Australia in World Twenty20 October 6, 2012

Australia's limitations confirmed

Well prepared though they were, Australia's quest reflected the thinness in their batting and spin bowling - limitations that will need to be rectified
  shares 87

Jonty Rhodes once said of Shane Warne's flipper that while the bowler's thumb position meant he could often tell it was coming, he still found the ball extremely difficult to play. Australia could not possibly have been better prepared for their tilt at the World Twenty20 in Sri Lanka, but for all the planning and forethought that went into it, their campaign still fell to pieces with alarming haste.

Pakistan dusted off a month-old blue print for beating George Bailey's side in their last Super Eights match, and West Indies improved upon it with startling effectiveness in the semi-final. All through a strong run to that point, Australia had never quite overturned the widely held view that their batting was suspect beyond the top three of Shane Watson, David Warner and Michael Hussey.

Watson and Warner had given their side the veneer of invincibility during the earlier matches, pummelling a series of opposition attacks when presented with middling targets. But as the Premadasa Stadium pitches grew tired and opponents adapted to Australia's tactics, the early sheen gave way to a greater number of errors and a creeping fatigue - mental as much as physical.

This was surprising, for no Australian T20 team has been so comprehensively drilled for a particular task. From the moment the national selector John Inverarity named Bailey as the new T20 captain in January, and also included the ageing wrist spinner Brad Hogg, it was clear the team's objective was no longer developmental or promotional in nature. Here was a team chosen to win the World T20 trophy, nothing more and nothing less.

In contrast to previous squads, Bailey's was given plenty of time to work together, playing series against India, West Indies and Pakistan while also spending time in camp. Inverarity had charged the team's leaders "to drive a focused, disciplined and fiercely determined culture in this team". Culture has become a key word in Australian cricket, and consistent team selections were geared towards creating the most united group possible for Sri Lanka. There was extra scouting work done too, as the coach Mickey Arthur stayed home from part of the preceding tour of the UAE to plan for Sri Lanka.

Initially it worked, as Ireland, West Indies, India and South Africa were swatted away with impressive might. Arthur's pre-tournament conclusion that the Premadasa pitches would start with some life proved well founded. Rested from the UAE series, Watson was at the centre of it all, claiming four Man-of-the-Match awards in succession. Xavier Doherty came in for Dan Christian against South Africa and immediately had an impact, burgling three wickets while keeping the runs down.

Yet the margins of these victories may ultimately have hurt Australia as much as they helped. A powerful top order flourished but did no more than required if the tournament was to be won. The less credentialled batsmen beneath had little to do, and little chance to prove to themselves that they were up to the task if a match became tight. The bowlers did well, Mitchell Starc especially, but invariably held the momentum after early wickets fell. When Pakistan and the West Indies both formed partnerships there did not seem an Australian bowler capable of twisting the match with a double break.

Bailey led the side neatly enough, and showed flashes of batting that indicated his place was more deserved than some thought. But he felt the strain of leading his country in his first year as an international cricketer, his trademark smile becoming wryer with each match.

So when the contests came, there was a flatness to the way Australia performed at the pointy end, a certain sharpness missing. This was best illustrated in the field, where a previously zippy unit moved sluggishly in the final two games, perhaps lacking Christian's vim. There was a costly dropped catch by Glenn Maxwell from the edge of Nasir Jamshed against Pakistan, and a handful of other misfields. Against West Indies, the fielders watched 14 sixes sail over their heads, but the brothers Hussey also allowed a pair of shots burst through their fingers to the boundary.

As Bailey, Arthur or Inverarity must have known, such lapses could not be afforded by a team lacking the depth of talent available to some other sides. Beyond Watson, Warner, Hussey and Starc, few of Australia's other players would have commanded places in the T20 teams named by the opposing nations. Maxwell's selection for the tournament was a bold gamble, showing confidence in a young allrounder with enormous belief in his own ability. But "the big show", as teammates dubbed Maxwell, was ultimately a sideshow, playing a poor game against Pakistan to lose his place for the semi.

It may have been a failure of nerve if anything to recall David Hussey in Maxwell's place. Possessing a rich domestic T20 record and a vast array of experience, he was left out until the last possible moment, as Bailey and Arthur judged Dan Christian, Cameron White and Maxwell to be better options. At times Bailey in particular was annoyed by the level of interest in Hussey's absence from the XI. Finally he was called on for the semi-final, and as it turned out he was ineffectual, expensive with the ball and bouncer-shy with the bat.

Bailey led the side neatly enough, and showed flashes of batting that indicated his place was more deserved than some thought. But he felt the strain of leading his country in his first year as an international cricketer, his trademark smile becoming wryer with each match. He also placed too much faith in his longtime Tasmania teammate and friend Doherty against West Indies, handing him a final over that felt predestined to end in carnage against Chris Gayle and Kieron Pollard.

Ultimately, the failure of Australia's quest reflected the limitations of their players. The nation's pace bowling resources are strong, but there is a thinness to the batting and spin bowling that needs somehow to be rectified. Otherwise all the planning in the world will not prevent Australia from puzzling at future ICC events, as Rhodes once did, about how familiarity does not guarantee success.

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

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • POSTED BY ScottStevo on | October 8, 2012, 14:36 GMT

    Why are there so many saying that M Hussey didn't do well in this tournament? If you look at his scores, he's done perfectly well albeit just not in the semi final. One bad score doesn't make a bad player...

    To the english and Indian supporters criticising the Australian lack of depth, they should certainly be looking in the mirror as both of their sides are terribly lacking in quality in T20. in fact, the English were using Luke Wright as their top batsman and hoping some bloke who had 1 good knock once was world class - that's when you know the cupboards are bare!! For india, if Kohli doesn't score the runs, then nobody does. Sehwag looks shot and gambhir was all over the place. Then they look to Dhoni to save them from the mire they've got themselves in to. They also blame a little bit of dampness hinders their "top quality" spinners so much that they're almost incapable of bowling anything other than the complete trash they threw done at Aus - which was duly caned to all parts!

  • POSTED BY Samdanh on | October 8, 2012, 8:50 GMT

    Getting players doing well in Tests and ODIs to play T20s is going to hurt performances in Tests and ODIs in the long run. Would rather develop a team only for T20. Steve O'Keefe and Callum Freguson should make it to the T20 team. Holland should be brought in first into ODIs and moved later to Tests-to help when Aus tours subcontinent where the boards trust dustbowls more than they trust their players

  • POSTED BY bobagorof on | October 8, 2012, 1:44 GMT

    @indiabadri: Yep, the Australian 'era' is over, and has been for a while. Let's all get behind India... oh wait, didn't they fail to even make the semis?

  • POSTED BY bobagorof on | October 8, 2012, 1:30 GMT

    Martin Crowther: I disagree with you on Bailey. With the exception of Doherty bowling the last over against WI, what has he done wrong as Captain? As a batsman, he was the only one in that match to offer any resistance. David Hussey has been out of T20 form for at least 2 years, and doesn't deserve his spot anymore - his last 15 innings have averaged under 14 at less than a run a ball. Shaun Marsh still hasn't regained any form and would most likely have been a walking wicket. This is the problem with picking players on reputation alone.

