Remove this Banner Ad

The Cricket Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter eldorado
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Brishawk said:
Would have liked to see Maxwell get a gig ahead of one of the pace bowlers. Even though this is a test match and I don't want to give away spots, if he is going to play in India I'd prefer him to be blooded here for a soft kill of a wounded opposition instead of being thrown in the deep end (although that didn't hurt Clarke!).
Click to expand...

Playing 5 specialist bowlers is just ridiculous.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Clarke dropped the ball bowling first after winning the toss. But when you have picked 4 quicks, whats he to do.

Selection dictated the decision at the toss which is always a dangerous thing. I would have rested/rotated Lyon and played Maxwell as a batting alrounder to replace Watson.
 
Lyon is accurate but he doesn't beat batsman in the air enough. Seems to do best where he gets extra bounce rather than turn. Won't get that in India and not going to trouble the Indians I suspect. It was very disappointing to see Holland get injured again. I think with a decent run at it he could be test quality (from the little I have seen).
 
Henry Jr said:
Clarke dropped the ball bowling first after winning the toss. But when you have picked 4 quicks, whats he to do.

Selection dictated the decision at the toss which is always a dangerous thing. I would have rested/rotated Lyon and played Maxwell as a batting alrounder to replace Watson.
Click to expand...
Can't believe we want to face Herath late in the match to chase a total! We went in too arrogant that our pace bowlers would knock them over cheaply. It may happen anyway but it isn't good planning.
 
Brishawk said:
Can't believe we want to face Herath late in the match to chase a total! We went in too arrogant that our pace bowlers would knock them over cheaply. It may happen anyway but it isn't good planning.
Click to expand...

It's all over the place, in my opinion. For my money, an all-rounder takes the place of a specialist, whether that be a batsman or bowler, because they earn that spot on merit, not because they're an allrounder. This fervour to have an allrounder at all costs unbalances the side. Johnon is a classic bowling all-rounder, but he needs to earn his spot as a bowling, then his batting adds strength down the order, but at number 8, not 6 or 7.

So, with Watson out it would have been the opportunity to pick the batsman ear-marked to take over from Hussey. if that's Maxwell - which I don;t agree with - then so be it. But playing 5 bowlers is just silly. Four bowlers has been more than adequate to dismiss the Sri Lankians, and history shows that it does the job, or should, more times than not. We lose a couple of cheap wickets up the top and it's going to put a bit of pressure on the team, especially if the Sri Lankans can get over 300.

A touch of hubris with this match me thinks.
 
Brishawk said:
I read today that Mitch Johnson is in the form of his life with bat and ball. Apparently you are as good as your last innings!
Click to expand...

Flatters to deceive does our Mitch.

I yearn for the days of Andrew Hilditch.
 
It really does seem with Bird in the mix now, and Siddle bowling his steady self at first change, we will go with the risky but rewarding left armer for the time being until Patto and some bloke named Cummins are back on deck.

Anyone care to put together their 11 that will play in the Indian first test?
 
Bird may just be the canniest bowler we've produced since McGrath.

The over in which he dismissed Dilshan was as smart in setting up a dismissal as a Lillee or McGrath.

I have an awful feeling that the 11 that play in the first test against India will be similarish to the one that played today.

Warner
Cowan
Hughes
Clarke
Khawaja
Watson
Wade
Johnson
Siddle
Lyon
Bird

Now that's not my favoured 11, but it's the one that I think is likely to be selected.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Henry Jr said:
Anyone care to put together their 11 that will play in the Indian first test?
Click to expand...

This is what I think they'll do:

Warner
Cowan
Hughes
Khawaja
Clarke
Wade
Maxwell
Johnson
Siddle
Starc
Lyon

I presume it will be Bird's turn to be "rotated" and Watson will pull his forehead muscles smiling at a cartoon. Maxwell will be the nod towards turning wickets and he's in the squad so its his turn to get a nice green hat. Having Wade at 6 is not compatible with a strong test team.

Personally I'd play Bird and a sixth batsman (probably Doolan by default) over Johnson and Maxwell.
 
I reckon Malcolm Knox has summed up today's play pretty well.

"FRED Astaire, when taken to a cricket match, asked why the ball was red. Some conventions in the game just are because they are, such as choosing your best six batsmen and four bowlers, and batting first when winning the toss. Australia has repudiated the old wisdom in Sydney, and so far, on the scoreboard if not morally or convincingly, it has managed to get away with it."
 
