Would Pete Handscomb fit England's criteria?
An excellent century against a three-part Australian attack that said plenty about the different methods needed to succeed.
While finishing yesterday’s post, “How is England going?” I had the NSW vs Victoria Shield game (Day one) on the box—no volume, although I am a Harry Conway fan; have you heard his David “Bumble” Lloyd rendition? Here it is. TBH, it’s just a pass!
SpeakingCricket is made possible by your subscriptions. If you’re still a free subscriber, please consider upgrading to a paid subscription. Your support truly makes a difference.
The SCG wicket looked a treat: good grass cover, proper pace, bounce, and some turn for Nathan Lyon—who, by the way, I believe is no guarantee to play in Perth. Although the optimistic Lyon stated this week that, “his best is still ahead of him!” That suggests he may also have similar thoughts.
In a hard-fought first day’s play, Victoria’s standout batter was Pete Handscomb. Dropped at slip early from the persistent Josh Hazlewood, Handscomb handled a three-part Test attack comfortably, mixing solid defence with effective counter-attack, and the odd slice of good fortune.
Hazlewood looked no different to his usual MO, although there was a passage of play before the new ball where he cranked it up with some speedy short stuff, a role he doesn’t usually take on. A popular punditry and coaching term is bowling a ‘hard-length’—for Hazlewood, it should be a ‘Hazlewood length’. I don’t know a current Test bowler who repeats such a difficult length—to be forward, or back, or caught between, England’s gun-slingers will have their work cut out.
Mitchell Starc assumed the role of the late Shane Warne—the illusionist.
Starc, during the ODI series with India, had complained about having no rhythm and that there were technical issues in his action that he needed to iron out before the Perth Test. Suppose you were to ask Campbell Kellaway if this were the case, little doubt the answer would be an affirmative no. Kudos to Kellaway, though, he battled hard for his 51—although he threw more punches than Tommy ‘The Hitman’ Hearns. Starc bowled with sustained hostility and looked comfortable in action against left and right-handers, finishing with 4 for 91 from 18 overs.
As said, before he had scored, Handscomb edged Josh Hazlewood low to first slip, where Jack Edwards, who handed the NSW captaincy to New Yorker, Steve Smith, for this match, grassed a regulation catch. 208 balls later, Handscomb reached his second Shield century of the season, and his 30th first-class hundred.
Handscomb is a relatively understated cricketer with a weather-worn look akin to an outback shearer.
Through the pathway system, he was an effective middle-order player who provided cover for the primary wicket-keeper. This flowed into his early years in the Victorian team, where he deputised for Matthew Wade when he was away on national duties. As Wade transitioned back into primarily a Shield player, Handscomb’s stickwork had progressed enough to warrant a place as a batter.
Handscomb earned his first Test call-up in 2016-17, and two centuries in his first four Tests followed. Like many, though, his international career flip-flopped back and forth. His last iteration was the 2023 tour of India, where he made an excellent 72 in Delhi, but, unfortunately, he’d been tagged as a spin or sub-continent specialist.
Two things stood out to me about his innings yesterday.
First, his capacity to adapt. Admittedly, I haven’t watched a lot of Handscomb’s batting this season, so the method might have been in play previously. However, there was a significant difference in his starting position for Starc and the right-armers. Handscomb chose to stay well inside Starc’s over-the-wicket line; this was either based on projected length (and the pitch conditions—above-average bounce), or he was guarding against Starc’s late swing into the stumps, avoiding LBW. Handscomb enjoys excellent hand-eye skills.
At this level, individual plans enter the conscious realm for all batters; implementing them is another matter. Breaking your heavily crafted mould is difficult. New players might not have the confidence to go against what they and their early handlers see as the norm. Alternatively, many veterans find themselves mired in their own shit (speaking from experience), so happy to wait for the scoring wheel to turn again in their favour.
The second flows from the first, and might lean into what England’s batters might take from Handscomb’s innings.
The word ‘plane’ entered the cricket/batting vocabulary only recently, borrowed from golf swing instruction, notably Ben Hogan. Hogan described the swing plane as a pane of glass resting on his shoulders, tilted down toward the ball. The club, he said, should travel along, or inside, this pane without breaking through it, ensuring consistent and repeatable ball striking.
Using Hogan’s theory in relation to Handscomb’s batting, I suggest the plane runs from the peak of his helmet straight down to the ground. Without exception, in defence, Handscomb’s bat repeatedly made contact with the ball on his side of the pane. And the bat angle was as close to perpendicular as you could get. Yes, it all sounds too much math-based, but what it showed in practice was a batter in control of his defence and ready to extend into attack.
Which English batters would benefit from taking a look at the Kayo highlights? For starters, Ben Duckett and Zac Crawley.
Handscomb’s approach in this instance serves as a reminder that run-scoring isn’t just about talent and intent; it’s about adaptability, strategy, and strength of mind.
As the Ashes series progresses, it will be interesting to see if England’s batters choose to take a page from Handscomb’s playbook and apply these principles. I think they are prudent to. Confidently defending your opposition’s best ball is not to be scoffed at.
