PlanetCricket
Bot
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2010
Article by Sylvester -
This article follows up Part 1.
Final vs England
Finally we are at the final game of the tournament where the weak-links I pointed out previously, all came together. Once again Australia were in trouble after losing both openers cheaply, once again number 3 and 4 made little to no impact. The total set would be similar to the ones against Bangladesh and Sri Lanka which incidentally had similar collapses. This time, the more consistent English batting lineup who were more equipped to handle the quicker Barbados, had no problem chasing down the total.
As I pointed out, a number 3 should be there to stabilize a collapse and then counter attack. Clarke partially did the former, although when he left Australia were still in deep trouble at 4/45. But he most definitely failed in the counter attack role. Ricky Ponting changed our expectations for a captain batting at number 3. There are numerous World Cups and vital Test matches where you see Ponting leading from the front with his bat, counter attacking when the team is in danger and most importantly producing that match winning 50 or 100. Michael Clarke didn’t even make it to 30 and certainly didn’t lead from the front with his bat.
The key point here is the number 3 and 4 of the team once again failed in this tournament. It should be no coincidence█ that when David Hussey batted at 3 we had one of our best days with the bat. The other, ironically came when David Hussey was in the other key position of number 4. There was no consistency in the two vital positions and Clarke and Haddin never delivered. You would never see Ricky Ponting move himself away from the number 3 spot. This really just emphasis the point that Clarke is not made for the T20 format, as number 3 is the only spot where he should be batting at, yet hes not even batting there half the time.
The openers that promised so much before and even during the tournament, failed to fire in the big matches. Warner was unluckily run out but the fall in form of Shane Watson was one of the big reasons why Australia struggled in this final. In the Champions Trophy where Watson was at the peak of his powers, he scored back to back 100s against England in the Semi and NZ in the Final. While his bowling was off key in the Final, it was more than effective before that including the 2-35 he took against England in the Semi. Fast forward to the World T20 where Watson produced back to back scores under 20 and his bowling cost him 13 and 14 runs per an over. Michael Clarke had no backup plan for this situation, although there was one right in front of his face, in the very effective off spin of David Hussey.
Some stats from the tournament
Michael Clarke – 92 runs at 15.33 with a strike rate of 80.70 and a highest score of 27.
Brad Haddin – 98 runs at 14 with a strike rate of 102.08 and a highest score of 42.
David Warner – 150 runs at 21.42 with a strike rate of 148.51 and a highest score of 72.
Shane Watson – 163 at 23.28 with a strike rate of 146.84 and a highest score of 81.
While none of the stats look all that impressive, the latter two contributed in a few games and their strike rate were at the perfect level. Clarke and Haddin on the other hand failed to contribute and their strike rates were dreadful for Twenty/20.
What can be done?
So with everything that has been written in the article, what could have been done differently and what could be done for the future?
The glaring one is obviously removing Clarke completely from the team and giving the captaincy to a guy that knows what he is doing in T20: Cameron White. The other is replacing a wicket keeper whose record is just as bad as Clarke with Tim Paine who scored 166 runs at 33.2 with a strike rate of 207.5 in the KFC Big Bash last summer.
On the bowling front, while its hard to be too critical of the bowling, the lack of a consistent bowler or a death bowler remain the concern. But the biggest one was the 5th bowling option in Watson not being up to the mark. This can be fixed by moving Steven Smith up to 7 and bringing in an extra bowler.
Lastly, allowing all our International players to play in the domestic competition would ensure we are picking from the best rather than guessing based on Test and ODI form.
So with these slight tweaks my lineup for future games would be:
Shaun Marsh could also come into the side if we decide against Steven Smith at 7. John Hastings should be another that comes into contention. Mitchell Marsh if he lives up the hype, could provide another bowling option if he becomes more consistent in the batting. And lastly Philip Hughes a man not talked about for the shorter formats, has a very good partnership with Warner and hes also capable of providing that steady opener.
The changes I made removed the dead weight we were carrying throughout the tournament. Would it have made a difference in the final? I suspect so but would they have won is something we will never know since that lineup never got the chance to play.
More...
This article follows up Part 1.
