FEATURES
Follow UsRemember how Test cricket used to look like in Australia before the pandemic? Big runs, big totals, bat dominating ball and bowlers having to toil reallyyyyy hard to get 20 wickets.
Between January 1, 2014 and January 8, 2020 (post the Sydney Test against New Zealand), the batting average in Australia was a whopping 35.03, the highest among all countries during the said period.
This period witnessed a staggering 84 hundreds being scored in the country, 23 more than the next best ‘hundred-scoring’ host country in the world, England, where 61 hundreds had been smashed.
A part of this was down to Steve Smith and David Warner being freaks, sure, but batting was generally easy in Australia, evident by opposition batters averaging 27.95 in the said six-year period, which was the second-best average for away batters in any country, behind Sri Lanka’s 29.62.
But post the pandemic, Test cricket in Australia has changed altogether.
Since July 2020, when cricket restarted after the pandemic, the batting average in Australia has fallen from 35.03 to 27.22.
It’s gone from the easiest place to bat in the world to the fourth-toughest, and the frequency of hundreds have fallen drastically: in this period, only West Indies, South Africa and Zimbabwe have seen fewer hundreds being scored.
This pattern, by the way, has extended to the Sheffield Shield, where the scores have fallen and the number of draws have drastically reduced despite all clashes being four-day affairs.
So what exactly has happened after the pandemic that’s made batting in Australia incredibly difficult?
In a recent appearance on The Grade Cricketer podcast, Usman Khawaja attributed this drop in batting average in the country to the changed Kookaburra ball, which has an extra layer of lacquer on it. The ‘new’ Kookaburra ball was trialed in the country five years ago and has been used in all red-ball games - both Tests and Shield matches - since the start of the 2020/21 season.
“The wickets were better when I first played first-class cricket. They were easier, they were flatter,” Khawaja said.
“The [changed] ball is probably the biggest difference. Those Kookaburra balls had a single lacquer on them. Now they have a double lacquer and the riding just doesn’t go off them at all. You have this new raised seam which, I feel, is the biggest change in Australian cricket for a long time.
“That’s why wobble seam is so prevalent now. Everyone wants to bowl wobble seam, not swing it, because there’s massive seam on the ball. You just put them down and they go in all directions. That wasn’t around back in the day,” he attested.
Khawaja, on top of this, also said something very interesting.
“I believe 100% that I’m a better player now than when I first started playing first-class cricket but I found first-class cricket easier when I first started playing than I do now because the wickets are greener, the bowling is tougher. The game has one hundred percent changed.”
To further decode why exactly batting has gotten tougher in Australia, Cricket.com decided to catch up with an individual who saw the ‘easier’ era Khawaja talked about as a player, and the ‘tougher’ current era as a coach.
We are, of course, referring to former Australia opener Phil Jaques who, apart from averaging 47 in Tests and piling on 16,035 runs in first-class cricket at an average of 48.29, also served as the head coach of New South Wales between 2018-2022.
Under Jaques, the Blues had three successive Sheffield Shield top two finishes, winning in 2019-20, while they also made two One-Day Cup finals, lifting the title in the 2020-21 season.
Below is the transcript of the interview
Do you agree with the sentiment that batting has gotten tougher in Australia?
PJ: It’s definitely harder to bat in Australia now, at the minute, more so due to the surfaces than the ball I feel. The Kookaburra ball did get changed a few years back, a little bit more lacquer on the ball and a slightly prouder seam. If anything, reverse-swing doesn’t happen much due to the amount of lacquer that’s on the ball. But there’s definitely more seam movement in Australia than there has ever been.
Could you elaborate a bit on what’s changed with the venues/surfaces that’s made batting harder in the country?
PJ: The grounds have sorta lost a bit of characteristic with some of the drop-in wickets that are now being played on. Adelaide Oval is very different to how it used to be when I played. It used to be a good wicket but now there’s definitely more seam in Adelaide.
Sydney is not a drop-in wicket but it used to be quite flat at the start and then turn; you got reverse swing too. Now it starts with a lot more grass on it and so there’s a lot more seam movement up-front, after which it flattens out and spins late.
