Showing posts with label Border-Gavaskar Trophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Border-Gavaskar Trophy. Show all posts

12 March 2013

Too harsh in the public eye given the evidence


Over the last 24 hours Australian Cricket has gone from a wobbly Indian tour on the field to a horrible atmosphere off the field. The axing of Shane Watson (vice-captain), Mitchell Johnson, James Pattinson and Usman Khawaja has shocked not only Australian Cricket supporters, but cricket fanatics in general.

Public outcry has been to sack Mickey Arthur based on this decision. This is definitely jumping the gun. I think this whole ordeal needs to be looked at with some perspective, much like our performances during the first two Tests of the Border-Gavaskar series. We need the best team on the park and the timing for such a drastic decision is worrying.

The Australian sports landscape isn't in great shape with all the drug inquests which brought about some worrying results, notably regarding AFL (Australian Football League) and NRL (National Rugby League). The timing of this news adds to the burden of current negativity in a country with such a strong and proud sporting culture.

Let me begin my look into this matter.

The first problem was the way the statement was delivered to the media from Arthur. We were left with the impression that these players had simply been dropped for not completing a "homework" assignment to assess how they can improve as players with the series going forward. They had four days to finish the assigned task, which was to be handed into the coach by whatever means were easiest for the players.

In modern day professionalism with high salary packages and rewards beyond your trade on the cricket field, this was not a big ask and should have been done. The team is currently needing a morale boost and this was clearly something Arthur and Clarke felt was a necessity as the team eyes an improvement for the 3rd Test. Maybe players have too much being spoon-fed to them nowadays, but it's still not a big ask.

Some have said that these blokes aren't admin boys. Their job is play cricket and improve via practice. Yes, I agree, but if a task is asked of you to require some application off the field to assess your own game, that falls under the job description in my opinion. The four players should have done it. I am interested to know what were their reasons for not submitting it in time. Forgetfulness or more pressing matters?

The reasons for the players not following through with orders should give better perspective on the standings on relationships with top management.

Yes, at first this is all we were informed about. Four players were dropped for not handing in a self-assessment form for improvement heading into the 3rd Test.
Therefore, to drop four quality cricketers on this basis in indeed bloody harsh if you ask me!

This is what we were told by Mickey Arthur and the bomb was dropped amongst the public. The media then took off with former players expressing their disgust and shock with the decision. Understandably we were seeing mixed opinions but the majority of us were obviously concerned that such drastic measures were taken.

The story went a step further, leaps further when Shane Watson announced he was leaving India to head back home. Immediately those who don't follow the players lives away from the game too closely were left to believe it was the decision that resulted in Watson calling it quits and that something bigger was going on.

However, Watson and his wife are awaiting the birth of their first child. His wife, Lee Furlong Watson, is in the final stages of pregnancy and it would seem some perspective was clear that the time was best spent with her rather than watching cricket from the sidelines. It's a special time is ones life and priority kicked in.

The fact Watson will be reassessing his future as a cricketer is a big cause for concern as to what this decision from management has done.

Pat Howard, Team Performance Manager, has stated Watson's commitment was questionable. Another indication that there is more to the story, but as a two time Allan Border Medalist, Watson has a vital position in the side, even though his Test performances remain inconsistent and tougher for him on a personal note given he can't bowl anymore. Howard also indicated that there's a lot of patching to do between Watson and Clarke with their relationship. 

"There's an individual aspect. That's a hard one to measure. I know Shane reasonably well. I think he acts in the best interests of the team sometimes. That's probably a better one for the players and the team to judge," Howard said.
"You don't get to pick and choose. The standard of the team is set, not playing under your own conditions. The first criteria to playing for Australia is wanting to play for Australia."
So, this picture immediately makes you either believe it was a fair move to drop the players due to slack discipline and disrespect to the Coach and Captain, or you will have felt the punishment was way too harsh for the information presented to us, which is how I felt. I am all for respect and good sportsmanship but was  still over the top.

Michael Clarke then came out to clarify it was a series of incidents that resulted in such drastic measures being taken. The players showed a lack of respect according to Clarke and in a time when the team needs to exercise strong discipline and off-field ethics, as well as on the field, this was unacceptable and a line was crossed.

