Cricket world championship

Remove this Banner Ad

Head and Smith have steadied the ship. 200 run partnership clocked up with Head reaching his 100 off 106 balls, after a decidedly sweaty bum 20 minutes in the 90’s facing a bouncer barrage. Gutsy effort.
 
Stumps Day 1:

Aus 3/327

Head 146 N.O.
Smith 95 N.O.

 

Log in to remove this ad.

Remind me why Head was left out of the first test in India?
******* morons running cricket.
 
Before Sandpaper gate Smith was going at a 67 strike rate. Since he’s returned it’s been 48.
 
Did anyone stay up and watch Head? Must have been magical
 
Kanga Glory said:
Did anyone stay up and watch Head? Must have been magical
Click to expand...
Up to his 100. Had to tough it out at times with some good short pitch deliveries but his stroke play is so crisp.
 
Mav said:
Up to his 100. Had to tough it out at times with some good short pitch deliveries but his stroke play is so crisp.
Click to expand...
Nearly run a ball, that wins test matches- big scores scored quickly
 
Kanga Glory said:
Did anyone stay up and watch Head? Must have been magical
Click to expand...

As evidenced by my 3.08am stumps post, yes indeed, and it was such a good counterpunch to witness from Head and Smiff. Haven’t seen Head that good since Zondor’s leaked Snapchat videos surfaced. :sternlook
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Twinkletoes said:
As evidenced by my 3.08am stumps post, yes indeed, and it was such a good counterpunch to witness from Head and Smiff. Haven’t seen Head that good since Zondor’s leaked Snapchat videos surfaced. :sternlook
Click to expand...

Heads innings against last summers SAF pace attack on that green monster at the Gabba, that nobody could bat on, is probably the best home knock since Warner's debut ton in Tassie on a massive greentop imo.

I think we are witnessing the emergence over the last 2 years of what will be viewed as a pretty special player in 20 years.

He probably has another 60+ tests left in his career. He's now averaging a touch under 49 entering his scoring prime of his career.

He probably averages 55+ between now and the next tour of England.

Retrospectively in 10-15 years once Green and Heads careers are complete, I think the current batting lineup containing Khawaja, Warner, Labuschagne, Smith, Head and Green will be considered a modern rival for the 90's side imo.
 
Last edited:

World Test Championship Final 2023: Travis Head makes selectors look silly on the back of another century​

Since Travis Head’s Test debut, Australia has never won a Test without him. As Daniel Cherny writes from London, it makes his shoddy treatment by selectors all the more mystifying.

Daniel Cherny in London

3 min read
June 8, 2023 - 5:36AM
https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/spor.../3bca4b53f1d91d433c15a302338a70ac#share-tools

Cricket: A near run-a-ball century from Travis Head has put Australia in a commanding position on Day 1 against India in the WTC Final.

​

Like the bushy growth above his upper lip, Travis Head’s Test career has long been endangered by the razor blade.
Having made his Test debut not even five years ago, Head has somehow been dropped by three different Australian selection panels for Tests on three different continents.
Quite frankly, they have all been made to look a bit silly. Since he got his baggy green in Dubai in 2018, Australia has never won a Test without him.
In 2019, Head was dropped for the fifth Ashes Test after averaging 27 across the first four rubbers. The idea was to bring in an all-rounder in Mitchell Marsh, even though the Aussies needed only a draw for a series victory. Marsh bowled well but Australia still lost.

The following summer the Aussies publicly toyed with the idea of dropping Head again to bring in an extra bowler on what was expected to be a flat MCG wicket. Head ended up playing that match, and made a century.
Twelve months later Head was dropped after scores of seven, 38 and 17 to start a series against India, as Will Pucovski and David Warner were included for the third Test in Sydney. That match was a draw, before Australia lost the decider in Brisbane, Head remaining an omission.
He then lost his central contract, before winning a tight selection duel with Usman Khawaja for the final batting place in the 2021-22 Ashes series. Head duly went on to make 357 runs across four Tests, named player of the series despite missing the fourth Test in Sydney – the sole occasion that summer that England hung on for a draw.

His most controversial axing came just months ago in Nagpur, as selectors, spooked by Head’s poor record in Asia and the prospect of Ravichandran Ashwin running through a lefty-heavy line-up, picked Peter Handscomb and Matthew Renshaw instead.
Handscomb did OK but Renshaw flopped and Australia lost. Recalled for the final three Tests, Head averaged 47 at a strike rate of more than 68, nervelessly slashing Australia home in its lone victory for the series at Indore.

