Australia in England 2012

Hussey still believes in Test call

Daniel Brettig

June 19, 2012

Comments: 55 | Text size: A | A

David Hussey launches one down the ground, Australia v Sri Lanka, CB series, Melbourne, March 2, 2012
David Hussey is hoping his ODI and county cricket experience can earn him a Test debut © AFP
Enlarge
Related Links
Players/Officials: David Hussey | Chris Rogers
Teams: Australia | England

Should Ricky Ponting and Michael Hussey fail to reach the 2013 Ashes, there are another two Australian thirtysomethings, slightly younger, with enormous experience of how to bat in England. At the age of 34, David Hussey has not played a Test and Chris Rogers has played just one, but both have made themselves very much at home on UK surfaces, and are as familiar with Jimmy Anderson, Stuart Broad and Graeme Swann as any participant in the past few Ashes encounters.

It would be a move from far left-field by Australia's selectors to entertain the thought of choosing either Rogers or Hussey for 2013, not to mention a strategy more short-term than long. But they remain in the wings, still holding out the faintest hope that their years of finding the right way to play in England might one day prove useful.

Hussey is part of Australia's ODI squad currently training in Leicester, and said he felt a greater chance of playing Test cricket under the current selection panel led by John Inverarity than he ever had in the days of Andrew Hilditch's former regime. "I think the new selection committee is going to select the best players available at any one time. I have not given up hope of playing Test cricket," Hussey said. "If I did not believe I could not play Test cricket I probably would not be playing or probably follow the Twenty20 leagues around the world but that is still a goal for me. Playing Test cricket for your country is still the ultimate.

"I just had a very good one-on-one meeting with the coach and it is probably the most comfortable I have felt in the environment. You always try your best to help your team to as many wins as possible. I actually feel that I have a few credits in the bank now. Hopefully I don't need to use them in the short term."

Since he took over the role of national selector following last year's Argus review recommendations, Inverarity has repeatedly insisted that Test cricket is closed to no-one. Selection discussions have occasionally thrown up more experienced names - Simon Katich's name was mentioned as a potential Test opener against India before the panel settled on Ed Cowan, for instance - and there is a greater desire to select the best and most thoughtful team for the task at hand, rather than hoping for younger players to grow into their roles.

Instead, potential Test batsman are being tried via the avenue of ODIs, meaning Peter Forrest, George Bailey and Steve Smith are the three with the Ashes most firmly in their minds. However none can call on the years of county batting that Hussey and Rogers have accumulated. Hussey made the county grounds of Nottinghamshire and Sussex his own, while Rogers has prospered for Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and now Middlesex.

"I am hoping the Aussie selectors realise that Chris and myself, Phil Hughes is making a lot of runs for Worcester as well, are doing the right things in county cricket and have played a lot of cricket over here as well," Hussey said of Rogers and himself. "Playing county cricket is a big advantage for Chris and myself and hopefully it is looked upon for future series. "I would not have got back in the ODI team last summer if they did not pick on form. I had a really good Big Bash and I think that helped getting back in the one-day team and I thought I may as well grab every opportunity because it might well be the last."

Since his brother Michael's Test debut in 2005, David Hussey has continued to accumulate runs for Victoria at home and a range of county and club sides abroad. He has learned to deal with feeling unwanted at Test match level. Irrespective of his international future, Hussey will do his best as a bulwark of the ODI team on this tour, and pass on as much knowledge to the aforementioned younger batsmen as he can. The bowlers, too, are likely to be offered a few suggestions.

"You always get disappointed when selection comes around," Hussey said. "You sort of sit back and hope you are going to be a on a tour playing for your country. All you have to do is to keep churning out the runs and I was probably at an unfortunate time where Australia had so many good batters.

"[But] I have played a lot of county cricket over here, I think it is seven or eight years and playing all over the country and getting used to the conditions. So it is up to me to pass on some knowledge about wickets especially to our younger bowlers and how to bowl and what bowling I didn't like to face."

