Is Cricket 'DEAD' Thread

[Langford4FBOTC]

To digress, I actually think that the last couple of tours have been blighted by some extraordinarily bad planning, coaching, playing and lack of an overall strategy. Hilditch and co were a disaster. As was Nielsen.

Fundamentally, we've never accepted that we're not the number one dominant side in the world anymore and we still played as if we were. Our batting, including flaying at everything, has been reckless on many occasions. We've churned through far too many players, and handled many of them badly, in the last few years we've never looked like we've been trying to rebuild our batting line-up or plan for the future.

And so it goes.

The lack of leadership and sound thinking was probably highlighted best in the recent capitulation in SA. People who should have known better failed to realise the South African collapse was due to poor shots rather than a minefield pitch. Subsequently led to the entire team playing as if it only a matter of time before they got out, so better try and make some runs first. A theory quickly dispelled by the South Africans in their second innings.

I think we've turned the corner.

 

[grizzlym]

The short-sightedness of Watson opening the innings keeps coming back to me. I mean, no one in the history of cricket has been able to do what has been asked of him - open the batting then bowl quality overs. A few tests maybe, a series, but not long term, just insanity.

One of Hussey, Katich or Ponting had to be dropped when the Kat was. But in hindsight keeping a rock like Kat at the head of the order to partner with Hughes, steady him, teach him, would have reaped huge benefits, drop Watson down to 6. Watson and Hughes as the opening partnership just sums up how crap our planning/selection had become.

But I could go all day on this. Needless, to say, I reckon we're pointing in the right direction now. I have much respect for Invers, Marsh and Arthurs. And Andy Bichel is spoken of very highly by people.

We'll see, I guess.

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

The short-sightedness of Watson opening the innings keeps coming back to me. I mean, no one in the history of cricket has been able to do what has been asked of him - open the batting then bowl quality overs. A few tests maybe, a series, but not long term, just insanity.

One of Hussey, Katich or Ponting had to be dropped when the Kat was. But in hindsight keeping a rock like Kat at the head of the order to partner with Hughes, steady him, teach him, would have reaped huge benefits, drop Watson down to 6. Watson and Hughes as the opening partnership just sums up how crap our planning/selection had become.

But I could go all day on this. Needless, to say, I reckon we're pointing in the right direction now. I have much respect for Invers, Marsh and Arthurs. And Andy Bichel is spoken of very highly by people.

We'll see, I guess.

Fundamentally the role of an opener is to aim to bat the day out and then some. An allrounder's job description doesn't fit with that.

Btw... You posed the question on the West Indians and Viv against Mureli and Warne. What's you take?

 

[grizzlym]

Viv was the most explosive, dominating and intimidating batsman I've seen play. Belligerent to a tee. And I have little doubt he'd be a great player in any era. But I think spinners of the ilk of Warne and Murali would challenge him more than any of the bowling he faced during his career. Not only are they two of the best spinners to have played, they were aggressive bowlers who had a wide variety of tricks, the likes of which Viv would never have seen.

Sure, there'd be days when the master blaster would cart them, but I have a feeling that these bowlers would have really troubled that great Windies side.

And Warne would have relished the challenge too. Gee I miss watching him bowl; just magical. Seeing his fey, metrosexual frame glide across the telly these days makes me slightly ill.

 

[grizzlym]

Fundamentally the role of an opener is to aim to bat the day out and then some. An allrounder's job description doesn't fit with that.

Btw... You posed the question on the West Indians and Viv against Mureli and Warne. What's you take?

Watson is a fine batsman, but long innings or occupying the crease 'aint his forte.

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

Watson is a fine batsman, but long innings or occupying the crease 'aint his forte.

As you pointed out too, physically not sustainable for anyone over a period to bowl 40-50 overs a match and bat for 80-120 overs.

Best case for an opener is that they spend as much of the 5 days on the ground as possible. A genuine all rounder needs time during a match to recover.

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

Think he might be ready

 

[grizzlym]

Bowling a great length. The Kiwis are like Lemmings leaping off a cliff though.

 

[Henry Jr]

Hughes fails again for the second time in he match.

 

[grizzlym]

As tenuous as Hughes' form is, that second innings would have no bearing on anything. 15 to get is kind of nothing. Not out 8, or out for 8, kind of makes no difference.

 

[Henry Jr]

As tenuous as Hughes' form is, that second innings would have no bearing on anything. 15 to get is kind of nothing. Not out 8, or out for 8, kind of makes no difference.

Was waiting for this excuse to roll out.

Didnt realize second innings small totals are excluded from averages. Could have easily got 15 not out and boost the average.

Plus the way he went out and the previous ball as well, its bloody groundhog day. Surely a bloke out of touch, goes out there to improve in match conditions, rather than to slog one thru the covers.

 

[grizzlym]

I acknowledged his form was crap.

I merely pointed out that second innings failures in those situations wouldn't be something that selectors concern themselves with unduly. His fate would be sealed (or not) on the first innings.

You think Warner did enough to save himself? A few sparkling boundaries and a not out pushed his average up to 15. That should be enough.