Warner
Cowan
Hughes
Watson
Clarke
Khawaja
Wade
Maxwell
Siddle
Lyon
Bird

Im going two quicks plus Watson (till he breaks down) with Lyon and Maxwell plus Clake/Warner for pie duties.

Oh, and Wade for medium pace duties when everyone else can't get the job done.
 
Brishawk said:
Can't believe we want to face Herath late in the match to chase a total! We went in too arrogant that our pace bowlers would knock them over cheaply. It may happen anyway but it isn't good planning.
Click to expand...

I think we are seeing a fair amount of arrogance at the moment from Cricket Australia, anyone would think we still had the 2006-07 team and dominating world cricket. It starts with this ridiculous policy of rotating bowlers, as if we can throw in any combination of bowlers and win the Test. Other countries at least do us the honour of playing their best available XI.

Then we come in with 4 quicks, forcing Wade up to number 6 and Johnson at 7. I don't think either are good enough to bat in these roles, I hope I'm wrong. Hell, we never even batted Gilchrist at 6, and yet we place Wade there. Go figure.

Then we win the toss and send Sri Lanka in. Okay, somewhat dictated by the fact we had 4 quicks, but the pitch didn't command it. Obviously, the decision was made ostenibly because Sri Lanka had some players out injured. It smacked of a lack of respect for the new players who came into the team. A couple of them batted very well, and the others will be bowling tomorrow. Who knows what they may do?

My theory as to why we played 4 quicks? The rotation policy commanded it. We'd rested Starc, he had to play. Johnson had been rotated, he had to play as well. Siddle wasn't due to be rotated again this summer, and Bird had only played the one Test. They all HAD to play.

Then there was the case of Sri Lanka losing their 4th wicket just before Tea. New batsman Mathews walks in and who does he face? A strike bowler to a new batsman? No, he faces part-timer Hussey, obviously a token gesture to please the crowd. Once again it smacked of disrespect for the new batsman.

I'm a huge fan of Michael Clarke, but I believe he got some things wrong today. This was backed by lacklustre performances by several players. Okay, I realised this wasn't axactly the Ashes, but it was still a TEST.

Even now, there is this expectation Australia will bat well into the 3rd day, make in excess of 500 and then bowlk Sri Lanka out a second time. This may happen, but we have a keeper at 6 and a bowler at 7, and if Warner gets out early to a loose shot, Clarke has a rare failure, and Hussey's emotions get the better of him, 294 could proove to be a tough score to chase.

Okay, I still think we can win this Test, I am hoping we do, but if we continue with our current attitude to Test cricket, the Poms will boot us fair up the clacker.
 
Brishawk said:
Cowan run out . . . is that a run out in each of the last three tests? Apparently he jogged the first and then hesitated and was a meter short of his ground. Rubbish cricket.
Click to expand...

Was about the most lazy piece of running you will ever see.

Cowan avg now 34. On shaky ground now for mine especially with Watson avg 45 as an opener.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Henry Jr said:
Was about the most lazy piece of running you will ever see.

Cowan avg now 34. On shaky ground now for mine especially with Watson avg 45 as an opener.
Click to expand...

Yeah exactly. He doen't convert his 50s to 100s either (or he would have a higher average). Just gets out too often in a way that screams not up to it.

But I'm not convinced on Watson as a batsman anymore. I think his form drop has nothing to do with his position in the order and everything to do with his lack of fitness. He looks exhausted once he gets to 30 and his body language in the field is one of a tired man. Seems like it is a great effort just to make it back to the top of his bowling mark. Needs to lose weight and get kms into his body before he makes it back into the test team.
 
Warner, for mine, is maturing as a batsman before our eyes. He looks so much tighter.
 
Henry Jr said:
Was about the most lazy piece of running you will ever see.

Cowan avg now 34. On shaky ground now for mine especially with Watson avg 45 as an opener.
Click to expand...
Tend to agree. Awful, lazy bit of cricket & really goes against what Australian batsman have set out to achieve since Simpson was coach.
 
Posted too soon. Rush of blood from Warner.

Still get the feeling that Warner and Hughes are the quality coming through. Much depends on their continued development.
 
grizzlym said:
Posted too soon. Rush of blood from Warner.

Still get the feeling that Warner and Hughes are the quality coming through. Much depends on their continued development.
Click to expand...
Kiss of death haha

Yep, agreed. If those two don't develop we have little else of the same talent behind them.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom