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

[Noble One]

Hauritz is the least of Australia's worries. It is nearly 4 years since the retirement of Shane Warne and it is nice to finally have a settled spinner who can perform a role for Australia.

Is it such a terrible thing that an inexperienced spin bowler with only 15 Tests of experience hasn’t mastered the art of burning through sides on a turning wicket? The improvement of Hauritz since his return to Test cricket has been remarkable.

It will be interesting to see how he fights off the challenge of Smith. The upcoming summer shapes up as a ripper with the ‘new golden child’ in Smith proving himself at Shield with Hauritz battling away in the Ashes. It could shape the composition of the Australian side for many years to come depending on respective results.

 

[tooextracool]

Hauritz is an average bowler for mine, but hes done well for himself and definitely better than expected. Probably the best spin option in Australia so dont see why he shouldnt be given a role in the side. Dont think he'll last though.

 

[aussie]

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.

No offence fellas, but somehow i think you two where watching a different test @ Cardiff & Hamilton.

There was no plan by Haurtiz to KP & Taylor on those days.

With KP, he was sweeping him easily with conventional sweep shots without much fuss. Then he tried to be too cute by sweeping a wide delivery & got a top edge & got caught. He would have never tried such a shot to Murali or Harbhajan.

With Taylor. It was just a brain-freeze from him. Hauritz was two or 3 balls into his first over & Taylor tried a ridiculous heave to midwicket & Johnson dropped a sitter. There was no plan from Huaritz or Ponting for that - just totally Taylor's stupidity ATT.

When Taylor composed himself, he totally was on top of Hauritz.

 

[Matt79]

It's almost like we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[aussie]

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.

What is this good job he has done?.

As i mentioned before 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. To date when he encountered such conditions all he been able to do is be accurate & not really penetrative which really isn't good enough for a test spinner to be a regular member of a test XI.

Other mediocre spinners like Paul Harris & Giles, Benn in such conditons where/have been able to do that (take 5 wicket hauls on turners/wearing 5th day track) for their respective sides. Hauritz has yet to do this.

AUS yes have a middle-order problem. The ridiculous amount of batting collapses since Ashes 06/07, North clearly has to go & Hughes should come in to secure the top 7.

I urge you to go on cricinfo & look @ South Africa for all tests between 1992-2000. You will see they adapted 4 & 5-man attacks alot. They hardly ever played a spinner except for really necessary circumstances @ home & in the sub-continent, with great success. Thats exactly what i'm suggesting AUS should do.

Hauritz clearly below Randiv and Ajmal? Righto.

Surely you are not implying that Hauritz isN'T way below them??. Those bowlers are clearly better than Haurtiz by miles.

 

[Furball]

He's played most of his cricket in Australia, what wearing and turning 5th day pitches has he actually played on?

 

[BoyBrumby]

Useful cricketer, IMHO and comes across as a nice chap too.

Different type of offie to Swann, IMHO. Doesnt give it quite the rip Swanneh does (very few finger spinners do, tbf) nor chucks it up so much, but is hard to get away and performs a crucial containing role. Think he's primarily a defensive bowler, which is why he picks up a lot of his wickets when batsmen try to hit out.

Decision to leave him out of The Oval test baffling, tbh. Rather like wearing sand shoes in Siberia because it was warm in the Sahara the week before.

 

[aussie]

Useful cricketer, IMHO and comes across as a nice chap too.

Different type of offie to Swann, IMHO. Doesnt give it quite the rip Swanneh does (very few finger spinners do, tbf) nor chucks it up so much, but is hard to get away and performs a crucial containing role. Think he's primarily a defensive bowler, which is why he picks up a lot of his wickets when batsmen try to hit out.

Decision to leave him out of The Oval test baffling, tbh. Rather like wearing sand shoes in Siberia because it was warm in the Sahara the week before.

Well if it as your are suggesting that AUS should have picked him @ the Oval because of the turn that was present, even though the all-pace attack owned ENG on the Headingley green-top in previous test. Then i totally disagree.