As for averages, I don't quite get what tangent you're navigating there.

 

[Henry Jr]

I acknowledged his form was crap.

I merely pointed out that second innings failures in those situations wouldn't be something that selectors concern themselves with unduly. His fate would be sealed (or not) on the first innings.

You think Warner did enough to save himself? A few sparkling boundaries and a not out pushed his average up to 15. That should be enough.

As for averages, I don't quite get what tangent you're navigating there.

Warner save himself? It was his first Test match. Copped a good cherry in the first innings. Played it poorly yes but I think he's a better opening option than Hughes.

 

[grizzlym]

Warner save himself? It was his first Test match. Copped a good cherry in the first innings. Played it poorly yes but I think he's a better opening option than Hughes.

I was being sarcastic.

If Warner had gone out cheaply in the second, it wouldn't have made any difference. He wouldn't have liked it much, but that's about it.

 

[Henry Jr]

I was being sarcastic.

If Warner had gone out cheaply in the second, it wouldn't have made any difference. He wouldn't have liked it much, but that's about it.

I do agree. However if you look at the field set for Hughes in that second dig, 5 slips and 2 gullys, yet he continues to try and hit the ball thru there rather than make the bowler bowl to him. If it was Grizzlym Jr in Under 10's, it would be back to the drawing board.

As good as Taylor, Slater, Hayden, Langer and even Katich were as openers, they would play to their strengths. They more often than not, take the shine off the ball, protect the middle order plus score some runs of their own.

I crave to watch a batsman that has a strike rate of less than 50 these days. You just can't find one. Everyone in life is in such a hurry.

Hughes, I just think he's a batsman with a flawed game plan.

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

I do agree. However if you look at the field set for Hughes in that second dig, 5 slips and 2 gullys, yet he continues to try and hit the ball thru there rather than make the bowler bowl to him. If it was Grizzlym Jr in Under 10's, it would be back to the drawing board.

As good as Taylor, Slater, Hayden, Langer and even Katich were as openers, they would play to their strengths. They more often than not, take the shine off the ball, protect the middle order plus score some runs of their own.

I crave to watch a batsman that has a strike rate of less than 50 these days. You just can't find one. Everyone in life is in such a hurry.

Hughes, I just think he's a batsman with a flawed game plan.

One of the problems with Hughes is that his strength is also his weakness. It's just such a fine line he treads.

It'll be interesting to see how the new regime deal with things. I don't think they'll drop him to bring in a new test cap from Shield ranks, but you'd think he's in the gun once Watson is fit and Marsh is fit and scoring runs.... particularly if Warner shows even moderate form.

 

[grizzlym]

I'm almost certain they'll drop Watson down the order. Surely that has to be the preferred spot for him to bat.

What you think of Sean Marsh, Langers? He seems to have two very big faults in my book, and neither relate to how he employs the blade:

1, bad back, like really bad. Forces him to miss games. And he is injury prone too.

2. Has frequent lapses of concentration during an innings. Not brain fades, just like he has cycles in his thinking or something. Doesn't have a really big first class score, which is odd for a player of his experience and apparent quality, but speaks to these concentration lapses.

 

[Dipper]

Just imagine guys like Hayden 40-50 years ago. Total confidence and disrespecting bowlers, I reckon they would have dominated.

Hayden is the perfect example of the modern day bulley who thrives on flat pitches a big heavy bat and heaps of protective gear.

You see his record in England when the ball is doing a bit he soon gets found out.

40 years ago John Snow would have torn him a new one, 50 years ago Fred Trueman wouldn't have broken seat to put him back in the hatch.

It's easy to overrate modern players due to inflated averages that we see currently.

 

[grizzlym]

It would be tantalising to see a batsman from modern times take on bowlers from another era. I agree re averages and the 'sterile' batsman friendly pitches we mostly play on these days. But I also think that, as a whole, modern cricketers like athletes, are also better prepared, better coached, better conditioned etc etc than their predecessors.

As for equipment, I picked up a modern bat a few weeks ago (my son is now playing) and couldn't believe the difference to what I used to wield. Just incredible. And protective gear: I'm all for it.

 

[go hawks!!!]

Hayden did not have much luck against curtly Ambrose did he?

 

[djboonie]

So the washup from the test is....

Hughes - Yet to cement his place in the team from the supporters view. Appears to be 'Penned' into that position by the selectors (they're the ones that count I suppose.) Would want to score some runs in Hobart...

Warner - Will be given a few opportunities this summer so no point judging him on this test. Got out cheaply in the first innings, but now he's there, I'd like to see him get a crack at it for a few tests, unless there's an obvious fatal flaw in his technique (cough!)

Khawaja - Was looking good out there until Punter ran him out. Was set for a second half century, and showed no obvious weakness to Vettori's bowling which would be one of the key areas he needs to work on. Happy for him to play every test this summer.

Ponting - Looked rock solid for most of his innings (from what I saw) typically got out after a session break. Still has not scored a century for over a year... Happy for him to play out the summer, and should rack up a lot of runs against the Kiwi's

Clarke - Not much to complain about, except the chances he was given. You need a bit of luck out there, but he was truly blessed on the weekend. Still 3 centuries since taking the reigns.

