Australia continue to disappoint

You could see it coming from a mile away. Just the look of the Australian squad for the second World Twenty/20 screamed orthodoxy and tentativeness. Australia, bowing out of the tournament before minnows Ireland and The Netherlands was hardly surprising, and it just shows the ignorance of the selectors and their continued failure to learn from their early 'hit and giggle' mistakes. So what do the Australians need to revise?

1) The specialist spinner(s): It is unbelievable that the Australian selectors and captain continue to ignore the fact that the specialist spinner is the number one weapon in 20 over cricket. For 60 odd games of the IPL, the matches were dominated by the slow men. Most sides had at least 1 specialist and 3 other quality part time spinners, some even had 2 front line spinners and 2 seamers making up their attack. Again, in this year's world 20/20, spinners have dominated. The Murilitharan/Mendis and Botha/van der Merwe combinations for their respective sides make up some of the best bowling attacks in the tournament. When Hauritz was finally played in the Sri Lanka match, he was by far the most dangerous bowler for the Aussies. 

Yet, Hauritz was left out of the West Indies match, in which he was probably most needed. And even against Sri Lanka, when the game was slipping away, Ponting went to Shane Watson again, even after bowling a horrible first spell, before turning to Hauritz and Clarke. Ponting's reluctancy to use the spinner was highlighted when Hauritz's 20/20 stats were displayed on screen. They read: 2 matches, 3.4 overs. A guy like Aaron Heal from Western Australia would fit perfectly alongside Hauritz.

2) The captaincy: Ricky Ponting does not understand 20/20 cricket. Either that, or he is completely blind to the ways that 20/20 is played in the modern day. He refuses to do something different; he sticks to the same game plan every single game: bowl the quick men in the powerplays, bowl the medium pacers, and then bowl the spinners, finally turning back to the pacemen for the death overs. Sure, this strategy might work wonders in 50 over cricket, but it is completely obsolete in the 20/20 format. He needs to start using the spinners earlier, he needs to learn to trust his spinners, he needs to try new techniques, new combinations, and start to adapt and learn from other teams. I would personally like to see Brad Haddin leading the side.

3) The all too orthodox batting: Australia's batsman are too old fashioned, again struggling to adapt to the new styles of modern day batting. Time and time again, they continue to be bogged down, and lose wickets at crucial times. As I watched the game unfold last night, I thought to myself: this isn't the Australia of old. The batsman lack confidence, and are too afraid of getting out. In the powerplay overs, they try too hard, and loose too many wickets, too early, and they simply refuse to innovate. 

The batting against spin is a massive, massive worry. All batsman, bar Brad Haddin, lack the confidence to come down the pitch and attack the spinners. Even Michael Clarke, the supposed "best player" of spin in the side, in afraid to come at the spinners. And all, with the exception of Brad Haddin again, refuse to use the sweep shot, which is a vital part of any batsman's repertoire when facing spin. The Australians need to figure out their own ways to attack spin, because if they continue to be bogged down by the slow bowlers, I don't see them winning many more T20 games in the future.

The other worry for the Aussies is the inability to play the inventive shots; the reverse sweeps, the scoop shots, the inside out lofted cover drive, all of which are such important scoring shots for other players around the world. In the future I would like to see a total revamp of the batting line up, with the addition of some new, young, fearless and innovative talent, in the Dave Warner mould. 

4) The pace attack: Another flaw in the Australian side, again showing the failure of the selectors to adapt to modern T20 cricket. The balance is not right, and they are giving away too many boundary balls and extras. In this day and age, a good pace attack consists of one really quick, wicket taking bowler to bowl at the start of the innings and the death. The other 1 or 2 pacemen should be accurate, medium fast bowlers who can methodically send down 135-140k deliveries consistently, on a good length. At the moment, there is only space for one of either Johnson or Lee (Johnson deserves the spot more than Lee). Nathan Bracken no longer swings the ball and is too slow, and hence useless, and Shane Watson is too tentative. Guys who should be making up the attack are bowlers like Peter Siddle, James Hopes, Ben Hilfenhaus, Doug Bollinger and Dirk Nannes. 

The answer? So what I would like to see for the future is a specialist 20/20 side. No more slow, orthodox, 'tried and tested' type players. I would like to see a new side made of fresh, free and fearless talent, who are not afraid to use their feet to the spinners and hit over the top at any stage of the game. This is what I would like the squad to look something like for the next series of T20 matches:

Warner, Haddin (c), Hodge, Ferguson, Hopes, M. Hussey, D. Hussey, Johnson, Heal, Hauritz, Nannes, Rohrer, Noffke, Siddle.