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

[aussie]

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

 

[zaremba]

I think Hauritz is a good bowler, and amongst the best spinners in the world (albeit that that accolade doesn't count for quite as much as it did a few years ago). The Peter Taylor comparison is a bit of a low blow.

3 quicks plus Waston plus Hauritz is a well-balanced attack. 4 quicks plus a 5th seamer in Watson plus some part-timers just isn't.

He's handy with the bat too.

 

[aussie]

I think Hauritz is a good bowler, and amongst the best spinners in the world (albeit that that accolade doesn't count for quite as much as it did a few years ago). The Peter Taylor comparison is a bit of a low blow.

3 quicks plus Waston plus Hauritz is a well-balanced attack. 4 quicks plus a 5th seamer in Watson plus some part-timers just isn't.

He's handy with the bat too.

Haurtiz is not a "good bowler" in tests. He is average, he has failed in his main role as test spinner to date. Their may not be any truly great spinners in the world now given that Murali is retired. But when we talk about quality off spinners in Swann, Ajmal, Harbhajan, Randiv - Haurtiz is clearly wayyyyyy below them.

The Peter Taylor comparison is by no means a low blow. They are the same in many ways.

Overall i'm not saying 4 quicks + Watson should be played in every test. I said specially that, AUS should & can.

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.

For eg in recent two test vs PAK in ENG. If Harris didn't get injured, AUS certainly could have played a full out all pace attack.

 

[zaremba]

Each to his own, mate.

As I see it, in games when Swann and Hauritz have played against each other, there's not been much to separate them, and I'm not convinced that Hauritz is the massively inferior bowler.

As for the balance of the team, I can see occasions when you might want to drop the spinner (on a track like Headingley for instance) but on those occasions I wouldn't play 5 quicks (including Watson) - I'd play the extra batsman and rely on Katich / Clarke / North / Ponting to get through a few overs.

 

[fredfertang]

Peter Taylor looked like a decent bowler against England, and not a poor England either, although I accept his record against everyone else was woeful

 

[robelinda]

Until Smith or someone else improves Hauritz is the man, however I wouldnt expect him to run through sides, more of a lesser Swann type. He has not disgraced himself, though at times guys like North look better.

I can tell your posting style War!

 

[aussie]

Each to his own, mate. As I see it, in games when Swann and Hauritz have played against each other, there's not been much to separate them, and I'm not convinced that Hauritz is the massively inferior bowler.

The games Hauritz & Swann played together in Ashes 09. Swann was better though. He spun out AUS on 5th day wickets @ Lord's & Oval. While Hauritz struggled to do so when he got his chance in similar conditons & circumstances @ Cardiff. Which is the fault i highlted initally.

Since the Ashes Swann has gone from strenght to strenght, displaying the best form from from a English offspinner since Jim Laker (no disrespect to Illingworth & Croft). While Haurtiz has remained stagnant.

 

[aussie]

Until Smith or someone else improves Hauritz is the man, however I wouldnt expect him to run through sides, more of a lesser Swann type. He has not disgraced himself, though at times guys like North look better.

I can tell your posting style War!

. Yep your here Sir Rob..

 

[robelinda]

Peter Taylor was decidedly average, one good test, but really good odi bowler. Does Hauritz have the potential? Maybe, maybe not.

 

[zaremba]

The games Hauritz & Swann played together in Ashes 09. Swann was better though. He spun out AUS on 5th day wickets @ Lord's & Oval. While Hauritz struggled to do so when he got his chance in similar conditons & circumstances @ Cardiff. Which is the fault i highlted initally.

I think you overstate Swann's performance in those two Tests, and understate Hauritz's at Cardiff.

Both at Lord's and the Oval Australia were chasing impossible fourth-innings targets in excess of 500 which pretty much took the pressure off Swann. He got 4-87 at Lord's as Australia made 406, and he took 4-120 at the Oval as Australia made 348.

Hauritz took 3-63 in the 4th innings at Cardiff (having also taken 3 in the first innings).

So it doesn't seem to me as though Hauritz performed much worse at Cardiff than Swann did in the two London Tests.

It's also fair to note that the best pitch for spinners of the lot was the Oval, where Hauritz didn't even play.

Anyhow stats aside I have been impressed with Hauritz's bowling. He looks a fine bowler to me.

 

[aussie]

I think you overstate Swann's performance in those two Tests. On both occasions Australia were chasing fourth-innings targets in excess of 500 which pretty much took the pressure off. He got 4 wickets at Lord's as Australia made 400 in the 4th innings, and he took 4-120 at the Oval as Australia made 348.

