going to succeed? Where can we be confident declaring with anything less than 400 on the board?

This article, for me, reflects this problem that we are just too ready to accept mediocrity nowadays and harp on about the ‘positives’. The idea that we should get used to getting thrashed by India because they have a bigger population sounds like the stuff we heard from New Zealand in their dark days of cricketing mediocrity. Pretty sure India had a larger population than us prior to last year. Yet we always expected to beat them – especially in our own backyard. Australia has always been a team that expects to win against larger nations, and because of that, we have always defied our demographic limitations, we have always punched above our weight.

An example of this false positivity vibe and creeping acceptance of mediocrity, for me, is Cameron Green. People will probably blast me for this but I am going to say it anyway. Solid batsmen, yes. Good prospect, yes. An allrounder with no wickets in around 50 overs – how is that good enough? He had his moments and didn’t lose his line but he was in no way penetrative enough. He needs a lot more tricks in his bag or he is just a no. 6 that bowls a bit.

And then we have the GOAT. He is a good bowler who has had a few very good series. But I am sorry – if you are a frontline bowler and you average 32 you are not a ‘great.’ It is the bowling equivalent of averaging in the late 30’s as a batsmen. Apparently Lyon doesn’t like to be listen to advice. He doesn’t like bowling to a silly mid off. He is our best spinner and is experienced but an inability to learn means that that average will probably not be coming down.

But the worst thing is that our batting line up got dismissed twice to those same net bowlers and benchwarmers coming in with limited preparation and zero experience at the highest level. What does that say about the Australian batting line up minus the Smith twins?

As for Paine – tactically, he had a shocking series. When you lose to poor batting you look at your line up. When you lose to impotent bowling you have to examine the captain’s field placings, management of his bowling resources, plans for each batsmen, ability to be calm under pressure, and ability to motivate your quicks. Paine tends to panic and go on the defensive too quickly, surrendering the initiative to the opposition. He is not managing Starc well and Green barely got a bowl on the bounciest pitch of the series. Many of the commentators couldn’t understand his bowling changes and his fielding placements – especially the paucity of slips, the lack of a leg gully until too late (Gavaskar) and the lack of a silly mid off (Warne and Waugh),

Yes the Indians were great. You have to admire their dedication, resilience, and self belief. You have to congratulate them for defying the odds. But 1980’s West Indies they were not. Not even close – nor even close to the Indian team of a couple of months ago. This has been one of the most humiliating losses in our cricketing history, and has to be right up there alongside those of the Ironic All Stars of the World Series Cricket rebellion period/early 80’s. For mine, we should only be considering leaving Paine as captain if he can set out the reasons how he will do better and avoid making the same mistakes next time, along with a promise to resign if he fails to do so. A few other players should be invited to say something similar.

No overaction in my view.

Our much vaunted bowling attack just got outbowled by a bunch of bench warmers and net bowlers. That should not be good enough for an impassioned Australian team.

Our quicks weren’t able to extract anywhere near the swing of the Indians which tells me either they can’t get their wrist positions right or think strategies better suited to the short game, like cross seam bowling etc, are the best ways to bowl against batsmen with more defensive mindsets. I watched about 1;5 hrs today and I could count on one hand the times the ball passed the outside edge with fingers to spare. The tactics were also poor and bowlers (and clearly the campaign) were easily flustered. What is more Green bowled around 50 overs and didn’t get a single wicket, but we are so used to mediocrity that this is somehow now ok. Lyon was the least effective spinner on either side, and although he has lacked penetration throughout the series, he complained after the last test that the ball felt good ‘out of the hand’ and that he was just unlucky. Apparently he is also the one that doesn’t like having a silly mid-off and he is known for not listening to people’s advice. Someone needs to tell him that having a bowling average heading towards the mid 30’s means you are solid but in no way a world beater.

If a fast bowling attack cannot move the bowl and relies almost entirely on pace and bounce yet can’t defeat a weakened batting line up on what is arguably the most pacey and bouncy pitch in the world, where will it pose a threat to a competent test-quality

Great article. Very good point.

There was a day where you could get the likes of Viv Richards and Ian Botham to play in the Sheffield Shield. I think making the Shield stronger can be done and will help.

One point comes back to selection. I think going back to making performance in the Sheffield Shield being the key criteria for selection for Australia being earned or denied (excluding incumbents of course) will up the stakes and strengthen the competition. It used to be that every game was seen as a vital opportunity for a young prospective player. I think if the selectors stick with their guns on this merit-based policy the intensity of the competition will improve.