21.50pm: This story was amended to correct the fact that Chris Rogers has played one Test

Daniel Brettig is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

RSS Feeds: Daniel Brettig

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by camcove on (June 22, 2012, 13:16 GMT)

@ hiclass - I think your analysis of the reasons to select Rogers and D Hussey versus the younger aspirants is excellent. I would just point out in relation to Forrest that his stats, I think, have improved decidedly since his move to Qld, so he could be an improver. I've always thought Bailey's stats have suffered from his responsibilities as Tas capt, and I think S Marsh is an improver (albeit at the age of nearly 30). The other factor that no-one has mentioned is the excellent fielding capabilities of Rogers and D Hussey, and the latter's tidy "nude nuts" offspin. I truly hope that some new talent or one or more of Maddinson, M Marsh, Lynn, Davis, Patterson and Maxwell (as well as Khawaja and Hughes) can stand up and produce in the coming season/s.

Posted by JG2704 on (June 21, 2012, 16:31 GMT)

@Rowan OfWin on (June 21 2012, 12:19 PM GMT) - Sorry to be ignorant but are there Australian players called Quick or did you just run out of inspiration for the last 2 names and quick = fast bowler? If so did you not think a WK might be a good player to try and squeeze in there somewhere?

Posted by JG2704 on (June 21, 2012, 16:24 GMT)

@Front-Foot-Lunge on (June 19 2012, 18:11 PM GMT) Please don't resort to that cheap sledging. You know that both guys are quality and have played well in the English domestic league

Posted by hyclass on (June 21, 2012, 14:17 GMT)

@Beertjie.Watson has less success down the order than up it.He has just 59 wickets in 35 Tests & is neither a stock nor a strike bowler.He lacks the stamina to play an innings of substance and runs with difficulty,having been involved in far too many run-outs.As Ian Chappell once said,'Sometimes when you choose an all-rounder,you end up a batsman & a bowler short.'His place is in the ODI which seems far better suited to his physiology.There has been far too much emphasis placed on youth.The Shield is & has always been the place for youth to demonstrate long term quality.Australia A and ODI tours are further validation.Youth was once required to battle its way into the Test side by virtue of irresistable performance.The intelligence of this method has always been its encouragement of excellence.Only when compelling cases have been built should they receive opportunity.The cricket equation isn't age,class,technique,style,combinations,heritage-its professionalism runs & wickets over time.

Posted by   on (June 21, 2012, 12:19 GMT)

1. rogers 2. warner 3. watson 4. clarke 5. ponting 6. hussey 7 hussey 8 hilfenhaus 9 siddle 10 quick 11 quick warner/hussey/clarke is enough spin team would be better wihtout clarke and ponting I feel

Posted by arya_underfoot on (June 21, 2012, 12:19 GMT)

a few years ago, soon after michael hussey was selected in the test team, steve waugh was talking up the other hussey, saying how highly he regarded david, and that he was certain that david hussey would be a long-term test cricketer for australia. unfortunately, david's prime has been wasted on county cricket. but to be fair, the omission of david hussey is hardly the worst or the only monumental blunder made by hilditch and co during their reign of terror.

Posted by Beertjie on (June 21, 2012, 11:24 GMT)

Well written @hyclass: "Chris Rogers or David Hussey are both complete professionals who have plied their trade around the world,including long stints as County professionals." However Watto is a logical #6. Finding the right 16 is complicated by the tour to India in April. If Hussey were to tour there and not succeed that doesn't imply he should not go to England! Granted that these oldies are serving as stop-gaps, one needs to bring others along as well. The tests against SA and SL would be the place to mix and match youth, experience and current form. However, watching how some of the contenders (A-team as well) go in England during the next few weeks should also be a factor. @BaggyGreen2, no one is trying to retire out Huss & Punter, but no one has a divine right to continue being picked while only performing sporadically. Punter's usefulness in the team has run out no matter how much guidance he can provide to youngsters. Imo, @RandyOZ, one of Hughes/Cowan/Khawaja could tour.

Posted by   on (June 21, 2012, 9:40 GMT)

@ Gautham Va......I agree with you gautham......If johnson plays in ASHES sure shot england will win very easily........Australia won test series against India because johnson not played........He is an unpredictable player just like ajit agarkar..........

