Mixed messages on order of batting

THE uncertainty swirling around Australia's XI two days from the first Test is matched by the mixed messages about who is setting the batting order.

THE uncertainty swirling around Australia's XI two days from the first Test is matched by the mixed messages about who is setting the batting order.

Traditionally, the selectors hand the captain a list of players and the skipper decides where they will bat.

But new coach Darren Lehmann discarded that custom last week when he said Shane Watson and Chris Rogers would open in the first Test at Trent Bridge starting on Wednesday.

Michael Clarke sought to reclaim the captain's prerogative when he said on the weekend: "I haven't picked the batting order yet, but I will at some stage.

"Chris and Shane have certainly put their hand up as opening batters in the tour games, but in regards to the batting order it hasn't been selected."

Further complicating the selection uncertainty, there are signs Clarke and Mickey Arthur decided to move Watson back to his favoured opening position before Arthur was sacked a fortnight ago.

It has been widely reported that the decision was Lehmann's, even though he took just two days in the job to announce Watson would open in the first Test.

Clarke cast doubt on the prevailing view in his weekend press conference. "There has certainly been some communication over the last few months since coming back from India with Shane about where he wants to bat, where I see him most suited to the team," he said.

While who made the call on Watson's elevation -- and when -- remains an open question, Clarke's determination to reclaim the captain's right to set his own batting order seems clear.

Like a frontbencher seizing on a Dorothy Dixer, Clarke again made it plain who was boss when asked if he would bat at four or five in the Test.

"I'm not sure," he said. "I'll wait and see what XI the selectors give me then I'll work out the batting order from there."

So while he's relinquished his selector's hat, it appears he has effectively told Lehmann to butt out of picking the batting order.

Lehmann gave conflicting messages in his press conference the following day. First, when asked to divulge the Test team, he said: "I'd love to, but I can't. I gave you the openers."

So Lehmann did pick the openers after all. But wait . . . "At the end of the day, I don't pick the batting order," he went on to say.

"In the years gone by it's always been the captain, and that's not going to change. So Michael, once we settle on the XI, then he'll pick the batting order."

If, as Clarke seemed to suggest, he and Arthur granted Watson's wish to return to the top of the order, then it might be Arthur's parting gift to an ungrateful nation.

Rather like Andrew Hilditch's panel left Nathan Lyon in a corner, twirling a ball, as they shut the dressing room door on the way out.

That of course assumes Watson succeeds in his new/old role, but his century against Worcester last week and his track record as an opener suggest he will.

There is a further complication to an already messy picture. Lehmann and his fellow duty selector Rod Marsh --

who together will effectively pick the Test XI -- have a history of enmity.

When Lehmann quit South Australia during the 2007/08 season, a rift with Marsh -- then SA's cricket manager -- was widely reported as a major factor in his decision to retire.

"Rod as a player was one of the guys I loved and idolised," Lehmann said at the time. "(But) his views differ from mine on how to manage cricket teams.

"It was just a decision-making process and communication breakdown. His views are always going to be right."

Marsh said at the time he was there to lift SA out of the doldrums, and "if people don't like the way I do it, in some ways it's just too bad".

A spokesman for Cricket Australia declined to comment last night.