Hazlewood says reverse swing 'crucial' as Australia prepares for second Test

Fast bowler's 6-49 in Durban highlighted by sharp old-ball movement on abrasive South African wickets

By LineZotpaper
Published
Read Time2 min
Sources3 outlets
Josh Hazlewood has declared reverse swing a "crucial" weapon in Australia's Test series against South Africa, eight years after the Sandpapergate scandal brought the art of old-ball movement into disrepute. The fast bowler's first-innings figures of 6-49 in Durban featured heavy old-ball movement, and he expects similar conditions at St George's Park in Gqeberha for the second Test starting this week.

Speaking ahead of the second Test, Hazlewood said the abrasive nature of South African wickets was key to generating reverse swing, in contrast to the green seamers common in Australia.

"With [wickets in] Australia being the green seamers, it just doesn't get talked about at all," Hazlewood said. "The ball still looks new late in the innings if it gets that far. So it's more, you know, if you go back to SCG years ago, we definitely got reverse there every year, and then here in South Africa, [they're] just abrasive wickets."

Hazlewood's performance in the first Test included the dismissals of David Bedingham (lbw) and Wiaan Mulder (caught behind) through sharp movement off the pitch. According to CricViz, it was the most old-ball movement Hazlewood had produced in a Test since the corresponding Durban Test in 2018.

The bowler emphasised that the methods being used this time are entirely legal. He said the balance between hardness and reverse swing is important: "You probably want the ball a little bit harder and a little bit of reverse swing, rather than a lot of reverse swing and the ball soft. It's much easier to navigate as a batsman."

Hazlewood predicted similar conditions at St George's Park, though heavy rain is forecast for the first two days. "The conditions sort of dictate it," he said. "So there's probably more grass and seam movement if it's not reversing."

The second Test also looms as a potential recall for South African quick Kagiso Rabada, who missed the first match.

§

Analysis

Why This Matters

  • Reverse swing could be decisive in determining the outcome of the series, especially on traditional South African surfaces.
  • The return to legal reverse swing marks a shift away from the controversies of the 2018 Sandpapergate scandal, restoring focus on skill rather than illicit tactics.
  • Australia's ability to generate reverse swing on abrasive pitches may influence team selection and bowling strategies for the remainder of the tour.

Background

The 2018 Sandpapergate scandal, in which Australian players were caught using sandpaper to artificially roughen the ball in Cape Town, led to suspensions and a major overhaul of the team's culture. Since then, Australian pitches have often been green and seamer-friendly, reducing the role of reverse swing. This series in South Africa, played on traditional grounds with worn squares, has revived the skill legally.

Key Perspectives

Josh Hazlewood and the Australian attack: Reverse swing gives Australia an extra dimension, especially on abrasive wickets that scuff the ball naturally. Hazlewood's control and ability to move the old ball make him a central figure. South Africa with Kagiso Rabada: Rabada's potential recall strengthens the home side's pace attack. He is also adept at reverse swing, and his presence could level the playing field. Critics and skeptics: Some may view the emphasis on reverse swing with caution given the history of ball tampering, but Hazlewood has stressed that all methods used are within the laws of the game.

What to Watch

  • Weather forecast for the first two days of the second Test in Gqeberha: heavy rain could reduce the opportunity for reverse swing.
  • Kagiso Rabada's fitness and availability: his recall would significantly boost South Africa's bowling.
  • How quickly the ball scuffs up on the St George's Park surface and whether Hazlewood can replicate his Durban form.

Sources

Zotpaper

Written by software from the reporting listed above, scored by an automated standards desk, and published without a person reading it first. If something here is wrong, tell the editor and it will be put right.

How we workSubscribe