By Adrian Meredith
MELBOURNE, Australia (TheSportsNEXT) December 6, 2012: The Cricket Australia announced Thursday Phillip Hughes as the replacement for Ricky Ponting who announced his Test retirement after the Perth Test.
TheSportsNEXT.com’s cricket analyst Adrian Meredith reviewed the candidates who looked likely to be Ricky Ponting's replacement in the Australian Test team:
George Bailey
Why he should be picked: Since his T20 debut about a year ago - as captain - he has forced his way into the ODI team as well, and has done increasingly well, with a very good average of over 40, putting a high price on his wicket, the kind of temperament needed in test cricket. He also averages over 40 in FC cricket and is in decent form.
Why he shouldn't be picked: His record in limited overs formats is considerably better than in first class formats and he is known as a limited overs specialist. Until a year ago, he wasn't even thought of as ever playing an international. He could easily fall apart, as did fellow limited overs specialist Shaun Marsh - though Faf du Plessis is a limited overs specialist, and Vernon Philander was considered to be too; so you never know.
David Hussey
Why he should be picked: He has ample international experience and, overall, has done incredibly well. He is in supreme form in all 3 formats right now. And he averages well over 50 overall. As the younger brother of Michael Hussey, Australia's best batsman, he can be guaranteed to do very well at test level, especially if the two of them bat together. He should have been picked some 5 or 6 years ago.
Why he shouldn’t be picked: He is already 35 (even though he is the younger brother) and would perhaps have 3 or 4 years in the side, at most. He is also known as a limited overs specialist - especially in T20s - in spite of his supreme FC record. If he does play, it'd be a stop gap measure, as then they'd have to find his replacement a few years later.
Phillip Hughes
Why he should be picked: He had such a great FC record, and did well in his first few tests, before failing somewhat dramatically, being dropped, coming back, and failing even worse. But he still has a better record than Ed Cowan. He is in good form in the past year or so.
Why he shouldn’t be picked: He still has that poor technique that has been found out. Until he fixes that technique, experienced bowlers at international level are going to keep exploiting it, and, no matter how good his form is, he is never going to score. His form is irrelevant while he has that flawed technique.
Usman Khawaja
Why he should be picked: He had a good start to his FC career and was somewhat prematurely thrust into the Australian team a couple of years ago, where he had a below par return. Since then his FC performances have dropped significantly; but in the past 6 months or so they have picked up again.
Why he shouldn’t be picked: After such a poor start to his test career, it is probably best to wait until he has a lengthier display of good FC returns before bringing him back. He is probably a good option in the long term but my feeling is that we should wait another year more before giving him a spot in test cricket.
Mark Cosgrove
Why he should be picked: He has been a solid batsman for several years now but since moving to Tasmania has really lifted a gear. Ed Cowan has been in the same side but Cosgrove has done better than Cowan, is in better form and has a better overall record, making many people wonder why or how Cowan could possibly have been ahead of Cosgrove.
Why he shouldn’t be picked: He is overweight and the physical demands of international cricket, especially test cricket, may be too much. Also, while he does have a better record in every way to Cowan's, it isn't much better and realistically Cowan probably isn't doing well enough to stay in test cricket, so having a similar player come in may be counter productive.
Callum Ferguson
Why he should be picked: He did very well at ODI level before injuries pushed him out of the side. He had a few good FC performances in the past few years too. He seems to be a player who lifts for the big time and if so could do well at the test level.
Why he shouldn’t be picked: His overall FC record is poor and he is more known as a limited overs specialist. On top of that, while he isn't out of form, he isn't exactly in form either.
Adam Voges
Why he should be picked: Something of a long game specialist, for various reasons Voges never played a test, in spite of doing well in the ODI setup, and showing that he is well suited to the longer formats. He is in decent form, has a wealth of experience behind him and is very solid.
Why he shouldn’t be picked: He is on the wrong side of 30 years old and, while 33 years old means he still has a few years in him, the David Hussey argument might come in. He also averages barely over 40 in FC cricket, which may make selectors nervous about picking him. He would probably do well but it could be seen as a stop gap measure, as he would then have to be replaced later on.
Alex Doolan
Why he should be picked: He has had some magnificent returns, and in that Australia A game against South Africa, when Rob Quiney "forced" his way into the team, Doolan actually had an unbeaten 160 not out. He is in fantastic form, probably only behind Ricky Ponting in domestic cricket this year. If they are serious about picking players while they are in form, Doolan has to be the choice.
Why he shouldn’t be picked: Doolan might be in form, but his overall record is somewhat less impressive. While he hasn't had a very lengthy career, it doesn't make very good reading. But then again, he played many games as a wicket keeper.
Peter Nevill
Why he should be picked: He has come on in leaps and bounds into the New South Wales squad, overtaking Dan Smith and realistically also Brad Haddin - though Haddin still gets to have the gloves, and is probably 2nd behind Wade on the wicket keeper ranks. His FC average of 43 suggests that he could make the test side purely as a batsman, and he is just going from strength to strength too. While he is a wicket keeper by trade, so is Michael Hussey, and he is becoming used to playing as a batsman. If he does end up replacing Wade, having some test experience behind him would be good too. He could be like AB de Villiers was to Mark Boucher.
Why he shouldn’t be picked: He is still regarded as a wicket keeper and it may be somewhat insulting to Wade to pick a 2nd keeper in the test side.
Joe Burns
Why he should be picked: He is a young player with a great average who is bursting through the ranks.
Why he shouldn’t be picked: Statistics can be misleading and after just one season that great average could easily slump. He has no international experience of any kind and it would be a massive risk to thrust him into the test side.
Steve Smith
Why he should be picked: He is in great form, has had success at international level and also failure and therefore is mentally strong enough to cope. He is starting to learn how to win. He also has a very good cricketing brain and knows how to make the most of any situation.
Why he shouldn’t be picked: His form isn't good enough to force his way in purely as a batsman and his failures in the tests that he did play in will make the selectors nervous. He needs another year or two of excellent performances to force his way in.
For me, the best options are: George Bailey, David Hussey, Adam Voges and Peter Nevill. Given that the selectors don't like Hussey and Voges because of their age; that leaves us with Bailey vs Nevill. I like both options actually. Bailey has shown that he has the temperament required to make it at test level and I think that his chances of success at test level are very high. Nevill is a wicket keeper by trade but he has had to fight so hard that he is developing all of the right characteristics to succeed at the highest level. Remember when AB de Villiers played for South Africa as a batsman in spite of being a specialist keeper? It worked out very well for them, and I see the same thing for Nevill. Then, if Wade is ever injured, Nevill can take over, which would make a nice easy transition.
For me, therefore, and bearing in mind the Australian selectors, I think that it will be Bailey and Nevill. Oh, and Ed Cowan is going to be dumped. Sorry, but while he did score that one century, he has done nothing else all series long and just isn't test quality.
