Nathan Hauritz's role in the Australian test side: Should he really be a fixture?

[morgieb]

Hmm....should he be a fixture? Possibly, but given our spinning depth, he's the best option atm, or at least until Smith's ready.

 

[Top_Cat]

No way is Hauritz OZ's worst ever spinner.

 

[andyc]

NOTE: The 5 wicket hauls he took againts the Pakistan team in turmoil dont count.

Did you know that Bradman averages 34 in every innings where he didn't score a 100? What a hack.

But that drop of Hauritz by Johnson was all down to Taylor's brain-freeze at the crease with a mixture of utter contempt towards Haurtiz's bowling - rather than anything special from Hauritz. Oterwise Taylor batting againts Hauritz pretty much proves my point, that good batsmen should not have any problem facing Hauritz. When he bowls accurately they should be good enough to negotiate/respect that - but at the same time when they want to make the transition to attack him it wouldn't be very risky at all.

That shot also was reministent of how Hauritz dismissed KP in the Cardiff Ashes test 1st innings. Where KP tried to be tried to play a cute sweep shot & ended up top-edging, instead of playing a comanding sweep shot like what he had done before againts the likes of Warne, Murali, Kumble, Harbhajan.

Think you need to think a bit more about why KP and Taylor were playing those shots, tbh. Hauritz keeps it tight, and when you're against a batsman like KP it may only be a matter of time before he tries something cute to get the runs going again. Nothing wrong with bowling to a plan...

 

[aussie]

You wouldn't know anything about this would you War?

Yea Tummy mate. You know how it goes...

Hauritz conned us all last summer when he said he would unveil his so called "doosra". Well Haury where the **** is it? That pig.

HAAAA...

 

[Top_Cat]

Think you need to think a bit more about why KP and Taylor were playing those shots, tbh. Hauritz keeps it tight, and when you're against a batsman like KP it may only be a matter of time before he tries something cute to get the runs going again. Nothing wrong with bowling to a plan...

tbh, there's even more to it than that. Spent a couple of hours setting KP up for that exact shot, throwing it fuller/wider, etc. KP couldn't get him away at all and didn't look that comfortable either. Very patient but also very smart bowling.

 

[vic_orthdox]

a) If getting Hauritz out of the team means that we are more likely to keep Marcus North in the team, then make Hauritz captain/coach.
b) Hauritz will always bring more to the table than a fourth/fifth paceman, whose job can be done by those picked before him.
c) I like how North's five wicket haul gets to count, but Hauritz's against Pakistan don't.

 

[Prince EWS]

Watching the New Zealand test series earlier this year, especially the recent 2nd test as Ross Taylor assaulted Hauritz in the first innings & the test vs Pakistan in ENG. Then in the second innings when Clarke managed to do a very steady job as spinner & North taking a 6 wicket haul @ Lord's. As a fierce critic of Hauritz use in the test side since he was recalled vs South Africa 08/09, i still remain unconvinced that Australia need to play him or any spinner in a test match at all. But rather adapt a 4-man pace attack for all tests - except when they tour the sub-continent (or home tests @ Adelaide or SCG) where having a spinenr really becomes a must.


The role of any normal spinner (who aint Warne, Murali or O'Reillly) is on the 4th or 5th day wearing wicket is to bowl his side to victory. Watching Haurtitz bowl in the past year in such circumstances againts opposition of quality or who where playing hard cricket (Windies & New Zealand):

- Cardiff 09

- Adelaide & Perth 09

- Wellington 09/10


NOTE: The 5 wicket hauls he took againts the Pakistan team in turmoil dont count.

In those 3 respective second innings. The opposition batsmen basically sat on Hauritz & played him quite comfortably in conditions where Haurtiz really should be causing havoc if he worth his salt as test match off-spinner. But he didn't all he was was accurate, while ocassionaly getting a bit of sharp/big turn out of the rough patches. But overall he was not very penetrative in those 3 innings. Theirfore if he can't do this role effectively, then he should not have a regular place in the test side.

Since if Australia play 4 seamers when all are fit in Hilfenhaus/Bollinger/Johnson/Sildde + Watson as back-up. In those same 4th & 5th day conditions in Hilfy & Siddle/Watson we got fast-bowlers who can reverse swing the old ball @ pace which makes up for the lack of a front line-spinner to exploit the rough patches quite well. Plus Johnson with his raw pace even on flat pitches will test batsmen always.

Some may may say that the 4 seamers may cause a problem with the overate. But if Clarke & North are in the team, depending on the state of the match you can bowl them to fill in some overs. Of course it may not be ideal since they could go for runs while doing so - but so would Hauritz in such a situation as Taylor showed in the Wellington test.

Nathan Hauritz is to Ricky Ponting now, what Peter Taylor was the Allan Border in the early 90s. A solid ODI bowler, but a below quality test spinner. 70-80% time in this post Warne/MacGill era of aussie spin talent (or lack of spin talent), Australia can & should go in to test matches without Hauritz or the forgotten man Krejza or Smith (until his bowling improves & becomes the next Benaud).


BEST AUS TEST XI:

Watson
Katich
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
North/Hughes (Hughes would open with either Watto/Katich going down in the middle)
Haddin
Johnson
Siddle/Harris
Hilfenhaus
Bollinger

Well, I'd love to agree with you. I've never rated Hauritz and I've always maintained that he's been vastly over-rated by not only the Australian cricket hierarchy but several members of this forum.

