Adelaide: The little Town that could

The conclusion of the Test Series between Australia and South Africa started off as one-sided and torturous for Australian fans, before becoming interesting, entertaining and full of hope with one small chardonnay-inspired move; to Adelaide.

While the Perth Test is always a boon for the majority of cricket-following Australians, where the 3 hour time difference allows one to get watch (at least) the final session after work.  It almost makes starting an 8-hour day at 9am bearable.  

The result in Perth, a crushing defeat after holding the advantage after the first day was tough to watch, but not apparently for the good people of Western Australia who didn’t appear to turn up at all.  You could argue that there was something better to do, but, well, Perth.

You can’t completely blame them though, while they have had a Test at home regularly for the last 20 years, its hardly received the same promotion or treatment as Melbourne or Sydney, whose dates have been largely locked in over the same period.

The same can be said for the Hobart Test.  While Cricket Australia seems to think it is doing various Capitals a favour by allowing them to host a Test match, they aren’t doing a lot to create interest or attraction to the game.

Doing anything outdoors in Tasmania in November is fraught with enough danger, but attempting a summer sport is just madness.  That the team was able to travel to the ground by snow-skiing over the Derwent River should have caused concerns.

The lack of interest in the game wasn't helped by the state of the Australian team, which seemed more like a boat struggling across the Tasman sea during the Sydney to Hobart race, though perhaps involving more players brothers storming off.

Then came Adelaide and for perhaps the first time in history, it seemed to fix everything.

Watching the game on television provided a real spectacle, not just on the field but off it too.  The sunsets were spectacular, the ground resplendent and you would think only an OLED TV could make the black colours stand out as much as they did.

In and around the ground a large crowd converged and created an energy about the game.  It reminded me of the Melbourne Cup, just without the images of young women assaulting police or people being pulled out of Rose Bushes.  It looked like people were enjoying the event and that it was being made accessible to all.

On the ground, the game itself suddenly became a contest, with the bowlers getting the advantage, enabling Australia to take wickets when in the field and hold out like Bill Lawry with the bat.

It's a real credit to the good people at the South Australian Cricket Association that they’ve been able to make the Test into such an enjoyable and accessible event in such a short period of time.

It is in Crickets best interest to expand to grow to survive, rather than retract, so six Test Matches (one in each Capital) through the Australian summer would be the logical extension of this approach, but only if they are events that people are drawn to.

They don't have to be six-Test series, they could be 2 three-Test Series, or even 3 two-Test Series.  How else are we ever going to see Bangladesh play here?

Melbourne has the Boxing Day Test, Sydney has the New Year Test and Adelaide seems to have successfully captured interest through its Day-Night Test; so what are we to do to get the other half right?

To start with, giving each ground a set date or order in the sequence of Tests would make sense (e.g. Melbourne with the Boxing Day Test).  This would enable the locals to plan around the event and for the organisers to promote it on the local calendar. 

There is also the opportunity for change along these lines; the Sydney Test could be held over the Australia Day weekend, enabling it to access a broad market while also cashing in on all sorts of Australiana.  This would also enable Hobart to take over the New Years Test, allowing the match to be played in sunny conditions and coinciding with the finish of the boat race.

As for Perth and Brisbane, well, I don't have all the answers.

So Three cheers for Adelaide for saving the Test series and showing the others how to do it, pie floaters all round.

Question of the Day: How much should Australia panic?

The first test is over and the Australian cricket team is in ruins.  Having been in a winning position after the first day, Australia’s batsmen folded like a house of cards, the Bowlers couldn't find a pole at a flag convention and the Captain had all the strategy of a slightly-worn lounge chair.

Or so the press are telling us.  The end is nigh and so on.

How bad was the loss really and what does it mean for the Team in the immediate and longer-term future?  How much should we actually be panicking?

Well, lets go through the elements…

Team Selection: It seems the selectors are more focussed on selecting by numbers, picking players to fit a plan, rather than fitting a plan around the top XI cricketers in the Country. 

Rod Marsh said Jackson Bird (a bowler) wasn't picked before the first Test because of his batting.  What next, drop the ‘keeper because of his ability to carry drinks?

Mark Waugh backed Mitchell Marsh to play in the second Test before the First was over, right after he’d scored a duck and not taken a wicket.

Panic level: Facebook just revealed a very dark side to the babysitter you hired for the night

Captaincy: Steve Smith was sent home from the lost Tour to Sri Lanka for a rest.  He obviously followed orders as he sure didn’t spend the time in the nets or working out strategies. 

12 months ago Smith was practically un-dismissible, walking around the crease to hit balls wherever he pleased.  Whatever has changed needs to be put in reverse faster than a pre-election promise.

Panic Level: Possible Trump Presidency

Batting: Dave Warner and Usman Khawaja both got 97s in the Test, which is apparently a Test match first and should lock them both in for the rest of the series. 

