Cricket 44: Abrar-Cadabra

[ljkeane]

They use different pitches for different games.

[Paxter]

50 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

I'm just starting to try and get into the cricket again. One thing I've always wondered is what's up with the pitch. All those different coloured strips of grass. Do they cut and move the wickets about? 

Pitch preparation is a weird thing. Basically the idea is to use a combination of mowing, rolling and watering to get the following result:

• Grass not too long that there is too much lateral movement for fast bowlers (achieved through mowing)
• Grass not too short or dry that it dies and you are basically left with dirt/dust (achieved through watering)
• Pitch flat and even enough to have decent bounce and not too much inconsistent height (achieved through rolling)

And of course, you have to factor in things like the soil type and weather into the above.

The reason for the moving of the wickets is to give the grass from a used wicket the chance to recover. If you use the same strip too much, the grass will just die (this happens a lot in Australian backyards, where a lot of cricket is played!)

[Jeor]

Comprehensive day for England and they have full control of this match. This was the sort of day where we saw Bazball in absolutely full flight - even as an Aussie I have to say it was pretty impressive. 

Australians were very poor in the field. They're really, really missing Nathan Lyon. You can bet he would have broken up some of those partnerships or at least posed a different question to the batsmen. He would go for the odd 6 but he'd also create chances and the right-arm pace just looks very samey and blunt. Cummins himself was probably one of the worst bowlers.

Also a bit disappointing there weren't many ideas in the field to change things up. Bazball was the go for he whole day and there didn't seem to be many creative ideas to challenge it. 

Australia may yet be rescued by the rain (Days 4/5 look like they have a chance of being completely washed out) but they're still going to have to earn it. They'll need to control the run rate to stretch the English innings out as long as possible and even then they're going to need to put in a solid batting performance in the third innings.

England will probably look to build the lead to 200 in the first session and then have a bowl at Australia after lunch and see if they can collect as many wickets as possible before stumps.

[The Winged Shadow]

Yeah, Australia are done if it doesn't rain. Things finally clicked for England batting lineup and they are miles ahead. Australia's batting has been on a decline since the first match, no one really looks solid. They all get starts but no one looks like like they will put up a big score. Even Marnus, who plays a lot of balls. No one looks bad necessarily (except perhaps Warner), but I don't have a lot of faith in their ability to put up 400+.

On the positive side, 2-2 would be a more accurate reflection on the competitiveness of the series. The 2-0 was flattering Australia quite a bit.

[Jeor]

The lead is now 232 and they've pushed Jimmy Anderson out to bat, so it's clear that England want as big a score as possible and not have to bat again. Given the Aussies got a lot of movement with the new ball, and the cloud cover does come over periodically, they'll fancy their chances at bowling the Aussies out for an innings victory.

The Australian team must be pretty tired. Cummins in particular doesn't have the spark and looks a bit down on pace, but it's hard to rest your captain. 

2-2 would make for a very interesting final Test, but at this rate the fortunes of the two teams are moving in very opposite directions. Australia started the series strongly but have fallen away quite badly and have lost their world-class spinner. England were shooting themselves in the foot and a mess, but they regrouped in the Third Test, have been bowling far better with Wood and Woakes coming off the bench and looking more incisive, and have been absolutely dominant in this Test. This won't bode well for Australia if they go to the decider at 2-2.

[BigFatCoward]

Being last man out when the other person is on 99 is surely costing a couple of rounds of drinks?

[Jeor]

22 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

Being last man out when the other person is on 99 is surely costing a couple of rounds of drinks?

Bad luck for Bairstow but he was probably lucky enough to get that close given Stokes didn't declare at lunch.

For the record even if Australia escape with a draw, I think Stokes made the right decision. Now it is absolutely certain England won't have to bat again whereas if he had declared earlier, they would have to worry about Australia scoring and potentially earning the draw more easily if someone like Mitch Marsh caught fire for an hour.

And it looks like there's going to be some play...!

