Cricket Discussion - Part 1

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ford Fairlane said:
Maybe we could pick a non-playing captain like Mike Brearley. :p
Click to expand...

could Bailey come back in just to captain?

Has Australia ever made that type of selection?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

QLD had a bit of a resurrection yesterday as well. They were 2/29 before finishing the day at 3/326 due mainly to Joe Burns 183.

Fawad Ahmed looks like he's found the answer to jumping the refugee queue. Just tell CA that you can solve all their spinning woes and they'll move heaven and earth to get you into the country.
 
The powerplays in the Australia v South Africa ODI's make interesting reading. In the 1st ODI Australia were able to get off to a flier as no wickets were lost and they got 0/60 in the first 10 overs. In the 2nd ODI the 2 openers went cheaply and this had a huge affect on the powerplay and they only scored 2/27. South Africa lost both openers early both times and scored 2/45 and 2/48. But the later 5-over powerplay was the one where neither team seems to have really taken the expected advantage. Although Australia scored 0/32 in the first ODI, South Africa only scored 4/17 and Australia 3/13 in the second ODI. In all ODI's in the 2014-2015 season there were only 4 occasions where there were over 50 runs scored in the 5-over powerplay and these were all in India.

There have so far been eleven 5-over powerplays(South Africa did not take theirs in the 2nd ODI). Of these only 2 were taken before it became mandatory after 35 overs.
 
mic59 said:
3/44 - Here we go again

4/107 - Might make a competitive score

4/304 - THUD (Sound of jaw hitting the ground).
Click to expand...
Yep: never doubted 'em - SA for the Shield :)

Edit: just watch - they'll be all out for 320.......
 
mic59 said:
Take you up on that. What odds will you give me for 450?;)
Click to expand...
Great rearguard action by SA, not just the tons by Ferguson and Ludeman but partnerships of 63 and 49 with the bowlers. Probably would have made it to 450 if Botha hadn't declared, he was still in and Putland and Sayers aren't total rabbits.
 
Sat down at the computer to look up the score, a wicket had just fallen after a stand of 130 and it was 1/136. Next second the score was 2/136. Two or three more wickets by the end of the day and we're right on top. Although it's not as if Victoria have a weak line-up. Stoinis and White in at the moment and Hussey, Handscomb and Christian to come.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Greasyrhys said:
Can't take a wicket, unless we can get a few quick ones any chance of a win will be rather remote!!!
Click to expand...
Hey, what is happening? I put up the cricket website and it said Vic were 2/136, Rogers out for 74. Now it says they are 1/175. There's nothing on the commentary. I don't have a working radio or other connection, do you know what happened?
 
I reckon they've made some stupid mistake and a batsman's done something like gone part of the way to the gate for new gloves and the commentators didn't look and thought he was out. Although I don't know how anyone could confuse Cameron White with Chris Rogers. I mean, Chris Rogers isn't exactly what you'd call imposing? Round faced and red-haired and 177cm while Cameron White is 187cm with brown hair and a long head.
 
raptalia said:
It will be interesting to see what happens if the Pakis lose a toss and have to bat last. Mind you I doubt the Kiwis have the spinners to take advantage anyway but it would be good to see the Pakis chase a total.

I cannot believe that Ian Chappell criticised Michael Clarke for losing the toss twice against the Pakis. On this subject how does the toss work in Test Cricket? Does the home Captain toss the coin and the visiting Captain call?
Click to expand...

It has happened the Pakis lost the toss and NZ batted first. NZ 3/243 at stumps. Tommy Latham 137 n.o.

The Pakis will probably have to bat last to win and their spinners will not have last use of the wicket.
 
South Australia will be in the position of having to bat and declare when they think they have a competitive total and enough time to win. For the captain it is a no-win situation, if you lose you have declared too early and handed them the game, if you win then your bowlers have backed you up.
 
raptalia said:
It has happened the Pakis lost the toss and NZ batted first. NZ 3/243 at stumps. Tommy Latham 137 n.o.

The Pakis will probably have to bat last to win and their spinners will not have last use of the wicket.
Click to expand...
Depends on how well Pakistan bats: they lost a total of 5 wickets in the First Test. So unless the Kiwi bowlers bowl a helluva lot better in this game, it may yet be NZ batting last.
 
