Cricket Discussion - Part 2

Remove this Banner Ad

raptalia said:
Oh boy, India have 4/303 on the board at stumps on day 1. Thus far Australia have not gone past 300 in a single innings this series. This is not looking good as we need quick wickets followed by some big scores. Time for Travis Head to build a big score from some of those good starts he has been getting and time for the likes of Khawaja and Handscomb to get among the runs. At the risk of stating the obvious it is also time for Sean Marsh to produce one of those one in ten big scores that keep him in the side.
Click to expand...
Not quite true - we made 326 in Perth, but I know what you mean. The first hour today could decide the Test. The current partnership is already worth 75, so breaking through early somehow is paramount. The real danger man is Pant - with 300+ on the board when he strides to the wicket, he'll have a licence to go to town on our tiring attack, so the total could pass 400 before you can say, "Crows for the spoon."

My prediction - Pujara to pass 200, and India to post 500+: Test effectively over. I hope I'm wrong.
 
So the press reports are that Labuschagne will bat at no3 which means Khawaja will probably open. I am not sure I understand what is going on here. I would have picked the in form opener in Joe Burns and tossed up between Labuschagne and Handscomb for the no6 spot. Labuschagne hasn't nailed the no 6 spot yet and Langer is asking him to bat at no3. Even if Labuschagne succeeds in this Test how likely is it that he will bat at no3 when Smith and Warner return? All the more reason to stick with Khwaja at no 3 and play an experienced opener like Burns. I am really perplexed why some players keep getting picked regarless as to how many failures they chalk up while others cannot get a look in. Shades of Ken Hinkley the selection.
 
Interesting stat provided by Shen Wun yesterday re the bowling records of Starc and Hazelwood for the last dozen or so test matches the Aussies have played.

Apparently Starc has averaged something like 47 runs per wicket, and Hazelwood more than 40, which combined with Cummins looking absolutely frazzled yesterday and struggling to get above 135 k's, plus Lyon's 48 runs per wicket at the SCG unfortunately suggested the Aussies were always going to be under enormous pressure to bowl the Indians out for a manageable total.

If the Indians make 450 plus the Aussies will be battling to salvage a draw, and it won't surprise me greatly if this test is over before the last session on the 4th day.

Re the Aussie batsmen, we have plenty of shot makers but not too many with strong defences, eg Travis Head, who tends to throw his wicket away if he is tied down for any length of time, or is denied the strike.

At the risk of being accused of making a Koch type BS statement :rolleyes: the Aussie selectors need to find a Pujara type who is prepared to bat all day, but good luck trying to find one of them amongst the current list of batsmen in this country.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

In batting order the team I want to see in the remaineder of tests this summer, in batting order:
Harris Khawaja Burns Head Wade Stoinis Paine Cummins Starc Lyon Hazelhurst Hanscombe (12)
It combines just about the best of the Sheffield Shield in batting averages, and a 5th speculative bowling option in Stoinis, who also has a reasonable ODI batting averge but no test experience.
 
raptalia said:
At 6/470 I would say that is game over as Australia cannot win it from here. The Indians will finish at 500+ and Australia will need 400+ just to have any hope of forcing a draw.
Click to expand...
Part of the problem is that we simply can't stop the constant flow of runs. Starc has bowled 24 overs without a single maiden - I'm sure Bumrah and co will be far more economical when it's their turn to bowl.
 
The pitch is pretty reasonable and not that hard to score on as India have shown. If we can bat into day four we have a chance of saving the game but I would not back us to do that. If on the other hand if we are bowled out in or before the final session tomorrow we are cooked.

If reckon Kohli will want and hour at us tonight and hopefully we will not loose any wickets in that hour.
 
