Cummins Overrated?

[dumb]

it's hard to complain given his success. i don't think he's a bad captain, he clearly has qualities that have helped lead to success. he can though very quickly appear tactically bereft. at times we appear to win in spite of his defensive tactics, he's not particularly forceful until the game is very much in his favour.
if warne were in commentary, he'd have been doing his thing of endlessly going on about the field placings to the spinners.

mind you, i reckon it would be hard not to be defensive if i had to be captain over this batting line-up of the last 2 years.

i mused about when i would declare in his position and i had no idea what i would do outside of making sure the bowlers had a second new ball. probably it boils back to a case of, if you can't bowl a team out in 90 overs on a day 5-ish pitch, then they deserve the draw.

 

[ABAB]

Think he’s an incredible player and leader. One of the best leaders by example a la Graham Smith or Steve Waugh that I’ve seen.

I did find it almost odd though reading some comments yesterday saying he got things spot on with his timing/non-decision to declare though - that’s a very subjective or revisionist look back at things. I still don’t feel like he has a lot of instinct for those little things like timing etc and like Waugh at certain stages and definitely Ponting, it’s the personnel and match situation that has helped rather than the decision itself.

Being realistic, some more judicious batting from Pant and Jaiswal and Australia probably end up cursing the fact that they didn’t leave themselves more time to take the wickets.

I guess on the flip side of that he was criticised for being proactive in Brisbane last year and declaring behind the Windies 9-down to have a go at them under lights and ultimately losing by a few runs so I can understand that it is a double edged sword

Once there was seam and swing on the 4th day, 300 was going to be very difficult (possibly even 250) as Starc usually bowl very well in those condition. The concern was whether it was the Indian bowlers and not the pitch and whether Starc was fit enough.

 

[Black Diamond]

That's not a reflection on the captaincy itself necessarily, more on the bowling options available.

It is a reflection though.

The basics mean line and length to a 6-3 or 5-4 field. This doesn’t change based on who is at your disposal because you still need wickets to win.

If England set the same fields to us in the Ashes as we did for them we would be laughing. Just like we laughed at Rohit’s field for the Lyon-Boland partnership.

You need to give the bowlers something to bowl to, and he has made this error too many times.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

It is a reflection though.

The basics mean line and length to a 6-3 or 5-4 field. This doesn’t change based on who is at your disposal because you still need wickets to win.

If England set the same fields to us in the Ashes as we did for them we would be laughing. Just like we laughed at Rohit’s field for the Lyon-Boland partnership.

You need to give the bowlers something to bowl to, and he has made this error too many times.

It is a reflection

If he has Warne then he has men around the bat, attacking.

Instead he has Lyon, so needs fielders saving one and saving four. Get through overs cheaply to freshen up the quicks.

Same captain, two diametrically opposite approaches based purely on personnel.

 

[samFFC]

Basically this. I don’t think India were ever a chance yesterday, come hell or high water, of chasing down a score

Yes and no

Many wanted him to declare late day 4, which would’ve meant chasing around 300-320 off 100-105 overs.
If Jaiswal can get away, then it’s game on for sure.

 

[Not Important]

x2

 

[DaRick]

Think he’s an incredible player and leader. One of the best leaders by example a la Graham Smith or Steve Waugh that I’ve seen.

I did find it almost odd though reading some comments yesterday saying he got things spot on with his timing/non-decision to declare though - that’s a very subjective or revisionist look back at things. I still don’t feel like he has a lot of instinct for those little things like timing etc and like Waugh at certain stages and definitely Ponting, it’s the personnel and match situation that has helped rather than the decision itself.

Being realistic, some more judicious batting from Pant and Jaiswal and Australia probably end up cursing the fact that they didn’t leave themselves more time to take the wickets.

I guess on the flip side of that he was criticised for being proactive in Brisbane last year and declaring behind the Windies 9-down to have a go at them under lights and ultimately losing by a few runs so I can understand that it is a double edged sword

The Smith comparison's a good call, actually - led by example, but at times ran plans into the ground.

Cummins is IMO a touch more creative, though.

 

[Bob Neil]

Putting aside the captaincy for the moment it’s hard to recall a more complete four innings performance by a single player in a test match. Major contribution in every stanza of the match .