[Jeor]

Well, Australia looks like they'll retain the Ashes with a washed out Day 5, but I'm glad they got on for 30 overs yesterday. The Marnus century and the 100-run partnership with Marsh, in appalling conditions (wet, overcast, poor light, change of ball to one that swung), will go some way to amending the moral outcome of the match and was the first real sign of fight from the Australians. It should perk them up for a good Fifth Test contest.

Trailing by 60-odd with only 5 wickets in hand (albeit still with two recognised batsmen at the crease and one more to come in a deep batting lineup) is definitely well behind in the match, but not absolutely hopeless. Even if there was unlimited time it probably dispels the myth that an English win would have always been the inevitable outcome.

Either way I think there's still plenty to play for in the Fifth Test. Australia will want to prove they earned a series win.

[ljkeane]

Well that’s a pretty rubbish way for Australia to retain the Ashes. It was a good effort from Labuschagne and Marsh to steady things yesterday but Australia were still effectively -60 for 5. England would have still been big favourites to win with two full days of play. 

After three largely even tests and one with England on top it seems a bit anticlimactic for the series not to be going into the final test 2-2 with all to play for. Oh well.

[Raja]

That's actually really really funny

[Jeor]

5 hours ago, ljkeane said:

Well that’s a pretty rubbish way for Australia to retain the Ashes. It was a good effort from Labuschagne and Marsh to steady things yesterday but Australia were still effectively -60 for 5. England would have still been big favourites to win with two full days of play. 

After three largely even tests and one with England on top it seems a bit anticlimactic for the series not to be going into the final test 2-2 with all to play for. Oh well.

It will matter to the historical scoreboard but I don't think either team really thinks that "retaining the Ashes" is mission accomplished. The competitiveness of both sides right now means that the Oval will definitely be hotly contested and I think a 2-2 will be seen as a "win" for England and a "loss" for Australia, given how things began. Australia will be keen to win to "legitimise" the series.

[ljkeane]

10 hours ago, Jeor said:

It will matter to the historical scoreboard but I don't think either team really thinks that "retaining the Ashes" is mission accomplished. The competitiveness of both sides right now means that the Oval will definitely be hotly contested and I think a 2-2 will be seen as a "win" for England and a "loss" for Australia, given how things began. Australia will be keen to win to "legitimise" the series.

Yeah, of course both sides will want to win the last test. Australia will want a first series win in England since 2001 and England won’t want to lose. Still, it’s taken a bit of an edge off, the Australian players looked pretty happy they can’t lose the series anymore at the end of the day yesterday and England were obviously massively disappointed they can’t win the Ashes now.

Obviously as an England fan I’d quite like us to be still in with a chance of winning but in general it’s just a bit of a shame because I think a final test decider would clearly make this the best Ashes since 2005.

[Jeor]

2 hours ago, ljkeane said:

Yeah, of course both sides will want to win the last test. Australia will want a first series win in England since 2001 and England won’t want to lose. Still, it’s taken a bit of an edge off, the Australian players looked pretty happy they can’t lose the series anymore at the end of the day yesterday and England were obviously massively disappointed they can’t win the Ashes now.

Obviously as an England fan I’d quite like us to be still in with a chance of winning but in general it’s just a bit of a shame because I think a final test decider would clearly make this the best Ashes since 2005.

This has been an excellent series. Australia were obviously outplayed in the Fourth Test and if England go on to win the Fifth, I'm sure many will point to this draw as justification that England was robbed of a series win and winning back the Ashes. 2-2 would have been the fairer reflection so far in the series and a decider would have been tantalising.

All that being said, it's easy to forget that Australia did win the first two Tests and they did that with only 10 men in the second (Lyon's injury) while losing both tosses and having to bat in very poor conditions. England might say the Australian wins happened while Mark Wood wasn't available, but the Aussies could just as easily say the English win (by only 3 wickets) happened while Lyon wasn't available (and he had taken 9 wickets in just over 2 innings at the time). Winning two Tests (and the previous series) does mean you retain the Ashes with a draw and I guess Australia were able to take advantage of that position.