India should just keep for as long as they can. Why declare? They should give us nothing. We need the win, they don’t. Bat for 3 days, make as many runs as they can. We’re not scoring 800 in 3 innings
 
RustyCage said:
India should just keep for as long as they can. Why declare? They should give us nothing. We need the win, they don’t. Bat for 3 days, make as many runs as they can. We’re not scoring 800 in 3 innings
Click to expand...
I still reckon Kohli wants a 3-1 series result. 14 overs left today - I'd say they'll give us a nasty little 6-8 overs to survive tonight.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Head replaced by Handscomb for ODI series.

f****** lol CA.

Handscomb averaging 21 in ODI's, while Head is averaging almost 35

Langer is best off sticking with the hit and giggle that t20 cricket is.
 
Why is there a coin toss before a test match?

I come from baseball, where there is no coin toss — the visitors begin batting. I know test cricket is a different beast, but still...

It seems better TO ME that, when a series is tied, the visitors should have the choice; otherwise, the losing team picks either ball or bat. Does it make sense?

---

I am not sure whether I have already mentioned this, but T20 and OD crickets seem too similar — at least, when compared to test cricket. Wouldn't a TWO 50-over innings in TWO days make more sense, being closer to test cricket and further from T20?

Hence, instead of OD, there would be a T100 (two days/innings, 100 overs) code. People that love one-day cricket, why is my suggestion bad?
 
GremioPower said:
Why is there a coin toss before a test match?

I come from baseball, where there is no coin toss — the visitors begin batting. I know test cricket is a different beast, but still...

It seems better TO ME that, when a series is tied, the visitors should have the choice; otherwise, the losing team picks either ball or bat. Does it make sense?

---

I am not sure whether I have already mentioned this, but T20 and OD crickets seem too similar — at least, when compared to test cricket. Wouldn't a TWO 50-over innings in TWO days make more sense, being closer to test cricket and further from T20?

Hence, instead of OD, there would be a T100 (two days/innings, 100 overs) code. People that love one-day cricket, why is my suggestion bad?
Click to expand...

I think cricket has it right. In cricket so much depends on the pitch. If you let one side bat first the curators could be asked to prepare wickets that deteriorated and put the side batting last at a real disadvantage. Conversely they might prepare green tops that counted against the side batting first. In short it is not beyond certain organisations to manipulate a situation when they know beforehand which team will bat first or last.

In baseball you do not have the pitch problem as the ball doesn't hit the deck.

Your comments about t20 and ODI are valid because with the advent of t20 we seem to waiting 100 overs and a day to get to the same situation that we get to after 40 overs in the t20 version. Once the 50 over version was seen as the excitement format in the game but now it sits in no man's land and creates real problems with match programming.

I find myself wondering how long it will be before cricket authorities realise that they would be better placed to concentrate on Test and t20 formats. From an Australian perspective we would be better placed if the Shield season started in early October had a break over Christmas then resumed in mid January. This would give our players the chance to prepare for the up coming Test matches. As it is Cricket Australia are trying to juggle the JLT ODI series with Shield cricket, t20 cricket and an International schedule and it just doesn't work. It would be interesting to know exactly how many Shield innings some of our regular Test players have played over the past two or so seasons.
 
Last edited:
raptalia said:
I think cricket has it right. In cricket so much depends on the pitch. If you let one side bat first the curators could be asked to prepare wickets that deteriorated and put the side batting last at a real disadvantage. Conversely they might prepare green tops that counted against the side batting first. In short it is not beyond certain organisations to manipulate a situation when they know beforehand which team will bat first or last.

In baseball you do not have the pitch problem as the ball doesn't hit the deck.
Click to expand...
Granted!

Your comments about t20 and ODI are valid because with the advent of t20 we seem to waiting 100 overs and a day to get to the same situation that we get to after 40 overs in the t20 version. Once the 50 over version was seen as the excitement format in the game but now it sits in no man's land and creates real problems with match programming.

I find myself wondering how long it will be before cricket authorities realise that they would be better placed to concentrate on Test and t20 formats. From an Australian perspective we would be better placed if the Shield season started in early October had a break over Christmas then resumed in mid January. This would give our players the chance to prepare for the up coming Test matches. As it is Cricket Australia are trying to juggle the JLT ODI series with Shield cricket, t20 cricket and an International schedule and it just doesn't work. It would be interesting to know exactly how many Shield innings some of our regular Test players have played over the past two or so seasons.
Click to expand...
The T100 concept wouldn't work. Is that it? Why?
 
