Tag Archives: Harris

Denialism

I’ve become weary of writing about the failings of David Warner and his dead weight on the team, but his comments in the press today can’t be ignored. He is living in denial.

He’s quoted as saying: ‘I’ve played a lot better than what I did last time [in 2019]. I’ve got in good positions, I’m looking to score, I’ve had a couple of unlucky dismissals and then dismissals where I’ve tried to negate the swing or the seam and it’s caught the outside edge of the bat.’

So that’s it. He’s been ‘unlucky’.

‘I’m looking to score,’ he says. Then SCORE! Please!

And playing better? Yes, his average of 25.13 so far this series does indeed surpass the 9.50 he recorded in the 2019 Ashes series, but it’s hardly good enough for Australia’s Test opener in one of the toughest series the team could wish to play. In a team of only eleven, Warner is the sixth highest run scorer. Even Mitchell Marsh has outscored Warner, and he’s played only four innings versus Warner’s eight. Warner’s average for the series is on a par with that of Carey (23.14), Starc (25.00) and Cummins (23.40), and he is supposed to be one of the team’s best players.

Warner isn’t the only Australia batter to underperform – Smith and Green are guilty, too – but Warner’s lack of runs stretches back several years and yet he keeps getting picked. One wonders if and how the selectors will take responsibility for choosing him and keeping Marcus Harris, who averaged 57.13 for Glamorgan this summer, on the bench.

Make Johnson a Selector

I couldn’t agree more with Mitchell Johnson in his selection of the playing XI for the Fourth Test; i.e.

M Harris

U Khawaja

M Labuchschagne

S Smith

T Head

M Marsh

A Carey

M Neser

M Starc

P Cummins

T Murphy

Johnson writes, “Put simply, Warner goes out because he’s out of form, Michael Neser comes in because he’s in form and Mitch Marsh retains his place for the same reason.

I would opt for Marcus Harris to open the batting with Usman Khawaja and Neser to replace Scott Boland, with Cam Green missing out despite declaring himself fit to play.”

How easy was that? The arguments for omitting Warner are too obvious to repeat (just see our last three or so posts). Neser has been on fire in England his summer, and while Hazlewood is a great bowler, Neser’s form with both bat and ball should not be ignored any longer. I’ve always been a Mitchell Marsh skeptic but Green hasn’t nailed it and Marsh played a blinder in the Third Test so why not turn him loose again? Green remains the future of the team, you would think, but some time out of the XI won’t hurt him and might even help.

Sure, Harris, Neser and Marsh may or may not fire in the Fourth Test, but they are likely to give Australia the best chance in a must-win game.

The Millstone Gets Heavier

I’ve been ranting for at least two years (e.g here and here) about the selectors’ stubborn insistence on picking David Warner despite precious little evidence that he justifies his place in the team. The selectors appear not to care, deciding instead the 36-year old deserves his spot for runs he made so many years ago that many younger cricket fans don’t even remember.

It’s a bizarre stance for the selectors to take. If nothing else, the Bairstow fracas demonstrates the huge significance of the Ashes in the sporting culture of both nations. You want to maximise your chances, don’t you? Why would you deliberately go into such a massive series with a such a prominent millstone around your neck? It’s difficult to understand.

It’s true Marcus Harris has fluffed the opportunities he’s had at Test level thus far (average of 25.29 in 14 Tests). No question about it. But it’s just as true that his performances over the past two years have conspicuously eclipsed those of Warner. In the 2023 country cricket season, Harris made 457 runs for Gloucestershire at an average of 57.13, with two centuries and two fifties in nine innings. The year before that, he made 726 runs at 42.71 for Gloucestershire across 17 innings. In the 2022-23 Sheffield Shield, he made 601 runs at 37.56 in the 2022-23 Sheffield Shield (i.e. okay but not stellar).

How does Warner compare? Let’s assume for a moment that Warner’s historically abysmal Ashes tour of England in 2019 (95 runs across five Tests at an average of 9.50, including three ducks and five single-digit scores) was some sort of aberration. (It wasn’t, but let’s for a moment say it was.)

He played two of the four Tests in the subsequent home series against India (which Australia lost), making 67 runs at 16.75 across four innings. In the 2021-22 home Ashes series, he rebounded a little, with 273 runs at 34.13 including two 90+ scores but no tons. In the three Test series in Pakistan (which Australia won 1-0), he maintained that level, averaging 33.80 across 5 innings, nearly achieving the bare minimum Australia requires of its Test opener. His highest score in the two away Tests against Sri Lanka was 25 (series drawn 1-1).