The nature of momentum and the feverish write-ups will always switch. After two Tests, the media was saying England were naive idiots and Bazball was dead, and then after the Fourth Test suddenly everyone's saying Australia are overhyped and Bazball is the greatest thing ever. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

[Paxter]

I think it's hard to really understate how massive the Lyon injury was. Australia looked the superior team to me in the first two tests and were good value for the lead. England then came roaring back when they had pace from both ends and could control the tempo with their aggressive batting. 

A few stray comments on individual performances:

• A pretty poor series for Jimmy. Strike rate of 171 says it all. He doesn't deserve his place on form. 
• An even worse series for Boland!
• Who picked Crawley as top run-scorer for the series after four tests(?!)
• Smith still a master but his average has dipped to 58. That's the lowest it's been since the mid 2010s. 
• Pleasing to see Woakes and Wood do well.

Edited July 27, 2023 by Paxter

[Jeor]

Interesting morning on the Fifth Test. Australia finally win the toss and bowl; seems to have been the correct call but they've dropped three catches in the first 90 minutes. One of them (Warner) was a sitter, one was a fairly easy keeper catch (Carey dropping Brook just now) and one was pretty hard (Smith). Pretty poor for an Australian team which usually prides itself on good fielding. That they've managed to still get three wickets shows it was the right decision to bowl.

Jimmy Anderson would have liked bowling in these conditions. That being said, he has had opportunities to bowl in swinging conditions and still hasn't had the breakthroughs that he would have liked. At 41, and with the next English Test series in January 2024, the scene would be set for a retirement but looks like he wants to keep going.

[Jeor]

The dropped catch off Brook has been costly. Brook/Moeen on another Bazball 100-run partnership at run a ball pace. I must admit it is an impressive style of playing to be doing this sort of thing regularly and to have a number of different players capable of scoring at this clip.

Previously it would happen in isolated circumstances, with most teams having one or two players capable of taking the bowlers apart at a high-octane rate (Gilchrist, Afridi, Sehwag), but this England team keeps them coming all through the lineup.

[ljkeane]

5 minutes ago, Jeor said:

Previously it would happen in isolated circumstances, with most teams having one or two players capable of taking the bowlers apart at a high-octane rate (Gilchrist, Afridi, Sehwag), but this England team keeps them coming all through the lineup.

I think in large part it’s because they haven’t really got any options. England have got quite a lot of good limited overs batsmen and not many solid test batsmen. The only real choice they had to make was Bairstow over Foakes (were admittedly they have gone with the aggressive batting option).

Very soft dismissal for Ali but, to be fair, by the sound of it it may well have been down to him struggling with injury. Hopefully he’s still able to bowl.

[Jeor]

Australia have clawed it back to have England 7/224. Could have been much better if they'd snaffled Brook in single digits, that drop cost 80 runs. They've made good use of the conditions, apart from the appalling catching, and they've created lots of chances and half chances. 

However, the poisoned chalice is that if they wrap up the English tail (not a foregone conclusion with Woakes there) then the fragile Australian top order is going to have to face up in these same conditions. I'm pretty sure England's bowlers will enjoy that opportunity with the customary David Warner wicket and the swinging/seaming conditions.

[Raja]

Nice to see Murphy get a couple of wickets.

Seeing wood bat is a lot of fun

Also, australia's catching was....something

Edited July 27, 2023 by Raja

[williamjm]

9 hours ago, ljkeane said:

Very soft dismissal for Ali but, to be fair, by the sound of it it may well have been down to him struggling with injury. Hopefully he’s still able to bowl.

He did seem to be barely able to do more than hobble, hopefully he can recover a bit later in the Test. It's a pity for what is likely to be his last Test (although we've thought it was his last Test before).

Banning runners seems a weird decision since it can lead to injured players exacerbating their injuries. Perhaps the rules were sometimes being taken advantage of before, but it still seems like a poor choice in terms of player welfare.

It wasn't a great total for England, but they still have opportunities if they can bowl Australia out for a similar amount tomorrow.