I was convinced there had to be more to the story to drop your vice-captain, second in command to Clarke, and drop three other players who were surely all under consideration for the 3rd Test. Based on this, I eased up in my opinion but not being internally involved in the time, from the outside it still seemed harsh.

The important statement of Clarke's to read into is below (*Source: ESPN Cricinfo)

"I want the public and the media to understand, don't get me wrong, it's not just about one incident. Firstly on this tour our performances have been unacceptable and there has been some stuff off the field [that has been unacceptable] for the standards an Australian cricket team needs to present itself to achieve what we are trying to achieve ... I know it is a tough day, a really tough day and it's a tough decision, but at the end of the day if people are not hitting those standards there are going to be consequences.

"Our head coach gave us two days off after the second Test, it was about freshening yourself up, get your rehab [done], your recovery, do what you have to do, get everything right for the next two Test matches, because the next two Test matches are as big as you might have in your career and you have an opportunity to turn this series around.
"We were asked to do one thing from the head coach. It was giving information back to the head coach about not only improving your game - what you've learnt from the first two Test matches - but also how can you help this team turn things around and have success.
"It was a very simple task. Yes, it took a lot of thinking because you had to look at your game and where you thought you could improve, what you had learnt and what you could do to help this team level this series. In my opinion, for the four players to not do it, not only does it let the team down, it also shows a lack of respect for the head coach and in the Australian cricket team that is unacceptable."

Unfortunately, the additional reasons and poor standards leading to the dramatic decision to drop them was not made clear to the public. This lack of transparency is going to hurt Australian Cricket and the public will still be confused and angry with the decision, given you had to read into Clarke's statement to realise there is indeed more to the story.

The reason alone given by Arthur to drop the players is harsh and I am sure many feel there were other ways to hand down punishment for the incident. With a series on the line and Australian Cricket not in the best shape I am not sure this was not a decision wisely taken to ensure the morale and unity within the side be maintained or uplifted. Instead we have the public now up in arms and shaken even more ahead of the next match.

The Coach may have taken a bold step, but it will be a long road for Arthur to win back the public support. Honestly, I think this move has cast a dark cloud over his future as Australian Coach. The public relations handling of this matter is questionable and while there is probably a policy that somethings don't leave the change room, this is a move that has resulted in cricketers being dropped for reasons unheard of. We are now in a state of deep concern and worry over the state of our team.

Andrew Symonds comes to mind in all of this.

Roy was a personal favourite of mine and his whole character was just so classic. He seemed like a good guy to have around the team. The sad side of Roy's story is he had problems that affected his commitment to the team and resulted in his career with Cricket Australia coming to an end. It got to the point where his love for the game was lost as well.

He drove himself to it though as he had warnings issued for his behavioural problems and even when punishment was handed down, it was within good reason and guidelines were followed. In the general public we knew of Roy's personal battles and it was a bit easier to accept the punishment handed down. His offences were relatively serious in the sporting world. 

In this case with the four players it seems as though things weren't that bad on their character checks. It also seems we didn't have any obvious indication that these guys were stepping out of line. So to all of a sudden hear they were dropped was indeed a massive shock and it's fair enough that we feel gutted at the decision.

There's still more to come out of the story but as far as I am concerned the decision was too much. It may have seemed the right thing to do in Arthur and Clarke's mind to cement what their vision is for the team and the value and discipline required to be in the Australian team. The catch though is I feel this will have implications for the team and disharmony will be ever-present in Arthur's reign unless the team can pull out some ridiculously impressive performances.

Arthur and Clarke are judged on their performances and results. As a result, good performances from here will ease the tension. This recent move is a sign that they mean business and are under a heck of a lot of stress and pressure. My concern is they, more so Arthur, have a steep hill to climb now and the fall from the other side may be a long one. The public will not be easily convinced.

As a cricketer, Michael Clarke has high standards as he spent a fair amount of time around the great team of the past and succeeded as a youngster, having also dealt with being dropped. Therefore, I would have to have some belief that this decision is to ensure a tougher nature is present in the team and that he will succeed.

