With all the respect in the world, I don't think that reviewing other instances is much help. Smith has always been in many respects unique, especially technically. At the start he looked like a walking lbw, but when anyone tried to hit his pads he pinged them through mid wicket for four. So they bowled a seventh stump line and he either waited them out or clouted them through point. He had the Poms baffled. But now, against a full pace swinging ball, fresh bowlers and zip in the pitch, at age 35, he's not quite there. Or not there often enough to be safe. In response, at the end of last season, the positions he was getting into were positively grotesque; too much even for a player of his greatness to overcome. A young opener who returned his numbers of last season would be sent back to the Shield to work on his game. Smith too should go back to where he is great. I'm with you -- Bancroft, even if some people obviously still don't like him. Fraser-McGurk is a box of Catherine wheels with too may damp squibs.
How much of Smith opening is due to the growing divide between Shield and Test cricket, when the standard of the former is diminishing further as players opt out of their state contracts to play in franchise leagues and the Test players themselves don't play anymore (although that's not new). Australia does not seem to be picking wildcards like Hull or Smith either, something Hussain and Atherton attribute to every county match now being streamed. The Lawrence experiment may also have been disrespecting an opponent, the same team that Tom Moody failed against when asked to open (away from home too).
Nice discussion. The kind of things that have been lost with the advent of ODIs and now T20s. Openers were a big topic of discussion among cricket fans in India in the 1990s when we could never find a reliable opening pair.
Its an interesting conversation for sure, but if Steve Smith doesn't open and we bring in a proper opener who do we drop? You mention that maybe we don't need two allrounders, but this WTC cycle Marsh has the highest average in the Aussie team and the second most runs behind Khawaja so you really can't leave him out. That leaves dropping Green, the man that we re-arranged the bating order around, surely he cant be dropped! Further in his favour, his stats speak for themselves, 3rd highest bating average this WTC plus a match winning performance in the last series. As much as I am reluctant to suggest it, is Travis Head the only player we can drop on form based on his low average? He is an absolute match winner when it comes off though and is coming in hot off some blistering performances in white ball cricket.
In summary, I feel that the batting order simply cant be changed before the first test against India. After that, if one fails when others prosper they have to get dropped. If its a middle order player who goes, Smith can get put back where he belongs, but I think we have to accept the idea that he might be the player who makes space for a proper opening batter.
As an aside, and because I commented several times above on averages, we only have 2 batters averaging over 40 this WTC, only the west indies has fewer players than that. India on the other hand has 9 players with an average above 40. I guess the point there is, will it matter where Smith plays or if he plays at all if the other batters out there cant get runs either.
In all these talk about openers, we loose sight of the fact that Virender Sehwag was also a middle order player and went on to open in test cricket and has a very successful test record with an average of 49.34, strike rate of 83 and with 23 test 100s after 104 test matches. A reluctant opener who wanted to bat in the middle order but had to open because of no vacancy there. He himself said that he like to bat in the middle order rather than opening.
But, when there are conversations regarding best openers, he hardly gets a mention unlike Hayden, Cook, Smith, Langer from his era.
Good point. He was a magnificent opener. I will never forget the straight drive he played at Chennai on Day 4 of the Test in 2004. He crunched it so hard it bounced back off the fence a long way and every Australian thought, oh god he is going to chase these runs down by lunch tomorrow. Then it rained.
The rise and rise of T20 etc is certainly having a negative effect on Australian test cricket (howzat for stating the bleeding obvious?) as we only have six first-class teams and few up and comers seem to have much desire of playing long-form cricket. Little wonder the team is ageing.
God knows how we're gonna beat India this season, but I guess miracles do happen. India must laugh their heads off when they come here nowadays; more Indian fans than Australian in the crowd (or at least make more noise) and no fear of Australian conditions anymore. Whereas - of course - we still struggle over there.
As far as an opener goes, just pick anyone, pick a name out of a hat, Smith will do. Maybe the Gods will smile on him this season (hopefully - fingers crossed).
Anyway, never mind about that, the real cricket starts this weekend, with that now-quaint form of the game: a domestic 50-over match between NSW and WA in Sydney which I hope to attend (with the other 500-odd diehards).
