Is the Australian ODI team at an all-time low?

[cricketerB94]

Is Australian team (or reserves) at the all time low?

If we look at their team that they are playing today, they have Cartwright as opener who does not look like a LOI batsman. His domestic stats in LO are not up to the mark.

Moreover, their wicket keeper is Wade who would not make even Sri Lanka side who are already at their all time low.

And last but not the least, their tail is getting longer. At one time they used to play Johnson at No.9, who was a very handy hitter down the order. But today, their tail starts from No.7 with Wade, Agar, Cummins, Coulter Nile and Richardson.

Now if we look at it collectively, there are four big loopholes in Australian team right now. i)- Their one opener is not good enough LOI player. ii)- Their Wk Bat is not good enough. iii)- Their tail is too long. iv)- They have no hard hitting batsman down the order. And their usual issues are also there i.e. playing against quality spin.

So, the question is, when was the last time they had as many or more loopholes in their team?

 

[Leo23]

they peaked during the 2015 world cup but now they are in decline

they have lost johnson,clarke,watson,hughes and haddin who were key players and are not easy to replace

however i still consider them among the top favorites of the 2019 world cup along side pakistan and india

 

[cricketerB94]

they peaked during the 2015 world cup but now they are in decline

they have lost johnson,clarke,watson,hughes and haddin who were key players and are not easy to replace

however i still consider them among the top favorites of the 2019 world cup along side pakistan and india

Yes they are favorites because there is not any standout team in cricket now a days. And they are a clutch team and have a habit to perform well in ICC 50 overs tournaments.

But my point was, in their (Australian) cricketing history, are they at their all time low? To me, it seems so.

 

[Proactive_]

Bring in Starc and Hazlewood and they're a completely different team. Batting isn't as strong as it used to be but with a bowling attack consisting of Starc, Hazlewood, Cummins, Coulter Nile and Zampa and with a part time option in Faulkner who is also a great hitter down the order, Australia wouldn't be facing 300+ totals many times to chase. By Australian standards it's definitely one of the weaker ODI team in the past 15 years but still a pretty strong team if they're playing full strength.

 

[Leo23]

Yes they are favorites because there is not any standout team in cricket now a days. And they are a clutch team and have a habit to perform well in ICC 50 overs tournaments.

But my point was, in their (Australian) cricketing history, are they at their all time low? To me, it seems so.

they were at their worst after the retirement of ponting and hussey and before the emergence of smith,warner,maxwell,starc,hazlewood,lyon etc around 2011-2013 period

at that time michael clarke was a one man army for australia and johnson was there as well but he was not consistent

now they have got a good core of players but they are short of a couple of top batsmen to become a dominant team once again

their batting is highly reliant on smith especially because warner can only score on flat wickets. i like handscomb though and i think he has the potential to be a world class batsman.

another major problem for them is the wk slot. it is surpising that a country that produced the greatest wk batsman of all time is now badly struggling to produce even a decent one.

 

[Ab Fan]

No. They just dont play their best XI in bilaterals. However their performance in alien condition even with their best team is still questionable.

 

[hadi123]

I think all time low is a bit OTT. They just don't play their best 11 in majority of bilaterals

 

[Convict]

No because we're playing extremely experimental sides and pursuing all sorts of objectives.

Cartwright isn't in the team on merit he's in the team to get international experience.

 

[Dingolfy]

Their batting has regressed a lot.Apart from Smith, all of their batsmen appear to be FTBs and struggle big time agaisnt swing and spin.

 

[Dingolfy]

Batting isn't as strong as it used to be but with a bowling attack consisting of Starc, Hazlewood, Cummins, Coulter Nile and Zampa and with a part time option in Faulkner who is also a great hitter down the order, Australia wouldn't be facing 300+ totals many times to chase.

Even Pakistan have scored more than 300 against Starc,Hazlewood,Cummins and Faulkner in Australia that too batting second.

In the era of super pattas and two new balls, all bowling lineups are capable of conceding 300 plus scores.

 

[Proactive_]

Even Pakistan have scored more than 300 against Starc,Hazlewood,Cummins and Faulkner in Australia that too batting second.

In the era of super pattas and two new balls, all bowling lineups are capable of conceding 300 plus scores.

I'm not saying it's not possible, my point is that the frequency of teams scoring 300+ against a full strength Aussie bowling line up would still be pretty less, even on flatties. And the Australian batting line up isn't that weak that they can't score 275-325 on flat pitches. If the pitch has a bit of juice then the full strength Aussie bowling line up would be absolutely deadly.

 

[Nil Dhumrojal]

Yes. No doubt.

 

[Slog]

They are just experiment

Come the big tournament they'll have guy sorted

 

[bujhee kom]

At full strength, they are still #1.