 

[Black Diamond]

It is a reflection

If he has Warne then he has men around the bat, attacking.

Instead he has Lyon, so needs fielders saving one and saving four. Get through overs cheaply to freshen up the quicks.

Same captain, two diametrically opposite approaches based purely on personnel.

That is not the case. If you push the field right back for Warne or any of the great spinners they immediately become less effective.

If you are pushing the field back it is because you are afraid of the batsmen.

 

[PhatBoy]

Putting aside the captaincy for the moment it’s hard to recall a more complete four innings performance by a single player in a test match. Major contribution in every stanza of the match .

Thought I had a couple from Big Jase for a moment but Holder let me down with 1 in the second innings (3-fer in both innings against Pakistan and a crucial 58

Then against Sri Lanka he hit 74 out of 204, took 4 wickets, scored 15…. Out of 98 and took 5-fer but Sri Lanka got home with a couple of wickets to spare.

Here’s a pretty good one:

Vernon Philander at Lords 2012:

2-48 first innings
5-30 second innings
35 in a 54-run 8th wicket stand with Duminy in the second innings
61 coming in at 6-163 in the first innings, SA ended up making 309.

They won the game by 51.

 

[Foucault1989]

Exactly. Prep is very thorough but there is rarely a backup plan beyond defence and no agility if it doesn't go our way.

Australia have a very distinctive gameplan under Cummins and McDonald. They are prepared to take the conservative approach when not much is happening and batsmen getting away, and for ultra aggressive batsmen not let them get going by restricting boundaries. Imagine if we had deep point up for Jaiswal and he cracks a few early boundaries and gets India going?

However, when we have our opening he does click into gear and go on the attack. They try and play with no ego....don't think you can always barnstorm through a team, pick your moments and limit the damage. We Australian's find it difficult to comprehend because it's not traditionally the Australian way but it stacks up all around the world.

 

[Teen Wolf]

40+ runs or 3+ wickets in all 4 innings, call it. A rare feat in Test cricket which seemingly comes in and out of fashion. Cummins would've been the first to manage it in 16 years... if Santner hadn't done it two weeks earlier.

Melbourne, 2024: Pat Cummins (49, 3/89, 41, 3/28)
Hamilton, 2024: Mitchell Santner (76, 3/7, 49, 4/85)
Chattogram, 2008: Daniel Vettori (5/59, 55*, 4/74, 76)
Karachi, 2006: Abdul Razzaq (45, 3/67, 90, 4/88)
Birmingham, 2005: Andrew Flintoff (68, 3/52, 73, 4/79)
Leeds, 1982: Imran Khan (67*, 5/49, 46, 3/66)
Lord’s, 1982: Kapil Dev (5/125, 41, 89, 3/43)
Birmingham, 1979: Enid Bakewell (68, 3/14, 112*, 7/61)
Port of Spain, 1977: Mushtaq Mohammad (121, 5/28, 56, 3/69)
Christchurch, 1969: Enid Bakewell (3/68, 114, 5/56, 66*)
Georgetown, 1968: Garry Sobers (152, 3/72, 95*, 3/53)
Brisbane, 1968: Rusi Surti (3/102, 52, 3/59, 64)
Gqeberha, 1967: Trevor Goddard (3/13, 74, 3/63, 59)
Brisbane, 1960: Alan Davidson (5/135, 44, 6/87, 80)
Johannesburg, 1910: Aubrey Faulkner (78, 5/120, 123, 3/40)
Sydney, 1894: George Giffen (161, 4/75, 4/164, 41)

Some of the most famous matches ever there. Arbitrary cutoffs being what they are, lowering the runs threshold by 1 would prompt the inclusion of another Mitchell (Johnson) and another noteworthy Gabba game (First Test of the 2013/14 Ashes).

If you were to pinpoint something unique about Cummins' entry, it'd be that nobody else on the list was captain and opening bowler and winner. Sir Garfield and Crazy Immy had their chances but, applying the same scrutiny we see today, blew it big time by respectively setting a 300+ target and not using the spinner enough.

 

[Bob Neil]

40+ runs or 3+ wickets in all 4 innings, call it. A rare feat in Test cricket which seemingly comes in and out of fashion. Cummins would've been the first to manage it in 16 years... if Santner hadn't done it two weeks earlier.

