Throughout the history of cricket, there have been vital matches which have marked the beginning of the end for a once dominant side. The previous one was the fall of the mighty West Indies in 1994 which continues to be marked as the day when the dominance moved from West Indies to Australia. We have now reached a similar stage but this time around, there is no clear number 1 side despite what the ICC rankings say.
Australia's fall from grace has been a steady fall until recently where they have slipped down to 5th on the Test rankings and they are now in the midst of a 7 game losing streak, something unheard off for over two decades. So where has it gone all wrong?
The first part of the problem starts at the very top of the chain; the National Selection Panel (NSP). We have heard for years from the Channel 9 commentators how Australian cricket won't make the same mistakes that the West Indies did back in the 90s. However, this is far from the case when you now see the age of the side. The transition period was looking good after the introduction of Siddle and Hughes which led to a surprising series victory over South Africa in SA. However, since that period only Bollinger has made the transition in the team. The transistion period has essentially stopped and the team will have to go through this period all over again once Ponting, Katich, Hussey and North call it a day. The latter two whom are currently being carried through their form slumps which further emphasis the problem at hand.
The selectors have clearly missed a trick by continuing to persist with Marcus North when there were numerous youngsters banging down the door for selection. Michael Hussey has been given more leeway because of his past heroic but he too is now in the same boat as North. The Hussey that burst onto the scene averaging 80 in the first two years of his career, has since averaged 40 since that period. Once again the selectors have been presented with a chance to bring in a youngster, albeit in the biggest series in Cricket. There is only so long you can carry the dead wood, the selectors were on the money by getting rid of Matthew Hayden from the Test side but have stood by North and Hussey for far too long.
Now I could go on about the bad calls our selectors have made but I'll still be writing for another week. So my last comment regarding them comes in the current ODI series against Sri Lanka. Xavier Doherty who just grabbed a 4 fer on debut ended up being replaced by Hauritz. Hauritz has done nothing recently to suggest he should walk straight into the side especially over Doherty who has been the form domestic spinner for the 50 over format. Without doubt there is a serious overhaul of the selection panel required and I don't mean just sacking Merv Hughes.
The next problem with the Australian side lies with the coach. The standards of the once mighty Australian side has been sliding ever since the departure of John Buchanan. There have been numerous world records set against Australia and now teams are coming back from impossible positions to win matches. You then have bowlers that don't bowl to a plan, something which they have no problem doing at State level. The side has become ill-disciplined and seems to lack ideas which comes right down to the coach. The sooner Australia get a new coach the better it is for the side.
The much talked about captaincy woes is another of Australia's problems. Ricky Ponting is the ideal leader when leading from the front but when it comes to the tactical side of things, he is well behind. Just seeing Kumar Sangakkara setting good fields and watching his bowlers bowl to that was a treat, on the other hand watching Ricky Ponting set his fields and then watching the bowlers bowl away from that was a complete nightmare. The captain in waiting - Michael Clarke hasn't fared much better and he lacks that aura about him to be a test captain. There is already disharmony in the camp with him as captain which is never a good sign.
And the last part of the chain lies with the players. There are batsmen who can no longer concentrate long enough to make a big hundred, it has come to a stage where I expect them to fall soon after their 50. Now if you compare this to other sides, they have a number of batsmen that are making big hundreds. Then you have the bowlers that aren't bowling to a plan and dissing out pies. Again comparing this to other sides, even the most recent match by Sri Lanka shows what a mess Australian cricket is at the moment. A lot of this lies with the people higher up in the tree, it really comes down to the coach and captain getting the best out of the players. The best example of this is that test series in SA which I mentioned earlier. That was a team firing on all cylinders despite having Andrew McDonald as a frontline bowler. Mitchell Johnson and Peter Siddle were bowling with venom and control and North was tuning out centuries. Confidence is a big factor in this but there is something not quite right when the same bowlers that bowled with such control, can now barely follow a plan.
Despite all of the problems mentioned, Australia came mighty close to beating India on home soil and may well have done so if Doug Bollinger didn't have to leave the field. This does not mean changes aren't required because they most definitely are required. A revamped middle order would be a good start followed by a new coach and selectors.
10 comments:
Sums it up. Don't know what to add. Very good clear words. Thank you for that, Sylvester. Should be printed out and handed to the selectors and whoever appoints them. Nine months ago that is.
I don't agree that "numerous youngsters banging down the door for selection". Sure, there are a lot of young blokes who are capable of playing a good innings, but only Klinger has consistently made runs and he has technical flaws masked by the SACA road and he is getting long in the tooth. Perhaps he is almost at his use-by date. I can't see the selectors preferring Klinger to Hussey & North. Hughes got a chance and maybe the selectors panicked when they dropped him, but a multi-life innings aside he has struggled since the 2009 Ashes. After that the selectors would be going on gut reaction. Uzzie Kawaja made a double ton, looks nice but has not cleaned up otherwise. His time will come. The bowlers have been absolutely butchered by injury. We have not been able to settle on an attack and this is reflected in our current haphazard efforts in the field. For what it's worth, and it's a little "out there", my gut reaction, I would like to see Andrew McDonald in the side; we play better cricket when he is in the XI, but Watson has picked up that fourth seamer role.
We can't go waiting till a player is 30 and say oh hes been consistently making runs lets now put him in. If a youngster is making runs and demanding selection then he should be picked especially given the amount of collapses we have had in the past 2 years. Smith averaged 78 including 4 FC 100s last season, that is banging the door down and he should have been picked over North in the tour to NZ. Khawaja has been equally as impressive and backed it up this season, another that is banging the door down. Then you have Shaun Marsh who easily averages 50 when he is actually fit, White likewise after returning from ODI duty. Then you have Hughes who took his Ashes rejection by scoring 963 runs at 67. Then you have Ferguson who has a modest FC record but has performed outstandingly in the International arena. Let's not forget that Clarke also had a sub par FC record when he was picked in the Test side.