  • POSTED BY Marcio on | October 8, 2012, 1:16 GMT

    I couldn't agree with Landl47 more. Luck just has way too much say in this format. The WI were one ball away from being eliminated vs NZ, and basically played awful the first 5 games - then won the comp. On performances they were not the best team in the competition - and by a long shot. And how SL blew the final from an unbeatable position simply defies belief! Just astounding tactical stupidity. Why prepare a spinner's paradise and then stubbornly keep bowling a fastbowler who is going for 15 an over when there are guys there going for 3 an over on a dead slow track? Was Homer Simpson captaining the team? Doh! Nobody to blame but themselves. But it was shades of the Galle test vs AUS. Prepare a dodgy track - then lose the toss and get burnt.

  • POSTED BY bobagorof on | October 8, 2012, 1:04 GMT

    I'd like to know what people suggest should have been done differently. Should either Watson or Warner, the two in-form openers, have been 'rested' or dropped down the order in the opening stages, when they were yet to display their form? As it was, Maxwell was tried at 3 in one match and had all of six balls to face. All in all, I think a semi-finals berth is something Australia can be proud of, considering their recent record. As mentioned, though, the tournament has highlighted a problem with spin bowling (facing as well as delivering) - perhaps Lyon should have been included - and a need for young batsmen. Both of these issues have been apparent for a few years at least, but there is no miracle cure. Maybe moving on from Hussey and White would be a good start though.

  • POSTED BY Massive_Allan_Border_Fan on | October 8, 2012, 1:01 GMT

    Came here to say exactly what landl47 has already said. Great comments. Will simply add that a three- or five-test series almost always delivers the right result, whereas a single T20 game (or even a few of them) can still deliver "lucky" results to a minnow team.

  • POSTED BY D-Ascendant on | October 8, 2012, 0:08 GMT

    Maybe Lisa Sthalekar could be given a go in the men's T20 team? She certainly looks like one of the top five spinners in Australia in this format currently.

  • POSTED BY ygkd on | October 7, 2012, 23:45 GMT

    One point where this WC does matter is that it's in Asia. Simple geography and maths tells us that Australia's international cricketers are going to play there a lot in the future. Spin will be important. One thing that can be taken from this tournament is the success spinners had in taking wickets and not with the toe-hitting slow bowling we see all too regularly here in Oz - but with variety and serious skill. That is a message we need to give our talented kids - learn to spin well and there are opportunities in T20, learn to bat and keep properly to quality spin and the same opportunities apply. By ignoring the whole concept however, we'll just leave it to them to go down the slogging, spot-dropping path. It's ironical that one mid-teen around here had a successful A-grade senior T20 series last year after being disregarded as a bit of a grafter. Because he'd focussed on long-form he'd learnt properly. Now he's adding the non-traditional stuff and that's the right order to do it in.

  • POSTED BY Meety on | October 7, 2012, 23:36 GMT

    @Martin Crowther - you had me right up until "....should have called up Shaun marsh...." then it got progressively worse. David Hussey has been as poor form as White (worse actually), & Brad Hodge (despite whatever slights he has had) is retired. @ heathrf1974 on (October 07 2012, 13:32 PM GMT) - except unfortunately we have the Champ League to bugger things up!

  • POSTED BY ScottStevo on | October 8, 2012, 14:36 GMT

    Why are there so many saying that M Hussey didn't do well in this tournament? If you look at his scores, he's done perfectly well albeit just not in the semi final. One bad score doesn't make a bad player...

    To the english and Indian supporters criticising the Australian lack of depth, they should certainly be looking in the mirror as both of their sides are terribly lacking in quality in T20. in fact, the English were using Luke Wright as their top batsman and hoping some bloke who had 1 good knock once was world class - that's when you know the cupboards are bare!! For india, if Kohli doesn't score the runs, then nobody does. Sehwag looks shot and gambhir was all over the place. Then they look to Dhoni to save them from the mire they've got themselves in to. They also blame a little bit of dampness hinders their "top quality" spinners so much that they're almost incapable of bowling anything other than the complete trash they threw done at Aus - which was duly caned to all parts!

  • POSTED BY Samdanh on | October 8, 2012, 8:50 GMT

    Getting players doing well in Tests and ODIs to play T20s is going to hurt performances in Tests and ODIs in the long run. Would rather develop a team only for T20. Steve O'Keefe and Callum Freguson should make it to the T20 team. Holland should be brought in first into ODIs and moved later to Tests-to help when Aus tours subcontinent where the boards trust dustbowls more than they trust their players

  • POSTED BY bobagorof on | October 8, 2012, 1:44 GMT

    @indiabadri: Yep, the Australian 'era' is over, and has been for a while. Let's all get behind India... oh wait, didn't they fail to even make the semis?

  • POSTED BY bobagorof on | October 8, 2012, 1:30 GMT

    Martin Crowther: I disagree with you on Bailey. With the exception of Doherty bowling the last over against WI, what has he done wrong as Captain? As a batsman, he was the only one in that match to offer any resistance. David Hussey has been out of T20 form for at least 2 years, and doesn't deserve his spot anymore - his last 15 innings have averaged under 14 at less than a run a ball. Shaun Marsh still hasn't regained any form and would most likely have been a walking wicket. This is the problem with picking players on reputation alone.

  • POSTED BY Marcio on | October 8, 2012, 1:16 GMT

    I couldn't agree with Landl47 more. Luck just has way too much say in this format. The WI were one ball away from being eliminated vs NZ, and basically played awful the first 5 games - then won the comp. On performances they were not the best team in the competition - and by a long shot. And how SL blew the final from an unbeatable position simply defies belief! Just astounding tactical stupidity. Why prepare a spinner's paradise and then stubbornly keep bowling a fastbowler who is going for 15 an over when there are guys there going for 3 an over on a dead slow track? Was Homer Simpson captaining the team? Doh! Nobody to blame but themselves. But it was shades of the Galle test vs AUS. Prepare a dodgy track - then lose the toss and get burnt.

  • POSTED BY bobagorof on | October 8, 2012, 1:04 GMT

    I'd like to know what people suggest should have been done differently. Should either Watson or Warner, the two in-form openers, have been 'rested' or dropped down the order in the opening stages, when they were yet to display their form? As it was, Maxwell was tried at 3 in one match and had all of six balls to face. All in all, I think a semi-finals berth is something Australia can be proud of, considering their recent record. As mentioned, though, the tournament has highlighted a problem with spin bowling (facing as well as delivering) - perhaps Lyon should have been included - and a need for young batsmen. Both of these issues have been apparent for a few years at least, but there is no miracle cure. Maybe moving on from Hussey and White would be a good start though.

  • POSTED BY Massive_Allan_Border_Fan on | October 8, 2012, 1:01 GMT

    Came here to say exactly what landl47 has already said. Great comments. Will simply add that a three- or five-test series almost always delivers the right result, whereas a single T20 game (or even a few of them) can still deliver "lucky" results to a minnow team.

  • POSTED BY D-Ascendant on | October 8, 2012, 0:08 GMT

    Maybe Lisa Sthalekar could be given a go in the men's T20 team? She certainly looks like one of the top five spinners in Australia in this format currently.

  • POSTED BY ygkd on | October 7, 2012, 23:45 GMT

    One point where this WC does matter is that it's in Asia. Simple geography and maths tells us that Australia's international cricketers are going to play there a lot in the future. Spin will be important. One thing that can be taken from this tournament is the success spinners had in taking wickets and not with the toe-hitting slow bowling we see all too regularly here in Oz - but with variety and serious skill. That is a message we need to give our talented kids - learn to spin well and there are opportunities in T20, learn to bat and keep properly to quality spin and the same opportunities apply. By ignoring the whole concept however, we'll just leave it to them to go down the slogging, spot-dropping path. It's ironical that one mid-teen around here had a successful A-grade senior T20 series last year after being disregarded as a bit of a grafter. Because he'd focussed on long-form he'd learnt properly. Now he's adding the non-traditional stuff and that's the right order to do it in.