One of the culprits, fast bowler James Pattinson, took accountability for his misdemeanor and said that he feels this will be good for Australia in the long run. Can only hope his optimism will be validated and that his attitude was in a bad place to accept this.

"The easy thing for me was to make excuses and say it's a harsh punishment.
"But the reality is it's not - it's part of playing cricket for Australia. You've got to do everything right. It wasn't hard for the other 12 blokes to get it in on time and they took the time out to really reflect and do what's best for the team whereas we four didn't. Right now I'm still hurting about it but in the long run I think it's going to make us a better team."

Accountability is so important as these are professional cricketers. Hard decisions must be made and justified punishment must be handed out. If Arthur and Clarke feel it is justified with more behind the scenes incidents, so be it. If accountability could be taken to learn from their (the four players) mistakes but not at the expense of being dropped, then I'd have been able to easier accept that. This is not protection for these players, but rather Australian Cricket's landscape. By the same token it may send a warning sign out to "up your standards".

Ian Chappell said this will damage team morale. Having looked over things on paper, heard and read enough opinions, I am inclined to agree with Chappelli. It's not so much about this short-term decision, the frustration we have four players axed who could have contributed to a vital match, but rather the negative impact this will have on the culture of Australian Cricket going forward. This includes; players, supporters, shareholders, former players and the management/coaching staff.

Only sublime performances will rectify this in the short-term. Such a major pity as things were supposed to get better, not worse, not as messy as this. It's a very disappointing situation and numbing. I hope it really does go a lot further than an assignment not being submitted.

In conclusion having looked at everything, it is clear there is more to the story. Seeing as I, as a supporter, have to go on my get feeling, where my loyalties lie and what information I have been fed, I back the players. I think this punishment was harsh and Australian Cricket did not need this right now.

The biggest question though in terms of cricket itself. Will we have the best XI on the park? That should remain decision number one over and above everything.

*Sources for quotes have been credited and links have been presented where applicable for The Baggy Green Blog's content and external content.

Welcome to The Baggy Green Blog!
Thanks for reading this article written by Ian.
To comment on this article, click on the 'Comments' tag at the end of the article.


TWITTER
@BaggyGreenBlog
@Ianbaggygreen
@SylvesterAu
@Dan_Stapo

05 March 2013

Where has it gone wrong for The Baggy Greens?


It's hard to not feel gutted as a supporter having witnessed the innings defeat against India, in Hyderabad.
The loss puts them 2-0 up in the series and it's been concerning as to how things played out in what will be regarded as a walk over for the opposition.

I have never felt the need to bad mouth the team or resort to overly critical analysis. If anything I find it far more important to support the boys as much as possible during these tougher situations.
However, it is only right to look at a few points of concern that lead into this game and what was witnessed in a game where our batsmen put up little fight.

Where has it gone wrong for The Baggy Greens in the Border-Gavaskar series thus far?

It would seem the selectors got it wrong, notably on two points.
Firstly, dropping Nathan Lyon was a step backwards and secondly, debuting Glenn Maxwell to play alongside Moises Henriques was a costly mistake. The rest was not about the selectors but rather our batsmen.

It was a big mistake to drop Nathan Lyon and bring in Xavier Doherty. In fact, it may have been okay to bring Doherty in but not at the expense of Lyon. It is simply another step back and we may very while find another spinners confidence has been damaged.

Jason Krejza grabbed an 8 wicket haul against India in 2008 on his debut. Despite going for plenty of runs he managed to get us wickets, something Shane Warne states he'd rather see than simply having spinners be economical and not claim wickets, vital wickets at that.

The thing is that after a poor Test against the Proteas at the WACA, he was axed and it was the end of the road for Jason as a medium-to-long term spin bowler. Krejza is now regarded as a State spinner at best.
We have also had a showcase of spinners given the debut at quick expense or given a mixed run; Bryce McGain, Beau Casson, Dan Cullen, Michael Beer (injured) and Nathan Hauritz, who did a good enough job.
Then there's been the part-time spin trial of Marcus North, Steven Smith and Cameron White.

We don't want to add Nathan Lyon to that list.