 

[another drop catch]

cartwright is not at all international material

 

[pakistanigoneaussie]

I reckon the top tier of ODI cricket right now is the following

India, Aus, Eng ( yes they are flat track bullies but that's what cricket is these days)

a full strength lineup from any of these teams will do well in most tournaments, I exclude South Africa from this due to their choking, but on paper they are there, though the team is aging

after that you have tier 2

Pakistan and New Zealand , both have quality and issues as well but can beat any side any day

then you have tier 3

Sri Lanka - not the same without the starts
Bangaldesh - perhaps they should be higher but I think they need to prove more outside of home territory , they are better sri lanka though


then tier 4

WI, Afghan, Zim, Ireland in that order

 

[hadi123]

cartwright is not at all international material

Early days in his career but I would have to agree with you. Doesn't look good at all as a batsman. He would be nowhere near the full strength team

 

[bujhee kom]

I reckon the top tier of ODI cricket right now is the following

India, Aus, Eng ( yes they are flat track bullies but that's what cricket is these days)

a full strength lineup from any of these teams will do well in most tournaments, I exclude South Africa from this due to their choking, but on paper they are there, though the team is aging

after that you have tier 2

Pakistan and New Zealand , both have quality and issues as well but can beat any side any day

then you have tier 3

Sri Lanka - not the same without the starts
Bangaldesh - perhaps they should be higher but I think they need to prove more outside of home territory , they are better sri lanka though


then tier 4

WI, Afghan, Zim, Ireland in that order

Bangladesh are better than PK and NZ. WI are better than Lanka and the other minnows.

Eng, Aus, India, Saffers (not in ICC events) are t1. Bangladesh are 1.5 tier. Pakistan, WI and NZ are 2nd T. Others are minnows.

 

[pakistanigoneaussie]

Bangladesh are better than PK and NZ. WI are better than Lanka and the other minnows.

Eng, Aus, India, Saffers (not in ICC events) are t1. Bangladesh are 1.5 tier. Pakistan, WI and NZ are 2nd T. Others are minnows.

A year ago id say Bangldesh were better than Pak but the only way you can that now with a straight face is if you are in denial

 

[another drop catch]

Early days in his career but I would have to agree with you. Doesn't look good at all as a batsman. He would be nowhere near the full strength team

there are many deserving batsmen waiting for their chances but selectors have choosen cartwright

 

[Mp812]

Why?
When India was defeating SL in ODI recently there was a similar thread asking if SL team is at all time low.
Now India takes a 2-0 lead and thread asking if Aus team is at all time low.
I gues the general idea behind the thread is India can only defeat teams which are at all time low ) else how is it possible India is winning ))

 

[cricketerB94]

Why?
When India was defeating SL in ODI recently there was a similar thread asking if SL team is at all time low.
Now India takes a 2-0 lead and thread asking if Aus team is at all time low.
I gues the general idea behind the thread is India can only defeat teams which are at all time low ) else how is it possible India is winning ))

Here comes a theory which only Indians can explain.

It's not about losing, it's about team formation. Look at the loopholes in their team. When was the last time any team had a hat trick against Australia in ODI?

For people who are saying that Australia is not full strength, India is not playing with full strength team too. Dhawan, Jadeja and Ashwin are their key LOI players.

 

[sachin100]

Bring in Starc and Hazlewood and they're a completely different team. Batting isn't as strong as it used to be but with a bowling attack consisting of Starc, Hazlewood, Cummins, Coulter Nile and Zampa and with a part time option in Faulkner who is also a great hitter down the order, Australia wouldn't be facing 300+ totals many times to chase. By Australian standards it's definitely one of the weaker ODI team in the past 15 years but still a pretty strong team if they're playing full strength.

Yes thats why they haven't been to semifinal of any icc odi tourneys outside of Australia in recent yrs.

They r a minnow team outside of Australia in recent yrs.

 

[sachin100]

I'm not saying it's not possible, my point is that the frequency of teams scoring 300+ against a full strength Aussie bowling line up would still be pretty less, even on flatties. And the Australian batting line up isn't that weak that they can't score 275-325 on flat pitches. If the pitch has a bit of juice then the full strength Aussie bowling line up would be absolutely deadly.

But their batting will collapse to single figure scores if there is any swing, seam or seam.

 

[sachin100]

At full strength, they are still #1.

Then why they haven't been to semifinal of any icc tournaments other than their home tournament isn't?

 

[Sachin136]

Here comes a theory which only Indians can explain.

It's not about losing, it's about team formation. Look at the loopholes in their team. When was the last time any team had a hat trick against Australia in ODI?

For people who are saying that Australia is not full strength, India is not playing with full strength team too. Dhawan, Jadeja and Ashwin are their key LOI players.

Probably not Ashwin since he hasn't been in form recently, but Dhawan, Jadeja, Umesh Yadav and Shami are important players who are missing.

 

[Abdullah719]

Probably not Ashwin since he hasn't been in form recently, but Dhawan, Jadeja, Umesh Yadav and Shami are important players who are missing.

Didn't Bhuvaneshwar and Bumrah start most of the matches at the CT over Shami and Yadav anyway?

Dhawan yes. Not sure about Jadeja but going by the recent stuff I've read, it seems the new spinners will be preferred over him in future as well.

On the topic of the thread, Australia's middle order is very iffy, even if this is an experimental squad. Not sure who the long-term option is for #4.

