Australian team in disarray

Australian cricket is not in a good position at the moment. A 3-0 whitewash of the Sri Lankans may have peppered over the cracks, but playing in the challenging Indian conditions has proven way too big of a task. There are problems with the personnel in the team, as well as the selectors, who really seem to be nearly as bad as the former panel headed by Andrew Hilditch. Here is a summary of the problems:

Top Order Batting
Australia's top order is young and inexperienced and are struggling to make big scores. All four of them tend to make starts without going on and scoring centuries. Their test match averages prove this with David Warner averaging 44, Ed Cowan 32, Phil Hughes 34, and Shane Watson 36. There is an issue of where Watson should bat, and whether he should replace Cowan at the top of the order. However the fact is Watson is not scoring enough runs to deserve that opening slot. I don't see why Cowan should be dropped, yet a player in similar form of Watson should be promoted. Hughes is on his third comeback in international test cricket, but his diabolical form in India of 25 runs in 4 innings has left him teetering on the edge.

Michael Clarke's position in the order
Michael Clarke's form is the only bright spot in the batting order. His miraculous 2012 form has continued into 2013 with a century and a 91 against India. Although his best form is undoubtedly at no.5, and it would be risky to move him, the frailty of the top order, really forces Clarke to move up the order. Ideally Clarke should be batting at no.4, and hopefully this move happens sometime before the Ashes in July.

Matthew Wade's keeping
Matthew Wade's keeping was under immense pressure in the Australian summer, but the fact is his batting more than does the job. He averages nearly 38 with the bat which is better than Cowan's, Hughes' and Watson's. At the moment he is safe, but he still has to prove that he can be consistent with the gloves, and possibly as well cement a place at no.6 in the batting order.

Bits and pieces players
This section pretty much translates to Glen Maxwell. Why the hell is he playing in this second test. He is nowhere near ready for test cricket. He did manage to take four wickets yesterday, but his off-spin bowling is mediocre at best, he has no real variations, and his batting is yet to shine at even first class level. The fact he is batting at no.8 is bizarre. The selector's decision to play him draws parallels with Cameron White's selection in India at no.8 as a "batting all-rounder."

Spin bowling
Nathan Lyon was unfairly treated by the National Selection Panel. Yes, he went for a lot of runs in the first test, but he took 4 wickets for the match, including the prized scalp of Sachin Tendulkar with a beautifully flighted delivery. Yes, he needs to work on slowing down and giving more flight, but dropping him was not the answer. Mickey Arthur said he has played 19 tests in a row and needed a bit of a break. ????? There was a 6 month break in between the West Indies and South Africa tests, and a six week break between the Sri Lanka and India test matches. I understand the selectors wanting to play a second spinner in Doherty, but dropping Lyon and playing Maxwell is a terrible move.

In conclusion,

Positives: Michael Clarke and pace bowling
Negatives: Everything else