Haurtiz would not have made one iota of difference in outcome of that test nor in the improvement in the AUS attack. Since Hauritz struggled to take wickets in the 1st test @ Cardiff on a similar wearing 5th day wicket that was seen @ the Oval & during the AUS summer @ Adelaide, Perth.

ATT i would have dropped Clark & picked Lee, Since Lee potential could have gotten some good reverse-swing with the old-ball as he showed in the warm-up vs ENG Lions before the 1st test.

He's played most of his cricket in Australia, what wearing and turning 5th day pitches has he actually played on?

2nd test vs WI @ Adelaide, pitch was turning from day. When Benn took 5 wickets from WI.

 

[fredfertang]

Hauritz looks far too much like a young Stephen Hendry - every time I see him I wonder where his cue is ................................

 

[zaremba]

Useful cricketer, IMHO and comes across as a nice chap too.

Different type of offie to Swann, IMHO. Doesnt give it quite the rip Swanneh does (very few finger spinners do, tbf) nor chucks it up so much, but is hard to get away and performs a crucial containing role. Think he's primarily a defensive bowler, which is why he picks up a lot of his wickets when batsmen try to hit out.

Decision to leave him out of The Oval test baffling, tbh. Rather like wearing sand shoes in Siberia because it was warm in the Sahara the week before.

QED. Should've won BOTM. Robbed by a crim, dammit

 

[Furball]

Well if it as your are suggesting that AUS should have picked him @ the Oval because of the turn that was present, even though the all-pace attack owned ENG on the Headingley green-top in previous test. Then i totally disagree.

Haurtiz would not have made one iota of difference in outcome of that test nor in the improvement in the AUS attack. Since Hauritz struggled to take wickets in the 1st test @ Cardiff on a similar wearing 5th day wicket that was seen @ the Oval & during the AUS summer @ Adelaide, Perth.

ATT i would have dropped Clark & picked Lee, Since Lee potential could have gotten some good reverse-swing with the old-ball as he showed in the warm-up vs ENG Lions before the 1st test.




2nd test vs WI @ Adelaide, pitch was turning from day. When Benn took 5 wickets from WI.

Marcuss North took 4 wickets at the Oval, you cannot possibly be seriously suggesting Hauritz wouldn't have been more threatening.

Adelaide wasn't turning, it's one of the worst pitches in the world. Benn took 5 by virtue of bowling about 7,000 overs. I'd back pretty much any bowler who's even remotely competent at FC level to come close to taking 5 if they're going to be bowling 50 overs in an innings.

edit: West Indies spent the majority of day 5 at Adelaide bowling anyway, so that's not even worth considering.

 

[aussie]

Marcuss North took 4 wickets at the Oval, you cannot possibly be seriously suggesting Hauritz wouldn't have been more threatening.

Hauritz certainly wouldn't have. He had similar conditions in the 1st test @ Cardiff & all he was accurate without being overly penetrative.

Adelaide wasn't turning, it's one of the worst pitches in the world. Benn took 5 by virtue of bowling about 7,000 overs. I'd back pretty much any bowler who's even remotely competent at FC level to come close to taking 5 if they're going to be bowling 50 overs in an innings.



edit: West Indies spent the majority of day 5 at Adelaide bowling anyway, so that's not even worth considering.

You certainly watched a different Adelaide test. Adelaide was turning as early as day 3 & remained so fo the rest of that test. Its fairly daft to saw Adelaide 2009 was the "worst pitch ever". I have never seen a Adelaide test in 12 years of watching cricket for AUS that could be consiered as the "worst" of anything. Adelaide plays one way all the time - a excellent batting deck early, which begins to deteriorate by days 3-5.

Benn is not a great spinner - but as i've continously said when joke/average spinners like a Benn, Harris, Giles, Boje get turners at least they should be expected to be threatening more often than not on turners/4th or 5th day wearing surfaces (take 5 wicket hauls) againts good opposition. Since they aren't of the callibre of a Warne/Murali/Kumble/Gibbs to be effective from day 1 of test. All those average/joke spinners have been able to do in their careers @ some point - Hauritz has not.