Posted by vertical on (June 21, 2012, 5:08 GMT)

I agree with user hyclass(thnks for the stats) hussey and rogers deserve the place ahead of march and cowan.

Posted by Indian_Fan09 on (June 20, 2012, 20:03 GMT)

Its amazing that guys like Marcus North, Steven Smith got a run in the team but guys like Brad Hodge, DJ Hussy, Chris Rogers hardly got a sniff!!

Posted by   on (June 20, 2012, 19:44 GMT)

@Smithy49 were you sleeping while typing those text? . omg steve smith and johnson in without watson siddle pattinson or cummins ... i'd rather take ravindra jadeja for johnson .... [ Warner, Cowan, Watson, Ponting, Clarke, M Hussey, Paine Pattinson/Cummins/Harris, HIlfenhauss, Siddle, Lyon ]

Posted by tasliskr on (June 20, 2012, 16:08 GMT)

good option hussey. you would be a good choice in place of andrew symonds in tests with quick runs u get.....there is an option to bat as opener in odi tooo.........u would be a master class action there

Posted by hyclass on (June 20, 2012, 12:43 GMT)

Smith averages 41,down from 56 when he was first selected & has only 5 x100's. Forrest averages 36 & has only 6 x 100's.Marsh averages 36 & has only 7 x 100's. Bailey averages 40 & has 14 x100's. Cowan averages 40 & has 13x 100s. Khawaja averages 42,down from 53 when first selected & has only 9 x100's. Cowan,Marsh & Forrest are all slow scorers. The entire group has ordinary records. Smith,Marsh,Cowan & Khawaja all average under 30 in Test matches. Rogers averages 50, with 17702 runs & 54 x100's & a highest of 319. Hussey averages 54, with 12339 runs & 41 x100's and a highest of 275. His strike rate is an amazing 70 in 1st class cricket.Its impossible to believe that any fair minded person can put forward a valid reason against the inclusion of Chris Rogers or David Hussey.They are both complete professionals who have plied their trade around the world,including long stints as County professionals. Which team is so good that it can afford to ignore 30,000 1st class runs & 95 centuries?

Posted by Gordo85 on (June 20, 2012, 12:42 GMT)

David Hussey is the new Brad Hodge and look how many Tests Brad Hodge played for Australia. For years now I have been seeing David Hussey develop into playing some good first class cricket with a great average and yet people all along have been saying that he is only a "Shorter format specialist" which I think is a total joke to be honest and also due to the fact that recently David Warner got in and played Tests yet he was also a "Shorter format specialist" so how does that make any sense at all? As far as Chris Rogers goes he should have played at least a few more matches and it was pretty harsh being dropped after one Test. Rogers would have been a perfect replacement for Hayden or Langer but it never really happend for him and then he moved states and never selected again. If Rogers plays another Test it will show me that Australian cricket picks people regardless of who they play for. David Hussey has to play a Test match that is for sure and he is a good fieldsman. Lots of luck.

Posted by bighit14 on (June 20, 2012, 10:00 GMT)

@derpherp, Read the last line "21.50pm: This story was amended to correct the fact that Chris Rogers has played one Test"

Posted by Smithy49 on (June 20, 2012, 9:39 GMT)

I think all the ashes team needs is Steve Smith as captain and getting a bit more of a bowl my team would be: Cowan, Warner, Ponting, Clarke, C Ferguson/D Hussey, M Hussey, STEVE SMITH, Tim Paine, Johnson, Hilfenhaus, Lyon. I think they should try D Hussey but if he doesn't go well just keep Ferguson at 5. Or you could have Tom Cooper.

Posted by RandyOZ on (June 20, 2012, 9:19 GMT)

As much as I like DHussey, it would be too much of a backward step to select him. Khawaja and Hughes will be there for the next Ashes make no mistake

Posted by Potatis on (June 20, 2012, 8:47 GMT)

David Hussey has all the skills and a lot of experience. He is hungry for a chance to represent Australia. The selectors should pick him for a test to see how he goes! I believe David has done enough good service to deserve the right to say he has played test cricket for Australia. He can't do worse than Shaun Marsh did in the series against India. Pick David Hussey, and put him out of his misery! :)

Posted by John-Price on (June 20, 2012, 8:43 GMT)

For my money, David Hussey is as good a player as there have has been without a test cap. He should have had some of Marcus Notth's caps.

