Australian batting team moving forward

[sifter132]

Once he got past those 2 LBW shouts against him, he looked really solid. Just played sensibly (until the end), ran well. I'll be interested to see how good Smith can get. I think he's a big LBW candidate because of the way he almost hides his bat behind his pad when defending the quicks.

And my hopes for Rogers were proved true! He looked way better, actually coming forward into the ball rather than staying rooted to the crease like he had in the first 2 Tests.

Khawaja will definitely get another shot after that dodgy call, so it's just a matter of getting Watson and Warner going now.

 

[War]

County news : Sam Robson qualification boost for England | Cricket News | County Cricket 2013 | ESPN Cricinfo

Talking about AUS batting future at it looks like they are about to loose two hyped young talents to England.

 

[Samuels]

What do you people make of Mark Cosgrove? The man has an impressive first class record if you ask me. It is better to have him in the side when the situation is as scary as it is for Australia. Australia's 2nd XI skipper averages 29 in FC. Whoa! Has the Aussie batting talents hit rockbottom?

 

[Cricketdude]

County news : Sam Robson qualification boost for England | Cricket News | County Cricket 2013 | ESPN Cricinfo

Talking about AUS batting future at it looks like they are about to loose two hyped young talents to England.

Their hearts have got to be with Australia so it doesn't matter

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Their hearts have got to be with Australia so it doesn't matter

Couldn't agree more.

I wondering why everyone is so keen on having Watson opening. He's been in awful form about about 2 and a half years. It's not exactly like this is his first shite series in a while.

He should be batting at 7. I don't care how he looks when he's sizzling along to get to 20, he can do that at 7. At opening, he's just making life hard for the batsmen to come in.

 

[sifter132]

^That's an option, going down a lot lower, but his batting started going to shite after they started moving him down. You can see why Lehmann (and Watson) have the hope that a move back to the top will get him going again. Particulary since he's done it well in the past, and is still doing it well in ODIs.

I do think it's either 1 or 6 for Watson - he doesn't make enough big scores to be at 3 or 4. That was always a move made in hope. Trouble is that Warner is exactly the same: 1 or 6. Against England, I could easily argue that Warner is better at the top, as it gets him away from Swann. Watson has been getting good starts with Rogers though, Warner is a bit more volatile. I think Australia would rather have a more reliable opening stand right now.


Looking forward, I'd love to see Australia really try and solidify this batting order and give them a long trial. They be saying, that was much better, now you guys are locked in as the top 6 for the next 4 Tests - last 2 here, first 2 in Aus - make the best of it! At present, there's just a bit too much chopping and changing: Cowan got canned after 1 Test, Hughes got canned after 1 bad Test (he did well at Trent Bridge remember). I think it would help these guys if they knew they were going to get a solid run to prove themselves.

 

[cricketmad09]

Their hearts have got to be with Australia so it doesn't matter

It does, but one of the problems is because of the poor standard of country cricket, playing cricket is England is a higher paying and much more stable form of employment. Blokes are attracted to this at a young age.

Having said that the English system puts pressure on dual qualified players to commit to England or risk not having a contract, such as the despicable bribery forced upon Boyd Rankin by Ashley Giles.

 

[War]

As i said in the 4th Ashes test thread:

AUS fought hard no doubt, but ENG were always better. AUS should be thankful that ENG were not at their ultimate best like in 2010/11 or they could have been 4-0 up already.

The Oval test is irrelevant now, AUS plans should focus towards the the return series in AUS. Hughes/Khawaja/Smith are young weaklinks its has to be said now that its debatable if they will have serious long term test careers or will just fade way like a Matt Elliot, Blewett, North.

The only way i can see AUS solidify the middle-order before the 1st test in Brisbane is to bring in Katich & Bailey. We have already seen how good the experience of Rogers have been - the youngsters are just not good enough. Plus also once again how Watson is used has to be reconsidered. He will never last a series as an all-rounder whether he is opening or batting in the middle. So at times i think AUS have to consider either picking 4 quicks & dropping Lyon. Or playing 5 bats/Haddin @ # 6 & Faulkner @ 7 if they want to keep Lyon in the starting line-up:

Rogers, Warner, Watson, Katich, Clarke, Bailey, Haddin, Starc, Pattinson, Siddle, Harris.

 

[sifter132]

Awww, I had a fantastic rebuttal to those points War, but it got wiped from Friday's server meltdown...

Anyway...

