Bad decision all-round
Handscomb axing just not cricket
CRICKET:
There are two types of cricket fans in this world – those who enjoy criticising selectors and those who don’t.
I’m in the latter category. They have an extremely difficult job and so far this summer they’ve made a reasonable fist of things.
Cameron Bancroft, Tim Paine, Shaun Marsh ... tick, tick, tick. Glenn Maxwell was unlucky but his chance will come.
But if reports of Mitchell Marsh’s selection for the WACA Test prove true, then Trevor Hohns, Darren Lehmann, Mark Waugh and Greg Chappell have got their latest decision horribly wrong.
Their disturbing obsession with playing an all-rounder at all costs has again gotten the better of them and Peter Handscomb (pictured) is the fall guy.
The selectors baulked because they saw 40 minutes of awkwardness in Adelaide against a bowler who has taken more than 500 Test wickets.
Never mind that everyone else failed too.
They baulked because unless you’re Steve Smith, you are not allowed to be different. Never mind that in bygone eras almost every world-class batsman was a back foot player.
They baulked because they listened to Ricky Ponting, Kevin Pietersen and Shane Warne dissect and unpack Handscomb’s technique to the point of ridiculousness on the TV coverage.
Here is what should matter: Handscomb’s technique allowed him to average 50 across his first 12 Tests in varying conditions.
Yes, his recent stats don’t paint a rosy picture.
Averaging 24 from nine first-class innings this season is hardly ideal but losing 4.5kg in 40-degree temperatures in Bangladesh in what was described as a “career-defining’’ knock just three Tests ago should count for something.
The selectors will argue they are again taking a “horses for courses approach’’. But since when does averaging 21 from 35 Test innings win you a spot in Australia’s top six? Since when did anyone doubt the ability of Australia’s four frontline bowlers to knock England over twice?
Remember the tourists have not scored more than 302 in an innings this series and the Aussies have claimed 40 wickets from a possible 40. No fifth trundler has been required.
First innings Shield scores at the WACA this year have included totals of 424, 414, 516 and 363. But how many of these matches included Josh Hazlewood, Mitchell Starc, Nathan Lyon and Pat Cummins? None.
A fifth bowler would be nice, but it is not a necessity. Australia has no Andrew Flintoff or Shane Watson equivalent and yet we continue to flog a dead horse.
Six batsmen, one keeper and four standout bowlers is a formula that has stood the Test of time in these conditions. Why tinker?