Hussey - No runs in S.A., didn't look assured out there against a pretty poor attack. Is he cooked? I know he's onloy recently come of a stellar tour of Sri Lanka, but would want to score some runs in Hobart just to hold back the wolves.

Haddin - Made runs. Well done. Actually cherished his wicket early, faced quite a few balls before trying to unleash. Wafted at a few outside off still, and wasn't good enough to get bat on them. Monstered the bad balls. I want him out, but will almost have secured his place in the side for the summer with that inning. I get a feeling they're truly keeping him in there until Tim Paine comes back form injury. It's like they've promised Tim the gloves, and wont entertain the idea of Wade coming in and making his mark.

Siddle - Stock bowler, bowls too short, too often. Economical, and reasonably disciplined, but perhaps there's nothing threstening about his bowling either. Will be persisted with, and fair enough too, can bowl the same stuff all day long.

Pattinson - First inning was a mixed bag, finished the innings bowling much better. Second innings... WOW! Full, Fast away swinging deliveries. Needs to find an inswinger to keep the batsmen guessing, but I was very impressed with his bowling as a whole.

Starc - Left Arm Eratic, I thought going into the test that this guy would have more tricks than Pattinson. That over to Martin on day 1 said it all for me. Could not hit the stumps. Needs to go back to shield level and work on his line and length. Bowls a lot more upright than Mitchell Johnson, but the resulting deliveries were similar. Could be a find in a year or so, but not ready yet, unless there's some remediation to his bowling. Massive effort with the bat with a 32. I like him, but needs some time.

Lyon - Unsung mostly. Shadowed by Pattinson's efforts, but I think we've found a spinner that offers drift, spin and deception. Perhaps bowled at the same pace a little too often(he'll get worked out by the Indians.) I'm really looking forward to seeing how he goes against the indians, not only looking at whether he retains his technique, but also how he handles the mental side of being on the receiving end of the best players of spin. There'll be days where he'll have 0/100, and that's the real test of him.

--------------

On the periphery

Decent knock on the weekend by Wade. Didn't dominate, but didn't throw away his wicket.

White took his best shield figures for over 9 years(or ever?) 5 fa

Cutting came down with a side injury

D.Hussey starred with 206 runs from the game with a 130, and a swashbuckling 76* in the second dig.

Quiney failed in his second innings (probably he and Cowan the best placed heirs to Hughes position ATM)

Herrick took another 3 to head the sheffield shield wicket takers for a second successive week.

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

I'm almost certain they'll drop Watson down the order. Surely that has to be the preferred spot for him to bat.

What you think of Sean Marsh, Langers? He seems to have two very big faults in my book, and neither relate to how he employs the blade:

1, bad back, like really bad. Forces him to miss games. And he is injury prone too.

2. Has frequent lapses of concentration during an innings. Not brain fades, just like he has cycles in his thinking or something. Doesn't have a really big first class score, which is odd for a player of his experience and apparent quality, but speaks to these concentration lapses.

I wonder if they're both linked. Pure speculation on my part. I haven't really heard anything specific about what's going on with his back... i mean is it degenerative or just a string of bad luck?

I really like him as a player and his recent test effort (injury aside) proved he's more than capable of making it at that level.

I'd like to see him walk in his old man's footsteps and slot in as an opener. Particularly in preference to the push for Khawaja who should make 3 his own.

I suspect they'll persist with Hughes until Watson is fit and bring Watson back into the openers slot, with Marsh there if Hussey or Ponting retire or fade dramatically.

 

[Langford4FBOTC]

Starc - Left Arm Eratic, I thought going into the test that this guy would have more tricks than Pattinson. That over to Martin on day 1 said it all for me. Could not hit the stumps. Needs to go back to shield level and work on his line and length. Bowls a lot more upright than Mitchell Johnson, but the resulting deliveries were similar. Could be a find in a year or so, but not ready yet, unless there's some remediation to his bowling. Massive effort with the bat with a 32. I like him, but needs some time.


--------------

On the periphery

Decent knock on the weekend by Wade. Didn't dominate, but didn't throw away his wicket.

White took his best shield figures for over 9 years(or ever?) 5 fa

Cutting came down with a side injury

D.Hussey starred with 206 runs from the game with a 130, and a swashbuckling 76* in the second dig.

Quiney failed in his second innings (probably he and Cowan the best placed heirs to Hughes position ATM)

Herrick took another 3 to head the sheffield shield wicket takers for a second successive week.

Love the description of Starc as Left Arm Erratic. Summed up his effort perfectly. I think that's where the comparison to Johnson ends though.

Of the periphery players you mention, I think you'll find White and Hussey have had their papers stamped, Quiney is a bit old for them to invest in and Herrick is a very good average cricketer.

 

[Henry Jr]

Just watching back Patto's five fa before.

Can someone answer me the last time they saw an Australian quick swing the ball in Australia during a Test match?

 

[go hawks!!!]

Just watching back Patto's five fa before.

Can someone answer me the last time they saw an Australian quick swing the ball in Australia during a Test match?