He's had one Test in India and can't be to blame. Yes, during the summer his lack of effectiveness was costly against the Proteas but it's still early days and I didn't see the need to drop him after the 1st Test.
If anything it would have been far more logical to play him and Doherty together. Another Test in the subcontinent could have only been good for his development. It was a step back as India moved forward.

The effort to improve our spin bowling doesn't rest so much with the technical dynamics of things but rather the management of the bowlers in Australia and the purpose as to why we select a spinner post-Warne. It's a topic best left to the professionals to debate and find a solution for.

Debuting Maxwell as a part-time spinner was another blunder. Not so much based on Glenn himself, but the fact we had two all-rounders and one spin bowler, having seen India's effectiveness with three spin bowlers.

Remember the Cameron White experiment? It was an absolute failure and as hard as Cameron White tried as the part-time spinner, but given the massive task of serious leg spin bowling contributions, it was all odds against him. Not his fault, but rather a selection blunder.

Maxwell managed 4 wickets for the match, one more than Doherty but it wasn't the point. Maxwell didn't give a significant contribution with the bat and as it was for Cameron White, the selectors simply asked way too much of him. It wasn't fair on his part, but I guess it will go down as experience in his books for development. It was also too difficult to debut him at the expense of Moises Henriques, even if Doherty and Lyon played as the two spinners in the starting XI.

Based on Henriques' performance in the 1st Test it would be hard to have dropped him to play Maxwell unless it was purely to have a third spin option, but what's done is done. The selectors should not try that move again as the previous incident in 2008 with Cameron White should have been a warning sign.

Having not learnt anything after the 1st Test in terms of using the spinners, the fast bowlers had too much work to do and the intensity proved to be way too much. Their pace could not be maintained and there wasn't regularly a serious pose of threat. India's batting was also brilliant in terms of how they paced things to get set. Excellent to say the least.

This is also not to put weight of blame on the shoulders of the spinners. It wasn't the case. The biggest problem is that the batsmen simply didn't get enough runs and our bowlers were exposed, especially the weaknesses of the bowling unit.

Experience is lacking in this side. I must say that although it is too hard to even predict if it would have made a difference had Mitchell Johnson been in the side, but it is that extra player with experience in the subcontinent that Michael Clarke could use. The issue still lay with the poor batting in the 1st innings which gave India a licence to attack once the lead was in place. Our bowlers were exposed.

The batsmen will know all too well about the problems but how they address over the next few days - which Michael Clarke has declared as "no rest" - will not be an easy task.

Clarke can't keep being the go-to-guy and the time has come for him to move up the order.
It's been needed for a long time and it's well known that your best batsman should not be batting at number 5. It seems the time is now to give Clarkey the push. Sure, his prolific run has been splendid at number 5 but the team needs the move and Clarke is that kind of a guy to do what is best for the side.

This still won't solve the issues of panic and thoughtless application to tackle the spin and build an innings. We've seen starts from the batsmen but they don't go on, with the exception of Clarke who continues to be amazing to watch. Even when he's made a good score, Clarke has been short on batting partners and has criticised himself when getting out. He's seen some bigger scores go sailing on by, seen how India have cashed in, and his lack of support from his batting mates directly influences this. David Warner, Ed Cowan, Shane Watson and Matt Wade can all handle these conditions, I hope they have the self-belief as well because Clarke needs it. We need it.

The weakest link, Phillip Hughes, should be given another go - dropping not always the answer - but his lack of handling spin is a massive, massive worry, which may result in him being dropped for the next Test. Usman Khawaja not an instant remedy and no evidence is there that he will miraculously be able to keep the Indian bowlers at bay. There is a chance though he will be trialled and tested.

Simply dropping guys is not a solution to the problems we face. Team unity is needed and if after a period of assessment, the majority of our batsmen have been able to improve while a few others get left behind, then it is time to resort to dropping. Hughes is an excellent batsman but the mental strength just seems to go when he puts on the white gear.

Reality is that the last two Tests have to be won in order to keep the Border-Gavaskar Trophy in our possession.