Greg Chappell recently wrote an interesting article on some fo the shortcomings of the modern professional system. He made some really good points. Perhaps Australian cricket could benefit with an American type college system or some kind of system which helps players foster other vocational skills, so that passion to play at the highest level keeps them in the game and not economic necessity.

I think the point was that they would slot Wade down the order. If it was between Wade and Head you would probably have to go Wade at the moment.

Pucovski and Warner were only kept out for injury. Had they both been fit, Wade probably would have given way for Greene. But from what we’ve seen, both Greene and Wade should play. That leaves Head the lucky man out.

Rare to see someone with such detailed, behind the scenes knowledge of the selectors’ thought processes.

1975 was better than 2020 and I would argue the 70’s was a far better decade than the last one and will probably be better than the next one. I also miss the days when you could watch Al Bundy doing his thing in the shoe store.

Anyway, as for the fat jibe, you see a hell of a lot worse than that even in the sanitised cricket books of former players.

Back to the cricket, at least Wade showed some fight. He didn’t flourish but he laid a foundation and applied himself. He’s a combative character and the banter seems to get him going, like it did Warnie and some other great players. Pity the Aussies couldn’t up the scoring rate after he’d seen off the new ball (he was also guilty on that front).

For mine Wade’s DRS challenge on the LB to Jadeja was interesting. I thought it was out, but that it wasn’t going anywhere near where DRS said it was going. Not sure if it was the camera angle or not.

You know what would be great? Show DRS projections taking the cut off point as one foot for the popping crease after a player is clean bowled. Will it show the ball hitting the exact spot it hit? Obviously they have done these tests countless times before, but it would be interesting to see this test goes in match conditions.

Could have rated the pitch. I thought both pitches were really good. Neither has misbehaved but there has been enough in it for the bowlers. This has made for good cricket.

This is a good article which has the courage to go against the flow. Thanks.

Disagree on this on a couple of points though.

Firstly, as someone has mentioned, the selectors have made a big point about going back to picking people who perform in Shield cricket. Burns obviously didn’t do that, and although he was the incumbent, Burns was by no means a well established opener, and there was a long hiatus between series.

But most importantly, picking a player at the wrong time doesn’t necessarily help a player’s career – it can hinder it and even end it. Given his poor domestic form, you couldn’t really be confident you would see Burns at his best this summer, and in his last innings he was all at sea. That last showing looked terrible and could well now mark the death knell of his international career. Had he not been exposed to the big stage at that time, he may well have had a better chance of fighting his way back into the side at a later stage. It will be a much bigger struggle now.

So I feel sorry for Burns, who seems a likeable character. In the end the decision to play him hasn’t helped his chances of having a longer career and as far as his selection for the series is concerned, it was probably a case of needing to be cruel to be kind.

No.

He will definitely get pelted with short balls by a good pace attack. I think with health issues in the mix, he should be given a rest this season. One more concussion could well spell the end of his career.

Not to be argumentative, but Matt Renshaw 276 at 92.00 this season.

Khawaja is also averaging above 50.

Neither are in the top ten this year in terms of runs scored. But ‘barely scored a run’ is a bit harsh IMHO.

For some reason my paragraph breaks aren’t appearing. Apologies.

I think this is a pretty good analysis. Thanks.

I’m not quite why Renshaw and Khawaja are not in the mix. Renshaw appears to have been pretty harshly treated. Of course, Renshaw is not playing as an opener now (I guess Wade wasn’t either).

I wonder if the Australian batsmen changed their approach to preparation this series? Whatever has happened it is not working.

Certainly the Indian bowling has been very good. But not Holder, Roberts and Marshall, scraping to 200 is a rare achievement good. Failing again in the second innings when India was one bowler down – in an attack already missing first choice bowlers – should be a wake up call. Bowlers to an extent can dictate how a batsman bats but the same is true in reverse. Giving credit where it is due should not be a get out of jail card. ANyway, Ponting has said all that needs to be said on that front.

For me Warner and perhaps Harris opening and changing Wade for Head might be the best way forward. Green looks the part.

Interestingly, Wade has soaked up lots of balls opening rather than playing the more aggressive game we are more acquainted with. Perhaps he would be ok opening with a better foil like Warner on the other end – especially since he seems to have calmed down and trusted his defense more against spin (didn’t save him against Jadeja though).

“Cricket Australia snubbed Perth’s Optus Stadium this summer after Western Australia premier Mark McGowan enforced the hardest border closure in the country.” (source – 7news)

I thought it was a mixture of both CA and the border issue. Probably nothing to do with the BCCI though.