At the start of the season we were informed that form in the Sheffield Shield was going to be the parameter used for selection in the Test team. That was refreshing to hear, even if given recent times it was difficult to believe. But looking at that first Test team you couldn’t argue too much with what the selection panel went with. Shaun Marsh had had a poor tour of the UAE but had scored plenty of runs in the Shield on his return so he had to be given another chance. Marcus Harris on form was the best opener in Australia and deservedly received his chance. Aaron Finch had done a good job in the UAE and deserved a chance to consolidate. Peter Handscomb had scored a Shield century and had made his case. Both Khawaja and Head were selections after being solid in the UAE. Cases could have been made for players like Joe Burns and Glen Maxwell and perhaps even Mitch Marsh to be in the team but those chosen could use form as a selection option.
So what has happened since that first team was chosen. Handscomb was dropped for Mitch Marsh for the 3rd Test, then came back in at his expense after one Test performance, essentially on the strength of one slogging 70 in a BBL match in which he was dropped a couple of times and enjoyed some good fortune. An extra bowling option was felt to be required in Melbourne, and though it was also seen to be necessary in Sydney it was decided that a different option from Marsh was needed, so Marnus Labuschagne was drafted in. This could not possibly have been on form, given he averaged 28 with the bat and 60 with the ball in the Shield after his return from the UAE, which was why he didn’t make the first Test squad – because of a lack of form. Finch was seen to be a liability at the top of the order but could perhaps still be an option in the middle order, but the selectors took him out of the team completely to fit in Handscomb. It all looks a bit muddled, and more than anything else sends mixed messages not only to the players but to the public as well.
All we ever ask of umpiring is consistency. All we ask of our players is consistency. And all we can ask of our selectors is consistency. They have had over the last nine months, and will continue to have over the course of the next nine months, a very testing time. They have had to balance a Test and ODI team that lost its captain, both openers and by far the best two batsmen in the country. In doing so they have had to play an away Test series against Pakistan and then face India at home who possess their best-balanced attack ever. They also have to somehow cobble together a squad to defend their World Cup crown and then a squad to immediately after that defend the Ashes in England. There was a lot of public pressure bearing on all of those series – two of which are now lost – and choosing the right players is paramount to any success coming their way.
Up to this point you can assume that the National Selection Panel (NSP) has been all about finding replacements for those players who were suspended, and hoping that these replacement players would do the job successfully enough that there would be a great battle for places on their return. It is fair to say that, in all formats of the game, that hasn’t occurred. Players have been tried – Finch (278 runs at 27.80) and Labuschagne (81 at 20.25) in Tests, Short (83 at 27.66) and Lynn (75 at 18.75) in ODI’s and McDermott (72 at 14.40) in T20I’s – and have not done enough to be considered first choice players. We would all have loved those guys to succeed, but the figures show that they have not.
So now we have a point where the scales have started to fall the other way. Bancroft is back playing, and it is now only a matter of weeks before both Warner and Smith will be able to play at international level again. With that in mind, you can assume that now the NSP is suddenly changing tack. Instead of finding replacements, they are now beginning to try and find players who will complement their return to the ODI team initially, and eventually the Test team. Australia has only the two Test series against Sri Lanka ahead of them before they have to defend the Ashes. They also have very few ODI matches ahead of them before they must be ready for the World Cup. These things will have come into the minds of the NSP as they chose the ODI team for the Indian series and will no doubt also be in their minds when they announce the squad for the Sri Lankan Tests.
Justin Langer had come out after the loss in Melbourne saying it was tough to select teams at the moment because no one was knocking down the door with runs or wickets in the Shield. Given the comment at the start of the season that they would be picking on form, this then appeared to be a dodge on what then happened with the team selected for Sydney. It has been well documented about just how that statement would have gone across to players such as Joe Burns (472 at 47.20), Matthew Wade (571 at 63.44) and Kurtis Patterson (428 at 47.55) in particular.
Burns was the best performed opening batsmen in the Shield last season as well (725 runs at 55.76) and played the 4th Test in South Africa after the three players were sent home, scoring 4 and 42 in a devastating loss. He was then passed over for the UAE tour as the selectors preferred Finch and his white ball form over his red ball form, which certainly seemed unfair at the time. Then Harris made a compelling case for selection and was rewarded while Burns again missed out to Finch. Now Finch has gone, and Khawaja moved up to replace him, and Burns has seen his Queensland teammate Labuschagne chosen in front of him with a batting average almost 20 runs less than his own. Any fair minded person would see this tale and make an assumed guess that the selectors are looking for any way possible not to pick Joe Burns as Australia’s opening batsman.
Wade had an accomplished season with the bat for Tasmania last season as well (654 runs at 43.60) and while he would not have been expecting a Test recall as a batsman at the end of last season, circumstances last March meant that opportunities were available come the start of this season. With one century and five half centuries he is the form batsman in the competition, and he surely had to be in conversations to bat at number six in the Test team. Apparently though, one can only suspect again that the selectors are looking for any excuse not to pick him, despite the fact he also started off the BBL season with good runs as well.