  • POSTED BY Meety on | October 7, 2012, 23:36 GMT

    @Martin Crowther - you had me right up until "....should have called up Shaun marsh...." then it got progressively worse. David Hussey has been as poor form as White (worse actually), & Brad Hodge (despite whatever slights he has had) is retired. @ heathrf1974 on (October 07 2012, 13:32 PM GMT) - except unfortunately we have the Champ League to bugger things up!

  • POSTED BY ygkd on | October 7, 2012, 23:09 GMT

    It is easy to not care about Australia's involvement in this T20 WC. But that approach only ignores the way the future is shaping up. Of course we shouldn't be in thrall of T20. We should keep it from the kids until they reach 16 or so and have an idea of how to play properly. That, however, is generally not going to happen. The Big Bash is specifically marketed towards families with young kids. They want to play it (whether or not it's good for their early development is an entirely different matter) and they are playing it and being taught it at both local &, more significantly, advanced rep stages. What we must accept is that it is up to those who care to make clear that it can be played inventively without slogging. Just ignoring it is not going to work, nor is disparaging countries that are successful at it. If the Aus media makes little of it, it is because we didn't win. Just look at the coverage of the women's game. Why has that increased? Because they did better than the men.

  • POSTED BY rsgarcia on | October 7, 2012, 20:44 GMT

    @chad-reid, that's exactly why Australia will never have the cup. No one wins anything they don't care about. While you all pretend it doesn't matter, you don't want it and you're too cool for school, you can continue to sit this format out. Care factor of Aussies winning T20 format to the rest of the world = ZERO. Nuff said.

  • POSTED BY cheguramana on | October 7, 2012, 20:11 GMT

    The bigger puzzle is why AUS takes the same approach even after earlier failures. In WC 2011 also, they came forward with same 'well prepared', 'well drilled', 'pace bowling strength'.... i, for one, expected AUS to easily beat IND, dint happen so. this time, i was wiser. AUS dont get the approach rite. They have still not uncovered a spinner after Shane Warne. their 'NextGen' bowlers are ready, but where are the next batch of great AUS batsmen ?

    But one thing is going strong : their arrogance. Warner gave WI lip and he got a bloody lip in return.

  • POSTED BY on | October 7, 2012, 19:28 GMT

    @Marcio on (October 06 2012, 13:19 PM GMT). You got the wrong person. You were referring to: OsWood on (October 06 2012, 11:12 AM GMT) "This WI team will beat Aus anywhere they play". My post was: Chris Sun on (October 06 2012, 10:33 AM GMT). If you look at the test team, neither Warner, Ponting or Clarke were able to capitalize against the WI in test matches. But they were able to score heavily against India which basically masked and shielded the problems in Australia's batting. This gave people false hope that Australia were back to their best. Here in T20, a whole different ballgame, Warner is now being found out and Hussey is on his last legs.

  • POSTED BY on | October 7, 2012, 18:20 GMT

    Aus's problem is, they think they are in still 2003 era. still they did not realize that those days are gone long ago. currently they don't have any strike bowler like Warne, Mcgrath, Lee, etc. in those days,these bolwers gave breakthrough when a big partnership built. In many matches those guy's 1 magical over turned the whole match! and Batsmen like Ricky, Gili, Waugh, Haiden could wine a match from very difficult moment. but currently they don't have batsmen & bowler like they had! current fast bowler are very good but they need more time to be more effective like past days. unfortunately no spin bowler they have who can be a world class spinner. If Australia does not concern about those matter then we might see Australia in a position that faced by West Indies! that will be a very sad thing!

  • POSTED BY heathrf1974 on | October 7, 2012, 13:32 GMT

    The Aussies won't be too concerned. They'll actually be pleased they made the semis. Now they need to focus on domestic cricket and a big Test series against SA.

  • POSTED BY landl47 on | October 7, 2012, 13:07 GMT

    There's really only one way to win T20s- hope like heck it happens to be your day today. Australia got through the qualifying rounds because it happened to be Watson and Hussey's day every day, up to the last Super8 match. In the semi, it wasn't their day, and Aus lost. WI has looked shaky all the way through, but in the semi, it was their day and they won. The fact that New Zealand, comfortably the weakest of the Super 8 teams, took both finalists to a Super Over shows how little form matters. Coming in to the tournament, England and South Africa had just fought a battle for top T20 side; they won one game between them in the Super8s, though neither was defeated by big margins. It just wasn't their day. Australia has problems ahead in test cricket, where their batting needs young players to replace Ponting and Hussey, so try to fix that. Don't bother analyzing or trying to fix T20, it will still come down to whose day it is for any given match.

  • POSTED BY on | October 7, 2012, 13:05 GMT

    David Hussey this year has shown to be in bad form. Even in the ipl. Glenn maxwell I don't think I'd ready to be in the t20 side full time yet as he has temperament issues. Again like Hussey Cameron white has been in poor form and should have called up Shaun marsh,maybe Mitchell marsh as both have experience playing in sub continental pitches (due to the ipl). George bailey should not be captain. If David Hussey was in form I would have placed David Hussey as captain. Australia did miss a trick in their squad selection as they didn't pick brad hodge! Hodge at 4 would have helped them chase down bigger scores.

  • POSTED BY on | October 7, 2012, 12:28 GMT

    Let's look at this in an objective perspective. Cricket is a team sport. SPECIALIST bowlers, keeper, and batsmen do their job. The captain leads the ship. When mixed up in a mythical all-rounders soup of DOT balls the results are imminent. One prominent player is a biomechanical mess and constantly in and out of the team. Body language can't hide tiredness. If one prefers individual sports then take up tennis instead.

    Cricket is mental as much as skill driven. Mentally weak are doomed. Even in T20, even with only 4 over's to ball, wicket taking bowlers that suite pitches and opposition will win. Bowlers need to adjust to the pitches, particularly spinners. The art of spinning is to CHANGE according to the pitch and the strength of the opponent. If you ball in a platter then you are bound to be eaten. Fearless Captain is pragmatic as well as strategic. Every team in every tournament is there to win and not for a TRIAL. Lot can be learned from losses rather than wins.

  • POSTED BY on | October 7, 2012, 12:26 GMT

    I cant see all this talent in australia waiting to be selected.Australian cricket is on the wane mainly because the football codes take so many good kids. Cricket is strong in Australia when WA is successful,once againthis year WA is hopeless. And dont kid yourself thst the Marsh boys are worldbeaters,they are pretenders.

  • POSTED BY chad_reid on | October 7, 2012, 12:25 GMT

    CARE FACTOR OF T20 WC IN AUSTRALIA = ZERO, ENOUGH SAID.

  • POSTED BY cdublew on | October 7, 2012, 6:02 GMT

    I cannot agree more with the issues that Alan Falkner has cleverly summarised as the problems existing in Australia's T20 squad selected for the WC in SL. It is particularly disappointing when there is so much talent available in the country for selection. Hopefully the existing problems will be reviewed objectively for future T20 tournaments.

