The Ashes Tour: Tour Game Travesty Day 2

Bad light stopped play on day 2 of the Australians’ tour match against the English Lions at Northampton and after a 68 over centre wicket practice for the Australians the match was declared a draw. Of the three batters seemingly fighting for two spots in the Australian team, Hughes, Smith and Khawaja, only Hughes spent a long time at the crease taking 92 balls to scratch out 30.

As I said yesterday: this was a terrible act of scheduling by the ECB and Cricket Australia playing a glorified net session or centre wicket practice for 2 days heading into the last test of the Ashes series. I guess though it is important to look for positives in every situation and I can see two here: Shane Watson did not get hurt and the final test is a dead rubber so at this net session didn’t make things worse for Australia.

Being on the last test!

Cricket: Sam Robson and the baggy green? Red Herring or indicative of a bigger issue?

So here is the latest from Cricket Australia Towers: they are going to change the rules of eligibility of players able to play in domestic competitions by making it easier for dual passport holding players to play. Why are they doing this and why are they doing this now? I have one name for you: Sam Robson. The “now” part is simple too: two weeks ago he qualified to play for England despite being Sydney born.

Only the closest of cricket watchers will know who Sam Robson is, or at least they would have until this season when he has exploded into a rich vein of form for his county side Middlesex for whom he has scored 3 hundreds at the top of the order and averaged 62.06. Six years ago, as an 18 year old, and behind the likes of Hughes, Katich et al in New South Wales he moved to England to play first class cricket. In fact, he is enamoured with the county game given that he is quoted as believing that the 16 four-day matches in that competition is better for his development than the Sheffield Shield competition. He returns to Australia in our summer to play club cricket for Easts in Sydney but under current rules cannot play in the Sheffield Shield competition.

So why then is Cricket Australia (and the NSW set up) moving for this rule change? Obviously those in power at Cricket Australia Towers have looked at the current batting line up and decided that the Australian line up needs another change and the injection of a young right handed batsman who has never played on Australian pitches is the answer.

Here is the thing for me: Robson, who I am sure is a lovely bloke, made a decision to move to England to further his career for which he is to be congratulated. He has had no part of the Australian set up though since playing for Australian U19s. He has not played a first class game on an Australian wicket. Most particularly though, there are other players of Robson’s vintage who have done the hard yards in Australia, worked their way through whatever roadblocks there were and are now playing at the first class (and test) level who also deserve a chance.

A cursory examination of the player list from Robson’s 9 Australia U 19 XI fixtures shows that only Phil Hughes is still playing in even first class cricket from the batters who were selected in any of those 9 fixtures. If one broadens the timeframe to the teams in the year preceding and the year following Robson’s time in the U19 set up some other names of note arise: Usman Khawaja, Tom Cooper, Steve Smith, Nic Maddinson. Additionally some names on the fringe of first class cricket in Australia also come up like Hill and Stoinis.

It is simplistic to say but should the powers that be at Cricket Australia Towers be rewarding someone for abandoning cricket in this country just because he is suddenly in a rich vein of form? My personal view at the start of writing this post was that CA should not be doing that (and that view has not changed) but the more I looked at the Australian U19 Xis from Robson’s time the more a worrying trend arose that is a bigger issue that needs to be discussed whether Robson plays for Australia or England or no one. The trend is simple: Phil Hughes, Michael Hill and Sam Robson aside not one batsman who played in the 9 under 19 fixtures that Robson played is currently playing first class cricket. Additionally, no one else is even playing Second XI cricket for their state at the moment. It is worth bearing in mind that Robson played in those games as leg spin bowling all rounder rather than an opening batsman and, on my count, some 13 other batters were used.

This all raises this question: what is happening to our best young batters between the ages of 20 and 25 that stops them from taking the next step? Robson had to move to England to get a chance, Michael Hill has played 37 fewer first class games than Robson in a sporadic career and Phil Hughes is a young star of the game. The rest are, at best, languishing in club cricket or, at worst, are not playing at all. The strange part of this is that presently in Australia our top cricketers play so little Sheffield Shield cricket (between test, ODI, T20, BBL and KFC and sock commercial commitments) that it is now considered very much behind the County Competition in stature yet some of our best young cricketers still cannot pierce the metaphorical glass ceiling and get a run.