So in that bunch of players, we have more than enough youngsters to pick from and that is without even mentioning Wade who has been averaging 50 in the past 2 seasons as well.
Sylvester, Clarke had done considerably better than Ferguson had when he was picked in a much shorter period of time. It's not as if Ferguson has had a poor start then suddenly come out of nowhere, he's consistently averaged sub-40. He needs to not just look good but make runs. Khawaja on the other hand is much more of a close match to Clarke - similar age (to when Clarke was first picked), obvious talent (everyone I've talked to who has seen him in person raves about his technique) and most importantly runs on the board.
I'm also a bit perturbed by the comments on the captaincy. Certainly Ponting's Test captaincy leaves much to be desired, but his ODI captaincy is generally good. I would say, controversially, that so has Clarke's - shown a willingness to attack, which is always handy. Not the most creative captain ever but that's not a complete tragedy. In any case my point is that a lot of people seem to be going after Clarke, and now Ponting, for these two losses. To a degree justified in the case of the MCG match as Clarke made one or two bad decisions, in particular taking off Doherty at a crucial juncture. I'm just going to say this, though - if a captain sets a field, tells his bowler to bowl a certain way, and then the bowler doesn't execute at all and bowls long-hops instead, whose fault is that, the captain's or the bowler's?
http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Players/8/8812/f_Batting_by_Season.html
http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Players/26/26530/f_Batting_by_Season.html
I'm really not seeing how Clarke was much better than Ferguson when he was picked in the Test side.
The Ponting comment when more on Test matches, just happened to use a ODI example. And in no way have I pinned this loss on him, again the example may seem that way but you will know if I'm blaming him for the loss.
As for your hypothetical, it's still partly the captain, bowling coach and bowler. If a bowler is feeling comfortable with his field placement and with the captain then he will bowl with a lot more confidence. However, take the Hauritz case where Ponting asked him to bowl like Harby and said here is your field. He wasn't comfortable at all with that and hence conceded over 4 runs an over. Is it all Hauritz fault for that?
This is a pretty damn good article Sly. I think it's good when guys come out and question things.
I do agree with a fair bit of what Tony has said in the comments. I am one for risks though as the play it safe game hasn't worked at all for us.
Sly has really made some good points though with calls to order. The NSP is a big problem! There is a serious power dilmena there and I do believe there is some hidden agenda we don't know about. Politics as Hilditch has been in power too long. His record is shit & I do target them as a big cause for our issues. Sure, the players have to ultimately go out onto the playing field and perform (which they have serious inconsistencies & self belief issues) but if those guys out there continue to fail & continue to get the backing of the selectors, with the results being below what is expected (which we've seen), that means the selections are failing, the NSP is failing.
As for Pup, fantastic test cricketer and his limited overs batting is picking up really well. However, as Captain you made a good point that, 'he lacks that aura about him to be a test captain. There is already disharmony in the camp with him as captain which is never a good sign.'
I also find him to be another programmed-drone when it comes to responsibility and post match presentations. Preferred him in his early twenties. Perhaps another sign of how the team aura has changed?
But yeah, he doesn't have the tenacity and I don't think he will earn the respect or intimidate the opposition.
Stand to be corrected.
Good article dude.
Very good article. I don't know what the answer is to bowlers who can't bowl accurately or to plans. Andrew McDonald is one answer as at least he can build pressure for the other guys and no-one else appears to be able to do that consistently.
I found the dropping of Doherty for Hauritz in the second ODI almost fanstastical. I was hoping the Sri Lankans would win the match once I realised what had happened as I have had enough of this selectorial nonsense now.
Agree with you about Clarke, Ian. I just don't listen to the guy anymore. At least Punter has a personality and a genuine identity. He's never been someone you can market in the way Clarke can be.
haha! Clint McKay for that matter as well.
That post-match presentation with him after his man of the match award was depressing. I wanted to slit my wrists hearing him dribble on in a monotonous tone about how shit was with the team. He bowled so damn well and yet he was so bland. Took all the inspiration out of his performances.
Just imagine their managers biting nails thinking, "Don't say something politically incorrect now!"
The NSP's greatest failure has been their lack of foresight & now they'll pay the price by not selecting players purely based on performances or future, rather than reputation. It's created alot of pressure that could've been avoided.
The way Australia's Baggy Green have performed in current Ashes series has been disappointing , its as if everyone is resigned to an inevitable decline and hope for a draw or a moment of miracle to win.
England are desperate to revise history and are seeking revenge
while the Baggy green are unable to play their normal game, current squad is failing at Fielding, Bowling and even batting and there is no stability.
Australian selectors continue with the "experiment" even during the ashes and this isn't good for the confidence of current squad.
While The selectors in australia are still looking for "Shane Warne and Glen Mcgrath's replacements replacement.
England in contrast don't have that problem and have stability. The players have confidence and discipline in their squad and they've made preparations for all eventualities.
It has been really disappointing to read that many were counting on the weather to save them. And I read in in newspaper about comparison between "boys against men".
I think the selectors in Australia have failed completely and should resign collectively.
Some players also should not make themselves available when they are really not fit because they become a burden on the squad
your post says it well. We need a new selection panel, they have made some terrible decisions and have left out obvious talent form test sides. Another issue is to not let any statists into the selection panel. At the moment both cricket and rugby selection panels have too many statists. This is the promblem of rugby also, which is dominated by nsw statists. You get a selectee who shows preference to people from his own state instead of being neutral in that area and selecting form and talent.
Post a Comment