With all the respect in the world, I don't think that reviewing other instances is much help. Smith has always been in many respects unique, especially technically. At the start he looked like a walking lbw, but when anyone tried to hit his pads he pinged them through mid wicket for four. So they bowled a seventh stump line and he either waited them out or clouted them through point. He had the Poms baffled. But now, against a full pace swinging ball, fresh bowlers and zip in the pitch, at age 35, he's not quite there. Or not there often enough to be safe. In response, at the end of last season, the positions he was getting into were positively grotesque; too much even for a player of his greatness to overcome. A young opener who returned his numbers of last season would be sent back to the Shield to work on his game. Smith too should go back to where he is great. I'm with you -- Bancroft, even if some people obviously still don't like him. Fraser-McGurk is a box of Catherine wheels with too may damp squibs.
How much of Smith opening is due to the growing divide between Shield and Test cricket, when the standard of the former is diminishing further as players opt out of their state contracts to play in franchise leagues and the Test players themselves don't play anymore (although that's not new). Australia does not seem to be picking wildcards like Hull or Smith either, something Hussain and Atherton attribute to every county match now being streamed. The Lawrence experiment may also have been disrespecting an opponent, the same team that Tom Moody failed against when asked to open (away from home too).
Nice discussion. The kind of things that have been lost with the advent of ODIs and now T20s. Openers were a big topic of discussion among cricket fans in India in the 1990s when we could never find a reliable opening pair.
Its an interesting conversation for sure, but if Steve Smith doesn't open and we bring in a proper opener who do we drop? You mention that maybe we don't need two allrounders, but this WTC cycle Marsh has the highest average in the Aussie team and the second most runs behind Khawaja so you really can't leave him out. That leaves dropping Green, the man that we re-arranged the bating order around, surely he cant be dropped! Further in his favour, his stats speak for themselves, 3rd highest bating average this WTC plus a match winning performance in the last series. As much as I am reluctant to suggest it, is Travis Head the only player we can drop on form based on his low average? He is an absolute match winner when it comes off though and is coming in hot off some blistering performances in white ball cricket.
In summary, I feel that the batting order simply cant be changed before the first test against India. After that, if one fails when others prosper they have to get dropped. If its a middle order player who goes, Smith can get put back where he belongs, but I think we have to accept the idea that he might be the player who makes space for a proper opening batter.
As an aside, and because I commented several times above on averages, we only have 2 batters averaging over 40 this WTC, only the west indies has fewer players than that. India on the other hand has 9 players with an average above 40. I guess the point there is, will it matter where Smith plays or if he plays at all if the other batters out there cant get runs either.
In all these talk about openers, we loose sight of the fact that Virender Sehwag was also a middle order player and went on to open in test cricket and has a very successful test record with an average of 49.34, strike rate of 83 and with 23 test 100s after 104 test matches. A reluctant opener who wanted to bat in the middle order but had to open because of no vacancy there. He himself said that he like to bat in the middle order rather than opening.
But, when there are conversations regarding best openers, he hardly gets a mention unlike Hayden, Cook, Smith, Langer from his era.
Good point. He was a magnificent opener. I will never forget the straight drive he played at Chennai on Day 4 of the Test in 2004. He crunched it so hard it bounced back off the fence a long way and every Australian thought, oh god he is going to chase these runs down by lunch tomorrow. Then it rained.
Has it not rained, he would have gotten us home, I am sure
The original Bazballer!
The rise and rise of T20 etc is certainly having a negative effect on Australian test cricket (howzat for stating the bleeding obvious?) as we only have six first-class teams and few up and comers seem to have much desire of playing long-form cricket. Little wonder the team is ageing.
God knows how we're gonna beat India this season, but I guess miracles do happen. India must laugh their heads off when they come here nowadays; more Indian fans than Australian in the crowd (or at least make more noise) and no fear of Australian conditions anymore. Whereas - of course - we still struggle over there.
As far as an opener goes, just pick anyone, pick a name out of a hat, Smith will do. Maybe the Gods will smile on him this season (hopefully - fingers crossed).
Anyway, never mind about that, the real cricket starts this weekend, with that now-quaint form of the game: a domestic 50-over match between NSW and WA in Sydney which I hope to attend (with the other 500-odd diehards).
Where is the new pod post?