Rather than rush through a rule change that could see Sam Robson in a baggy green (as an aside has anyone thought of what kind of look it would be for Cricket Australia if they change the rule and he still says no OR Cricket NSW don’t select him?) maybe those in the seats of power at Cricket Australia Towers need to look more closely at the development of all of our young cricketers and consider methodologies for keeping those cricketers in the game rather than selecting someone developed in another system? Surely a long term solution is better for Australian cricket than a stop gap one?

A final comment: Nic Maddinson has played 27 games of first class cricket, averages the same as Robson and is two years younger. Plus he has been committed to the Australian system since day one. Shouldn’t he be getting first crack at the team?

Cricket: What more does Nathan Lyon have to do?

Imagine you are Australia’s off spinner Nathan Lyon for a moment. You have made your way back into the Australian team in England after the selection of a 19 year old who had played 5 first class games for the first two tests of the Ashes failed dismally. You have just finished a test match in which you have taken 7 wickets over 42 overs and had an economy rate of 2.30 over those overs. You have snared your main tormentor in the English batting line up, Kevin Pietersen, twice in the test match as well as extracted England’s other best batters in Trott and Bell in a magical first innings spell.

If you were Nathan Lyon right now you would have cause to feel pretty happy with your lot in life (save for the pain of defeat) and you would be feeling like you had done enough to secure your place in the Australian team, again, wouldn’t you?

Then you read this quote from the Chairman of the National Selection Panel, John Inverarity, talking about Fawad Ahmed and whether he is potential starter for the return Ashes series in Australia:

“He would be in contention for that," said Inverarity."We’ll see how he goes. He played in some Shield matches at the end of the last Australian summer, bowled well and took wickets, so we’re just keen to see how he goes at international level. He and a number of other spinners will be contention as well."

Nathan Lyon, reading that over a cup of tea and some toast this morning, would have every right to spit out said tea and blow up in disgust. He has done everything asked of him in my opinion and has shown maturity and poise in what must have been a difficult situation for him. Yet he has the chairman of the Australian selection panel tell a phalanx of journalists that there are a number of spin bowlers in contention for the return Ashes series and one of them is a player with limited first class experience and is 7 years older than the incumbent.

Can anyone explain the logic to me? There once was a time when Australian cricket selectors stuck with a team and backed the players that they considered to be good enough to do the job. Nathan Lyon surely has shown that he is one such player. Unfortunately he is playing in what I have started calling the “Inverarity Era” which has proven already to be an era of instability in selection and “project players” rather sticking with a team, supporting the players in the team and actually doing an apprenticeship in first class cricket before one is put into the cauldron of test match cricket. No wonder our team looks down on confidence: they do not know whether the next test match will be their last.

Cricket: Australian Short Form Squad named for post Ashes series

National Selection Panel Chairman of Selectors, John Inverarity, has announced the following squad to play England in a series of T20 and ODI fixtures against England after the end of the Ashes series:

Michael Clarke (c), George Bailey (vc), Fawad Ahmed, Nathan Coulter-Nile, James Faulkner, Aaron Finch, Josh Hazelwood, Phil Hughes, Mitchell Johnson, Shaun Marsh, Glenn Maxwell, Clint McKay, Steve Smith, Mitchell Starc, Adam Voges, Matthew Wade, David Warner, Shane Watson

One assumes that Watson will be released from the squad if the injury he sustained in the 4th Test at Chester-le-Street leads him to having to withdraw from the 5th test at the Oval in a week’s time. Xavier Doherty has been left out in favor of Fawad Ahmed which, if nothing else, vindicates the Australian government decision to fast track his citizenship. According the Chairman, Doherty might be in the frame to play in the seven match ODI series in India which follows this series. Given that Doherty has done nothing wrong, in my opinion, in ODI fixtures or T20 fixtures for that matter it is a strange decision.

From the current squad in the UK, Clarke, Faulkner, Hughes, Smith, Wade and Warner will remain to play in this series.

The Ashes: 4th Test Australian Player Ratings

In the shadows of Australia’s devastating loss at Chester-le-Street here are my ratings of each Australian player’s performance:

Chris Rogers: 9 out of 10

Scored a career defining hundred in the first innings that will long be remembered for its determination and grit more so than its batting craft. 49 in the second when Australia needed more but by then he had done his bit! Has made the opening spot his own.

David Warner: 6.5 out of 10

Batted as well as I have seen him bat in the second innings to press Australia’s hopes for victory. Got a jaffa in the first innings. As always a live spark in the field.