Based on this, and my continued belief that our batsmen are good enough to collectively put better runs on the board, I will continue to support the boys as we look ahead to the 3rd Test.
They need the support as much as ever and while I am upset and can understand many supporters are livid at the performances thus far, the series is not lost and any chances of improvement now with the build up to the Ashes must be taken.

On a final note to instil some kind of positivity, keep in mind we thumped India 4-0 in Australia during the summer of 2011/12.

This is Test cricket in India and they will always be tough to beat and the nature of the contest is harsh in their conditions. The same as it was for them against us during the home series. 
We have a team lacking experience in the sub-continent and the experience of Michael Clarke has proven to be invaluable. It shows the importance of it and this is a huge but mean learning curve.

Sadly, patience for application against a tricky spin setup - not extraordinary - has lacked.
It will indeed take serious focus and determination to turn things around for the guys. Michael Clarke is a man who shows serious responsibility. If he says they will not rest, they won't.
However, it's going to be hard work so best wishes to the boys as they prepare for another big clash with the series at stake.

Spare a thought for my mates who have traveled to India for this series. A bit bleak a result. India is good for traveling though I believe, so no shortage of ways to uplift oneself, especially with Waving The Flag.

Welcome to The Baggy Green Blog!
Thanks for reading this article written by Ian.
To comment on this article, click on the 'Comments' tag at the end of the article.


TWITTER
@BaggyGreenBlog
@Ianbaggygreen
@SylvesterAu
@Dan_Stapo

22 February 2013

Century no.23 for Michael Clarke

Michael Clarke's form has been sublime the last two seasons and he's opened up his first tour of India as Captain with a century, while also building an innings saving partnership with debutant Moises Henriques (Baggy Green #432). Their stand brought 151 runs, matching Clarkey's individual score on debut back in 2004, Bangalore.

When I did the statistics wrap-up for the summer a few weeks back I made a note that Clarkey was just a few runs away from equaling Sir Donald Bradman's career runs scored.

He managed to surpass this milestone of The Don's, but no comparison should ever be drawn to the legend.
Those runs were scored during a different era, with tougher conditions, basic equipment, as well as achieving his 6,996 runs in only 80 innings.

However, the achievement placed Clarkey in the Top 10 all time run-scorers for Australia in Test cricket. He also went past 7,000 Test runs.

To top it off his century is number 23 (his ODI shirt number) and his 3rd Test century in India, against India. This century puts him level with Justin Langer in terms of most centuries scored for Australia in Test cricket, placing him 7th on the list.

© BCCI. Clarke reaches his century (Chennai)
Massive congrats to the skipper, very proud of him!
Always a pleasure to watch him battle against spin bowling. The foot work and bat speed is always a treat. No exception with this innings, especially being played under pressure.

It was a challenging day for our batsmen as India sent down 95 overs. 73 of these overs were delivered by India's three spin bowlers. Ravichandran Ashwin claimed 6 wickets for the days play, quite a stack.
This will raise Nathan Lyon's eyebrows and give him some confidence, but will also mean the pressure is on come our dig at the Indians in the first innings. He likely has a huge job to do.

Michael Clarke and Peter Siddle will resume tomorrow with the score currently 7/316, with James Pattinson and Nathan Lyon to follow.

After being in a worrying position at 4/131, after the opening stand between David Warner (59) and Ed Cowan brought 68 runs, we have recovered excellently to ensure it's an even sort of day come the stumps.
First session tomorrow is a massive one for us as we target 350 runs and India eye those last three wickets.

Michael Clarke's individual innings list since taking on the Captaincy against Sri Lanka (2011/12):

Summary: 21 matches, 35 innings, 2,350 runs, HS 329*, Average 75.80, x9 centuries, x4 fifties.

Versus Sri Lanka: 23, 60, 13, 6, 112,
Versus South Africa:
151, 2, 11, 2,
Versus New Zealand:
139, 22, 0,
Versus India:
31, 1, 329*, 18, 210, 37,
Versus West Indies:
73, 6, 45, 15, 24, 25,
Versus South Africa:
259*, 230, 38, 5, 44,
Versus Sri Lanka:
74, 57*, 106, 50, 29,
Versus India:
103* (currently in progress)

Welcome to The Baggy Green Blog!
Thanks for reading this article written by Ian.
To comment on this article, click on the 'Comments' tag at the end of the article.