 

[Plumb]

2 games and the knives are out. Aussies 'll bounce back they are tough. Its just matter of finding the right combination. Finch getting injured was a big blow. Not to mention Ind spinners are all over them at the moment same happened when they visited pak in UAE. few games doesn't make them a bad team.

 

[ToeCrusher2]

2 games and the knives are out. Aussies 'll bounce back they are tough. Its just matter of finding the right combination. Finch getting injured was a big blow. Not to mention Ind spinners are all over them at the moment same happened when they visited pak in UAE. few games doesn't make them a bad team.

It's not about 2 games, they've lost 10 out of the last 12 away games, and the other 2 were washouts, that's pathetic

 

[cricketworm]

Yes, they are in all time low, because India is beating them. How can that be?

 

[Sadevdesai]

Indians making hay while they can !!!!!!

 

[CricFan2012]

No because we're playing extremely experimental sides and pursuing all sorts of objectives.

Cartwright isn't in the team on merit he's in the team to get international experience.

Yeah, they're not playing to their potential atm.

 

[Abdullah719]

Yes, they are in all time low, because India is beating them. How can that be?

Or maybe it's because their last 13 matches outside Australia read 10 losses, an abandoned game and two no-results.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

No because we're playing extremely experimental sides and pursuing all sorts of objectives.

Cartwright isn't in the team on merit he's in the team to get international experience.

Put your strongest team.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

All time low is just silly. However, their middle order has weakened. They are not a settled side by any means even if they weren't experimenting. I don't see any polished player they can add that would strengthen it immediately.

 

[wrongun]

I think with our full strength attack we're a decent team.

But our batting is weak and even worse away from home. At home our batters are good enough that I'd say we win more than we lose just because in Oz, Starc, Pattinson, Cummins & will win a fair share of games without much pressure on our batsmen.

The decline in batting is a real worry imo for both our ODI & Test teams. Prioritising the Big Bash at the cost of the Shield & even Test preparation has now led to the rot everyone predicted.

 

[Mobashir]

Warner
Handscombe (wk)
Smith
Shaun Marsh/ khawaja/ Lynn
Head
Maxwell
Mitch Marsh/Stoinis
Starc
Cummins
Hazlewood
Zampa/Coulter Nile

There biggest worry is the wicket keeper. If they can sort it out they can come back.

 

[Buffet]

I think with our full strength attack we're a decent team.

But our batting is weak and even worse away from home. At home our batters are good enough that I'd say we win more than we lose just because in Oz, Starc, Pattinson, Cummins & will win a fair share of games without much pressure on our batsmen.

The decline in batting is a real worry imo for both our ODI & Test teams. Prioritising the Big Bash at the cost of the Shield & even Test preparation has now led to the rot everyone predicted.

I think in Aus, it's about no movement of ball helping to score big. Bowling helps, but it's mostly about having a batting which can put big total or chase big totals.

Coming back to this topic. Nope, this is not a new low or anything like that. Aus is not putting the best possible team so don't judge it based on how this team is doing. How many big finals Aus made it in the last 5-6 years? yes, they made one and won it, but that was in Aus. So it's not a new low. Same team will win big if game is played in Aus.

 

[cricketworm]

If you have seen these 2 matches, who will see that Aus. is no where near all time low despite losses. You can't run them over.

 

[ToeCrusher2]

If you have seen these 2 matches, who will see that Aus. is no where near all time low despite losses. You can't run them over.

We did beat them quite comfortably

 

[Cricfan4eva]

Cummins sent back too.

Tbh, a bit offended as Indian fan that Australia have treated this series as a series where they can experiment for 2019. Sure Ashes is important but its at least a couple of months away and Australia has it's no.1 ODI ranking at stake.

If this is how series leading up to World Cups are going to be treated and not much emphasis is given to ODI rankings. It wouldn't be far-fetched to assume bilaterals will soon lose their value for mass audiences as well.

Whatever happened to the ODI league ICC was planning to give context to bilaterals?

 

[leatherface58]

They will be strong again during the World Cup. They are rebuilding. Never count the 'roos out.

 

[Hasan123]

They are just experimenting in this series. There middle order is a little weak but the rest of the team is strong.

 

[R0H1T]

On flattish surfaces Aus are the team to beat, on anything that has seam/swing/spin they aren't half as good as the 2003 side that set the record for most ODI winds in a row.

 

[Convict]

Cummins sent back too.

Tbh, a bit offended as Indian fan that Australia have treated this series as a series where they can experiment for 2019. Sure Ashes is important but its at least a couple of months away and Australia has it's no.1 ODI ranking at stake.

If this is how series leading up to World Cups are going to be treated and not much emphasis is given to ODI rankings. It wouldn't be far-fetched to assume bilaterals will soon lose their value for mass audiences as well.

Whatever happened to the ODI league ICC was planning to give context to bilaterals?

Its nothing new. Cricket Australia hasn't cared about non world cup ODIs for nearly a decade now - and inevitably public interest in Australia has fallen right off.