In two Tests against West Indies and three against a very lacklustre and dispirited South Africa during the 2022-23 Australian summer, he made 315 runs at 39.38, but the data needs close examination. Those 315 runs included one innings of 200 against a totally demoralized South African attack. I’m not saying that knock must be dismissed, just heavily discounted. After all, Alex Carey made 111, Smith 85, Head 51 and Green 51 not out in the same innings (Australia made 575 for 8). Not the most challenging of conditions, you’d have to say. Stripping out that one big score, Warner made 115 runs at 16.43 in his other seven innings that summer. He then made scores of 1, 10 and 15 (average 8.67) in three innings on the tour of India before getting injured. And then he walks into the Ashes team.

Why? It doesn’t make sense.

In addition to everything else, it isn’t fair. The selectors always tell players they’ll be rewarded for performances. Tell that to players like Harris and Neser, who can’t get a game even after doing all that’s asked of them.

Warner, meanwhile, has a history of failures in English conditions. Did he play county cricket like Harris? No, he played IPL. The selectors picked him anyway, despite little evidence that he can play in England, and despite a recent history of deteriorating performances.

So far across the World Test Championship final against India and the first three Ashes Tests, Warner has 185 runs at an average of 23.13 but has failed to reach double figures fifty percent of the time (4 innings out of 8). His top score of 66 in the Second Test was on a slow, flat pitch on which Smith made 110, Head 77 and Labuschagne 47, not to mention Stokes’ 155 and Duckett’s two scores of 98 and 83. You could say Warner underperformed in that game, too. The pitch in the Third Test at Headingley is much harder and faster than in the first two Tests and batting clearly is more challenging for all players, but once again Warner’s failures were conspicuous. He lasted only five balls in both innings, falling to Broad yet again. It’s painful to watch. The selectors seem to cherry-pick data points such as his 200 against South Africa to justify Warner’s inclusion, but they fail to acknowledge that it’s Warner’s occasional decent score that is the aberration. The failures are the norm.

Meanwhile, the selectors and his teammates (bless ’em) tell us they ‘back Davey to come good’ and he’s ‘batting better than ever in the nets’. Terrific. The next time a Test match is played in the nets, I’ll put some money on him.

I have no idea whether Harris would succeed if given another chance, but isn’t it common sense to pick the best players you have available, then hope for the best? Australia needs its best openers for the Ashes. Warner is not that. He simply isn’t, and hasn’t been for some time.

I don’t get it. Where is Trevor Hohns when you need him?

Warner: Enough Already

Enough is enough. David Warner must not be picked for the WTC final or the Ashes. It’s been fifteen months since we last called on the selectors to put Warner out to pasture (see Yesterday’s Hero). He’s still here, and dragging down the team’s chances every time he walks out to bat. It was alarming to see Andrew Macdonald quoted as saying “[a]t the moment Dave’s fully in our plans for the World Test Championship” after the end of the India Test series. He needs to explain the logic underlying that statement.

Ricky Ponting, too, seemed to share this sentiment, saying “I think they’ll definitely want to play him in the World Test Championship match” without giving a reason. Even Ponting, however, seems confused, saying in the same interview that he thinks Warner missed a chance to retire during the Australian summer and that “David’s record in the UK is not as strong as it is in some other places around the world”. Ricky, if he should have retired and plays poorly in England, why on earth would they select him for England? It makes no sense.

In 28 Test innings in 17 Tests since December 2021, Warner has made 847 runs at an average of 31.37. This is already mediocre for a Test opener, but if you strip out his aberrant 200 against a weak South African team in the first innings of the Second Test of the 2022-23 home series, it drops to 24.88. And it’s worth noting Alex Carey also made 111 in that same innings, while Steve Smith made 85 and both Travis Head and Cameron Green each made 51. So not the toughest of assignments, really.

If you look only at his most recent 7 Tests (11 innings) from the beginning of the 2022-23 home summer to the Second Test against India in Delhi when he retired hurt, he’s made 341 runs at 31.00. Strip out that one-off double ton against the Proteas, and his average for that period drops to 12.82. And this is the guy who averaged 9.50 across ten Test innings (including three consecutive ducks) in the most recent Ashes series in England in 2019 when he became Stuart Broad’s bunny.

It’s delusional to imagine Warner will do well in England this summer. And there are – for a change – a number of compelling alternatives.

*Renshaw’s number include Sheffield Shield, PM’s XI vs West Indies and three Tests. ^Harris’ numbers include Sheffield Shield and PM’s XI.

The most obvious is Cameron Bancroft, who deserves a Test recall several years after Sandpapergate. He’s the leading run-scorer in the 2022-23 Sheffield Shield, with 849 runs at 60.64, including four centuries. And while I don’t recommend picking Test players based on white ball, it doesn’t hurt his case that he’s made 327 runs at 65.40 in this season’s Marsh One Day Cup.