TWITTER
@BaggyGreenBlog
@Ianbaggygreen
@SylvesterAu
@Dan_Stapo

09 February 2013

The Australian squad to battle India in India


With the ODI series claimed against the West Indies, which will help our ODI ranking, the Indian Test series is now just around the corner and trying to retain the Border-Gavaskar Trophy will be no easy task in Indian conditions with a side that very few can wholeheartedly identify with.

Sachin Tendulkar recently scored 140* runs for Mumbai - at a ground we will not be playing at - and India's bowling stocks seem to be on track for the series, so they're gearing up for the clash with varied results.
The batting averages for India's Ranji Trophy saw a majority of batsmen boasting mighty high batting averages, while a vast majority of the wicket takers were fast/medium pace bowlers, a big contrast to the lack of balance in bowler type wicket takings between India and England.

A whole bunch of our boys have already made the trip over to settle in and of our side only a handful of players have experienced Test cricket in India, specifically four players; Michael Clarke, Mitchell Johnson, Peter Siddle (2008) and Shane Watson.

Three of the above mentioned players have tasted individual success in India but not victory as a team in recent times. The last time we won a series in India was 2004 and you cannot bring up the carnage we brought about with a 4-0 win in Australia last summer. This is India in India and it always proves to be a whole different dynamic.

Interestingly enough I had a look back at the last series which we lost 2-0, a series that should have been shelved with the shortage of games.

The 1st Test at Mohali was a game were the fast bowlers performed with spin providing assistance, something Peter Siddle sees as a legitimate strategy.

Zaheer Khan and Mitchell Johnson both claimed 5fors and in the second innings for both sides India had Zaheer and Ishant Sharma claim a collective 6 wickets with Douggie Bollinger and Ben Hilfenhaus claiming a collective 7 wickets for Australia. The seam bowlers dominated the proceedings with the ball.

On the batting front Shane Watson scored his second Test century (126 runs followed by 56) and with his return to cricket being highlighted with a century and a half-century against the Windies it ought to put a hop in his step as he recalls that innings and steps up as vice-captain.

In the 2nd Test our boys struggled to pick themselves up due to a sense of being deflated having thrown away a golden opportunity to take the 1st Test after being kept at bay by the determination of VVS Laxman (now retired) and support from his lower order companions.

Despite the track of the M Chinnaswamy Stadium, Bangalore, proving to be a good batting track for both sides in the 1st innings we saw the value of spin being well executed and an all-round effort from the support bowlers.

Nathan Hauritz did not share as much fortune as the Indian spinners and Shane Warne slammed Ricky Ponting for his lack of creativity with the field settings for Ritz. India found the target of 207 all too easy.

It was another case of lessons learned and the harsh reality of the challenges in India.

It's a tough game there, as soon as you let your guard down and give them an opening in any passage of play they usually have the utmost confidence to play you out of the game and it is usually a slow manner in which they do it.
It is a quality they lack outside of India but within their own borders it's brutal and we saw a prime example in the 2nd Test that one below par batting performance was all it took to turn an evenly matched contest into a walk in the park for MS Dhoni's men.

We may lack experience and players of past experience but therefore the scars of the past will be minimal in the minds of the newcomers and a fresh attitude is the first step to take heading into India, especially with all the drama over the rotation-policy which caused a bitter-sweet summer.

Our squad is not one to boast about or has massive talking rights for that manner but a squad that has a light at the end of the tunnel, which will hopefully be reached come the Ashes series!

It's an obvious reason why Peter Siddle spoke highly about our fast bowling attack in front of the media, stating that is our strength and should be used with full assault. Simply put it is validly our strength and the most proven stronghold of this side.

We do not have a duo of dynamite, high quality spin - a monstrous advantage in the sub-continent - nor do we have a settled batting line-up, so the fast bowling unit is one area the boys can make mention of. Talking up your fast bowling outfit in India isn't exactly fashionable but is clearly due to our emerging squads minimal track record.

This strategic outlook has value and Peter Siddle's statement highlighted this line of thinking. Attack with an all out pace attack with the back up from the spin department, as well as the part-timers in Clarke, Maxwell, Warner and Smith.