Melbourne is a drop-in wicket as well; they’ve been working on trying to get more pace and carry and seam movement into that. That’s turned bowler-friendly and Brisbane and Perth have always been bowler-friendly, as is Hobart. So everywhere you go, there are seaming wickets. Of course, there are phases in the game where the wicket flattens out but yeah it’s a lot harder to bat up-front. Especially in the first innings.
What, in your opinion, led to these changes happening? We had that infamous clash at the MCG in 2017 but, aside from that, wickets in Australia seemed fine even though they were batter-friendly.
PJ: There seemed to be a shift in trying to create wickets in the Sheffield Shield that produced results. I think there’s definitely been more results [in the Sheffield Shield] because of that. Due to this, it’s definitely become harder to bat in the Shield as well. But that being said, I think if batters are prepared to bat some time, and ride those [tough] periods out, you can still make some runs.
I also feel the decline [in the run-scoring at the Shield level] is partly to do with T20 cricket. A lot of the younger players are fast-fed white-ball cricket. There is a lot less red-ball training at a younger age that is coming in now. This has become a lot more prominent since 2020. I think, as a result, you’ve got a perfect storm there: you’ve got tougher wickets with batters in a lot more hurry and, as a result, it’s become harder for the batters to adapt.
Is it fair to say that the biggest victims of this change have been top-order batters? Outside Khawaja, no top three batter has averaged over 50 in the Shield across the last three seasons. But lower-order batters have continued to thrive in this period, in both Tests and at the Shield level.
PJ: It’s definitely harder to score in the top four, where you are exposed to that new ball on seaming wickets. There’s still some good opening batters around in Australia. Cameron Bancroft has been one of the best performing openers in the country in the last two years, as has [Marcus] Harris. Matt Renshaw was pretty good probably until the last 12 months. Good signs he’s started to get a few more runs again, now.
The top openers are still doing well but it’s a lot harder now for them to pile on the massive runs. It’s become very difficult for them to force the hand of selectors to pick them.
Considering how difficult it’s been for top-order batters in Australia of late, then, are you a fan of the selectors and the management making middle-order batters open? Especially being an opener yourself? Matt Renshaw recently said that the move to promote Nathan McSweeney ‘hurt’ some of the openers in the country.
PJ: I don’t like middle-order batters going up top, but I don’t mind number three batters being pushed to open. I don’t like guys who have spent their careers batting 4, 5 & 6 going to open, because opening is a very different game. If a middle-order player wants to be an opener, I’d like to first see them open in a Shield game before getting picked. But I think if you’re a number three batter, opening is very much the same. Number three to an opener is a similar game plan because you could go in the second ball of the match.
So were you on board with the decision to open with Nathan McSweeney in Perth? You did see him thrive in that first India ‘A’ clash in Mackay, which you commentated on.
PJ: Yes, I didn’t mind the McSweeney promotion because he spent a fair bit of time at number three and did a great job there. And he always looked like a player who could adapt to the opening spot. I also felt he was the form batter in Australia, so he deserved an opportunity. He’s been very good for the last 18 months and then he scored runs under pressure in those ‘A’ games as well.
There’s suddenly a lot of pressure on McSweeney now on the back of his twin failures in Perth, where he was bamboozled by Bumrah. Do you still feel he is the right person for the job?
PJ: I do feel he is still the right person for the job. I think he’s been the form player and he’s got the game to do it. I think he’ll be better for the runaround after the experience in Perth. Everyone that’s played Test cricket will tell you that the first Test is a bit of a blur, no matter who you are. There’s a lot of different emotions going around on debut and I think he’ll be better and put on a better showing in the second Test. I think McSweeney is a really good player and ready to go.”
Lastly, going back to the change in nature of the wickets in the country, do you feel these bowler-friendly wickets have taken away Australia’s home advantage a little bit? Since the pandemic, they’ve already lost four Tests and also came close to losing a Test to Pakistan last year.
PJ: I’m not sure exactly [about Australia losing home advantage], but what it does when you have spicy wickets is it does bring both sides into the game depending on who wins the toss. I think it makes it a bit more of a lottery when there’s a spicy wicket. Puts a lot of pressure on your batting group to get a score in the first innings.
If you’ve not downloaded the Cricket.com app yet, you’re missing out on our content — big time. Download the App here