  • POSTED BY TommytuckerSaffa on | October 7, 2012, 4:49 GMT

    Dont worry Oz, i wouldnt take this 20 over slog too seriously. Just look at the quality of the teams in the final, essentially 2 minnow teams.

  • POSTED BY mamboman on | October 7, 2012, 4:49 GMT

    It's 20/20. Does anyone in Australia REALLY Care?

  • POSTED BY on | October 7, 2012, 1:54 GMT

    Oz's problem was simple - the selectors dont understand that the 20/20 game requires the All rounder flood. Almost all the other top teams minimise batsmen for all rounders. They bat way down and throw guys into bowl 1 or 2 overs with constant rotation. The Mike Hussey, Bailey & White dont bowl and David Hussey isn't quite up to the bowling level required. That middle order just doesn't have the right skill set. Doherty is a poor bat and a middle of the road spinner and Hogg's skills have waned. Had they kept Christian & Maxwell in the side and had people like Steve Smith, Moises Henriques, Andrew McDonald, Steve O'Keefe, Mitchell Marsh, James Faulkner or John Hastings available then they could have done the flood that teams like WI, PAK & SL use so well. 20/20 isn't traditional cricket and selectors need to understand that it requires a non traditional side. Going forward they need to embrace the flood because Australia actually has the all rounders to do it right.

  • POSTED BY VivGilchrist on | October 7, 2012, 1:36 GMT

    This is T20 cricket. Power disguises lack of technique. Australia is in the top 3 Test nations. Last time I checked WI were 8th. How many wickets would Badree take in a Test? Sammy is there 3rd seamer in Tests. Samuels has a Test average of just over 30. I like WI, I'm not saying this as criticism, but I just want to emphasize the difference between T20 and real cricket. South Africa and England are 1 and 2 in Test cricket yet couldn't make the semis. A semi final T20 exit does not mean you are doomed as a cricketing nation.

  • POSTED BY Marcio on | October 7, 2012, 1:25 GMT

    @Aspraso, surely even you see the absurd irony in attempting to 'spin' all AUS' big wins as being due to weather, & suggesting Ireland was their only true win. Take a look at the WI's record! Just scraped home against IRE chasing 120 with 6 balls & 4 wickets to spare. Taken to super over by NZ, carted all over park by AUS. SL smashed them by 9 wickets in nix overs. If that is not exposing limitations, I don't know what is! Over-reliant on Gayle, the weakest bowling in the comp, obvious lack of teamwork, & easily demoralised. A single 15 run win vs Eng was their most 'convincing' win. The WI were before this last game the great disappointment of the comp, & of all the teams in the super 8s were the least deserving of a semis birth, IMHO. Now they have 1 good win against form (from 6 starts) & we are supposed to forget all that. The reality? Nothing has changed. All those weaknesses remain. It's just that, unlike AUS, there haven't been 15 million articles/comments written about them.

  • POSTED BY Sinhaya on | October 7, 2012, 0:48 GMT

    Australia's main strength is test cricket as proven over the decades. They enjoyed ODI success from 1999 to 2008 largely due to McGrath and Warne. Since 2008, Australia's ODI form has been rather inconsistent. Even now, Aussies are the 2nd best test team for sure. As a Lankan, I feel we will have a tough time in the tests against Aussies this summer, but we should do well in the ODIs as proven by our record against Aussies when we visited in late 2010 and also for this year's CB series.

  • POSTED BY Meety on | October 7, 2012, 0:08 GMT

    @Dan Brettig - I would say that the squads for the W/Cup differed significantly from the teams that played series against India & WIndies. The WI series, Oz played basically their ODI side. Oz's warm up series v Pakistan was a good line of sight for SL though. Whilst I agree that the squad was a specific T20 side, I would say that it precludes itself from any gauging of our overall depth. At the moment Oz have two offies at test level in Hauritz & Lyon, plus another with a superior FC record in SO'K.

  • POSTED BY Meety on | October 7, 2012, 0:01 GMT

    @davidpk on (October 06 2012, 12:52 PM GMT) - so T20 "hid" our "dearth" of talent - what did it hide of England's "talent" pray tell? They fell to pieces because they didn't have KP! LOL! @ jmcilhinney on (October 06 2012, 17:12 PM GMT) - IMO, this W/Cup is further proof as to why T20s world cups should be ditched for a spot in the Olympics instead. This format is very poor as a way to crown a world champion. I agree, as of now, the only team that has any claims to deserving the honour, is SL. Should the WIndies (I am hoping they do), they will have a shoddy overall record. If you look at England's win, they won the W/C despite not winning a round robin match! @Aspraso on (October 06 2012, 14:25 PM GMT) - mate you are so WRONG! Read the qualifying rules. It would of been an upset had Oz not made the Super8s, & Oz had no D/L matches in the Super8s! LOL!

  • POSTED BY Meety on | October 6, 2012, 23:44 GMT

    @ Shafi79 on (October 06 2012, 09:12 AM GMT) - good comments, unlike other crud on this site. I would say as an Ozzy - a semi final birth is not something I am overly excited by, it was a par result. As an Ozzy I always expect us to at least reach the semi's, no matter where a tournament is played. @davidpk on (October 06 2012, 09:44 AM GMT) - so much wrong in such a few sentences. The irony of your comments is amazing when you consider England (apart from questionable recruitment), have two batsmen with mid 30s averages on their touring party to India AND have a miserable SC/UAE record AND bombed out of the super 8s. How many "England's" two best batsmen in short forms are KP & Morgan, hmmmm says plenty IMO! @ Behind_the_bowlers_arm - well said. What everybody is overlooking is, that those opening 5 overs of the WIndies innings could of gone a drastically different way. From memory, Stacr (or Cummins) bowled an over where he got an edge of every ball!

  • POSTED BY BG4cricket on | October 6, 2012, 23:33 GMT

    I think at the end of the day the Aussies gave a good account of themselves over the course of the tournament as a whole and they tried to play to their strengths which ultimately weren't enough to get the job done. In my mind the real issues are the spinners and 2 middle order spots (although personally I would love to see Hadds back with the gloves. I would have had O'Keefe and Lyon as spinners instead of Doherty and Hogg (what were they thinking !!) and certainly Aaron Finch for White would have been better and surely McKay would have been worth a go at some point given his great ODI form. D Hussey was hard done by in the way he was used but was not in form, however Maxwell is really only a finisher bat at 6 or 7 as his bowling is not good enough. Starc was a huge positive and would stick with Bailey who is a very sound player.

  • POSTED BY spinkingKK on | October 6, 2012, 23:23 GMT

    In the match against Pakisthan, Australia feared that they could miss the semi-final berth if they couldn't score 112 AND if India absolutely smashed South Africa. So, they played to lose and awarded Pakithan a huge win. It was worse than bowling under-arm when six runs were required off the last ball and the number11 batsman was facing. By being so negative in their thoughts, Australia faultered. They have put negative thoughts ino their players. Even with the postive thoughts, it would have been difficult to beat this West Indies team which is tailor made for this format.

  • POSTED BY wellrounded87 on | October 6, 2012, 22:54 GMT

    @Aspraso What are you talking about? in the Super 8's we beat South Africa and India handily in the full 20 overs no D/L involved at all.

    If you are referring to the first game against WI then you are failing to realise that we would have made the super 8's regardless of the outcome of that game. Not to mention at 1/100 after 9 it was looking like a victory anyway.