"The best way of attacking India is with whatever your best line-up is," Siddle told reporters at Melbourne airport on Thursday. "The way we've won Test matches for years now has been with our pace and I think that is going to play a big role. But Nathan [Lyon] is going to play a big role at the other end, and his game is going to flourish even more with the pressure we build at our end.
"Combined, we'll do well and definitely be able to take 20 wickets. We're strong, we've got a good set of quicks going over and we've got good back-up for Nathan over there with spin."

It certainly isn't doom and gloom for the Baggy Greens, far from it. If anything the concerned undertones are most likely as a result of a side that has many players of perceived "potential and skill" and a relatively unknown sense of unity.

The good news is Watto and Clarkey have sound experience in India and while Watto makes his return to Test cricket with a wave of self-confidence, we know the sublime excellence of our skipper with the bat.

Phillip Hughes has done something no player has done in years and that is to work towards a goal, grab the opportunity and stamp it with everything he had to offer to fight his way into our side with pride. He is fast becoming a competent number 3 batsman and his Test return will call on valuable input and determination with his first tour to India.

Ed Cowan and David Warner have started to find a connection, slowly but surely.
Both have recognisable skill sets that will hopefully prove to be enough to protect our middle order in the majority of the contests. Both batsmen will be targeted by spin possibly early on and this would raise the alarm!

A fast bowling outfit of Johnson, Pattinson, Starc, Siddle and Bird leaves me with few worries but their bodies will be put on the line with the heat, humidity and concerns of past frailties.

The key will be how well Nathan Lyon and/or Xavier Doherty will compliment them and find ways to plug out wickets should our fast bowlers keel over at any stage. It was something well noted that Lyon struggled to do against South Africa but taking him to India is wonderful for his continued development. This is the time to make it count!

We have new blood in Khawaja, Smith, Maxwell and Henriques who can hold their own at State level but the head to head against India will be a matter of combat that only time will tell. Most would say they're walking wickets but until they've lived the battle in the middle we won't know enough.

All in all, while we collectively have good batsmen, the majority have been identified as men who struggle against spin within Australia. This is a warning sound for what is to come and recent history indicates spin has remained as important as ever in India, despite the findings of how many top wicket takers in India's Ranji Trophy have not been spin bowlers.

In the Test series against England, of the 110 wickets that fell 82 of these were to spinners (full and part-time) with the top takings going to Graeme Swann (20), Pragyan Ojha (20), Monty Panesar (17) and Ravichandran Aswin (14). Just a small indicator of the role that spin played.

With an eye on the most recent Test series completed in India, Nathan Lyon is opting for two spinners to play at once if the opportunity is present based on what he watched during the India versus England series. His outlook may be a slight variation to that of Siddle's but either way it makes for an exciting prospect as to whether it will be a front line fast bowling attack with one spinner or two spinners complemented by the best fast bowlers for the job.

What are your thoughts ahead of the Test series?

Australian Test Squad for the Border-Gavaskar series:

David Warner, Ed Cowan, Phillip Hughes, Shane Watson, Michael Clarke (captain), Usman Khawaja, Steven Smith, Glenn Maxwell, Moises Henriques, Mitchell Johnson, Matthew Wade (wicket keeper), James Pattinson, Mitchell Starc, Peter Siddle, Jackson Bird, Xavier Doherty, Nathan Lyon,
Ashton Agar. 

*Indian Squad for the 1st Test:

MS Dhoni (capt), Virender Sehwag, Sachin Tendulkar, Virat Kohli, Shikhar Dhawan, M Vijay, Ajinkya Rahane, Cheteshwar Pujara, Ravindra Jadeja, Harbhajan Singh, Ishant Sharma, Bhuvneshwar Kumar, R Ashwin, Pragyan Ojha, Ashok Dinda

Welcome to The Baggy Green Blog!
Thanks for reading this article written by Ian.
To comment on this article, click on the 'Comments' tag at the end of the article.


TWITTER
@BaggyGreenBlog
@Ianbaggygreen
@SylvesterAu
@Dan_Stapo