Austraia/SL/Pakistan - T20s
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.
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.
Spin to win, Australia's change in T20 tack
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id ... e-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."
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id ... e-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."
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-anal ... -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."
Australia’s Fork in the Road
http://cricviz.com/2019/11/cricviz-anal ... -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."