In my last cricket post I suggested that the problems with Australia's batting were as much systemic as anything else. This means that the solutions are not easy and will take time. But what does that mean for the team right now? What should Lehmann, and the rest of the leadership do now?
Firstly, and I can't believe I am saying this, but we need to realise that the current Ashes are not everything -after all we have a series against the world's best coming up next year. Not that we give up. We should fight out this series and the next. However, we have spent the last couple years putting band aids on our problems, and taking risks especially in selection to try to pull off an amazing win. This goes way beyond the batting, and it hasn't worked. Now we need to take a longer term view - realising that it may cost us matches in the short term. However, if we used the same sort of short term thinking we have in the recent past, we will need to settle in for a long time in the middle of the pack, maybe even lower.
Short of wholesale systemic change, the main area we need to change the way we work is in selection. Our selection policy is all over the place at the moment. Two of the eleven picked for the first test were not even in the 16 player squad. They effectively leap frogged at least seven players to get into the team. It is this sort of panic selection that exacerbates the problems the team is having.
In this post we will look at the selection of the batsmen, who form our biggest problem. In the next post we will look at the bowlers, who have performed reasonably well in spite of some poor selection decisions.
The selection of our batsmen has been somewhere between haphazard and panicked. The top order in the first couple of Ashes tests only barely resembles the top order in India not that long ago. Warner has gone for disciplinary reasons. Cowan was dropped down the order, and then out of the team. Hughes, if you include the tour matches, has batted every position from one to six in the last month or two. His position in the team is being questioned even though he has the highest score of the series from any of the batsmen. Watson has finally been given the opening spot he campaigned for, and is rewarding us with well made 30s and 40s. Clarke doesn't know whether he should bat at four or five. Khawaja only got back into the team last test, but was widely considered to be playing for his spot in the next test during the recent tour match - in spite of a reasonably compiled fifty in the second innings last time around.
All of this instability is making the batsmen nervous for their places and is detrimental to their performances. As I noted last time, only Clarke is really safe, and even he is struggling a little with the pressure of being the one class batsman, the one who has to perform every innings. We need to pick a top six that blends current talent with future potential. Then we need to give them a long run. At least until the end of the second Ashes series this year. Preferably longer unless someone outside the team is scoring so heavily they can't be ignored. Not only that, we need to work with these six to teach them how to build an innings. Also give them intensive training to tighten their batting and shot selection. This is the sort of thing Gooch is doing with the English team (though he is starting with a better quality player). I would also encourage these players not to play T20 until they were established test players.
So who would I pick? Firstly there is the very small pool of current talent. The best batsmen from Australia at the moment are (roughly in order): Clarke, Hussey, Ponting, Katich, Rogers. The trouble is that Clarke at 32 is the youngest of these. Two are retired, one virtually so. And Rogers is still finding his feet in the test arena, a task more difficult because he is being treated a bit like a senior player. Not that that is surprising since he is almost 36. I think both Clarke and Rogers should be retained. Rogers has proved himself over and over in first class cricket, and shows as big an appetite for runs as anyone else in Australian Cricket. While he is near the end of his career, if he finds his feet in the test arena, he will have a lot to teach the other batsmen. He needs that chance.
Watson needs to be considered separately to the rest. I have never been overly convinced about Watson. He did almost make me change my mind when he was at his peak in 2009-2010. However, at 32, he is no longer in the future potential category. Nor does his test average of 35.34 after 75 innings in 41 tests (2 hundreds) really make him a current talent. His bowling is more than handy, and his fielding is good, but he is in the team to bat. Since his last century, he has played 22 tests with an average of 30.73. As an opener in that time he has averaged 33.28 in 26 innings across 14 matches. If we ignore the first three of those matches which were still in his most productive period, his opening average drops to 27.9 across 11 tests and 20 innings. Hardly inspiring stuff. I would not pick Watson.
So there are four spots for future potential. The first of these goes to Hughes. I have not been a big fan of Hughes. However he gets the nod for a few reasons. Firstly he has shown the capacity to score hundreds at the first class level, and three at test level (25 matches). More importantly he has finally shown the capacity to learn: He improved against spin in India and he did not try to hit the cover off the ball in the first Ashes test like everyone else was. He far from the finished product, but at 24 he has time to learn, and has recently shown the inclination to do so.
The second goes to Warner, who would open with Rogers. His test average of 39.47 is higher than anyone other than Clarke. He needs to be banned from twitter, and preferably from pubs as well. However he needs to play. And he needs to show the sort of grit he did in Hobart a couple of years ago.
The last two spots are harder to pick. The incumbents are Khawaja and Smith. Cowan was in the team one match ago. These are the obvious three to choose from, though I have also been considering a couple of outsiders: Wade and Jordan Silk.
I am an Ed Cowan fan. He is a deep thinker about the game. Unfortunately his record, in both first class and test, is not good enough. Khawaja looks good, but has yet to deliver. However, his single century last summer was a classy one on a horrible seamer in Hobart when everyone else struggled. Smith does not look that good. However he has a reasonable first class record, and has shown some promise since returning to the team in India. Wade has a test average the equal of the rest of the hopefuls, and has scored half the centuries the Aussies have scored this year. Silk has made a really promising start to his first class career. At 21 he is one of only three players to score more than one century in last summer's shield season. Ponting and Rogers were the others.
In a tight decision, the deciding factor is stability. Khawaja and Smith get the nod. Wade is very close, but would rather be seen as a wicketkeeper-batsman. Silk needs to prove himself over more than 5 first class matches. However if his start is continued, he will push for selection early next year.
So my line up is Rogers, Warner, Khawaja, Hughes, Clarke, Smith. I realise that this is not much different than the last test. However that is the point. Changing the team drastically in the desperate hope that everything will suddenly change is part of the problem. At this point, this team is as good as it gets. They need to feel the support of the selection panel. So lets pick them and stick with them.
Next time: the bowlers.
No comments:
Post a Comment