Patterson has been on the fringe of international selection for four years, and indeed was expected to get the call two years ago when Nic Maddinson instead got his call up in Adelaide. His 2017/18 was only average (672 at 37.33) but having improved that this season and again shown he is willing to bat time as well as runs he would look like the perfect foil for the Test team. Once again though, his card appears marked as not to be selected by the panel.
An argument was also made for players such as Marcus Stoinis and Glenn Maxwell to be chosen as an all-round option rather than Marsh or Labuschagne. Both had had limited red ball exposure due to their international white ball commitments which no doubt the selectors would have used in their favour not to choose them. Maxwell (126 runs at 42.00 and four over only) and Stoinis (298 runs at 42.57 and 10 wickets at 25.20) both had reasonable form compared to Marsh (264 runs at 37.71 and 6 wickets at 62.16) and Labuschagne (254 runs at 28.22 and 5 wickets at 59.60), but for reasons only known to the selectors it was the latter two who have received Test call ups this summer. On top of this, last season Maxwell was told to go away and make big runs to gain a recall after being ignored for the Ashes. His next innings was 278 and he eventually scored 707 runs at 50.50 for the season. Once again, here is another player who appears to have done everything asked of them in trying to gain national selection but is being ignored by the selection panel, and in an age where Australia just isn’t capable of putting together a defendable total it seems unbelievable that this is the case.
The announcement of the ODI squad to play three games against India caused more rumblings. In particular, the omission of power players D’Arcy Short and Chris Lynn was universally panned given that they had received little opportunity to establish themselves in the team, while long term middle order player Travis Head has been dropped. Instead, Usman Khawaja has been given the chance to make his way into the ODI squad as a solid presence at the top of the order, while Peter Handscomb also returns to the squad. Handscomb appears a surprising choice on the surface, but he did finish fifth on the aggregates of this season’s JLT Cup ODD competition with 361 runs at 51.57 with four half-centuries in seven innings. Reasonable form to be selected on. The top three though? They were Chris Lynn (452 at 75.33), Ben McDermott (427 at 71.00) and D’Arcy Short (404 at 80.80, including a top score of 257). Given that both Lynn and Short have only been given four matches each in 2018 in which to establish their credentials in the top team, it seems a harsh assessment to leave them out on those figures.
One of the biggest problems with the ODI squad is the ‘resting’ once again of Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins after their Test bowling load, and with two Tests still to come against Sri Lanka. Why is it a problem? Well, if all three are considered our number one bowlers with a view to the World Cup, then when are they going to show us they are up to bowling in 50 over cricket? They all played all three ODI’s against South Africa in November but have played no others since January 2018. Missing these means they will only get an opportunity against Pakistan in March to show they deserve to be chosen. If they are our best then they should be playing, and if they are not then it should be explained why they are not. Is Siddle the answer at his age, despite his excellent winter in England in County cricket? Is Stanlake a realistic chance of touring? Is Jhye Richardson? If we are going into a ODI series against India with our second string bowling attack, how do we expect to win it? And if we aren’t picking our strongest team at all times in order to try and win every match, then what exactly are we doing?
Our current selection panel consists of chairman Trevor Hohns, Greg Chappell and Justin Langer. Hohns and Chappell have been on the panel numerous times over the past thirty years. They are knowledgeable cricket watchers and both fine players in their own right. In Chappell’s case he is a legend of the game. Langer is a selector by being the Australian head coach, something that still grates with me. If you are the coach of the national team you should be allowed to have an input into the selection process by expressing your views on the merits of the players in contention for selection, but you should not be one of those who is actually selecting the team. It is a conflict of interest, given that players should feel comfortable in going to the coach to discuss problems they may be having with their game without the coach being able to then decide on the validity of whether or not that person plays in the next match.
As much respect as I have for these three gentlemen, it is time for them to move on and allow the next generation to come in and help Australia move forward. New selectors will not make our players any better. It will not make them score more runs or take more wickets. But it really feels like we need some new eyes and new minds and new ideas in the selection of our national teams, and return to a method of selecting players through performance first and mixed with an eye for rising talent through the junior ranks. Hohns and Chappell have been selectors through different ages of Australian cricket and perhaps their ideas are now outdated. We should also immediately remove the national coach from the NSP, allowing both the coach and captain to have their say without being able to exert any further influence on selection than that.
Who should we have as our selectors? I can offer some ideas. Firstly, not Shane Warne. If Warne was in charge then we would have five different players every match as his own ideas change. Certainly people who come to mind who are ex-players with good cricketing minds who watch a lot of cricket as it is who would be excellent in the role would be Ricky Ponting and Simon Katich, as well Tom Moody who has coached all around the world and knows cricket in all forms. Of course they would have to be approached, but it is people such as these three who I believe would offer a fresh insight into what needs to be done, and how teams need to be selected, to help Australia regain their way in the cricket world.
Or, better yet, pick me as selector. I’m ready, willing and able to put my hand up and do the job.
No comments:
Post a Comment