  • POSTED BY ygkd on | October 6, 2012, 22:03 GMT

    Australia picked a "specialist" T20 team with too many similar players. The West Indies did likewise. However, there was one big difference that Brettig is trying to point out - the Windies took spin seriously which shouldn't surprise - the thing was being played in Sri Lanka, not Oz. So no lessons to be learned? Of course there are. Christian sitting out the match was debatable, though it could easily have been Andrew MacDonald filling a role. O'Keefe could have been considered, or Lyon. But the batting is the biggest immediate problem. The Husseys aren't getting any younger. Others like Ferguson & Paine have dropped off the radar for various reasons. Batting to spin used to be an Aussie trademark through most of its long cricket history. If you look at the Sri Lankan team they have more balance, more diversity and thus deserve to be favourites. Of course, playing at home helps but SL did well in the ODI series last year in our conditions. They will do well here again no doubt.

  • POSTED BY Sanawana on | October 6, 2012, 21:06 GMT

    There's only one man of the match in every format and so i T20; T20 is not a one man show! It is just quick paced and it tests your skills at fast pace!

  • POSTED BY on | October 6, 2012, 17:33 GMT

    In a tournament notable for some spectacular captaincy blunders - de Villers' obstinacy in sticking with his seamers at the death against Pakistan after his spinners had brought the Pakistanis to their knees & Dhoni's muddleheaded selection of three spinners on a seaming track against the Aussies & three seamers on a spinning track against SA being two prime examples - George Bailey, by contrast, marshalled his resources with admirable aplomb. Giving Doherty the final over against WI & holding back David Hussey until the semi-final were minor blemishes on his captaincy, certainly, but overall he showed he's worth persisting with as both captain & batsman (an SR of 134's something not to be sneezed at). In building towards 2014 the Aussies need to be ruthless in putting Hogg, Doherty & both Husseys out to grass, while trying out Phil Hughes at No. 3, Joe Burns in the middle order, Smith & Pattinson as batting/bowling all-rounders & giving Nathan Hauritz a go as the frontline spinner.

  • POSTED BY on | October 6, 2012, 17:29 GMT

    @roh.camp, that's exactly what I'm saying. Twenty20 is such a fickle format that you can win the game off the performance of a single player. Australia won plenty by Watson, just like England had through Wright, India by Kohli, and the Windies by Gayle. The fact is you don't need an all-conquering middle order to win a T20 comp, let alone a single game, it's not Test cricket, you can survive and succeed with the majority of your team under-performing. 'Tis a silly game.

  • POSTED BY jmcilhinney on | October 6, 2012, 17:12 GMT

    I'm inclined to agree that Australia have had their weakness(es) exposed but it's certainly not fair to imply that they are the only or most flawed team in this competition. Various people at various times were talking about England, SA and India as possible semi-finalists and there was some exposure going on there for sure. I don't necessarily see WI as any less flawed either, with their just having had a good game at the right time. I'd have to say that SL have been the most consistent team in the competition so far and, from that point of view, they deserve to be in the final as much as anyone.

  • POSTED BY indrajith127 on | October 6, 2012, 14:44 GMT

    Speaking of the 2nd T20 semi, 2012, a huge mistake was made by Baily bringing a spinner on to ball the last over(a moral devastating over).Any skipper with a wee bit of grey matter wouldnt have done it. To me it was what turned the game around.

    its always good when openers do their duty upfront and win matches for the country, bt in Aus's case, winning matches by means of just openers resulted the middle order batting in not being tested at all throughout the series aside from the semi which adversely impacted on the Ausies. so Ausies r stil a extremely good T20 side in the world though im not a Ausie fan

    Speaking about the best T20 teams, i would rather rate Pakistan and WI as the best 2 teams and SL r the 3rd and only the well balanced T20 side in all departments. SA and Ausies r 4th and 5th, India need some rapid improvement on balling coz indian balling attack is a crap now, it was very evident in the match against Afgan lads.India were well nigh beaten by Afg.

  • POSTED BY Aspraso on | October 6, 2012, 14:25 GMT

    The Aussies just happened to be lucky with the rain/DL rule that gave them the 2 points which allowed them entry into semis -- otherwise if that had been full uninterrupted match the fate they met in the semis would have been met in super eights itself and with a subsequent loss to Pakistan they would have struggled to get into the semis.

  • POSTED BY on | October 6, 2012, 13:40 GMT

    Those who comment here do not understand that 20/20 is not a serious game.

  • POSTED BY mateyman on | October 6, 2012, 13:39 GMT

    T20 world cup is cool, but nobody really cares about it too seriously. Also, all the comments about how bad Australia are you would assume would come from WI and SL posters, as they are the only teams to finish above us this tournament (obviously not the case). I was pleased with our performance overall actually. Lost it in the last couple of games, but this sometimes happens in T20. Looking forward to South Africa. Hopefully we continue our run of not losing a test series for a while

  • POSTED BY roh.camp on | October 6, 2012, 13:36 GMT

    So, Sam Brown you are saying " Twenty20 is such a short game that a team can ride on the success of one player (see Chris Gayle, Virat Kohli, Luke Wright and Brendan McCullum)", what about aus, the matches they won had only watson showed up to play and they won. The last 2 matches watson didnt play good and aus lost both the matches. What do you have do say about that ?

  • POSTED BY bobmartin on | October 6, 2012, 13:29 GMT

    I like the way the Aussies are reading some sort of success into their reaching the semi-finals... But I seem to remember one of your famous countrymen once saying.. "Coming second means you're the best loser" But why read too much into what is after all nothing more than a sideshow... The true test of your ability as a team comes in the four-day format not in a slogfest.

  • POSTED BY Farrukh.91. on | October 6, 2012, 13:19 GMT

    It was Pakistan once again who exposed the weaknesses of Aussies, the same happened in T20 WC2010 semi final and England worked the weaknesses of Australia to win the tournament; it was West Indies this time who benefited from Pak Aus match. Anyhow, Austalia was still one of the best teams of the tournament.

  • POSTED BY Marcio on | October 6, 2012, 13:19 GMT

    @Chris Sun "This WI team would beat AUS anywhere." Look dude, they lost the second last game against AUS two weeks ago. Is everybody on this forum completely incapable of dealing with reality? Of seeing beyond the last game played? It is apparent to me that many simply are not. The WI couldn't even beat AUS in the T20 series in the WI a few months ago. If they played in AUS it is highly reasonable to assume the WI would NOT win, given that they have not been able to win more than 50% of the games in spin-friendly conditions when AUS has played them away from home.

  • POSTED BY Mary_786 on | October 6, 2012, 13:18 GMT

    The real focus has to be for the South Africa test series and hopefully the likes of Khawaja, Maddinson and Forrest will push their claims as they are needed in the top order.

  • POSTED BY Front-Foot-Lunge on | October 6, 2012, 13:16 GMT

    Watching Doherty get smashed for six after six after six was pure comedy. Australia have the worst spinners in the world, and have had the cupboard so bare for so long. Let's not forget their endless slide down, started by England thrashing them time and time again, to the netherworld of amateurish, boring cricket. When those useless Australian coaching staff try to investigate what went wrong in this game, and build a video analysis list, try looking at replays of that final Doherty over for starters. What a joke.

  • POSTED BY on | October 6, 2012, 13:01 GMT

    Making the semi finals of an international cricket tournament is always a failure. I wish we'd gone home early like those other great t20 teams.