Finally if also as you claim:

I'd back pretty much any bowler who's even remotely competent at FC level to come close to taking 5 if they're going to be bowling 50 overs in an innings.

Explain these two Hauritz bowling performances then:

- 2nd Test: Australia v South Africa at Melbourne, Dec 26-30, 2008 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

- 1st Test: New Zealand v Australia at Wellington, Mar 19-23, 2010 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

Hauritz again was just accurate without being overly threatening on wearing pitches. While compared to guys like Benn, Harris when they have gotten similar conditions & bowled close to 40+ - 50 overs, where been able 5 wicket hauls & bowl their side to victory even.

 

[Matt79]

You seem to watch a lot of different matches from the rest of us Aussie.

When you say that Hauritz hasn't bobbed up with good performances, you should at least acknowledge that you're subjectively excluding performances based on them not fitting your preconceptions.

 

[Top_Cat]

You seem to watch a lot of different matches from the rest of us Aussie.

haha, no ****. We're all insane!

 

[Prince EWS]

Honestly, when even I think Hauritz should be in the team, he should be in the team.

 

[Top_Cat]

haha, genius. Managed to be conciliatory and hold onto your prejudice in the same sentence. Should be in office.

 

[aussie]

You seem to watch a lot of different matches from the rest of us Aussie.

HA. Well so i'm presuming then you agree with Sir Furball's statement that the recent Adelaide test pitch & generally is "one of the worst pitches in the world"?

If it is yes, then i'd have to say regrettably that the rest of you have missed a few Adelaide test over the last decade or so & is very out of touch with your history.

Will be interesting to hear what CWs adelaide local Top_Cat has to say about this.

When you say that Hauritz hasn't bobbed up with good performances, you should at least acknowledge that you're subjectively excluding performances based on them not fitting your preconceptions.

Yes it doesn't fit my preconceptions. But those preconceptions isn't a biased POV or wasn't just something i woke up one morning & started suggest baselessly. Its backed up factually by historical evidence in test history, which as i've continously said in this thread in many different ways):

The role of any normal spinner (who aint of the calibre of a Warne, Murali or O'Reillly, Kumble, Gibbs, Grimmett) is on the 4th or 5th day wearing wicket or turner, is to bowl his side to victory ( by taking 5 wicket hauls).

Second Calibre/Average/decent/joke spinners like a Benn, Harris, Giles, Boje, Tufnell, Greg Matthews, Croft, Roger Haper etc etc etc. Have been able to do that in their careers @ some point againts good teams in such conditions.

To date when he encountered such conditions all Hauritz been able to do is be accurate & not really penetrative which really isn't good enough for a test spinner to be a regular member of a test XI.

How is that unfair?.

Plus how can you include his so called "good performances" againts that joke PAK team, who gifted a 6 wicket haul to a part-timer to North in seamer friendly conditons?. He might as well & have taken those two 5 wicket hauls vs BANG given how shocking poor PAK played & given that performances vs BANG 99% of the time dont count - the wickets vs PAK dont count as wickets vs a good team.

 

[aussie]

This thread is going around in circles & i'm having to repeat the same poitn & positions with different posters over & over. Expect for PEWS i am skeptical if anyone else actually read my opening post with great detail. So let me be 100% clear what i'm suggesting AUS do with Hauritz.

Australia should 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.

I urge all CWers to go on cricinfo & look @ South Africa for all tests between 1992-2000. You will see they adapted 4 & 5-man attacks alot. They hardly ever played a spinner except for really necessary circumstances @ home & in the sub-continent, with great success. Thats exactly what i'm suggesting AUS should do.

 

[Nate]

Aussie, I read your opening post.

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

DWTA.

 

[TumTum]

I don't agree with the 4-man pace attack bit, but seriously Hauritz is ****. I just wanna repeat that bit very clearly. I don't really care if we have nobody better atm, he is ****ty **** ****.