The concept is that fans want a shortened format that has plenty of action and excitement while giving a same day result. They want a day out at the cricket where they can have a beer etc. then go home with a result. They do not want to come back for a second day to watch a result. This is born out by the crowds at t20 cricket compared to ODI and Test matches. The crowds are going to the quick game with plenty of action for their dollar. Test Cricket is the multi day format of the game while t20 should be the one day format.

One of the problems with the 50 overs format is that batting sides would work to a formula, they would hit out during the first 15 overs when the field restrictions were in place then bat conservatively for the next 25 overs while saving wickets for an all out assault in the last 10 overs. This meant the middle 25 overs became a bit pedestrian while the side preserved wickets. To avoid this power plays were developed. If we had a 100 over format the Captains would soon work it out and 60 or so overs could become pretty slow and predictable. I think we should save the slower and more predictable stuff for Test cricket where there are no over or fielding restrictions.
 
Apparently Langer gave the bowlers a spray so now he has to get into the batsmen as they have been the real culprits all series. Australia will struggle to get to 300- again!!

I stand convinced that Shaun Marsh is in this side simply because he is the best of a poor lot.

Play interrupted due to rain.
 
Last edited:
We haven't reverse swung a ball since the first test in South Africa last year. Makes you think what they were doing for years to make it reverse swing?

They have cracked down on lollies in the mouth whilst shining the ball, bounce throws into the wicket from the outfield and a couple of other minor thing but it leaves a big doubt in my mind about pre March 2018 activities.
 
RussellEbertHandball said:
We haven't reverse swung a ball since the first test in South Africa last year. Makes you think what they were doing for years to make it reverse swing?

They have cracked down on lollies in the mouth whilst shining the ball, bounce throws into the wicket from the outfield and a couple of other minor thing but it leaves a big doubt in my mind about pre March 2018 activities.
Click to expand...


I heard Dirk Nannis I think it was on the ABC the other day saying that the Aussies are polishing the ball "dry" recently - ie not even using much sweat or spit - hence the lack of reverse swing. And as you darkly hint, perhaps they've stopped using other methods too...
 
Just a couple of days after Neesham's heroics in game 1, another miracle is unfolding in game 2. Sri Lanka is chasing 320 to win, and they seemed gone at 7 for 128. But their fast bowler Perera didn't read the script - he's currently 140 not out off 73 balls, and the visitors need 23 off 23 to complete the most incredible comeback win in ODI history.

Edit: he got out next ball - game over!!!
 
Forecast for Sydney:

Cloudy. Medium (50%) chance of showers, becoming less likely late this afternoon and evening. Winds southerly 20 to 30 km/h, reaching up to 40 km/h along the coast in the morning, then turning southeasterly 15 to 20 km/h in the late afternoon.

Radar looks fairly clear atm so hopefully there will be a full day's play.

Tomorrow's forecast is similar to today so the players may be on and off a bit today and tomorrow.

Needless to say India are in the box seat. Given their results thus far in the series the best case scenario for Australia this morning is to survive until lunch or just after. Even if that happens Kohli will have the choice of enforcing the follow on. If he decides to bat again Australia will possibly be faced with making 450-500 in four sessions if he enforces the follow on Australia will be forced to survive for five sessions.

For Australia to survive we need to reduce India's lead to less than 200 and for that to happen Handscomb needs to make 100 and Cummins and the tail need to wag vigorously.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Opinion Jeremy Finlayson verdict broader discussion
2 3
Replies
71
Views
1K
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
Holden Hillbilly
Bombshell announcement leaves $2.6b Commonwealth Games in tatters
Replies
6
Views
911
Holden Hillbilly
Holden Hillbilly

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top