Maybe the rest of the team just isn’t watching enough OLED TV?

After failing in England and Sri Lanka but smashing a depleted West Indies at home last summer, it looks like Adam Voges' time may be up.  A Chris Rogers replacement he is not & you’ve got to wonder if the selectors didn't miss a trick in picking a younger batsman (read: anyone) instead of him 18 months ago.

Peter Nevill batted beautifully in the Second Innings, showing his ability with the willow could be as good as his ability with the gloves.

Shaun Marsh is injured and in other news, water is wet.

Panic Level: That feeling when you think you may have left the back door unlocked

Bowling: A fresh Mitchell Starc, Peter Siddle and Josh Hazlewood, combined with an opportunistic Nathan Lyon to dismiss South Africa for 242 in the first innings, which is pretty impressive.

Less impressive was the second innings effort when the pitch flattened out and there seemed to be no clue as to how to get a wicket.  Hazlewood and Starc both had moments, but leaked runs, while Lyon was ignored by his Captain and belted by the batsmen.

There has been suggestion that Lyon should be dropped based on other spinners doing well last weekend in the Sheffield Shield, but none (O’Keefe, Holland, Agar) of them are huge turners of the ball or have over 200 Test Wickets.

It is seriously possible that Starc may need a rest.

Panic Level: To paraphrase Kent Brockman “it is time for our viewers to crack their heads open and feast on the goo inside”

Summary: With Smith out of form and Starc out of the side, Australia is much less of a threat to score enough runs or take enough wickets. Bringing Joe Burns in for Shaun Marsh is (at least) a good longer-term strategy though another, proven, middle order bat is needed.

The inability to take second innings wickets is the real worry, though someone with Lyons experience should bounce-back.  Siddle and Mitch Marsh, possibly not.

Panic Level: You’re the guy on the Titanic who forgot the key to open the case that holds the binoculars, just when you need them

Top 5: Alternatives to Mitchell Marsh

The First Test between Australia and South Africa begins tomorrow, with Mitch Marsh looking to take the all-rounders place, batting at 6 and bowling quite a bit with the expectation of Mitch Starc being undercooked and needing reprieve.

This is all very good and well, until you consider Marsh’s form of late, which gives little confidence of his ability as a batsman or a bowler.  Jackson Bird was apparently not picked because selectors didn’t rate his ability with the bat, which makes you wonder what Marsh is being picked for given he can’t seem to do either.

With this in mind, I’ve identified the Top 5 alternatives to Marsh as the number 6:

1.     Travis Head

Remember when Australia had middle-order batsmen who could score centuries, look good doing it, and bowl a bit of spin to relieve the main bowlers?  You know, when we had players like Darren Lehmann, Andrew Symonds and Mark Waugh coming in at 5 or 6?

Those were the days when we used to win a lot of cricket, and there may be something to having more run scoring options in the side. Call me crazy.

Head is a very good batsman who can bowl a bit, but probably shouldn't be picked for it. Further, he is only 22 years of age and could have a long role in the team ahead of him.  Getting a prolonged run at 6 could set him up better than ditching smashed avo helps new home buyers .

2.     John Hastings

“The Duke” is arguably the best and most reliableInternational all-rounder in Australia at the moment.  He regularly takes wickets in ODIs and can be relied upon to guide the team home in chaces or hit out.

More of a bowling all-rounder than a batting all rounder, he is a genuine chance to take wickets (he was once picked in a Test as a bowler) and can bowl long spells.

While not the most graceful person to have picked up a cricket bat, Hastings can keep his head and compile innings, rather than simply swipe at every ball like someone at the checkout at Coles.

3.     Marcus Stoinis

Stoinis plays with a bat that is so straight that Tony Abbott feels very comfortable in its company.  Coming in higher up the order for Victoria, Stoinis could provide some stability and reliability in the middle overs.

He also bowls quickly and consistently, if unspectacularly, and at 27 years of age has plenty of upside to offer.

4.     Glenn Maxwell

“The Big Show” is similar to Marsh in many ways, with seemingly unending and unfulfilled talent that commentators insist on talking about until you repeat it to yourself in your sleep.

Maxwell has little Test experience, but has been used primarily as a top order batsman.  Batting with in the middle orders may force Maxwell to take some responsibility and bat sensibly.  Also, he can play spin pretty well, which is generally of benefit to a middle order bat.

His spin is nothing to write home about, or even email, but he is primarily being picked to bat and help provide the main bowlers with a rest.

5.     Shaun Marsh

A controversial pick, but one that ensures that at least one of the Marsh brothers is picked in the side, something selectors seem to feel very strongly about.

Like Maxwell, Shaun Marsh is an excellent player of spin and seems to prosper when there is less pressure (e.g. against the West Indies side that was offered up last summer), so like the US Army, could be more successful coming in closer to the end than the beginning.

While he doesn’t provide a bowling option, that is hardly a change from what his brother is doing now.