Is the Australian team better?

Posted by
< 1 minute read

Certainly Australian cricket is better.

Look at the players that aren’t even playing: Phil Jaques, Test average 47; Brad Hodge, Test average 56; David Hussey, first-class average 55. That short list can quite easily be extended.

The English system produces the odd exceptional player and that’s being generous – more likely it’s just chance and nothing to do with the system. We don’t produce large numbers of high quality cricketers which would create competition for places (as well as better competition in county cricket). Most counties don’t feature a single player you’d want to pick for England.

Is the Australian team better? Let’s see next week. However, if we took a wider sample and pitted the respective second XIs against each other, it’s pretty obvious which nation’s cricket is stronger. Until that’s addressed, England will continue to rely on the stars aligning for their occasional victories.


Mike Gatting wasn't receiving the King Cricket email when he dropped that ludicrously easy chance against India in 1993.


Why risk it when it's so easy to sign up?


  1. True on the batting side of things, but I don’t see too many Aussie bowlers mentioned outside of their current squad.

  2. True, but with Stuart Clark and Lee on the sidelines and competent reserves like Nathan Bracken, they’ve got some depth. If Shaun Tait ever gets fit for Tests, he’d be a handful.

    That’s not really the point though. The point is that the average bowler in Australian state cricket would adapt to Test cricket a damn sight quicker than the average county bowler and probably be more successful to boot.

    There may be dry spells for the Aussies in terms of producing Test-standard cricketers, but those dry spells are less likely.

  3. True. Their system does seem to produce hardened players by the time they make their debuts, unlike in England where they’re picked and make it up as they go along (Mahmood, Plunkett, Broad…).

    Plus, anyone who does have a poor start in Test cricket in Australia tends to come back, and come back far better (Martyn, Hayden), whereas the likes of Bell and Harmison come back doing exactly what they did before.

  4. Capt. Kirk,

    That;s may be what it looks like from afar,

    but some of them never come back – Rogers, Hodge – and others seem to have reserved places on the team forever, like Hussey and wannabee Twatto. And then there are those who should never have arrived, like the current selectors. And then there are others whom we now wish had never left. Like most of the pre-2008 players of the past decade.

    Would you all stop moaning about Bell and co. and the failings of the counties? You’ve got JC Superstar, even if you have to wheel him out in a bath chair.

  5. that’s a remarkably objective opinion, but don’t you think you are ignoring journalistic integrity by failing to mention that all australian cricketers are born evil with the mark of lucifer upon their forehead?

  6. It is easier to average 50+ if you play most of your cricket in Australia.

    Most decent England players have a higher test average than first class average. Most australian players have a lower test match average than first class average.

    Remember the days when law, lehmann, maher, cox were making hay in England: we always used to go on about how much depth they had. We ignored that fact that Ramps, Hick, Adams, Maynard, James etc were piling on as many runs while peripheral to the England set up.

    Similarly, we got a lucky escape in Cardiff but at the same time were not good enough to bowl out the WI last year.

    Get some perspective: two weeks ago and it was looking like we were clearly on top in this series. Now we are down and out.

    I expect better king cricket.

  7. We have got perspective. The broader perspective says England have won one of the last ten Ashes series.

    Ramps, HIck, Adams, Maynard and James spanned a good few years and all of them could be considered Test failures as well.

    Strength in depth? It’s hardly on the same level as omitting Lehmann, Bevan, Hussey and MacGill for years on end.

Comments are closed.