Cricket IV

[DemonKing]

[quote name='Jeor' post='1586113' date='Nov 12 2008, 22.43']I'm sure there were more dead Tests lost than just those English ones, because I remember it was an accusation levelled at Waugh in the columns more than once - but I can't remember the exact instances.[/quote]

You don't win 16 matches in a row if you're suffering from "dead rubber" syndrome...also a huge number of the series wins under Tubby ended up with 2-1 scorelines (the first two matches being won, the last one lost).

The only time a test was lost in a dead rubber situation under Waugh was in the 2001 and 2002/3 Ashes series and I think one series in South Africa early on. In the 2001 series the Aussies were already leading 3-0 going into the 4th match, Waugh was injured and Gillie made a reasonably generous declaration...so I can hardly put it down as "Dead rubber blues".

[Paxter]

[quote name='DemonKing' post='1587377' date='Nov 13 2008, 12.35']The only time a test was lost in a dead rubber situation under Waugh was in the 2001 and 2002/3 Ashes series and I think one series in South Africa early on. In the 2001 series the Aussies were already leading 3-0 going into the 4th match, Waugh was injured and Gillie made a reasonably generous declaration...so I can hardly put it down as "Dead rubber blues".[/quote]

Here's my recollection of dead rubbers lost in the Waugh years
- Ashes 2001 (4th test)
- South Africa 2002 (3rd test)
- Ashes 2003 (5th test)
- West Indies 2003 (4th test)

As has been said before, Gilly was captain in the Ashes 01 dead rubber loss, so you can't attribute that to Waugh.

[Paxter]

Good start for India in the first of way too many ODIs. 59/0 at the moment, and Gambhir is looking good again.

[Jeor]

Ah yes, that was one that I'd forgotten, the Windies loss, where they had the highest ever successful run chase.

Watching the exhibition match between the Australian team and the "All-Stars". Tait is bowling at 150 kph and swinging the ball everywhere - where was he during the Indian tour? Hm.

India absolutely smashing England. Scored 387 with Yuvraj going crazy; I wonder how much of it was bad bowling / great batting and how much of it was the pitch. Anyway, England are out of it now at 5/77. I can't believe that there are 7 ODIs before the two Tests though. Wouldn't it be a better balance to have three Tests and five ODIs? Then again, it probably doesn't raise as much revenue, given the lack of attendance at Tests.

[Paxter]

[quote name='Jeor' post='1588718' date='Nov 14 2008, 18.14']India absolutely smashing England. Scored 387 with Yuvraj going crazy; I wonder how much of it was bad bowling / great batting and how much of it was the pitch. Anyway, England are out of it now at 5/77. I can't believe that there are 7 ODIs before the two Tests though. Wouldn't it be a better balance to have three Tests and five ODIs? Then again, it probably doesn't raise as much revenue, given the lack of attendance at Tests.[/quote]

By rights, India vs. England should be a four test affair, with maybe 3 ODIs and a T20 on the side. But, as you point out, that kind of schedule just doesn't generate any revenue (unfortunately).

[Hereward]

Our biggest ever ODI loss, apparently. It seems the Pietersen "magic" has well and truly worn off.

[IheartTesla]

T20s and ODIs are larger revenue grabbers than Tests. The ECB was probably only too willing to go ahead with what the BCCI proposed.

This English team ... dont know what to say. I think they are the new Pakistan.

[Paxter]

[quote name='cyrano' post='1589106' date='Nov 15 2008, 01.51']This English team ... dont know what to say. I think they are the new Pakistan.[/quote]

Hey, easy tiger. At least Pakistan are winning!

[IheartTesla]

True. Yet another defeat for the English team, although their loss margin was significantly lower. By a regression fit I claim they will achieve parity by game 5 allowing them two consolation wins in dead matches :pirate:

[Jeor]

There are some encouraging signs for England though - at least Pietersen and Flintoff seem to be in fairly good form. They're both absolutely critical to the English batting lineup - not necessarily because they're the best batsmen (I think Pietersen is, Flintoff clearly isn't) but because they're the only shotmakers in the lineup. All the others can be tied down in an innings, which is especially bad in spin-happy India where draws are always a big possibility and scoring quickly in Test matches does matter. An in-form Pietersen and Flintoff can ensure that England's batting performs as good as it seems on paper.

And Cyrano's predicted trend may help England after all - they'd go into the Tests with some momentum at least. ;)

[Paxter]

Well, what a difference six weeks makes. Back then I was eagerly awaiting a feast of high quality test cricket between two evenly matched teams. And although every pitch in the series was a little too batsman-friendly for my tastes, the India-Australia series still made for compelling viewing. By contrast, I have barely any hope for this Aus vs. NZ series. This is a Kiwi team that would have lost a test series against Bangladesh if not for Vettori's heroics and has just lost a fixture against one of the least experienced NSW teams ever to play for that state. Worst of all, no Oram in this series. Of course, the Aussies aren't exactly on Cloud 9 at the moment, but they still have a high-quality line-up. Anyway, I'm hoping that maybe McCullum or Vettori might make things interesting, but I'm not holding my breath.