Posted by derpherp on (June 20, 2012, 8:40 GMT)

Dave hussey averages just under 55 in first class, thats insane, and rogers is at 50.

Posted by derpherp on (June 20, 2012, 8:38 GMT)

@ SSRajan reread it again mate- "At the age of 34, David Hussey has not played a Test and Chris Rogers has played just one, but both have made themselves very much at home on UK surfaces"

Posted by Ozcricketwriter on (June 20, 2012, 7:54 GMT)

I sincerely hope that David Hussey isn't considered out of the race due to age when his OLDER brother is still playing...

Posted by   on (June 20, 2012, 7:51 GMT)

hey the indian players should not retie because they are good but i do you agree that laxmen should start thinking of retirement

Posted by Iamnotboredofcricket on (June 20, 2012, 7:05 GMT)

512fm is right... But anyway... I do hope the Aussies pick Steve Smith. It'd be just like playing 10 men. He's one of these players who seems to be in peoples minds but really isn't ready. Reminds me of the wasted time and effort England put into Luke Wright for the ODIs, and actually also reminds me of Bell being brought in in 2005 when Thorpe would have been a better bet. And before you all go on about 1 eye for the future, it took Bell a long long time to get established. Stick with Punter and Huss... I really hope those guys do well, as an English supporter I want one of the greats (Punter) playing - if he's in form. Probably better to get Katich to "un-retire" than play Rogers.

Posted by   on (June 20, 2012, 6:47 GMT)

@ Meety. Can't agree with you on Cowan's spot being up for grabs. I think he should get at least two more tests yet. I just think he's the kind of guy that needs time to settle into the environment and to analyse what works and what doesn't at test level. Sadly for Hussey, D and more particularly Rogers I just don't see too many opportunities. Hughes is making runs and indeed i watched one of the matches he played in last week where he made a big score. I'm not sure he's being tested too much by the 75mph seamers and nude ball spinners, certainly I'd still have Cowan in front of him until he can make some scores against better bowling attacks.

Posted by hyclass on (June 20, 2012, 6:36 GMT)

The text clearly says' At the age of 34, David Hussey has not played a Test and Chris Rogers has played just one,'unquote.I have maintained for sometime,that Rogers should have been opening,not Cowans and that Hussey should have batted at 4 and Watson been dropped. Watson is a wonderful player who lacks the stamina to play a Test innings of substance and has fragility issues that prevent him from being either a stock or strike bowler.His place should be in the ODI and T20 arena. A top order that reads Rogers,Warner,Ponting,D.Hussey,Clarke,M.Hussey,has the capacity to bat for long periods against all types of bowling. Warner is the young project player,though his game demonstrates the same flaw as Gilchrist late in his career; the inability to keep cuts on the ground or deal with bounce around off stump.His average has fallen significantly and I feel he has been fortunate in both 1st class and Test cricket.Hussey & Rogers views on the previous selection panel should elucidate all.

Posted by zenboomerang on (June 20, 2012, 6:30 GMT)

Good luck Dave & Chris, but it will be a bit of a leap for either of them to make a Test team next summer... Not my call, just looking at the Aust A & CoE squads which is usually where the selectors are looking... Already Forrest seems the next middle order batsman to be picked... Then there are Klinger, Cowan, Bailey, Smith, Cooper, Davis, Burns in the Aust A tour to Eng... Klinger would be my pick as a replacement opener & all could be playing for another 4+ years - Huss & Rogers would be pushing it... Don't see a make-shift Test squad for just 12mths when there is the 2015 WC filling the window...

Posted by zenboomerang on (June 20, 2012, 6:28 GMT)

@whatawicket... Not being pedantic... but Mike Hussey is 37 & Ponting will be 38 this year - not your 36... That being said, players age differently... Clarke & Watson will be lucky to be playing at 35/36 due to physical restraints that neither of the Husseys nor Ponting have been shown to have...