Here are some other numbers. Head is not even 30, has six Test centuries, averages in the high 40s and has a strike rate in the 60s.
There’s a pretty clear lesson in all this. Australia is a much better side with Travis Head in it. On Wednesday at The Oval, he arrived in the middle with Australia 3-76 and on the back foot in the World Test Championship final.
Within half an hour he had changed the tempo of the match, aggressively sticking it to Mohammed Shami and Mohammed Siraj, India’s two primary pace threats.
With Steve Smith grinding at the other end, Head took advantage of sunny afternoon conditions, and a flagging attack that afforded him way too much to swivel.

It was a classic counterattacking innings, quickly becoming a Head trademark.
Heading into this tour, Smith was the lone member of the Aussie party with a Test century on English soil (he had six of them).
By day’s end that tally had risen to seven, albeit Smith was on the cusp of making it eight. The freshest one was from Head, who having never previously made an overseas Test ton will enter the Ashes on the back of one.
Head was magnanimous when asked post-play about his treatment from the selectors.
“I‘m very privileged to be where I am and do what I do,” Head said.
“Selection isn’t going to always go your way, it hasn’t in the past. That’s out of my control.
“Yes I’d love to play every single Test match, that’s not always going to be the case.
“Hopefully I don’t get dropped too much in the future.”
While so much of the hype heading into fight for the urn has surrounded England’s revolutionary Bazball, Head plays the game in as swashbuckling style as any of Brendon McCullum’s men.

More Coverage​

That should be an afterthought for now though, because this innings could set up a maiden world title for Australia in the game’s most prestigious format.
For a while it was reasonably said that Head was a great player in certain (i.e. home) conditions. You can drop the qualifiers. And surely you can forget about him being dropped anymore
 
Mav said:

World Test Championship Final 2023: Travis Head makes selectors look silly on the back of another century​

Since Travis Head’s Test debut, Australia has never won a Test without him. As Daniel Cherny writes from London, it makes his shoddy treatment by selectors all the more mystifying.

Daniel Cherny in London

3 min read
June 8, 2023 - 5:36AM
https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/spor.../3bca4b53f1d91d433c15a302338a70ac#share-tools

Cricket: A near run-a-ball century from Travis Head has put Australia in a commanding position on Day 1 against India in the WTC Final.

​

Like the bushy growth above his upper lip, Travis Head’s Test career has long been endangered by the razor blade.
Having made his Test debut not even five years ago, Head has somehow been dropped by three different Australian selection panels for Tests on three different continents.
Quite frankly, they have all been made to look a bit silly. Since he got his baggy green in Dubai in 2018, Australia has never won a Test without him.
In 2019, Head was dropped for the fifth Ashes Test after averaging 27 across the first four rubbers. The idea was to bring in an all-rounder in Mitchell Marsh, even though the Aussies needed only a draw for a series victory. Marsh bowled well but Australia still lost.

The following summer the Aussies publicly toyed with the idea of dropping Head again to bring in an extra bowler on what was expected to be a flat MCG wicket. Head ended up playing that match, and made a century.
Twelve months later Head was dropped after scores of seven, 38 and 17 to start a series against India, as Will Pucovski and David Warner were included for the third Test in Sydney. That match was a draw, before Australia lost the decider in Brisbane, Head remaining an omission.
He then lost his central contract, before winning a tight selection duel with Usman Khawaja for the final batting place in the 2021-22 Ashes series. Head duly went on to make 357 runs across four Tests, named player of the series despite missing the fourth Test in Sydney – the sole occasion that summer that England hung on for a draw.

His most controversial axing came just months ago in Nagpur, as selectors, spooked by Head’s poor record in Asia and the prospect of Ravichandran Ashwin running through a lefty-heavy line-up, picked Peter Handscomb and Matthew Renshaw instead.
Handscomb did OK but Renshaw flopped and Australia lost. Recalled for the final three Tests, Head averaged 47 at a strike rate of more than 68, nervelessly slashing Australia home in its lone victory for the series at Indore.

Here are some other numbers. Head is not even 30, has six Test centuries, averages in the high 40s and has a strike rate in the 60s.
There’s a pretty clear lesson in all this. Australia is a much better side with Travis Head in it. On Wednesday at The Oval, he arrived in the middle with Australia 3-76 and on the back foot in the World Test Championship final.
Within half an hour he had changed the tempo of the match, aggressively sticking it to Mohammed Shami and Mohammed Siraj, India’s two primary pace threats.
With Steve Smith grinding at the other end, Head took advantage of sunny afternoon conditions, and a flagging attack that afforded him way too much to swivel.

