Forgot your password?
Or sign in with one of these services
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.
Xray the Enforcer, July 15, 2013
Posted July 15, 2013
It's a shame Agar got out and didn't lead Oz to victory. I was all set to offer up this line: "Cometh the hour, cometh the kid".
Xray, are you still going to one of the tests?
Actually, here's as good a place for me to ask as any. I have tickets for the Oval but unfortunately due to some extremely annoying circumstances I now can't use mine for the first day (21st August). Obviously reselling it wouldn't be a problem, but I'd rather go than have the money. If anyone has or knows anyone with a ticket for day 2 or 3 who wants to swap, please do let me know.
As to that last wicket, that was out, at least according to HotSpot and Snicko, which I trust more than my own judgment given that I didn't see it live. Out by about as little as it's possible to nick something, mind, but them's the rules. I don't set much store in the whole "fielders didn't look that convinced" thing - for pretty much any wicket - and the person in the best position to see (Prior) was the one who appealed convincingly.
Yep. Still on for the Durham test (hopefully that'll prove to be a good match-up since it's not a "home" ground in the same way the Oval is).
I can't remember is anyone here has tickets for those days at that venue. Jealous though, that you got tickets for Day One.
@Brades: So you think the mark on hotspot was bogus? And the supporting snicko? I haven't heard too many complaints from the Australian camp about that dismissal - Haddin nicked it. Obviously Broad is a different story, but I think that was more than compensated for by the Agar/Trott decisions.
ETA: Adelstein beat me to it.
I thought the hotspot didn't show much, actually. It looked to me that there was a mark on his bat well before the ball came near it. The commentators on the feed I was watching (foxtel) both seemed pretty doubtful. I didn't see the snicko, but I don't generally pay much attention to it anyway because I think it's a pretty inaccurate tool to begin with.
I didn't even see the Broad thing, so when you said Aussie whinging I assumed it was in reference to the Haddin dismissal, because that was what I was disappointed in, and my initial response was that he wasn't out. I'm willing to go back and rewatch the footage though.
Hotspot marks tend to be quite difficult to spot for thin edges, but there is definitely one there just after the ball passes. And snicko is fairly reliable when there is no other source of sound (e.g. bat hitting pad or ground). Haddin's lack of protestation/outrage also told a story.
But yeah, I was referring more to the Broad dismissal than the Haddin one (I wasn't really responding to your post in the previous thread).
On the side view, there was a mark on hotspot prior to the ball reaching the bat and from front on, there was no mark to be seen (this could be due to the angulation of the bat of course). Also, the ball didn't look to be close to the bat on regular slow-motion. Snicko was the only modality clearly in favour of an edge, and that should not be enough. Anyway, England were definitely the better side so I don't think they would've deserved to lose that test.
If Clarke gets some runs, and the English bowlers don't provide better support for Anderson, and everything else remains equal, Australia should do better at Lord's. The fast bowlers look to be in decent form and should be able to exploit a harder, greener wicket.
Stubby, check the batting averages mate- only Agar comes close to Hughes. There's no way this loss is Hughes' fault. If anything, Clarke and Cowan were the really big letdowns. Cowan is in real danger of getting tossed aside, especially now with Lehmann in a position of influence.
Cricketologist Wayne Hayes said: "You can get arseholed whilst watching it, it’s officially not allowed to be played when the weather is terrible and yesterday pissed off the entire continent of Australia. "If all of that isn’t enough for you then you’re operating on a level of jaded I can’t actually comprehend."
Oh I know that. I don't want to admit it, but I know it. :P
Yeah, I think Haddin was probably out, and on the balance of play England deserved the win.
Certainly Australia didn't use DRS as well as England, but I think it's an illustration of how both sides use it tactically, and not necessarily only for 'howlers'. As much as we might like that they use it only to overturn horrible decisions, I think both teams are going to go for it in other cases too.
