Cricket 38: Ashes Openers Crash and Burns

[Jeor]

Triple century for David Warner...makes me want to gag.

I can't see this lasting more than another day. Pretty sure Australia will enforce the follow-on. They will probably bowl out Pakistan within 50 overs, so the bowlers won't have had a heavy workload. And in a day-night Test, it's not as if they'll have been out in the field in sweltering conditions and need time to recover and recharge.

[williamjm]

5 hours ago, Jeor said:

Triple century for David Warner...makes me want to gag.

At least the declaration meant that he couldn't make an attempt on Lara's record.

[The Winged Shadow]

Yasir Shah might have a poor bowling record in Australia but his batting record must be top notch!

[Jeor]

Well that was a bit of fun for the Pakistanis, although they're still headed for an innings defeat.

Shame Babar did not get his century (although he got one in the previous match). He is a promising batsman - one of the best ODI batsmen going around (averages 50+) and a great T20 record, if he can nudge his Test average upward he might be Pakistan's next world-class batsman.

[Jeor]

Well the sooner that Australia-Pakistan series was over the better. Bring on NZ!

The England/NZ test match looks like it'll be a fizzer too with rain forecast on the last day. It's a pity - with scores level and NZ with 8 wickets in hand, it could have turned into a nailbiter if England made early inroads.

[Paxter]

Nice little series for Warner - averaging a lazy 489.

On the bright side, Pakistan had no problems with Steven Smith. Statistically, that was Smith's worst series since his debut :P. 

Kudos to Joe Root. England have saved a bit of face. But they will still likely be on the receiving end of another series loss in New Zealand.

[Jeor]

Well they've managed to get on the field in New Zealand vs England which is good.

NZ lead by 13 runs with 8 wickets remaining - this could turn into a one-day shootout. But the English stand-in keeper dropped a sitter off Williamson - that may be the drop that costs England a chance of getting a result in this match.

[ljkeane]

9 minutes ago, Jeor said:

But the English stand-in keeper dropped a sitter off Williamson - that may be the drop that costs England a chance of getting a result in this match.

I doubt it. New Zealand aren't the kind of team to collapse in a heap and given the predictions of rain I can't see them getting bowled out quickly and cheaply enough for England to have a chance.

Still, having praised England's selections before the first test they really shouldn't have been in a position were the loss of Buttler through injury required them to have someone as inexperienced as Pope keeping wicket. They've got plenty of wicket keepers, it wasn't that long ago they had three in the side, take a bloody reserve keeper in the squad.

[Jeor]

And credit to Williamson and Taylor - they have counterattacked and are scoring the runs quickly to secure a draw. Rather than hunkering down, stalling and just batting time, they've come out with good, positive play (with a bit of luck).

Re: the England wicketkeeper situation, shouldn't they have used Foakes? As a pure keeper and reasonable batsman. 

[Jeor]

Well that has to be one of the worst dropped catches I've seen - one of the biggest sitters there could be. They really should have had Williamson in the bag twice now.

[williamjm]

1 hour ago, ljkeane said:

Still, having praised England's selections before the first test they really shouldn't have been in a position were the loss of Buttler through injury required them to have someone as inexperienced as Pope keeping wicket. They've got plenty of wicket keepers, it wasn't that long ago they had three in the side, take a bloody reserve keeper in the squad.

I'm also not keen on not having a specialist spinner in the side, no matter how much a pitch might favour seamers having a bit of variety is always a good thing.

[Jeor]

Is there a reason why Foakes isn't in the picture?

He's a specialist keeper but has a decent first-class and Test batting average of 40. And he's only in his mid twenties, so at least on paper seems like an ideal candidate for Test wicketkeeper. I understand if Buttler was fit they'd prefer to go with him being the more destructive batsman (supposedly) but in his absence you'd have to think Foakes' record would be putting forward a strong case.

Centuries from Taylor and WIlliamson. Glad to see Taylor still in good form - for a while he was the only class batsman New Zealand had, but now he's able to enjoy the good times with Williamson, Latham and co all stepping up in recent years. This batting lineup should be able to rack up some scores in Australian conditions, and one hopes that the bowlers will be good enough (especially if Boult is healthy and Wagner in good form) to take some Aussie wickets.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Match drawn, surprisingly exactly nobody.

The fifth New Zealand series win over England (after 1984, 1986, 1999, and 2018). England's beaten us in 23 series.

[The Anti-Targ]

On 11/30/2019 at 3:25 PM, Jeor said:

New Zealand grinding England's attack down again with unspectacular but solid batting.

I can't wait for this Pakistan test "series" to be over. New Zealand vs Australia will be a cracker of a series in December/January. New Zealand are a very, very good team and I think they have a legitimate chance at beating, or at least severely testing Australia at home.

