Ian ConstantineAll-round headache for Australia
November 20th 2008 02:02
While the Australian team has been blessed with these unique cricketing specimen since the beginning of time, the use of two ‘specialist all-rounder’s is a little perplexing to say the least. On the surface it has merit… You now have a batting line-up that stretches down to 8 and have a plethora of bowling options…
But the problem with a specialist all-rounder is that they are not specialist batsmen nor are they specialist bowlers… Therefore they are robbing a genuine playmaker or wicket-taker of a position…
Now one all-rounder works because it gives you that little bit of depth in the batting line-up and gives you a bowling option when your mainline attack is getting tired…
However two all-rounder’s?
We now have two players picked not because they excel at one or the other, but because they can do an adequate job at both… adequate!
Why do you need two part-time bowlers in an attack instead of an out-an-out spearhead? Here lies our problem… Australia have a severe bowling shortage! Playing two all-rounders highlights that when Mother Hubbard went to the Cupboard, the Cupboard was bare…
So to the argument of picking Andrew Symonds in the side?
Lets answer these simple questions… Is he in the top six best batsmen in the country? Absolutely not.
Is he then lets be generous in the top twenty best bowlers let alone top 5 in the country? I seriously hope not.
Hmm… so we have a player taking up a spot in the Australian team who is a decent but inconsistent batsmen at best and he is not going to win you a game with the ball… ever.
The same with Shane Watson, who was arguably one of Australia’s best in India… (I subscribe to that theory)
He is a decent bat, but too often gets out when his side needs him the most... his technique simply lacks the complexity for the five day format… his bowling though, unlike Symonds is probably right up there in Australia at the moment… And after years of injury, Watson never gives up, keeps coming and refuses to lay down… It was evident in India. He may not be the most talented, but geez he is trying to make up for lost time.
I’m not having a go at either here, just pointing out that if playing two all-rounders is the best way to go, than Australian cricket is struggling more than we think.
Now against New Zealand, I don’t think it would matter if we brought back Jo Angel, Greg Rowell and Shane George, we still would wrap up the Test match fairly comfortably… (as I type we are 3-22) and I still think we have it in the bag…
Hey Bro... Who's that dude?
But against stronger teams such as South Africa the selectors will have to make a choice, I can’t see Symonds and Watson co-existing in the same line-up for long… it just doesn’t make sense.
If you pick Watson, you don’t need Symonds's off-spinners… which means you are picking him as an out-and-out batsmen… hello?!? Brad Hodge is the original Mr Cricket, just hasn’t gone on to do what Hussey has done… hasn't had the opportunity to do it either i might add.
Hodge is knocking louder on the door than Bob Dylan ever dreamed of. But instead has two ‘batsmen’ in his way… The simple question is who is most likely to score a test match century/ double? No contest…
Now everybody knew that McGrath and Warne would retire, but we have had since 1998 to start bringing bowlers through… and a part from Brett Lee, who has been around forever now and Stuart Clark, the bowling stocks look shorter than David Boon’s healthy diet…
Just look back at the Australia v Australia A games of 1994… look at the batting line-up for Aus A and how they have all come through and then take a look at the bowlers in the same game…. .
1 GS Blewett
2 ML Hayden
3 DR Martyn
4 MG Bevan
5 JL Langer
6 RT Ponting
7 PA Emery
8 GR Robertson
9 J Angel
10 GJ Rowell
11 SP George…
Hmm the battling line-up is a whos who… but the bowlers are just a who?
Remember last Ashes when they almost didn't pick Stuart Clark? he was the best bowler of the series... but who was challenging for the position and where have they gone? We now have Mitchell Johnson opening the bowling... Johnson is useful... but a long way away from being the strike bowler Australian's are accustomed to cheering..
Australia have some problems in the coming years... the batting stocks still look strong, but the bowling looks about as intimidating as my little friend here...
Australia's future Australia bowling attack... cute, cuddly and a Batsman's best friend
In closing, nothing against either Watson or Symonds both are remarkable cricketers... but picking them both in the same team has highlighted a deep seeded problem in Australian cricket...
| 70 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by damian
Urban Telegraph
Sports and All
The Squirter McGee Diaries
Actually, I don't quite know how strong my logic is on that one, but I'm sure Kennett is to blame anyway!
Comment by sportsbar
Fret X
Kennett also should have had the foresight to clone Shane Warne