Melbourne, 2024: Pat Cummins (49, 3/89, 41, 3/28)
Hamilton, 2024: Mitchell Santner (76, 3/7, 49, 4/85)
Chattogram, 2008: Daniel Vettori (5/59, 55*, 4/74, 76)
Karachi, 2006: Abdul Razzaq (45, 3/67, 90, 4/88)
Birmingham, 2005: Andrew Flintoff (68, 3/52, 73, 4/79)
Leeds, 1982: Imran Khan (67*, 5/49, 46, 3/66)
Lord’s, 1982: Kapil Dev (5/125, 41, 89, 3/43)
Birmingham, 1979: Enid Bakewell (68, 3/14, 112*, 7/61)
Port of Spain, 1977: Mushtaq Mohammad (121, 5/28, 56, 3/69)
Christchurch, 1969: Enid Bakewell (3/68, 114, 5/56, 66*)
Georgetown, 1968: Garry Sobers (152, 3/72, 95*, 3/53)
Brisbane, 1968: Rusi Surti (3/102, 52, 3/59, 64)
Gqeberha, 1967: Trevor Goddard (3/13, 74, 3/63, 59)
Brisbane, 1960: Alan Davidson (5/135, 44, 6/87, 80)
Johannesburg, 1910: Aubrey Faulkner (78, 5/120, 123, 3/40)
Sydney, 1894: George Giffen (161, 4/75, 4/164, 41)

Some of the most famous matches ever there. Arbitrary cutoffs being what they are, lowering the runs threshold by 1 would prompt the inclusion of another Mitchell (Johnson) and another noteworthy Gabba game (First Test of the 2013/14 Ashes).

If you were to pinpoint something unique about Cummins' entry, it'd be that nobody else on the list was captain and opening bowler and winner. Sir Garfield and Crazy Immy had their chances but, applying the same scrutiny we see today, blew it big time by respectively setting a 300+ target and not using the spinner enough.

Awesome stats work Teen Wolf . Interesting collection of players and matches but the captain plus winner touch was the coup de grace!

 

[sosos]

I was concerned his bowling might drop off with taking on the captaincy, but it hasn't.

He seems to have the ability to force a wicket with his strength of personality, like Dennis Lillie and Merv Hughes.

Whole hearted performer, and he seems to be taking the team along with him.

The series is not won yet, so I hope he has another big one in him, with the short turnaround.

 

[Around the Wicket]

He isn't anywhere near Bumrah with the ball but he is definitely that next level down.

 

[Mateyman]

Was losing my mind him bowling the spinners with so many on the boundary and not even halfway to the fence but on the boundary when India weren't even trying to chase the runs. I guess he got the last laugh by Pant playing one of the dumbest shots given the context I've seen in a long time

 

[Coops93]

I'm not convinced by the critique of him tactically. I thought he played that 3rd & 4th innings perfectly.

We were never going to declare on day 4. The team operate with a fairly public 24 hr rule for the bowlers having a rest, and Cummins himself had just faced 70 odd balls himself and had a several hour partnership with Labuschagne. The other opening bowler, Starc, has/had a niggle and had bowled earlier in the day. Bowlers being cooked was part of what did us in last time India were here, so extra rest was the smarter choice despite the usual suggestion of "You'd like to have a 20 min bowl tonight at them". Further, we needed extra runs and less time worked in our favour, actually.

As for the field placings and general strategy on day 5, again I think he played it perfectly. They couldn't just over-attack and allow them to go at 4s an over. The pitch was still fairly decent for batting and we have seen from this India side first hand that they can chase 300 in a 4th innings. So we had to balance keeping the carrot dangled but not letting it get so close we suddenly need to go all out defence, and that's the part I thought he did perfectly. India were never completely out of the game until the 3rd session but it was always probably just too far, and eventually that pressure broke Pant.

They ended up getting the job done with plenty of runs in the bank and about 10 overs left in the back pocket. I'm not sure anything about that warrants queries around his tactics.

They play the percentages. It might look boring or safe but they basically make the right call almost every time, nothing unnecessarily aggressive for the sake of aggression - let England throw games away by doing that. They won't surprise you, but they don't beat themselves.