As an example, the way that Nathan Lyon has been treated over the last six months or so has been appalling. He has entered the last two series as Australia's leading spinner. In India he was dropped for Maxwell, a glorified part-timer. Yes, technically Doherty was the key spinner in the team, but the reason he was there was that they wanted Maxwell as an all-rounder. And they did not want two off spinners, so Doherty came in as a left arm spinner, and Lyon got dumped. Doherty is a reasonable short form bowler, but not really a test level player. Maxwell is a batsman that bowls a bit. The experiment failed, and Lyon returned and took nine wickets in the final match of the India series. He was once again the number one spinner. Except that he was dropped for the next test for an virtually unknown nineteen year old, after a third spinner, Fawad Ahmed was tipped to take his spot.
Lyon's main fault is that he will never be a Warne or McGill, nor even a Swann. What is true is that he is a solid performer, but not a world beater. He hasn't won Australia many matches, however a record of 79 wickets in 22 matches suggests that he is quite useful.
I have not seen enough from Agar to know how good he is, or is going to be. He shows a reasonable temperament, especially given his age. A few of his deliveries show great potential, but he has a bit still to learn. I have seen even less of Ahmed, whose main claim is that he is the first half decent leggie since Warne and McGill.
The selectors need to figure out who is the best spinner in Australia (or perhaps the one with the most likelihood of becoming a world beater) and stick with them unless and until a weight of wickets makes them change their mind. If it is Agar due to potential, work with him and stick with him in the long term. If it is Lyon, stick with him and stop chasing the possibility of spin saviour. Whoever it is, pick and stick unless the competition is taking a bag of wickets regularly. The constant changing undermines confidence and performance.
With the quicks, the selection has been better, but not without its problems. The so-called rotation policy needs to go. The best bowlers available need to play each match. 'Best' may be determined by pitch condition and form, but on the whole, best won't change much or quickly. It is the 'available' that might cause problems. In particular Harris may need to be managed. But generally speaking fitness concerns (or disciplinary action- though we hope we are past that) should be the only reason the best do not play. When fit, Pattinson, Harris and Siddle should play. It is hard to pick between Starc and Bird as the first back up. The former can win a test for you, but he can also spray the ball a bit. Bird gives you good control, and just enough movement to be a handful. I would probably put Bird in front, mainly for those moments when England try to grind. I am not sure where Cummins sits at the moment, though he shows potential to be the best of the lot in the future.
Finally, we need to look at all-rounders. The leading all-rounders are Watson (the incumbent), Faulkner, Maxwell, Henriques and McDonald (remember him?). Watson I dealt with last time. McDonald is off the radar, and probably not at his best anymore. Maxwell is a batsman who bowls a bit. I think that Faulkner bowls better than Henriques, and does not suffer much in the batting. If we need an all rounder, I suggest Faulkner bat at seven, and Haddin bat at six.
So my team for the next eight matches, barring injury, illness or discipline problems is:
Warner, Rogers, Khawaja, Hughes, Clarke, Smith, Haddin, Pattinson (once recovered), Siddle, Harris, Lyon, Bird (until Pattinson is better). If we need an all-rounder, the Faulkner replaces Khawaja or Smith.
I suspect that in reality Watson will play at the expense of Rogers or Hughes, and they will probably stick with Agar over Lyon. It will be a close call between Starc and Bird.
No comments:
Post a Comment