We've never been Nathan Hauritz's biggest fans at the Reverse Sweep (see the link at the end of this post for evidence), but even we would admit that he had done a reasonable job as Australia's spinner and indeed was (and still is) incontestably the best twirler to wear the Baggy Green post-Warne.
Sure, he struggled in India just prior to the Ashes but a) he was just coming back from injury, b) Ricky Ponting's lack of faith in his spinner was ably demonstrated by the atrocious fields he set, and; c) it's not as if he was the first spinner to struggle in India - just ask Warne and Murali.
Butother than India, Hauritz had done a steady if unspectacular job and actually took 29 wickets in six home tests against Pakistan and West Indies last year at a decent 26.82. Those two sides may not exactly be the strongest in the world, but we can't imagine that Xavier Doherty or Michael Beer would have done as well.
Hauritz also did quite well in the 2009 Ashes, taking 10 wickets in 3 Tests at 32.10. Indeed, the decision to leave him out of the XI in the decider at The Oval probably ensured that Australia's grip on the Ashes was relinquished.
Despite his culling from the national side, Hauritz has also picked up 19 wickets in six first-class matches this season at 26.78 (as well as hitting his first two first-class hundreds). Hardly spectacular, but as we hinted before pretty reasonable. Again, it is significantly better than Beer's 16 wickets at 43, Doherty's almost identical 15 at 43 -or even Steve Smith's 12 at 42.
So, Hauritz really would seem to be the best spinner Australia has and their failure to call on him during the series appears to be inexplicable. We're not saying that Hauritz would have made the difference between Australia winning and losing the Ashes, but we bet he would have done better than those that replaced him.
Where next?
5th Test preview: England aim to give Clarke a baptism of fire
Michael Beer's selection explained
Read all the latest from our Ashes 2010/11 coverage
The best and worst Test XIs of 2010
If you like this, follow us on Twitter @thereversesweep
Completely agree. I get the impression that the selectors just don't want to lose face by selecting him again. Especially once he started selling his kit. He would surely be a better prospect than Doherty or Beer. It's completely mystifying.
Posted by: Cory | Sunday, January 02, 2011 at 18:37
Beer certainly wasn't much better than Doherty. Hauritz is no Warne, or even a MacGill, but he is the best spinner the Aussies have and should be in the XI.
Posted by: The Reverse Sweep | Saturday, January 08, 2011 at 06:16