It's not just that they've got two world-class performers in Williamson (batting) and Boult (bowling). They have a solid backup cast too. In the batting there's the experience of Ross Taylor, plus Latham and Nicholls have been doing some heavy lifting lately. Watling is probably one of the best batting wicketkeepers going around in Test cricket, especially after his recent double ton. And the bowling behind Boult has a lot of variety - the bounce of Matt Henry, lefty Wagner, experienced Southee and maybe the sheer pace of Lockie Ferguson will get a look-in too. The only gap in the side is the lack of a frontline spinner, as Santner isn't quite there yet.

I really like this NZ side (possibly still a result of the World Cup robbing) and @Paxter will be pleased to know I'll be cheering for an Aussie defeat in the upcoming Trans-Tasman series!

I mean I will too. But the last time that happened was when Hadlee got a 9-for. According to Stats Guru on Cricinfo  for NZ in Aussie matches dating from 1973 there have been 31 test matches, 3 wins 17 losses and 11 Draws. And two of those wins was in that '85/86 series win. So one win in Aus without Hadlee being in the team. The odds are agin the lads. But this is probably the best NZ test team in a long time, so if a post Hadlee era team is going to do it it could be this team.

Well done Williamson and Taylor notching up centuries each. Won't go down as one of the great batting knocks. But their partnership was important to secure the draw, and secure the series win.

I saw one good comment on Cricinfo live: "Just need the weather to clear up so they can have a super over." I don't know how sarcastic the commenter was intending to be, but after my rant about it being dumb to have had a super over in the T20 match last month when a tied game in a bilateral series is perfectly fine, I chose to interpret the comment as having a dig at matches having unnecessary tie-breakers.

[Jeor]

33 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

But this is probably the best NZ test team in a long time, so if a post Hadlee era team is going to do it it could be this team.

They might not have Hadlee, but they've probably got a better batting side than in the 80s and the overall depth of the bowling is better too.

Beating Australia at home is always very difficult (especially since Warner and co. transform into behemoths on those flat tracks) but, barring India I don't think there's anyone else currently in world cricket that would have a better chance than NZ.

I rate the prospects of Australia-Draw-New Zealand as probably 50-20-30.

[The Anti-Targ]

Just now, Jeor said:

They might not have Hadlee, but they've probably got a better batting side than in the 80s and the overall depth of the bowling is better too.

Beating Australia at home is always very difficult (especially since Warner and co. transform into behemoths on those flat tracks) but, barring India I don't think there's anyone else currently in world cricket that would have a better chance than NZ.

I rate the prospects of Australia-Draw-New Zealand as probably 50-20-30.

Those are generous odds. Maybe I'm being pessimistic because I want to be able to say "it was most unlikely anyway" if they lose / draw, but I'd be more inclined to say 60-30-10.

[Jeor]

On 12/3/2019 at 3:01 PM, The Anti-Targ said:

Those are generous odds. Maybe I'm being pessimistic because I want to be able to say "it was most unlikely anyway" if they lose / draw, but I'd be more inclined to say 60-30-10.

Maybe I am being optimistic. Australia are hard to beat at home, but I don't think the Pakistan series is any real gauge of their strength. The Ashes was fought to a 2-2 draw and England aren't a side to write home about at this current time, so I think New Zealand could have a realistic chance. Even if the Australian batting is starting to find its stride with Warner regaining form, Labuschagne and Smith forming a potent middle order axis, and Starc in good touch - NZ could say the same for a lot of their players (Taylor, Williamson, Latham, Watling, Wagner).

[Paxter]

Very optimistic. NZ have just the one test win in Australia in the past 34 years and that was in relatively favourable conditions for the Kiwis in Hobart.

Vale Bob Willis. Amazing career in both his playing days and in commentary. I will miss him on the Sky podcasts.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Also, that Hobart match was a matter of just 7 runs. It remains the only time we've beaten Australia while batting first in a test-match. 

The biggest issue with New Zealand facing Australia in Australia is psychological. Decades-worth of thrashings take their toll, even if this side is substantially better than previous New Zealand teams.

[Jeor]

16 hours ago, Paxter said:

Very optimistic. NZ have just the one test win in Australia in the past 34 years and that was in relatively favourable conditions for the Kiwis in Hobart.

Vale Bob Willis. Amazing career in both his playing days and in commentary. I will miss him on the Sky podcasts.

Okay, you're all starting to convince me...I will adjust my predictions to 60-25-15 for Australia/Draw/NZ. Based on historical reasons only.

I never saw Bob Willis play, but a lot of people say he was an incredible fast bowler, seriously quick but a workhorse as well. Viv Richards wrote in his autobiography that he reckoned the toughest fast bowler to face was Bob Willis and that he was the equal of Dennis Lillee (and that this opinion would surprise a lot of people). Without Willis blasting Australia out in their final innings, Botham would never have had his famous Test match.