Or there’s Matt Renshaw. Although Renshaw failed in the three innings he played in India this time, it’s worth remembering he made a match-winning 68 in the first innings of the First Test in Pune in 2017 (when Steve O’Keefe cleaned up with 12 wickets). He’s had only an average sort of red ball season in 2022-23 with 501 runs at 41.75 including 81 and 101 not out for the PM’s XI against the West Indies but made 194 runs at 64.67 in the Marsh One Day Cup. He also made 620 runs at 47.69 for Somerset in the England County Championship in 2022, so he knowns English conditions.

Then there’s Marcus Harris, who continues to fall short when he gets his opportunities but who still represents a better bet than Warner. Harris only played 7 Shield games this season, making 468 runs at 39.00, but scoring two centuries and two 50s. Like Renshaw, he did well in the Marsh One Day Cup (315 runs at 63.00) and knows English conditions , making 726 runs at 42.70 for Gloucestershire in 2022.

Any one of these guys, who have all played Test cricket, could do a better job than Warner in England, although Bancroft is the obvious chance given the numbers he has racked up recently.

Swap Burns for Wade

It’s no longer up for discussion. The Australian selectors cannot afford to retain Joe Burns as opening batsmen for the First Test against India in Adelaide on 17 December. After scores of 4, 0, 0 and 1 in practice matches against India A and India – and 57 Sheffield Shield runs across five innings this season at an average of 11.40 – Burns has demonstrated his confidence is shot and his technique sadly lacking. With an average of 38.30 and only 4 centuries across 36 Test innings, Burns has never been a world-class opener, and at 31, he’s not going to start getting better.

With David Warner and Will Pucovski absent due to injury and concussion respectively, Marcus Harris has been drafted into the squad. With scores of 35, 25 not out, 26 and 5 in the practice matches, Harris hasn’t shot the lights out, but he’s more convincing than Burns. And with scores of 239, 71 and 45 in his three Shield games this season, his recent results suggest he’s learned a thing or two since his first 9 Tests led to 385 runs across 17 innings at 24.06. With openers dropping like flies, he’s a reasonable selection.

But if Burns is jettisoned – and he should be – who will open with Harris?

I don’t like the idea of shoe-horning Labuschagne into the opening position. He’s not in the team as an opener and I think messing with his position in the order could be damaging.

Bring back Shaun Marsh? I suppose it’s not the worst idea, only because Marsh – with the pressure off him now he’s left the Test team – is churning out runs in the Sheffield Shield with scores of 31, 110 not out, 6, 115, 88 and 135 so far this season (485 runs at 97.00). But Marsh is 37 and right at the end of his career. It would hardly be a forward-looking move to bring him back.

I think the best option is to elevate Matthew Wade to open with Harris. Yes, it’s true Wade doesn’t normally open in red ball cricket, but he faces the new ball in white ball cricket, so it’s not as if the role is completely unfamiliar. And although I’m sceptical of picking Test batsmen on their white ball form (remember Aaron Finch and George Bailey?), Wade is an incumbent member of the Test team and has been in good form with the bat in white ball cricket. Moreover, his two Shield games this season have yielded 83, 57 not out, 10 and 59. It’s far from a perfect solution, but with openers thin on the ground and Burns doing his best to drop himself from contention with a string of low scores, it’s difficult to think of a better one.

The only other possibility might be to draft in Alex Carey to open the batting, which wouldn’t be utterly crazy only because Carey is Paine’s heir-apparent and some time in the Test team might be useful for him. But Carey is not a red ball opener either, and his inclusion would mean either Green or Wade would miss out in the middle order. So not a great idea, really.

Justin Langer likes to show loyalty to players and can be blind to their failings (Mitchell Marsh, anyone?), so it wouldn’t surprise me if he retains Burns to open. I hope, though, that he concedes Burns is not up to the job.

Here’s my preferred team for the First Test:

  1. M Wade
  2. M Harris
  3. M Labuschagne
  4. S Smith
  5. T Head
  6. C Green
  7. T Paine
  8. Cummins
  9. Starc
  10. Lyon
  11. Hazlewood
  12. Pattinson

Selectors Colour Blind on Finch

One of the biggest criticisms of Australia’s Test selectors is that they are inconsistent in their selection criteria. They imply that performance in red ball cricket is of paramount importance, yet they have in recent years rolled the dice on untested youngsters (e.g. Ashton Agar) or on players who have done well in white ball cricket. (e.g. George Bailey).

The Test squad selected for the first two Tests of the 2018-19 Indian summer is a reasonably sound one. It faces an uphill battle to defeat India because there is so little batting talent in Australia to choose from, but at least it’s consistent in that most of the batsmen can justify their selection on the strength of their red ball cricket, if for no other reason that there is nobody better to take their place.

