By Adrian Meredith
MELBOURNE, Australia
(TheSportsNEXT) December 6, 2012: The Cricket Australia announced Thursday
Phillip Hughes as the replacement for Ricky Ponting who announced his Test retirement
after the Perth Test.
TheSportsNEXT.com’s cricket analyst Adrian Meredith reviewed
the candidates who looked likely to be Ricky Ponting's replacement in the
Australian Test team:
George Bailey
Why he should be
picked: Since his T20 debut about a year ago - as captain - he has forced
his way into the ODI team as well, and has done increasingly well, with a very
good average of over 40, putting a high price on his wicket, the kind of
temperament needed in test cricket. He also averages over 40 in FC cricket and
is in decent form.
Why he shouldn't be
picked: His record in limited overs formats is considerably better than in
first class formats and he is known as a limited overs specialist. Until a year
ago, he wasn't even thought of as ever playing an international. He could
easily fall apart, as did fellow limited overs specialist Shaun Marsh - though
Faf du Plessis is a limited overs specialist, and Vernon Philander was
considered to be too; so you never know.
David Hussey
Why he should be
picked: He has ample international experience and, overall, has done
incredibly well. He is in supreme form in all 3 formats right now. And he
averages well over 50 overall. As the younger brother of Michael Hussey,
Australia's best batsman, he can be guaranteed to do very well at test level,
especially if the two of them bat together. He should have been picked some 5
or 6 years ago.
Why he shouldn’t be
picked: He is already 35 (even though he is the younger brother) and would
perhaps have 3 or 4 years in the side, at most. He is also known as a limited
overs specialist - especially in T20s - in spite of his supreme FC record. If
he does play, it'd be a stop gap measure, as then they'd have to find his
replacement a few years later.
Phillip Hughes
Why he should be
picked: He had such a great FC record, and did well in his first few tests,
before failing somewhat dramatically, being dropped, coming back, and failing
even worse. But he still has a better record than Ed Cowan. He is in good form
in the past year or so.
Why he shouldn’t be
picked: He still has that poor technique that has been found out. Until he
fixes that technique, experienced bowlers at international level are going to
keep exploiting it, and, no matter how good his form is, he is never going to
score. His form is irrelevant while he has that flawed technique.
Usman Khawaja
Why he should be
picked: He had a good start to his FC career and was somewhat prematurely
thrust into the Australian team a couple of years ago, where he had a below par
return. Since then his FC performances have dropped significantly; but in the
past 6 months or so they have picked up again.
Why he shouldn’t be
picked: After such a poor start to his test career, it is probably best to
wait until he has a lengthier display of good FC returns before bringing him
back. He is probably a good option in the long term but my feeling is that we
should wait another year more before giving him a spot in test cricket.
Mark Cosgrove
Why he should be
picked: He has been a solid batsman for several years now but since moving
to Tasmania has really lifted a gear. Ed Cowan has been in the same side but
Cosgrove has done better than Cowan, is in better form and has a better overall
record, making many people wonder why or how Cowan could possibly have been
ahead of Cosgrove.
Why he shouldn’t be
picked: He is overweight and the physical demands of international cricket,
especially test cricket, may be too much. Also, while he does have a better
record in every way to Cowan's, it isn't much better and realistically Cowan
probably isn't doing well enough to stay in test cricket, so having a similar
player come in may be counter productive.
Callum Ferguson
Why he should be
picked: He did very well at ODI level before injuries pushed him out of the
side. He had a few good FC performances in the past few years too. He seems to
be a player who lifts for the big time and if so could do well at the test
level.
Why he shouldn’t be
picked: His overall FC record is poor and he is more known as a limited
overs specialist. On top of that, while he isn't out of form, he isn't exactly
in form either.
Adam Voges
Why he should be
picked: Something of a long game specialist, for various reasons Voges
never played a test, in spite of doing well in the ODI setup, and showing that
he is well suited to the longer formats. He is in decent form, has a wealth of
experience behind him and is very solid.
Why he shouldn’t be
picked: He is on the wrong side of 30 years old and, while 33 years old
means he still has a few years in him, the David Hussey argument might come in.
He also averages barely over 40 in FC cricket, which may make selectors nervous
about picking him. He would probably do well but it could be seen as a stop gap
measure, as he would then have to be replaced later on.
Alex Doolan
Why he should be
picked: He has had some magnificent returns, and in that Australia A game
against South Africa, when Rob Quiney "forced" his way into the team,
Doolan actually had an unbeaten 160 not out. He is in fantastic form, probably
only behind Ricky Ponting in domestic cricket this year. If they are serious
about picking players while they are in form, Doolan has to be the choice.
Why he shouldn’t be
picked: Doolan might be in form, but his overall record is somewhat less
impressive. While he hasn't had a very lengthy career, it doesn't make very
good reading. But then again, he played many games as a wicket keeper.
Peter Nevill
Why he should be
picked: He has come on in leaps and bounds into the New South Wales squad,
overtaking Dan Smith and realistically also Brad Haddin - though Haddin still
gets to have the gloves, and is probably 2nd behind Wade on the wicket keeper
ranks. His FC average of 43 suggests that he could make the test side purely as
a batsman, and he is just going from strength to strength too. While he is a
wicket keeper by trade, so is Michael Hussey, and he is becoming used to
playing as a batsman. If he does end up replacing Wade, having some test
experience behind him would be good too. He could be like AB de Villiers was to
Mark Boucher.
Why he shouldn’t be
picked: He is still regarded as a wicket keeper and it may be somewhat
insulting to Wade to pick a 2nd keeper in the test side.
Joe Burns
Why he should be
picked: He is a young player with a great average who is bursting through
the ranks.
Why he shouldn’t be
picked: Statistics can be misleading and after just one season that great
average could easily slump. He has no international experience of any kind and
it would be a massive risk to thrust him into the test side.
Steve Smith
Why he should be
picked: He is in great form, has had success at international level and
also failure and therefore is mentally strong enough to cope. He is starting to
learn how to win. He also has a very good cricketing brain and knows how to
make the most of any situation.
Why he shouldn’t be
picked: His form isn't good enough to force his way in purely as a batsman
and his failures in the tests that he did play in will make the selectors
nervous. He needs another year or two of excellent performances to force his
way in.
For me, the best options are: George Bailey, David Hussey, Adam Voges and Peter Nevill. Given that the selectors don't like Hussey and Voges
because of their age; that leaves us with Bailey vs Nevill. I like both options
actually. Bailey has shown that he has the temperament required to make it at
test level and I think that his chances of success at test level are very high.
Nevill is a wicket keeper by trade but he has had to fight so hard that he is
developing all of the right characteristics to succeed at the highest level.
Remember when AB de Villiers played for South Africa as a batsman in spite of
being a specialist keeper? It worked out very well for them, and I see the same
thing for Nevill. Then, if Wade is ever injured, Nevill can take over, which
would make a nice easy transition.
For me, therefore, and bearing in mind the Australian
selectors, I think that it will be Bailey and Nevill. Oh, and Ed Cowan is going
to be dumped. Sorry, but while he did score that one century, he has done
nothing else all series long and just isn't test quality.
No comments:
Post a Comment