  • POSTED BY bumsonseats on | October 6, 2012, 12:52 GMT

    GlinnMgraw the derth of your batting is thru all 3 formats, its just its been masked in T20 were techniques can be hidden thru the limitations of that format. your game was found out when the sloggers in the openers hid the team from scrutiny. the health of the state game is Australia's problem, were quality is missing.

  • POSTED BY potofazherbaizan on | October 6, 2012, 12:45 GMT

    Once, the middle order for Australia was rock-hard. Even in the last two years, when White was a star, Michael Clarke was a beast, and others like D.Hussey played great, the Australian side was unbeatable. Now look what they have come to. Only decent batsman other than the top 3 is occasionally Bailey, no one else. Even bowlers such as Johnson was great a few years ago, but now, look at him. Australia, although still one of the best, needs to turn around things greatly.

  • POSTED BY vicky_ibm on | October 6, 2012, 12:38 GMT

    Maybe Bailey will get a spot in CSK s playin eleven :P

  • POSTED BY bhaloniaz on | October 6, 2012, 12:18 GMT

    If WI scored 160 or so, Aus had a chance. Aus should have picked three genuine quicks. Someone mentioned McKay. Then Watson, Hogg and others would survive. Aus could still lose. Only 2 teams will go to finals. On another day Aus could beat WI. WI have two real bowlers in Narine and Rampaul. See whether SL can expose Sammie, Samuel and Pollock's bowling.

  • POSTED BY Simoc on | October 6, 2012, 12:14 GMT

    There's a fair bit of over analysis happening. WI did everything possible to lose to NZ including bowling Samuels in a super over, but still won. Against OZ Gayle was on and that is the ball game. He's not the most sought after T20 cricketer in the world by accident. If he is on (and Narine) against Sri Lanka, West Indies will win the World Cup and if not they will lose to a more talented SL team.

  • POSTED BY AMAZINGFAN on | October 6, 2012, 12:10 GMT

    OZ WILL BE WHITEWASHED IN INDIA NEXT YEAR AND THEY R PLAYING ON DUSTBOWLS LIKE CHENNAI,KANPUR,DELHI WHERE THE BALL WILL START TO SPIN ON DAY 1.....CAN'T WAIT TO SEE CLUB-LEVEL BATSMEN DANCING TO THE TUNES OF INDIAN SPINNERS.....

  • POSTED BY inswing on | October 6, 2012, 12:00 GMT

    T20 is a very fickle format and anything can happen on a given day. Drawing sweeping conclusions based on one or two games is silly. Aus would beat WI prob 7 out of 10 times. Everything clicked for WI today and they made 200. Tomorrow they could get out for 100 and you would be waxing lyrical about their batting depth. T20 is basically randomness when it comes to single match knockouts.

  • POSTED BY balakumar246 on | October 6, 2012, 11:53 GMT

    You nailed it man...the aussie batting was too dependent on warner,watson and michael hussey throughout the tournament...the one time warner and watson failed in the super eights against pakistan,it was left to hussey to make sure that the aussies qualified for the semis...the middle order didn't put up a fight in that match...the 'big show'was a disaster in a match where he could have made a difference...again the middle order didn't click in the semis except for bailey...as for their spinning resources,i really don't blame the players...yes,shane warne was a genius with the ball and stuart macgill was a good spinner as well but how can you manage to produce good spinners if your pitches don't back spin save the one in sydney...giving the ball to doherty in the final over was a poor tactical decision especially when the more experienced brad hogg had an over left...a pity that the match was so one-sided...hope the team management and CA take notice and make amends...pls publish.

  • POSTED BY unregisteredalien on | October 6, 2012, 11:46 GMT

    Not a bad result for Australia, top 4 seems about right. Unsurprisingly, most of the critics seem to be from (non-semi finalists) England and India. I do think we'll see the national selection panel asking some tough questions of Warner and Wade, amongst others. These guys may be part of the future vision but they've been given a good run and haven't really nailed it. Let's send them back to their states for a little while. As for the likes of DHussey, White and Hogg, this is probably the end of international cricket. Is Maxwell the new White? Would you persist with limited short-form specialist Doherty or try Lyon or O'Keeffe? Interesting times.

  • POSTED BY masoodali150 on | October 6, 2012, 11:34 GMT

    What a match to watch and beating Australia by a huge margin.

  • POSTED BY PFEL on | October 6, 2012, 11:27 GMT

    Not quite sure what to make of this . . . Of course Australia are suspect against spin in these conditions. Have you seen India/Sri Lanka/Pakistan's recent tours to Australia? India's struggles against Aus's quicks was far worse than Aus struggles against subcontinental spin "bowlers". Aus have done VERY well over the last couple years and are still one of the best sides in the world in every format, as the recent results have shown. Any one who thinks they are "minnows" is thinking wishfully. A lot of success is in the future for Aus, against the best teams like SA, India etc. A "failure" (reaching semi-final) in the T20 WC where luck plays the biggest role is not a major set back

  • POSTED BY Munkeymomo on | October 6, 2012, 11:26 GMT

    @counterstrike: Have you ever seen Ian Bell play spin? Also he wasn't playing.

    I'm surprised Aus are getting such a bashing to be honest, they (well Watson) were dominant up until they met Pakistan (The Green Curse! :p). They bowled well (apart from Doherty, don't rate him). They should have played Clint McKay, he is a very good bowler. There may have been batting failures but do you think Clarke would have solved them? Really? Did you not watch him in the IPL? It was painful to watch. The fact is Australia brought their A game, played as well as they could and did pretty well, proving they don't deserve their 9th place ranking, really. They lost to a good side. I am glad they didn't make the final though. Come on Windies!

  • POSTED BY OmanBiek on | October 6, 2012, 11:12 GMT

    This WI team will beat Aus anywhere they play

  • POSTED BY on | October 6, 2012, 10:33 GMT

    If you look at the test team, neither Warner, Ponting or Clarke were able to capitalize against the WI in test matches. But they were able to score heavily against India which basically masked and shielded the problems in Australia's batting. This gave people false hope that Australia were back to their best. Here in T20, a whole different ballgame, Warner is now being found out and Hussey is on his last legs.

  • POSTED BY zarasochozarasamjho on | October 6, 2012, 10:32 GMT

    As a Pakistani supporter, let me remind everyone, that only after 2 games in the Super 8, Australia virtually confirmed a semi-final position. This they achieved by, in my opinion, beating the best 2 T20 sides, ie India and South Africa, - very emphatically. An Australian side is never weak, given their culture of total competitiveness irrespective of their skills and match situation. Their only real weakness is their inabilitye to play top-class spin, with the exception of Mike Hussey and Clarke (who strangely was not in the team).

  • POSTED BY indiabadri on | October 6, 2012, 10:31 GMT

    Happy to see Australia bowed out. I was telling from beginning that they depend on Watson, Warner and Mike Hussey too much and it proved exactly the same. Their Era is over. Come on other teams grasp this opportunity and beat them everywhere you face them. All the best WI and Gayle be careful against SL. One last time you bat well.