It was a classic counterattacking innings, quickly becoming a Head trademark.
Heading into this tour, Smith was the lone member of the Aussie party with a Test century on English soil (he had six of them).
By day’s end that tally had risen to seven, albeit Smith was on the cusp of making it eight. The freshest one was from Head, who having never previously made an overseas Test ton will enter the Ashes on the back of one.
Head was magnanimous when asked post-play about his treatment from the selectors.
“I‘m very privileged to be where I am and do what I do,” Head said.
“Selection isn’t going to always go your way, it hasn’t in the past. That’s out of my control.
“Yes I’d love to play every single Test match, that’s not always going to be the case.
“Hopefully I don’t get dropped too much in the future.”
While so much of the hype heading into fight for the urn has surrounded England’s revolutionary Bazball, Head plays the game in as swashbuckling style as any of Brendon McCullum’s men.

More Coverage​

That should be an afterthought for now though, because this innings could set up a maiden world title for Australia in the game’s most prestigious format.
For a while it was reasonably said that Head was a great player in certain (i.e. home) conditions. You can drop the qualifiers. And surely you can forget about him being dropped anymore
Click to expand...
It's true, I am a selector.
 
So far, so good.
 
Lomas said:
It is a point based competition based on series results over the previous two years.

Edit: there are issues when it comes to longer vs shorter series.
Click to expand...
Points are awarded on a per-match basis. It was per-series in the first cycle but changed to per-match for this one. But the table is determined on the basis of the percentage of available points won. Sri Lanka and Pakistan both finished with 64 points, for instance, but because Pakistan played more tests, Sri Lanka finished fifth (44.44% of points won) and Pakistan seventh (38.1%). That’s to take into account the different number of tests played – England played 22, Australia 19, India 18 and down to Sri Lanka, with just 12.

Because everything in international cricket is stupid, the ICC doesn’t decide who plays who. That’s all done on a purely bilateral basis, as cricket has always been done. National boards sign up to play a series, then submit it to the ICC, who stick it in an Excel sheet, put some colours on it, print to PDF and call it the Future Tours Program.

The top test teams have agreed that the World Test Championship can be a thing because there is some money available for the winners, and a trophy that can sit in reception at their head office. But they would not agree to any kind of draw that does not include England, India and Australia all playing each other as much as possible. So we have a world championship that, like most things the ICC is involved with, is kind of half-arsed.

That said, test cricket needs this to work. It does provide some context to the format – controversial but does it really matter if we lose the Ashes, when the last one was only 18 months ago and the next one is only another two years down the road, and when 95% of the cricket world could not care one iota? – but needs to have everyone involved, otherwise it marginalises Zimbabwe, Afghanistan and Ireland even more than they are now. But international cricket being as it is, the next cycle is the same format, and whether there’ll be a fourth cycle is still unknown.

A good match here would help a lot, more than most people realise.
 
big_e said:
Points are awarded on a per-match basis. It was per-series in the first cycle but changed to per-match for this one. But the table is determined on the basis of the percentage of available points won. Sri Lanka and Pakistan both finished with 64 points, for instance, but because Pakistan played more tests, Sri Lanka finished fifth (44.44% of points won) and Pakistan seventh (38.1%). That’s to take into account the different number of tests played – England played 22, Australia 19, India 18 and down to Sri Lanka, with just 12.

Because everything in international cricket is stupid, the ICC doesn’t decide who plays who. That’s all done on a purely bilateral basis, as cricket has always been done. National boards sign up to play a series, then submit it to the ICC, who stick it in an Excel sheet, put some colours on it, print to PDF and call it the Future Tours Program.

The top test teams have agreed that the World Test Championship can be a thing because there is some money available for the winners, and a trophy that can sit in reception at their head office. But they would not agree to any kind of draw that does not include England, India and Australia all playing each other as much as possible. So we have a world championship that, like most things the ICC is involved with, is kind of half-arsed.

That said, test cricket needs this to work. It does provide some context to the format – controversial but does it really matter if we lose the Ashes, when the last one was only 18 months ago and the next one is only another two years down the road, and when 95% of the cricket world could not care one iota? – but needs to have everyone involved, otherwise it marginalises Zimbabwe, Afghanistan and Ireland even more than they are now. But international cricket being as it is, the next cycle is the same format, and whether there’ll be a fourth cycle is still unknown.

A good match here would help a lot, more than most people realise.
Click to expand...
Cheers, good to see they simplified it.
 
India’s seamers look a bit average without Bumrah. Siraj is quality and Shami can trouble most, but their attack looks a bit one-pace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Twinkletoes
Opinion NMFC Board Cricket Thread III - Shield Final WA v Tas
31 32 33 34 35
Replies
853
Views
20K
big_e
big_e
krakouers
Autopsy Vs Carl - Is it cricket season yet
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
291
Views
10K
The Dingrel
The Dingrel

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top