Their was certainly pressure on @ the Oval. If AUS had been able to bat & save the test like ENG did @ Cardiff & Centurion recently & saved the Ashes. Swann would have criticized for not doing his role then.

Same thing @ Lords. Just like @ Old Trafford 2005, when Giles struggled to take wickets on that 5th day turner, thus forcing the seamers to keep coming back. Swann did his job @ Lords & took the pressure of the quicks.

So it doesn't seem to me as though Hauritz performed much worse at Cardiff than Swann did in the two London Tests.

It's also fair to note that the best pitch for spinners of the lot was the Oval, where Hauritz didn't even play.

When Swann was bowling, Cardiff was still very much a road. The pitch began to deteriorate when Hauritz began to bowl & he didnt do his job.

The Oval spun as much on 5th day as Cardiff where Hauritz failed to run through ENG & the Lord's tests. So Hauritz potentially not playing @ Oval wouldn't have made much of difference. Especially when he got other oppurtunites also after the Oval vs WI & NZ @ Adelaide, Perth, Wellington to do damage on wearing pitches as i said before.

Anyhow stats aside I have been impressed with Hauritz's bowling. He looks a fine bowler to me.

In ODIs yes. In test i struggle to see how. But thats your POV.

 

[Furball]

So in writing off Hauritz as a spinner, you're ignoring both his good performances and the fact that his home pitches are roads?

Seems like a fair, logical thing to do.

 

[aussie]

So in writing off Hauritz as a spinner, you're ignoring both his good performances and the fact that his home pitches are roads?

Seems like a fair, logical thing to do.

The only good performances Hauritz had was his two 5 wicket hauls againts a PAK team was in turmoil for reasons that are well know. He might as well had taken those two 5 wicket haul againts Bangladesh, given how horrible PAK where playing.

Plus the home pitches in AUS last summer where certainly roads. The only road present was the Hobart test.

The Adelaide test that i highlited. Benn from Windies utilize that turning surfaces with a 5 wicket haul & North outbowled Hauritz. While @ Perth when the pitch was beginning to wear as shown by turn Benn got & the how Bravo was getting his off-cutter/reverse swing to move, when WI bowled AUS out for 150 odd. Hauritz struggled to be penetrative on that 5th day surface.

 

[Howsie]

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

It was one over remember, up until that over Hauritz had been rather economical and should of had Ross Taylor in just his second over had Johnson not dropped a rather simple chance.

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

Why? They weren't in turmoil until after that second test had finished.

 

[SirBloody Idiot]

Hauritz clearly below Randiv and Ajmal? Righto.

He's clearly the best spinner in the country, bowled well in a losing Ashes cause and bowled well against Pakistan and the West Indies. And seriously, an off spin bowler being attacked by an aggressive batsman is hardly anything new and not limited to Nathan Hauritz.

He doesn't choose who he bowls against, and so far he's done a pretty fine job. Until he stops taking wickets at the rate he has been since returning to the side, he fully deserves his spot in the team.

 

[aussie]

It was one over remember, up until that over Hauritz had been rather economical and should of had Ross Taylor in just his second over had Johnson not dropped a rather simple chance.

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 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.

Why? They weren't in turmoil until after that second test had finished.

They where in turmoil long before the test series started. Younis Khan giving up the captaincy before the tour etc. Clerly alot on infighting was going on & the team (especially the batsmen) where not playing sensibly. Only the bowlers (Asif/Gul/Aamir) could have left AUS with any level of respectability.

That same PAK batting line-up gave up a 6 wicket haul to North the other day in seaming conditons @ Lords too. ENG, NZ & WI who batted sensibly played Hauirtiz with ease in conditions where he should have been effective (4th & 5th day wearing pitch), PAK where the odd team out.

 

[NUFAN]

Hauritz plays a very important role in the current Australian team.

His economy rate is usually good, he has shown that he can take vital wickets and bowl long spells and of course his batting has been the most solid out of the bowlers.

It's already been said, but the balance of the team dictates that a spinner should be in the XI.

 

[outbreak]

Hauritz isn't going to be anything sensational. But then again i don't think any of the current established spinners are. Hauritz is doing his job and deserves his spot. He may not be game breaking but he performs decently and his batting is a bonus. I don't really rate any other spinners much higher then hauritz at the moment.

 

[Nate]

Hauritz's figures are much more impressive than how he has actually bowled, it must be said.

 

[TumTum]

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

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