Well, it's now official. Cam White is a d***head. If he thinks South Australia are going to bat like maniacs for 3 hours so that they can present Victoria with a carrot of a total to get in 2 sessions he's got another think coming. Anyone going to the cricket tomorrow will do their dough as only 13 wickets have fallen so far and all that will happen is South Australia will get in some batting practice.

If he'd declared 60 behind like Botha did against QLD, or if his batsmen hadn't taken 27 more overs than SA did to overtake them by 1 run there might have been a chance of a result, but this will end up nowhere. Victoria get 0.5 bowling points by 2 balls as Ludeman, the 5th wicket, was dismissed on 99.4 overs. South Australia get no bowling points as the 5th wicket was after 100 overs. Victoria were 3/274 at the end of 100 overs so get .01x74=.74 batting points. South Australia were 5/319 so get .01x119=1.19 batting points. So Victoria only come out .05 better than us. And would be .45 behind if Ludeman had held out for another 3 balls.
 
Last edited:
mic59 said:
Well, it's now official. Cam White is a d***head. If he thinks South Australia are going to bat like maniacs for 3 hours so that they can present Victoria with a carrot of a total to get in 2 sessions he's got another think coming. Anyone going to the cricket tomorrow will do their dough as only 13 wickets have fallen so far and all that will happen is South Australia will get in some batting practice.

If he'd declared 60 behind like Botha did against QLD, or if his batsmen hadn't taken 27 more overs than SA did to overtake them by 1 run there might have been a chance of a result, but this will end up nowhere. Victoria get 0.5 bowling points by 2 balls as Ludeman, the 5th wicket, was dismissed on 99.4 overs. South Australia get no bowling points as the 5th wicket was after 100 overs. Victoria were 3/274 at the end of 100 overs so get .01x74=.74 batting points. South Australia were 5/319 so get .01x119=1.19 batting points. So Victoria only come out .05 better than us. And would be .45 behind if Ludeman had held out for another 3 balls.
Click to expand...
Mick - you seem to have forgotten our last Shield game against NSW, when we lost a stack of wickets in the final session. If anybody can lose from here, it's the Deadbacks!!!!!
 
philreich said:
Depends on how well Pakistan bats: they lost a total of 5 wickets in the First Test. So unless the Kiwi bowlers bowl a helluva lot better in this game, it may yet be NZ batting last.
Click to expand...

NZ 6/291 so there goes any chance of the big score that NZ needed to put pressure on the Pakis. As you say Phil it is now down to the Kiwi bowlers.
 
philreich said:
Mick - you seem to have forgotten our last Shield game against NSW, when we lost a stack of wickets in the final session. If anybody can lose from here, it's the Deadbacks!!!!!
Click to expand...

I thought the same when I read Mick's post. With five wickets in hand and a lead of 90 the Vics could still set SA 190 in two sessions tomorrow and fancy their chances. Hopefully the Redbacks will bat with some pride this time around and save the match.

Cannot see Fawad Ahmed getting a game for Australia anytime soon then again there is still the SA second dig to come.
 
philreich said:
Mick - you seem to have forgotten our last Shield game against NSW, when we lost a stack of wickets in the final session. If anybody can lose from here, it's the Deadbacks!!!!!
Click to expand...
Slightly different weather and bowling conditions. NSW had been bowled out for 230 and SA 293 with 1 batsman, Cooper, scoring nearly half of SA's runs. NSW scored 5/392 and it was a spinner, which Victoria do not have, who ran through us. Some of the early wickets may also have fallen because we did, for a while, have a chance of winning that game.

Cam White had two options, declare behind and wait for the declaration which may give them a chance or let SA survive for a day with no chance of winning on a pitch which has given up 13 wickets in 3 days. You can never say we, or in fact any other team will not lose but Cam White could have done so much better.

Wickets are always more likely to fall when one team is in the position of having something to bat for.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

K
Opinion Jeremy Finlayson verdict broader discussion
2 3
Replies
71
Views
840
Duckimus Prime
Duckimus Prime
Festerz
Corona virus and other pestilences. Poxes ‘n stuff. Part 6.
71 72 73 74 75
Replies
2K
Views
69K
OneGreatClub
OneGreatClub
ibd77
Numerology of 119
Replies
6
Views
1K
dirty2
dirty2

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top