Unfortunately though, I don't agree with you. Rate him or not, Hauritz has done a very good job in the Tests he's played so far and he shouldn't be dropped until that stops happening - if it ever indeed does stop. Whether he's actually any good or not it's been working. This is really compounded by Watson and North now, too - North no longer justifies his spot as a batsman so he shouldn't be in the team and thus he couldn't supply offies as the fifth bowler in a team with four specialist quicks, and Watson has been doing a very good job as the fourth quick of late, being Australia's best bowler in their last Test series. The only argument I could actually see making any sense at all would be propping up the failing middle order with another batsman and having North bat seven with Haddin at eight, followed by three quicks - that'd acknowledge Watson's effectiveness as the fourth bowler, North's failings as a batsman and the middle order problem... but I wouldn't really support that either.

 

[aussie]

a) If getting Hauritz out of the team means that we are more likely to keep Marcus North in the team, then make Hauritz captain/coach.
b) Hauritz will always bring more to the table than a fourth/fifth paceman, whose job can be done by those picked before him.
c) I like how North's five wicket haul gets to count, but Hauritz's against Pakistan don't.

a). I dont want to keep North in the team at all. I would think most people want him out & would like to see Hughes back.

b) The "more" Haurtiz would bring to the team in mainly taking 5 wicket hauls on 5th day wicket. He has consistently failed to do. Another seamer who can use to those same 5th day wearing conditons & get the ball old-ball reverse-swing, will be more useful. But i'm not advocating an all-pace attack to play always, as i specifically said in the openign post:

i still remain unconvinced that Australia need to play him or any spinner in a test match at all. But rather adapt a 4-man pace attack for all tests - except when they tour the sub-continent (or home tests @ Adelaide or SCG) where having a spinenr really becomes a must.

c) North's 5 wicket haul vs PAK doesn't count. Him taking 5 wicket haul vs PAK further proves why Hauritz two 5 wicket haul vs PAK doesn't count. Since he is part-timer & he took those 6 wickets in basically seaming conditions @ Lord's - the pitch didn't deteriorate @ all on the final day last month. PAK batted like fools & made both Hauritz & North look good.

 

[andyc]

Yeah, how dare a spin bowler take a swag where conditions don't suit him.

 

[Sir Alex]

If Ponting doesn't play a spinner, he'll have time only to explain poor overrates.

 

[GotSpin]

If Ponting doesn't play a spinner, he'll have time only to explain poor overrates.

Has he had poor overrates since Bret Lee played?

 

[Sir Alex]

Has he had poor overrates since Bret Lee played?

Has he played without a spinner?

 

[Prince EWS]

If Ponting doesn't play a spinner, he'll have time only to explain poor overrates.

If the over-rates rule is set up in such a way that it's actually impossible to get through your overs if you pick a certain combination of bowlers, then it should be changed immediately. Personally I don't actually think it is impossible to get through 90 overs without bowling spinners or pie-chuckers, but if it is, it's a terrible rule. I'm sure people going to the cricket would rather watch 82 overs of quality bowling with the bowling changes being purely dictated by the match situation than 70 overs to that and 20 overs of crap just to make sure they got 90 in.

Over-rate rules should never, ever play a role in selection or bowling changes. Picking a spinner just to avoid a fine/ban is just as wrong as bowling White and Hussey as Ponting infamously did in India.. just hustle between balls and overs; it's not that hard.

 

[Spark]

Has he played without a spinner?

Yes...

 

[Hurricane]

I think that Hauritz is learning to be just as canny as Swann and the rest of them. I think NZ found him to be testing. He gets the most drift in world cricket today if that counts for anything. I am surprised that batsman are able to adjust to his drift so easily. If he learned some different grips, like Swann has, I think HAuritz would find that he could alternate his drift and start to beat players with his flight.

I think Swann>Hauritz but not by an awfully big amount. I predict that Swann will go through a lean patch soon as every bowler does - as batsman adjust to him and stop taking as many risks against him. For example Salman Butt showed him a lack of respect by hitting his first ball of his spell for four and then tried to repeat the dose and was dismissed. I think that teams should sit on Swann and pick up their runs against other bowlers.

In terms of answering the question - I would pick Hauritz for Australia you never know when a pitch is going to turn out to be a raging turner - and Australia lost a test match by leaving him out against England and going with 4 quicks.

 

[Matt79]

Don't know about fixture, but it is right that Hauritz is pretty secure in his spot. He does his job and does it well. The attack is better with him in it than it would be with any of the alternatives. Pretty simple equation for me.

 

[Debris]

Australia almost never go in without a spinner so he is pretty much a fixture unless Smith improves a fair bit at the start of this season.

 

[GIMH]

Hauritz was lambasted prior to the Ashes last year and I think has proved himself quite well since.

One of the best in the world, I'd say

 

[TumTum]

A lot of Hauritz love here

He is rubbish. Please don't compare him to Swann in any way. I can't remember how many rants I made in the past watching him bowl.

 

[Jono]

Hauritz will never get respect I reckon. Just one of those unfortunate players who will always be a scapegoat.