Posted by   on (June 20, 2012, 3:16 GMT)

@ Tully Matthews - completely agree with your point. The only reason age comes into the picture is when it impacts on fitness, reflexes and results in poor showing on the scoreboard. At the end of the day, any team's job is to win matches, and the simple formula for doing that is picking the best team. How does it matter how old a player is if he is winning matches for the team? Inverarity seems to understand this, and Cowan's selection for Australia's home series against India was proof of this. Pity Hilditch didn't do the same. Ponting and Hussey should play the next Ashes series if they are making runs, and more in form than other players knocking on the door.

Posted by   on (June 20, 2012, 2:03 GMT)

The selectors job is to pick the best team, at the time, for the conditions and opponent. Age should not come in to it at all, ever! If a player is in form, whats it matter if he is 18 or 38?

Re the comment about old players being slow in the field. Say that to Ricky Ponting & Mike Hussey! 2 of the best and most agile fields representing Aus.

Posted by Meety on (June 20, 2012, 2:03 GMT)

Interesting times, do the Oz selectors do a temporary "plugging" of the order with well qualidfied but aging talent, or do they continue to takes some educated guesses. I felt Cowan did enough to get on the plane to the Carribean, & despite some relatively good knocks (low scoring series), I think his spot is up for grabs for the Saffa series. Casting an eye around the Shield for an opener, we have a few blokes early on in their careers, & are not really ready, Hughes & Cowan are the best of the "young" openers, Liam Davis needs another good season (IMO). My gut feel is to give Rogers a crack, & make the young brigade have to trample over the top of him to get a Baggy Green. As far as David Hussey is concerned, we have a test middle order that have the runs on the board & are unlikely to be shifted from position 4 to 6, inside of 12mths. I think DHussey would be a good choice should there be any injuries. We do however, have some reasonable talent coming thru in the middle order.

Posted by kh1902 on (June 20, 2012, 1:35 GMT)

I don't think age should be a factor when selecting players. If Hussey has what it takes, he should be selected, even if he is a late bloomer.

wiseshah: the article is about Australia's cricketers. Not everything is about Sachin Tendulkar. However, just to correct some factual inaccuracies in your post:

1. Dravid has already retired 2. Australia doesn't always pick players on form - that's why Ponting was repeatedly selected despite his underperformances over a two year period. 3. Tendulkar is still India's best batsman, based on performance over the last three years. His selection in the team is not based on reputation. 4. Performance is not related to age. You conveniently overlook Gautam Gambhir, who has consistently failed India while performing well for the Kolkata Knight Riders. The attitudinal problem of some of India's young players (who only care about the IPL) is a bigger problem than the ageing players, who still have a committment to test cricket.

Posted by BaggyGreen2 on (June 20, 2012, 0:58 GMT)

Stop trying to retire out Huss & Punter, Cricinfo!

Posted by 512fm on (June 19, 2012, 22:49 GMT)

Isn't it a bit early to be talking about the Ashes?

Posted by RednWhiteArmy on (June 19, 2012, 21:42 GMT)

England must be worried hahaha

Posted by wiseshah on (June 19, 2012, 20:31 GMT)

tendulkar, laxman, dravid, shehwag should retire ASAP. why aussie tradition of retirement when players in pick form dont apply for indian cricketer. they dont retire until they are kicked out

Posted by whatawicket on (June 19, 2012, 19:56 GMT)

guys dont be so pedantic so hes played a test. in the era of ageism age should not come into it. but in a years time DH will 36 and CR close to 36. the age which the elderly incumbents namely ricky and michael have reached. who is going to chase and field the bowl. the aussies will have an oap of a team, and iv not checked the other members of the proposed 11 will be.

Posted by SSRajan on (June 19, 2012, 19:08 GMT)

"At the age of 34, neither David Hussey nor Chris Rogers have played a Test match,....". Didn't Chris Rogers play a test against India? I think the Perth test that India won.

Posted by   on (June 19, 2012, 18:50 GMT)

Rogers *has* played a Test - against India at Perth in 2008.