  • POSTED BY on | October 6, 2012, 10:27 GMT

    Some of these comments are straight up laughable. Australia being "minnows"? I'll be the first to admit that we were beyond poor in the last two games, but don't be so quick to forget the other results. Australia was easily the form nation heading in to both the Super Eights and the Semi Finals, and deservedly so, but Twenty20 is such a short game that a team can ride on the success of one player (see Chris Gayle, Virat Kohli, Luke Wright and Brendan McCullum). Rankings are so irrelevant that of the four teams that made the semi's, 3 were outside the top five, and the other occupied top spot. Twenty20 is a moment in time, if one isn't alert then they're left behind and made to look silly (sometimes twice). I'd say the Aussie campaign was disappointing, but by no means a failure. After all, we did catch a later flight home than 4 of the 6 teams above us (one by virtue of scheduling). Glass houses, people. Don't forget your own failings too quickly.

  • POSTED BY KingofRedLions on | October 6, 2012, 10:22 GMT

    I struggle to see why I should care about our Twenty20 depth. It amazes me that anyone can take it seriously.

  • POSTED BY Trapper439 on | October 6, 2012, 10:22 GMT

    As an Aussie fan I'm happy with just getting to the semi final. The West Indies beat us fair and square with a really good batting effort. More power to them. I'd like to see them go on and win it, although it would also be a shame to see the hosts lose in front of their own crowd. My only complaint is with the continued selection of Cameron White. What is the point of him, exactly? He's not a frontline bowler. I've never seen him bat well. Why does he keep getting selected? I don't get it, but as long as he isn't allowed near the Test team again it's not that big of a deal.

  • POSTED BY brusselslion on | October 6, 2012, 10:22 GMT

    Reaching the semi-final of a major tournament is hardly a disaster & what 20/20 tells us about Test cricket is open to debate. Having said that I think that the author may have a point: Watson is a great player in any form of the game, Clarke is a good Test player. Ponting & Hussey were great players but can't go on much longer. Apart from Cowan, no Aussie 'A' batsman showed much form in England last summer, nor did anyone in the ODI side (OK, Hughes butchered county attacks again but everyone knows he is not Test class). So far as the spinners are concerned, Doherty is clearly not international class (nor is Beer). One Aussie poster lauded Lyon as the World #3 spinner (not on Aussie 'A' form he ain't). Assuming we have seen the 30 or so best Aussies over the past year, the fast bowling looks promising but the batting and spin bowling do lack depth. Mind you, same could be said about England. Substitute fast for spin and ditto India. Apart from SA, no good Test team around currently.

  • POSTED BY Behind_the_bowlers_arm on | October 6, 2012, 10:11 GMT

    Australia as said had a very high risk strategy (top 3 make the runs, 2 fast bowlers take early wickets) due to their limitations in other areas and I actually think they did better than expected in this format. In hindsight i would have used McKay as he is a clever bowler and added Phil Hughes as a third opener to make it 4 batsmen at the top. To be honest im more interested in the first SA Test in 5 weeks but hopefully this tournament , which understandably had a team picked with a view to winning not developing, will see the end of some of those players as international and t20's over the next couple of years WILL be used a development format. The players whose Australian careers in ANY format should be over are D Hussey, Christian, White, Hogg (obviously) & Doherty. Cummins , Starc and Pattinson should now be excused any further t20 games and be aimed at Tests only.

  • POSTED BY rohanbala on | October 6, 2012, 10:11 GMT

    The main reason for the Australian team's defeat is their over-dependence on Cameron White. It is really a surprise that a player who has contributed so little for the team's middle order, finds himself selected time and again. Not long ago, their selectors were obsessed with Marcus North/Phil Hughes in the test team and now it is Cameron White for the shorter version of the game. The keeping and batting skills of Mathew Wade are questionable and unless the selectors find suitable replacements, Australia will continue to be at the bottom of the table.

  • POSTED BY eastmanlucas on | October 6, 2012, 9:59 GMT

    Are you guys nuts? How can you take T20 seriously? It is instant cricket, not real classy cricket. The only test of a cricketer's skills is test cricket. Wake up, guys.

  • POSTED BY bumsonseats on | October 6, 2012, 9:44 GMT

    you have to look at the squad when a 42 year old spinner is the 1st choice then something back home is seriously weak. and cummings who looks to become a quality bowler if they can keep him on the park should never have been selected hes the other way to young what is he to learn playing T20. its a young mans game. the 2 brothers at 36 and 38 and it showed in the fielding yesterday. they as a team conceded 400 runs in 2 games that is so bad. they should count themselves lucky that Dan Christian was not part of the team, it would have cost them more. australia must realize the cupboard as far as batting is concerned is so poor. when you look at the test side the oap in that must be a worry the aussie coach must fear for his future.

  • POSTED BY thebarmyarmy on | October 6, 2012, 9:19 GMT

    So Windies slaughtered 'Funny Australia' Most of us could see that coming, looking forward to SL v WI. :)

  • POSTED BY on | October 6, 2012, 9:16 GMT

    Bailey did try his best with bunch of poor players

  • POSTED BY Shafi79 on | October 6, 2012, 9:12 GMT

    @Brisvegan - i am Sri Lankan and i couldnt agree more mate, i mean at the start of the super 8's i honestly wouldnt have picked the Aussies to make the semis's - for me it was SA + one of the two sub continental giants. I think this Aussie side can be proud of what they achieved, SA and IND given their the strength of their teams would be a lot more disappointed.

  • POSTED BY ibbani on | October 6, 2012, 8:38 GMT

    Except for the openers, Aus has no depth in batting. The middle order is very brittle and vulnerable. Unfortunately, if India could have just overcome them or had the 2 LBWs given out, things were much different than the match results. Hussey is past his prime, no wonder, Hussey brothers are almost near to retiring. Wade is just waste. Tim Paine or Haddin is much better than him. Bowling is the only praise for Aus. The standings are right as they are in 9th position.

  • POSTED BY rahulcricket007 on | October 6, 2012, 8:38 GMT

    i think australia should be really concerned about wade 's batting failures against spin bowlers . aginst spinners he looked like a school boy .warner is also another batsmen who struggle against spinners . the big problem is that both these players are in test squad & the selectors think them in for their long term plan . they have to play a four test series in india . the venues for these tests are also quite dustbowls chennai , delhi , kolkata .

  • POSTED BY on | October 6, 2012, 8:32 GMT

    waoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

  • POSTED BY BrisVegan on | October 6, 2012, 8:31 GMT

    Mr Brettig:

    "their campaign still fell to pieces with alarming haste" - yes, after Oz reached the S8 qualification and semi-final match.. anyone not following the results would think we got knocked out in the group stages or something. Journalistic drivel. We got further than some other major teams.

    "Here was a team chosen to win the World T20 trophy, nothing more and nothing less" - And what about the other teams? They were just messing around with their selections and didn't care about winning?

    Re: culture and planning: "Initially it worked, as Ireland, West Indies, India and South Africa were swatted away with impressive might" - That had nothing to do with planning and grooming. It was largely due to a (fleeting) good run of form by Shane Watson, Mike Hussey and a few of our bowlers.

    "the failure of Australia's quest reflected the limitations of their players" - You don't say! Tell us something we don't know.

    With articles like this no wonder Oz bashing is so fashionable.

  • POSTED BY rahulcricket007 on | October 6, 2012, 8:31 GMT

    much was said by cricket experts about indian batting . somel went on to say that indian batting depends only on virat kohli , now what would they say about austrlain batting . the truth is that australia 's batting depends only on watson . watson was cheaply out against wi & pak & both times australia didn't even score 140 . at least india was ablle to make 152 against sa in which virat kohli only made 2 runs .