Final vs England
Finally we are at the final game of the tournament where the weak-links I pointed out previously, all came together. Once again Australia were in trouble after losing both openers cheaply, once again number 3 and 4 made little to no impact. The total set would be similar to the ones against Bangladesh and Sri Lanka which incidentally had similar collapses. This time, the more consistent English batting lineup who were more equipped to handle the quicker Barbados, had no problem chasing down the total.
As I pointed out, a number 3 should be there to stabilize a collapse and then counter attack. Clarke partially did the former, although when he left Australia were still in deep trouble at 4/45. But he most definitely failed in the counter attack role. Ricky Ponting changed our expectations for a captain batting at number 3. There are numerous World Cups and vital Test matches where you see Ponting leading from the front with his bat, counter attacking when the team is in danger and most importantly producing that match winning 50 or 100. Michael Clarke didn’t even make it to 30 and certainly didn’t lead from the front with his bat.
The key point here is the number 3 and 4 of the team once again failed in this tournament. It should be no coincidence█ that when David Hussey batted at 3 we had one of our best days with the bat. The other, ironically came when David Hussey was in the other key position of number 4. There was no consistency in the two vital positions and Clarke and Haddin never delivered. You would never see Ricky Ponting move himself away from the number 3 spot. This really just emphasis the point that Clarke is not made for the T20 format, as number 3 is the only spot where he should be batting at, yet hes not even batting there half the time.
The openers that promised so much before and even during the tournament, failed to fire in the big matches. Warner was unluckily run out but the fall in form of Shane Watson was one of the big reasons why Australia struggled in this final. In the Champions Trophy where Watson was at the peak of his powers, he scored back to back 100s against England in the Semi and NZ in the Final. While his bowling was off key in the Final, it was more than effective before that including the 2-35 he took against England in the Semi. Fast forward to the World T20 where Watson produced back to back scores under 20 and his bowling cost him 13 and 14 runs per an over. Michael Clarke had no backup plan for this situation, although there was one right in front of his face, in the very effective off spin of David Hussey.
Some stats from the tournament
Michael Clarke – 92 runs at 15.33 with a strike rate of 80.70 and a highest score of 27.
Brad Haddin – 98 runs at 14 with a strike rate of 102.08 and a highest score of 42.
David Warner – 150 runs at 21.42 with a strike rate of 148.51 and a highest score of 72.
Shane Watson – 163 at 23.28 with a strike rate of 146.84 and a highest score of 81.
While none of the stats look all that impressive, the latter two contributed in a few games and their strike rate were at the perfect level. Clarke and Haddin on the other hand failed to contribute and their strike rates were dreadful for Twenty/20.
What can be done?
So with everything that has been written in the article, what could have been done differently and what could be done for the future?
The glaring one is obviously removing Clarke completely from the team and giving the captaincy to a guy that knows what he is doing in T20: Cameron White. The other is replacing a wicket keeper whose record is just as bad as Clarke with Tim Paine who scored 166 runs at 33.2 with a strike rate of 207.5 in the KFC Big Bash last summer.
On the bowling front, while its hard to be too critical of the bowling, the lack of a consistent bowler or a death bowler remain the concern. But the biggest one was the 5th bowling option in Watson not being up to the mark. This can be fixed by moving Steven Smith up to 7 and bringing in an extra bowler.
Lastly, allowing all our International players to play in the domestic competition would ensure we are picking from the best rather than guessing based on Test and ODI form.
So with these slight tweaks my lineup for future games would be:
- Tim Paine (wk)
- David Warner
- Shane Watson
- Cameron White (c)
- David Hussey
- Michael Hussey
- Steven Smith
- Mitchell Johnson
- Nathan Hauritz/Doug Bollinger/Ryan Harris
- Shaun Tait
- Dirk Nannes
Shaun Marsh could also come into the side if we decide against Steven Smith at 7. John Hastings should be another that comes into contention. Mitchell Marsh if he lives up the hype, could provide another bowling option if he becomes more consistent in the batting. And lastly Philip Hughes a man not talked about for the shorter formats, has a very good partnership with Warner and hes also capable of providing that steady opener.
The changes I made removed the dead weight we were carrying throughout the tournament. Would it have made a difference in the final? I suspect so but would they have won is something we will never know since that lineup never got the chance to play.
More...