Usman Khawaja: 3.5 out of 10

Frankly: a passenger for the bulk of the game. Gave hope of something good in the second innings but then missed a straight one from Swann. Must find a way to combat spin bowling.

Michael Clarke: 5 out of 10

Out captained by Cook: stagnant when needed a plan B. Woeful shot in the first innings. Snorter in the second.

Steve Smith: 3 out of 10

Has gone from Australia’s next big thing the second time around to bereft of form in a blink of an eye. A nothing performance when more was needed punctuated by a bad missed catch in England’s second innings.

Shane Watson: 6.5 out of 10

Was having the perfect match right up until he was injured AGAIN. Second innings dismissal returned to form of past dismissals playing around the front pad.

Brad Haddin: 6 out of 10

Glove work was again excellent from Haddin. Out LBW both innings playing back to, respectively, Swann and Broad. Reflexes slowing?

Peter Siddle: 4 out of 10

On a pitch that should have suited his style of seam up bowling was innocuous at best. Did not really threaten or hold up an end when Harris needed support. Massively out of sorts with the bat.

Ryan Harris: 9 out of 10

9 wickets for Harris with some valuable 1st innings runs that put Australia in front. I shudder to think who Australia would have gone without him. Our best in this test!

Nathan Lyon: 8 out of 10

An excellent test match for Lyon; indeed probably one of his best in the baggy green. His dismantling of Pietersen in this game a joy to watch.

Jackson Bird: 4 out of 10

An Ashes debut that he will probably prefer to forget particularly his bowling effort on day 4. Again was served up a wicket that should have suited his style but under pressure could not get it right.

The Ashes: 4th Test, Day 4 Talking Points

Day 4 of the 4th test of this Ashes series dawned with much hope for Australia fans but by the end of the day Australian fans, and I hope cricketers too, have been left numb by England’s charge to victory by 74 runs.

With a heavy heart, here are my day 4 talking points:

1. R Harris = just brilliant

It can be said simply this way: without Ryan Harris in this test match Australia would have lost by a lot more! In the first session of the day Harris kept Australia in the game with 3 wickets in short order to make it 7 for the innings and 9 for the match. An epic effort by someone not deigned good enough to be in the top team at the start of the series.

2. T Bresnan = quality player

Bresnan’s innings here took the game away from Australia after Bell had done all the hard work on Day 3. Best described as a “bustling” cricketer Bresnan repaid the faith of the selectors with the willow has he attacked Australia’s bowling and went a long way to setting up England’s victory here. 2 big wickets in Australia’s chase in Warner and Watson only enhance the importance of his role in this victory.

3. S Broad = one of the best Ashes performances of our time

If you thought Broad’s 5 wicket burst in the first innings was good, his effort here in reducing the Australian chase to rubble and at the same collecting 6 wickets was nothing short of exceptional. 11 wickets in any test is a special effort but this effort stands out because Broad stood up when England’s main striker in Jimmy Anderson was down on form and given the stakes. Broad is much maligned by Australian fans but boy if he was playing in a baggy green cap he would probably be our most loved player and that is saying a lot!

4. When the acid was on Australia again lacked fight

That is a harsh statement but listening to the coverage throughout the night and early hours of the morning left me with the impression, unfortunately again, that Australia, in particular the middle order, lacked the fight or will to win this game when things got a bit difficult. I concede the bowling was excellent but to go from 0-109 chasing 299 to all out 224 in the space of 40 overs in the biggest series many of these players will ever play just smacks of a line up lacking conviction in their purpose. In the aftermath of that performance one can only conclude either that the middle order is woefully inept or lacking fight and I do not think they are inept!

5. Battle of the Captains: Cook by a knockout

Michael Clarke was out captained today again as he has been for much of this series. The contrast between Clarke and Cook is at its starkest when one considers how each respond to their bowlers taking patches (2 or mode in the space of 5 overs) of wickets. Cook’s approach seems to be to take advantage of a new batter at the crease and set attacking fields whilst Clarke seems to maintain the status quo and stands stagnant at second slip. I am not saying that this difference would have made a difference to the ultimate result but is shows that the Australian captain has little confidence in his team.

So England have now not only retained the Urn but have won the series. I could say that this was another day of fascinating cricket (and it was) but as an Australian fan I am sick to death of losing these fascinating days.

Congratulations to England: it kills me to say it but the better team won.

Look out for my player scorecard for Australia later in the morning.