Posted by Joe123 on (June 19, 2012, 18:40 GMT)

Check your ow cricinfo player profile, Daniel! Chris Rogers has a test cap.

Posted by wiseshah on (June 19, 2012, 18:30 GMT)

i think selection should be based on current form, not based on age. so many players never shined after their early debut. i think we should live in the present and give players due what they are deserving. david hussey definitely deserve a chance

Posted by   on (June 19, 2012, 18:30 GMT)

Sorry to be pedantic but Rogers has played one Test match.

Posted by   on (June 19, 2012, 18:30 GMT)

Daniel, Chris Rodgers has played test cricket for Australia against India.

Posted by   on (June 19, 2012, 18:16 GMT)

Rogers has played test cricket. I've watched him. Just the one test I think, he was pretty average.

Posted by   on (June 19, 2012, 18:13 GMT)

Chris Rogers has played one Test match for Australia

Posted by whatawicket on (June 19, 2012, 18:12 GMT)

the above mentioned cricketers of lesser age. i doubt they have not played much county cricket against englands bowlers as they just dont play county cricket, none of england cricketers do. but i gotta laugh has australian batting stocks dropped so much that they have to pick two 34 year olds, good grief. what about stewey law now there is a quality batter just looked at his profile to old at 44. sorry guys im having a laugh. we said last year against Indian cricketers get the aussie batters playing county cricket to improve their game.

Posted by Front-Foot-Lunge on (June 19, 2012, 18:11 GMT)

Is this all they've got? The cupboard is bare for our average, middle-ranked Australia.

Posted by pranav on (June 19, 2012, 18:09 GMT)

chris rogers has played 1 test match.

Posted by   on (June 19, 2012, 18:01 GMT)

...but Chris Rogers HAS played a Test match. Dropped after given once chance.

Posted by Kath on (June 19, 2012, 17:59 GMT)

"At the age of 34, neither David Hussey nor Chris Rogers have played a Test match"

Chris Rogers played a test in 2008 when Hayden was injured.

Posted by k4zz on (June 19, 2012, 17:54 GMT)

Its ridiculous to think someone as good as David Hussey has yet to play Test cricket but that's what has happened. I can imagine the Hussey bro's destroying all who stood before. Heck when the Aussies went looking for a spin bowler trying out a bunch of useless players they could have had David Hussey as their frontline spinner and he would have done a better job than most of them, his bowling is underrated.

Posted by   on (June 19, 2012, 17:53 GMT)

Chris Rogers has played 1 test match...

Posted by DazTaylor on (June 19, 2012, 17:52 GMT)

"At the age of 34...Chris Roghers has never played a test match." Wrong. He played one match against India back in 2008.

Posted by dsirl on (June 19, 2012, 17:49 GMT)

Rogers not played a test? Aus v Ind at Perth a few years ago perhaps...

Posted by Tomek on (June 19, 2012, 17:47 GMT)

Think you will find Chris Rogers has very much played a Test match....literally A Test, but all the same he has a Baggy Green lurking around his pool room.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Daniel BrettigClose
Daniel Brettig Assistant editor Daniel Brettig had been a journalist for eight years when he joined ESPNcricinfo, but his fascination with cricket dates back to the early 1990s, when his dad helped him sneak into the family lounge room to watch the end of day-night World Series matches well past bedtime. Unapologetically passionate about indie music and the South Australian Redbacks, Daniel's chief cricketing achievement was to dismiss Wisden Almanack editor Lawrence Booth in the 2010 Ashes press match in Perth - a rare Australian victory that summer.
Tour Results
England v Australia at Manchester - Jul 10, 2012
England won by 7 wickets (with 11 balls remaining) (D/L method)
England v Australia at Chester-le-Street - Jul 7, 2012
England won by 8 wickets (with 13 balls remaining)
England v Australia at Birmingham - Jul 4, 2012
Match abandoned without a ball bowled
England v Australia at The Oval - Jul 1, 2012
England won by 6 wickets (with 26 balls remaining)
England v Australia at Lord's - Jun 29, 2012
England won by 15 runs
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days