An Aussie win is needed soon, although I think they'll take heart from this Test, which wasn't as bad as many were anticipating. There might be enough batting to carry us through a match or two if Clarke, Watson and Rogers can find form at the same time. The lower order seems to be working well with Haddin and the bowlers. If worst comes to worst, we should just give Lehmann a bat and some pads and he can go out there to biff a few. :P
I'll be interested to see how Agar bowls the rest of the series. Nothing in this match to say that he is particularly special with the ball in hand, but with his batting performance they'll keep him for a couple more Tests I reckon.
Well England have named the same 13 man squad with the only question being should they retain Finn in the starting XI or swap him out for either Onions or Bresnan. I'd drop him probably for Bresnan.
On the side view, there was a mark on hotspot prior to the ball reaching the bat and from front on, there was no mark to be seen (this could be due to the angulation of the bat of course). Also, the ball didn't look to be close to the bat on regular slow-motion. Snicko was the only modality clearly in favour of an edge, and that should not be enough.
So what exactly made the sound then? A piece of wood hitting leather in a different part of the stadium? And it looked like an obvious hotspot to me.
Kasprowicz's dismissal at Edgbaston though? Now that one wasn't out. If only DRS has been in play that day...
I just watched a replay of day 5. I, too, didn't think that hotspot showed contact, and that snicko wasn't conclusive. That said, considering my relative n00bitude to the sport, take all of that with a mountain of salt -- and the lack of protest from Haddin does tell it own story.
I didn't see anything on the hotspot, but I did hear a noise even before they brought out the snicko.
Ah, well. Onto the next Test!
I think there's only been a handful of Tests played at Chester-le-Street so it's true that most of the England team probably haven't had as much experience playing there as they have at other venues (I don't think there are any Durham players in the team unless Onions plays). I think it should be helpful for seam/swing bowlers which might suit both the Australian and English bowling attacks.
I've been lucky with tickets this time (after never having managed to get any Ashes tickets in previous years), I've got one for day 4 at Lord's and one for day 1 at the Oval. Lord's looks like it should be good in terms of the weather, I'm just hoping there's a big first innings by one of the teams so it isn't a three-day Test.
I haven't rewatched it, but I thought there was a faint mark, although I it wasn't particularly clear. I could definitely hear a noise, and there didn't seem to be any obvious source for it other than an edge. I agree Haddin's acceptance of the decision at the time (not sure if he's said anything about it later) suggests he thought he probably nicked it, he'd have been rightly furious if he was given out incorrectly and I don't think he'd have hidden his emotions.
Posted July 16, 2013
I really think Clarke needs to move back down to number 5 in the order. This is something that's been an issue with Australia for a while, and I can understand the reasons for wanting your best batsman further up, but it just isn't working. He's played most of his career at 5 and that's where he's made his buckets of runs; since moving to 4 his performances have been pretty dismal, especially by his standards.
People have called Chanderpaul selfish for not moving up the order (and Tendulkar for not going to 3, for that matter) but, to be honest, I think that's nonsense. It's not selfishness to play your best batsman in their best position, rather, it should benefit the team. Right now, Clarke's not making runs at 4 and the other batsmen aren't making the runs to compensate. To move "selflessly" to a new position doesn't actually do any good if it means you're not performing at your best, especially when there's such a gulf in quality and experience between the best batsman and the rest.
For that matter, while the England middle order has become established orthodoxy, I do think it would be worth experimenting with Bell at 4 and KP at 5. Bell struggled with 4 initially, but has improved massively as a batsman and has performed as a credible 3 more recently, while KP has mentioned in the past that his favoured position is 5. But that's tinkering, and they're both fine where they are; I just wonder if they could be even better.
I think one of the ideas behind leaving Pietersen at 4 is to ensure that the fast-scoring batsmen (Pietersen, Bairstow, Prior) aren't overly concentrated in positions 5-7. Sometimes you need a stodgy player a bit further down the order (as per Bell at Trent Bridge).
Bell's average also drops significantly at number 4, while KP's drops at 5.