  • POSTED BY ravi_hari on | October 6, 2012, 8:26 GMT

    I had written earlier that this Aussie batting looks weak in the absence of Ponting, Clarke and Haddin. If they had to chase down a big total like 206, they needed everyone to fire from the word go. Apart from a desperate Bailey no one had the fire in the belly to do so. Does it come from the fact that the captain himself is suspect of such non-performance in the previous games? Aussies were never led by others' example. Each one has his own role to play and if someone fails, the others come in and share the responsibility. That spirit is lacking in the present lot. The likes of Border, Waugh, Gilchrist, Hussey, Clarke is missing in the middle order. Sad to see bowlers belted like school kids, and fielders unable to stop straight forward strong hits. Never seen an Aussie side so below par. They looked more like Indians! The powers that be must quickly take stock and create the right combination for future games, lest people will forget the Aussies completely. Wake up CA!

  • POSTED BY on | October 6, 2012, 8:21 GMT

    Yeah, but they still came to the semis...and they destroyed SA, India ( two of the most dangerous sides of T20) in the process...so, their campaign wasn't really a failure

  • POSTED BY Porky_PigTheToon on | October 6, 2012, 8:11 GMT

    I don't understand, why all of us were treating Aus as a Strong team. The fact is, they were Minnows. A team that depends heavily on Top-3 having no potential batsman to follow were just lucky to reach Semis. SA and Ind were more deserving teams. But thanks to some weird grouping that Ind, Pak and SA found themselves in one group despite topping their respctive grps in league matches. In fact we should celebrate that Aus somehow managed to leave Ind, SA, Eng and NZ behind. Cheers ! This is sub-continent where you need technique to play spinners. Not everyone can be Amla, Bell, Trott and AB.

  • POSTED BY Marcio on | October 6, 2012, 8:08 GMT

    Give it a rest already. I'm tired of reading the same article over and over again. Look at the WI. They were very ordinary and had many problems exposed as they struggled to make the semis, which they did despite playing poorly. This is T20. AUS played the WI 4 times in T20 this year, all away from home in super-spin friendly conditions. The result: 2-2. Yet we are supposed to believe it is the end of the world now they only made the semis of the T20 WC. I wonder how the Windies or Pakistan would fare playing AUS in Australia? I seem to recall that last time they both failed to win a single game in any format. AUS has now played 7 successive series away from home, and done well in all but one of them. So why all the doom and gloom?

  • POSTED BY Baber_Baloch on | October 6, 2012, 8:06 GMT

    Australian are like one man army...they depend lot on two 2W,s....theire middle order be strong. they are good team...but 2w,s can not win evert for them.watson is greattttttttttt allrounder.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • POSTED BY Baber_Baloch on | October 6, 2012, 8:06 GMT

    Australian are like one man army...they depend lot on two 2W,s....theire middle order be strong. they are good team...but 2w,s can not win evert for them.watson is greattttttttttt allrounder.

  • POSTED BY Marcio on | October 6, 2012, 8:08 GMT

    Give it a rest already. I'm tired of reading the same article over and over again. Look at the WI. They were very ordinary and had many problems exposed as they struggled to make the semis, which they did despite playing poorly. This is T20. AUS played the WI 4 times in T20 this year, all away from home in super-spin friendly conditions. The result: 2-2. Yet we are supposed to believe it is the end of the world now they only made the semis of the T20 WC. I wonder how the Windies or Pakistan would fare playing AUS in Australia? I seem to recall that last time they both failed to win a single game in any format. AUS has now played 7 successive series away from home, and done well in all but one of them. So why all the doom and gloom?

  • POSTED BY Porky_PigTheToon on | October 6, 2012, 8:11 GMT

    I don't understand, why all of us were treating Aus as a Strong team. The fact is, they were Minnows. A team that depends heavily on Top-3 having no potential batsman to follow were just lucky to reach Semis. SA and Ind were more deserving teams. But thanks to some weird grouping that Ind, Pak and SA found themselves in one group despite topping their respctive grps in league matches. In fact we should celebrate that Aus somehow managed to leave Ind, SA, Eng and NZ behind. Cheers ! This is sub-continent where you need technique to play spinners. Not everyone can be Amla, Bell, Trott and AB.

  • POSTED BY on | October 6, 2012, 8:21 GMT

    Yeah, but they still came to the semis...and they destroyed SA, India ( two of the most dangerous sides of T20) in the process...so, their campaign wasn't really a failure

  • POSTED BY ravi_hari on | October 6, 2012, 8:26 GMT

    I had written earlier that this Aussie batting looks weak in the absence of Ponting, Clarke and Haddin. If they had to chase down a big total like 206, they needed everyone to fire from the word go. Apart from a desperate Bailey no one had the fire in the belly to do so. Does it come from the fact that the captain himself is suspect of such non-performance in the previous games? Aussies were never led by others' example. Each one has his own role to play and if someone fails, the others come in and share the responsibility. That spirit is lacking in the present lot. The likes of Border, Waugh, Gilchrist, Hussey, Clarke is missing in the middle order. Sad to see bowlers belted like school kids, and fielders unable to stop straight forward strong hits. Never seen an Aussie side so below par. They looked more like Indians! The powers that be must quickly take stock and create the right combination for future games, lest people will forget the Aussies completely. Wake up CA!

  • POSTED BY rahulcricket007 on | October 6, 2012, 8:31 GMT

    much was said by cricket experts about indian batting . somel went on to say that indian batting depends only on virat kohli , now what would they say about austrlain batting . the truth is that australia 's batting depends only on watson . watson was cheaply out against wi & pak & both times australia didn't even score 140 . at least india was ablle to make 152 against sa in which virat kohli only made 2 runs .

  • POSTED BY BrisVegan on | October 6, 2012, 8:31 GMT

    Mr Brettig:

    "their campaign still fell to pieces with alarming haste" - yes, after Oz reached the S8 qualification and semi-final match.. anyone not following the results would think we got knocked out in the group stages or something. Journalistic drivel. We got further than some other major teams.

    "Here was a team chosen to win the World T20 trophy, nothing more and nothing less" - And what about the other teams? They were just messing around with their selections and didn't care about winning?

    Re: culture and planning: "Initially it worked, as Ireland, West Indies, India and South Africa were swatted away with impressive might" - That had nothing to do with planning and grooming. It was largely due to a (fleeting) good run of form by Shane Watson, Mike Hussey and a few of our bowlers.

    "the failure of Australia's quest reflected the limitations of their players" - You don't say! Tell us something we don't know.

    With articles like this no wonder Oz bashing is so fashionable.

  • POSTED BY on | October 6, 2012, 8:32 GMT

    waoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

  • POSTED BY rahulcricket007 on | October 6, 2012, 8:38 GMT

    i think australia should be really concerned about wade 's batting failures against spin bowlers . aginst spinners he looked like a school boy .warner is also another batsmen who struggle against spinners . the big problem is that both these players are in test squad & the selectors think them in for their long term plan . they have to play a four test series in india . the venues for these tests are also quite dustbowls chennai , delhi , kolkata .

  • POSTED BY ibbani on | October 6, 2012, 8:38 GMT

    Except for the openers, Aus has no depth in batting. The middle order is very brittle and vulnerable. Unfortunately, if India could have just overcome them or had the 2 LBWs given out, things were much different than the match results. Hussey is past his prime, no wonder, Hussey brothers are almost near to retiring. Wade is just waste. Tim Paine or Haddin is much better than him. Bowling is the only praise for Aus. The standings are right as they are in 9th position.