Side-note: If he gets a decent bat, it will be interesting to see how Symonds goes. Personally, I don't think he deserves his place in the team. It'll also be interesting to see how some of the India flops like Brett Lee do in this series. He usually performs well against the Kiwis so this might be the perfect panacea for him.

[Jeor]

Well, looks like the Australian selectors are trying to handicap themselves again. They've chosen Symonds in at 6, Watson at 7, Haddin at 8 and there's no Krejza. Given the popgun bowling attack of the Kiwis, I think they've just gone way too paranoid stacking the batting at the expense of a full-time spinner. I know it's the Gabba and it looks to be a bit of a seamer's greentop, but it's not as if it's the WACA.

Vettori sent them in. I understand why he did it, but I don't think it's the right decision. I'm sure he did it because his side is terribly low in batting confidence, and with the rain and juiced up pitch he's hoping to get some breakthroughs. But history is never on the side of someone who sends the Australians in to bat at home; Hussain did it at the Gabba and got smashed up by the Aussie lineup.

EDITED: Well he got the breakthrough of Hayden. Hm. I still don't see the Kiwis giving too much resistance though - all due respect to Vettori and some others who are good players, but without Oram or Bond they don't have any 'impact' players, those guys who just have that something extra.

[Stubby]

Heh. The Kiwis are doing just fine at the moment.

Bastards.

[Paxter]

Absolutely loving this game! What a pleasant surprise to see good competitive cricket today. Hope this continues throughout the series.

I too was sceptical of the decision to bowl first, but the Kiwis have backed up by not only taking wickets but also keeping the runs down.

[delete this account pls]

I thought Vettori made a mistake choosing to bowl but it's turned out brilliantly for him so far.

[sckma]

Well well well, today was surprising. New Zealand bowled well! And as other have mentioned before, bowling first seemed a mistake, but it worked out quite well for them. And other than it being a little boring after lee got out, it has been a great day. Tim Southee bowled very well, and I thought without Bond, NZ would have a very difficult time down here. he was helped by O'Brien as well. Having said that, this was in helpful conditions, so we'll see how the NZ bowlers perform later. But still very impressive, and if NZ bat well, and get a bit of a lead, it does not bode well for Australia.

I do feel bad for Clarke, he's one of my favourite players, and i wanted him to get a hundred, or if not be not out at the end.

[Jeor]

Well, don't I look like a fool now. ;)

Through some disciplined bowling and good, safe catching the Kiwis are now on top. I thought Vettori (like many opposition captains over the years) had got suckered into bowling first and would suffer a couple of days of hard toil, but turns out the Australian batsmen were tentative and the NZ bowlers put the ball in the right places.

This is terrible for Australia, seeing as this NZ side is probably at its lowest point in the last few years, having struggled against Bangladesh and without the services of some of their star players in the past (no Bond, no Oram, and if you go a bit further back, no Styris, Fleming or McMillan). That being said, I'm fairly sure that Australia will bowl the Kiwis out for just as much, given that the NZ batting order is low on experience and low on runs, and that the Aussies will play a better second innings when they bat again. The Kiwi batsmen's records are underwhelming...Hayden's average is roughly 10 runs more than the two NZ openers How (25) and Redmond (20) put together. They did well to escape the day without losing any wickets, at least.

Want to see how Ryder bats. He's been talked up as a bit of a raw primal talent, and the two wickets he got today will have his confidence up. By first-class record (average 42) he's clearly the best of the top order batsmen compared to all the others' first-class records.

Felt a little bit sorry for Clarke getting out on 98, but then again, he batted slowly throughout the entire day, even when it became apparent early on in the last session that he was going to only have the tail to work with. He partially has himself to blame for not playing any shots even when the end was nigh.

[Rimmer]

Our best day of test cricket in 20 years!

Now now, our bowling attack isn't [i]quite [/i]popgun at the moment. The names Martin, O'Brien and Southee wouldn't keep any international batsman awake at night, but they're all very decent toilers, and with Vettori I would personally pick them by a whisker over the current Aussie crop. :leaving:

It's our batting that's been woeful, and I'm not sure if they're good enough to get a first innings lead here, but let's wait and see. I'm also looking forward to Ryder, because he can absolutely cream the bowling if he's on song. Ryder, Taylor and McCullum is an underperforming but very talented lineup, and they could be a force in a few years' time.

This might be my last post for the match in anticipation of our impending collapse, but for now life is good!

[sckma]

ARGH! What is it with NZ and imploding? They have a batting pitch which should enable them to get a good score, but ryder and mcCullum throw it away. i especially looking forward to see ryder bat, he looked pretty set after the bad decision by bad hands (as cricinfo dubs him) to go for it when it was going straight to hayden.

hopefully ross taylor plays well. 4/84 atm

[Horza]

Heh, for once it's actually the pitch. Looks like a low-scoring Test, thank space-Jesus.