Austraia/SL/Pakistan - T20s

[K]

Andrew Tye needs elbow surgery and will be out for "up to four months".

[K]

A cricinfo reader comments: "Role definition is huge in any team sport, and Warner and Finch are doing Smith's job. Not sure about the long term viability of this approach."

Not sure if that's true (that they're playing like him), but it reminds me of the ODI WC, where Khawaja and Smith were both doing the same very limited role and getting in each other's way.

[K]

Oz 1/69 (8.5).
Finch out for 37 (25).
Both openers were previously dropped.

Smith in.

[Donny]

Finch out for 37.

1/69. Dave Warner 26* (29).

Then: Smith 8* from 2 balls.

[K]

Smith out for 13 (9).
McDermott in.

Is Smith straining to try to show he can play this form of the game?

[Donny]

14 overs gone.

3/110.

Warner 40* (39).

[K]

Yet another LBW review blunder by Oz, as McDermott fails to make the most of his opportunity.

Turner in.

[Donny]

Another 50 for Warner.

Undefeated in this series.

[Donny]

Aussies won by 7 wickets.

Warner 57* (50), Ash Turner 22* (15).

[K]

Media reported at the end of July that Turner's shoulder surgery was "successful" and he was "back batting in the nets".

I assume this means he can now bowl and throw again.

[K]

B. Jones, CricViz, on Smith:

"Australia are trying to turn Smith into a T20 player they already have, and in doing so, may lose the Test player only he can be. Right now, that is a gamble not worth taking."


According to CricViz, Smith has moved from mediocre since T20 WC 2016, to bad over the last two years:

"Whereas previously Smith’s scoring rate had just been fine, it has now deteriorated into a real problem. An anchor who can score at the same pace as the average player but with little to no risk – i.e. a player still in the top right area of the graphic, the player Smith was before – is quite a valuable asset.

By contrast, an anchor who can eliminate risk but at the cost of scoring rate – i.e. a player in the top left area of the graphic – is something altogether more delicate, and harder to build a team around."


CricViz rank Smith's "batting impact" 23rd for Australian batsmen in the last two years, between Maddinson and Agar.


But wait; there's more:

"On top of this, any issues with Smith are exaggerated by the fact that he’s an extremely slow starter. Over the last two years of T20 cricket, Smith scores roughly 21 runs in the first 20 balls he faces. When you compare this scoring rate to that of other Australian batsmen over that period, he’s among the slowest around. The effect of this is clear. Slow starters, particularly in the middle order, pile pressure on the team; if he gets out after 20 balls, he has most likely made a negative contribution to the side."

They show he's the 4th-slowest starter among Australian T20 batsmen in the last two years, ahead of only Cartwright, White & Klinger. (Cameron White, shame on you! )


http://cricviz.com/2019/10/cricviz-analysis-steve-smith-in-t20-cricket/

[K]

Spin to win, Australia's change in T20 tack

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/27985958/spin-win-australia-change-t20-tack

"... 12 months out from a home World Cup, it's looking increasingly likely that Adam Zampa and Ashton Agar could be key pillars in Australia's specifically designed five-man attack in home conditions, following their success as a pair in the 3-0 whitewash of Sri Lanka.

Agar and Zampa were Australia's two most economical bowlers for the series, conceding just 5.33 runs per over each, and taking eight wickets between them. At the MCG on Friday night, they bowled five overs straight in tandem without conceding a boundary to restrict Sri Lanka as they attempted to make a competitive total. Agar conceded just one boundary for the series, Zampa only three."

[Donny]

Pakistan 5/107 from 15 overs. Rain.

Aussies 0/41 from 4.1 overs. Finch 37* (16).

[Pies4shaw]

Australia was actually 41 from 3.1 overs. To no avail. - the game is a washout.

[K]

F. Wilde, CricViz, has his say on Smith (have a look at B. Jones above):

Australia’s Fork in the Road

http://cricviz.com/2019/11/cricviz-analysis-australias-fork-in-the-road/

"The selection of Steve Smith in Australia’s T20 side is hugely significant, not only because it sees the addition to the squad of a player whose T20 credentials remain in considerable doubt, but because selecting him has knock-on effects on Australia’s entire team and strategy. That is not to say it is the wrong decision, that much remains unclear, but it is a decision with considerable consequences that represents a fork in the road for their strategy and it is essential that Australia understand that and adapt accordingly.
...

A small sidenote. While the Australian management might look at Smith’s method and see a player who minimises risk by prioritising strike-rotation over boundary scoring, they could well be getting their logic back to front. Often in T20 not taking the aggressive option is as risky as taking it.
...

The consequence of opting for the stability of Smith is that to match the bottom half of their team with their top half Australia need to focus on building a very strong bowling attack because they are now less able to win teams with their bat alone.

Bowling in limited overs cricket is a weak-link discipline, meaning that a bowling attack is often only as strong as its weakest member. This therefore places huge importance on the quality of the fifth bowler in an attack and as illustrated in the table below, Smith’s selection gives Australia less flexibility with this role."