Wanted to post some research I did about the Aussie top 7. Australia has played 14 Tests since the summer of 2012/13 began. There have been 11 different top 7 batting orders - and I'm only counting the first innings for each Test! Did that because sometimes quick runs are needed in the 2nd, or sometimes innings aren't finished. Nightwatchmen have also been ignored...
vs South Africa
Cowan Warner Quiney Ponting Clarke Hussey Wade (got 2 Tests vs SA)
Cowan Warner Watson Ponting Clarke Hussey Wade
vs Sri Lanka
Cowan Warner Hughes Watson Clarke Hussey Wade (got 2 Tests vs SL)
Cowan Warner Hughes Clarke Hussey Wade Johnson
vs India
Cowan Warner Hughes Watson Clarke Wade Henriques (got 2 Tests vs Ind)
Cowan Warner Clarke Hughes Smith Haddin Henriques
Cowan Warner Hughes Watson Smith Wade Maxwell
vs England
Watson Rogers Cowan Clarke Smith Hughes Haddin
Watson Rogers Khawaja Hughes Clarke Smith Haddin
Watson Rogers Khawaja Clarke Smith Warner Haddin
Rogers Warner Khawaja Clarke Smith Watson Haddin

There have been 4 different openers, 6 different #3s, 4 different #4s, 7 different #6s, and 5 different #7s. Look where Clarke has batted: 5 times at 5 - his longest streak, but since then he's been all over the shop. Once at 4, back to 5 for a couple of Tests, up to 3, out with a back problem, back in at 4, then down to 5, then last couple at 4.

So what's been the problem generally?
*Gut feel selections. By which I mean they aren't seen as guys who'll be fixtures in the team, but selectors think they'll do alright in a particular series/game/role eg. Quiney instead of Hughes vs South Africa, Wade over Haddin, Glenn Maxwell...Rogers to do well in England, Smith to do well vs spin in India (those last 2 worked out at least)
*Sudden retirements forcing reshuffles
*Shane Watson's injuries, poor form, or lack of homework meaning he's been in and out of the team, up and down the order
*Clarke not knowing whether he wants to play at 4 or not
*Having too many opening batsmen and having to find them positions down the order: Hughes the prime example, Cowan, Watson and Warner as well have had this treatment. Khawaja batted at 6 too in a previous stint for Australia.
*Lack of patience from selectors in sticking with a role they've been picked for. Ed Cowan got only 1 game at #3, Warner got 1 Test at #6, Hughes got 1 Test at #6 and only 2 Tests at #4 (non consecutive)
*Last, but definitely not least...No one performing which has made it easy for the selectors to chop and change.

I'm just sick of the tinkering...is it too much to ask for the selectors to pick a top 7 and not muck around with it for 3 consecutive Tests? Heck 2 Tests in a row would be start...

 

[Aislabie]

Well, we have tinkering.

 

[sifter132]

^Yep, more random selections...Faulkner selected for his 'toughness' apparently. It's the same thing that's been said about Matthew Wade. Dave Warner was going to 'bring some fight' to the Aussie team too. Glenn Maxwell was 'competitive' as well. I'll see if I can dig out the official quotes about those guys from Inverarity/Clarke/whoever, but basically it doesn't matter a ---- how tough they are if they can't make runs.

Apart from changing the batting order, Australia has gone through a LOT of players in the last 2 years. Loaded up the old Statsguru to prove this point and chose the cutoff period as the end of the World Cup - made sense since all international teams were involved. Also a good cutoff point for Australia because that's about when John Inverarity took over as chief selector.

Here's a list of which countries have used the most players across all 3 formats since April 3 2011:
53 - Australia (30/38/34)
48 - India (32/40/31)
46 - West Indies (26/30/34)
45 - Pakistan (25/36/35)
45 - New Zealand (26/33/33)
44 - Sri Lanka (26/35/30)
37 - South Africa (19/28/31)
34 - England (21/24/23)
In brackets in the number of players used in Tests, ODI and T20Is.

So again, Australia very profligate with their selections...even ahead of India which has been effectively sending their 'A' team to places like Zimbabwe while the big guns rest.

 

[Bluey Zarsoff]

The current top 5 positions look settled at least going into the 1st test at the Gabba. Number 6 is wide open though. Maddinson?

 

[aussie1st]

If Maddinson can hit some runs early in the Shield season he is definitely a chance. McDonald can spring in as well especially if Watson is giving up bowling.

 

[Bluey Zarsoff]

If Maddinson can hit some runs early in the Shield season he is definitely a chance. McDonald can spring in as well especially if Watson is giving up bowling.

The welcome mat is out for a batsman, particularly a young batsman, putting some early season runs together. Looking at the Australia A results in South Africa I think Maddinson is the frontrunner.

"Ronny" McDonald remains an underappreciated resource. A big start to the season might put him back in contention. Particularly if Watson's ability to bowl is hindered yet again.

 

[Bluey Zarsoff]

Adam Voges has commented how Boof Lehmann is giving the batsmen more licence to back themselves and play with more freedom. Something it seems Mickey Arthur wasn't prepared to do.