Khawaja? Yes, fine. Travis Head? Well….I suppose so. Just. He’s been unconvincing but has done just well enough to get another chance given his youth. Marcus Harris is not a ‘bolter’ as the media has said. He has averaged north of 40 for both of the past two completed Shield seasons and is averaging 86.40 so far this season. He deserves his shot, and 26 is a good age to have learned his craft and to hit the accelerator. I hope Matt Renshaw gets his act together because he has youth on his side and just seems to ooze potential from every pore, but Harris edged him out, fair and square. Peter Handscomb might not make the starting eleven on 6 December but he, too, has a good combination of track record and recent performance. Even the hellishly inconsistent Shaun Marsh deserves his position based on recent performances. His brother, Mitchell, more assuredly does not deserve his, but the selectors have made it clear Mitchell Marsh will be picked if he can more or less stand upright. Yes, he made 151 against Queensland at Allan Border Field recently but who hasn’t made a score like that on that wicket? It’s a road. Put me in on that wicket. I’ll make 150, too.

But I digress.

The glaring exception is Aaron Finch. Why on earth is he described by all and sundry as a ‘lock’ for the First Test? Finch is a nice bloke and an experienced hand, but there is no evidence (and I mean none) to suggest he is among Australia’s top six red ball batsmen. After 79 first-class matches, he averages 36.58 and has made a mere 7 centuries from 131 innings. In the 2017-18 Shield season, he played 8 matches but averaged only 35.28 with only a single century. His selection is being described by the coaches as justfied based on innings of 62, 49, 39 and 31 in the 2-Test series against Pakistan in the UAE. Not long ago, Glenn Maxwell was denied a Test spot because it was said he needed to make hundreds. Now, personally I think Maxwell is overrated and does not necessarily deserve to be in the Test team, but if that is the rule for selection, why on earth is Finch a ‘lock’? It makes no sense. He currently appears to be out of form, but Finch is primarily a white ball specialist who swings hard for the fences without moving his feet. C’mon, he is not a Test batsman. I hope very much to be proven wrong, but if he opens for Australia on 6 December, I suspect he will fail against what is the best Indian pace attack to visit these shores for a long time.

If one is honest and logical, there is no place for Finch.

If the selectors really mean what they say and wish to strike the proper balance between performance and potential in red ball cricket, and if they absolutely insist on retaining M Marsh, the top six should be:

M Harris
M Renshaw
U Khawaja
S Marsh
T Head or P Handscomb
M Marsh
T Paine
P Cummins
M Starc
N Lyon
J Hazlewood

Personally, I would jettison M Marsh and play both Head and Handscomb with four bowlers (after all, Head can bowl some part-time offies), but as I said, the selectors appear illogically committed to M Marsh.

Paine’s position deserves plenty of debate, but we’ll save that for another post.

Square Pegs in Round Holes

Australia’s Test, ODI and T20 teams all have their problems; some are common across more  than one format whereas others are unique to a respective format. As far as the ODI team is concerned, the biggest problem is the selectors have stacked the batting order with T20 bash-&-crash merchants who have a lot of brute strength but precious little technique.

The selectors appear to have missed the fact that the ODI format is more of a long form of the game than a short form. Fifty overs is a long time to bat. A top order batsman ideally needs to be able to bat for at least 20-30 overs (and preferably more if they can). If they get half the strike, that’s something like 60-90 balls. He/she needs to be able to negotiate the new white ball, dig in and build an innings and then launch an attack later in the innings.

T20 players are rarely called upon to bat for more than, say, five or ten overs at most (i.e. 30 to 60 balls). With half the strike, that’s 15-30 balls. Throughout Aaron Finch’s T20 career, he has faced an average of only 22 balls per T20 innings (yes, I looked it up on ESPN CricInfo). For Chris Lynn, the figure is 19 balls. For Glenn Maxwell, it is only 15 balls (because he usually comes in down the order). Players like this have great hand-to-eye coordination but next to no foot movement. When the white ball is coming onto the bat they just stand and deliver, but when it’s moving around, they inevitably fail. The selectors are flogging several dead horses.

But, I hear you cry, Australia has no decent batsmen in the longer form either. True enough! But successful ODI batsmen won’t be found in the T20 ranks. The selectors need to look at the likes of Matt Renshaw, Usman Khawaja (when fit, of course), and Peter Handscomb. Other potential candidates are waiting in the wings (e.g. Marcus Harris, Jake Lehmann – both of whom could just as easily be considered for the Test team at some point over the summer).

By all means reserve a couple of slots at No. 6 and/or No. 7 for the bash-&-crash merchants but without some technically accomplished batsmen in the upper order, the cause will be lost by the time the big hitters are asked to come in. By then, the pressure is on and the game is more often than not already lost. This pretty much sums up Glenn Maxwell’s career.

Sound batting technique is currently in desperately short supply across all forms in Australian cricket, but the T20 specialists are the guys least likely to display it.