Jump to content

Cricket V


Paxter

Recommended Posts

Well, the WACA ODI ended up being a fairly one-sided affair, with SA successfully defending 288 thanks to good contributions from Botha and the newcomers; Parnell and Tsotsobe. I thought that Botha was a bit unlucky not to have been named man of the series: he captained with aplomb, hit the winning runs in two games, fielded well and was clearly the best bowler on show during the series (equal top wicket-taker and lowest economy rate among all bowlers). Albie stole the show in two crucial games, but I still think Botha deserved the award for his consistency.

As for the tour in general, well there must be a great sense of achievement within the SA squad. They outplayed Aus in both of the major series and also unearthed some fantastic talent along the way (Duminy, Amla, A Morkel). Kallis and Amla might be slightly miffed that they failed to reach three figures despite batting well throughout the tour, but that is a fairly minor complaint. To be honest, I think that defeating Aus in both test matches and ODIs on Aussie soil is probably the hardest thing to do in world cricket (harder even than winning the World Cup or the Champions Trophy). So hats off to SA - this team have come a long way since Smith took over.

Australia have very few positives to take out of the ODIs. Ponting and Marsh batted well, but neither of them went on to make the kind of big scores that Aus really needed. They sorely missed a fast-bowling spearhead (Johnson was below par - probably due to his workload in the tests), a spinner (Brad Hogg you were a legend mate) and strong middle-order players (the performances of the two Husseys, Cam White and Hopes were just not up to scratch). The only real positive I can think of is that they have a chance in the NZ ODIs to build some confidence leading in to the SA tour.

Regarding non-batting captains - well Waqar Younis would have to be the standout here. He was a pretty poor batsman - never made an international fifty and made just 6 first-class fifties in 283 innings. But he was a decent captain for Pakistan - 17 matches, 10 wins and 7 losses (no draws!). In fact, that win-ratio makes him, statistically, one of the most successful Pakistani captains of all-time.

BTW Rimmer - no way do I think Stephen Fleming was a below-par batsman! He didn't score as many centuries as he should have (only converted about 15% of his fifties into hundreds), but he still has very good stats against all nations bar Australia and was an extremely elegant player. Players like Nasser Hussain and Mike Atherton must regard his above-40 average with considerable envy ;)

ETA: I was doing some research on Australia's ODI performances, and it seems to me that Australia have been building towards a drop in the ODI rankings for quite some time. In the last 4 years, Australia have won both of the two major international tournaments in ODI cricket - the WC and the Champions Trophy. So they have shown that they can lift their performances in the big tournaments. But in other "ordinary" ODI series and tri-series since the 2005-06 season, Australia have won just 5 of the 10 series they have played, and two of those victories came against Bangladesh (the other wins were against NZ, WI and the DLF tri-series with India and WI). So that's a fairly unimpressive 3-5 series win/loss ratio against the "major" nations. Thus, despite winning the big tournaments, there is no question in my mind that the Australian ODI team deserve to drop in the rankings.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats to SA. 4-1 in an ODI series vs Aus in Aus is a formidable achievement.

Interesting times for Australian cricket. Uh, any chance you folk can lie down for the next game as well? I'm getting sick of Monday morning telephone meetings with our Sydney office where we have nothing to brag about cricket wise.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='ithanos' post='1669184' date='Jan 31 2009, 20.23']Congrats to SA. 4-1 in an ODI series vs Aus in Aus is a formidable achievement.

Interesting times for Australian cricket. Uh, any chance you folk can lie down for the next game as well? I'm getting sick of Monday morning telephone meetings with our Sydney office where we have nothing to brag about cricket wise.[/quote]

We've just had a massive thunderstorm and the forecast is for more of the same tomorrow. There may well be some green on the wicket. Win the toss and bowl and you might not have to put up with Sydney Monday!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, the Australian ODI team just can't win anything. Sure, the South African team smashed us fair and square, but to be down 5/56 after 21 overs is a ridiculously bad position, worse than anything the Saffers put us in. I still wouldn't count Australia out because the New Zealand batting is still very fragile (sorry Rimmer) but they're definitely making a good fist of it. Maybe it's justice after all though. I think it's rather silly that we can be beaten 4-1 by South Africa, and then regain the top ODI ranking again ahead of South Africa by beating New Zealand a week later.

Regarding non-batting captains...yeah, Waqar was one. But apart from Bob Willis and Courtney Walsh (who wasn't very long term) I can't really think of any captains who couldn't bat at all (Mike Brearley anyone?).

Captaincy is a strange thing. Mike Atherton wrote that he didn't think an opener was the best captain because he was always thinking of his upcoming innings towards the end of the opposition's batting, at just the time when your captaincy needs to be sharp to clean up tails quickly. But there have been a number of long-term opening captains, including Smith right now, as well as Gooch and Atherton in the 90s. For obvious reasons a wicketkeeper isn't usually a great option for captain as they already have to concentrate on every single delivery without having to worry about field placements, bowling changes etc. Bowling captains are often wildcards; the danger is that a bowling captain will either underbowl or overbowl himself, and as a owling captain you exert yourself physically on the field so you are more likely to be tired/frustrated/flustered, but I think bowling captains tend to be more attacking in their field placements because they, more than any other types of captain, know what it means to really want to get a wicket and give yourself the best chance of doing so. It'll always remain one of the great 'what if's' as far as Shane Warne captaining Australia.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Paxter' post='1669046' date='Jan 31 2009, 00.15']BTW Rimmer - no way do I think Stephen Fleming was a below-par batsman! He didn't score as many centuries as he should have (only converted about 15% of his fifties into hundreds), but he still has very good stats against all nations bar Australia and was an extremely elegant player. Players like Nasser Hussain and Mike Atherton must regard his above-40 average with considerable envy ;)[/quote]
Ha, I always get a bit defensive of him, one of my favourite players ;)

Well this is going almost comically well for us, Hussey takes the batting powerplay on 49 and chips it straight to the fielder first ball. And Hopes is out as well as I type, wow.

Interesting after all the debate over the Aussie all-rounders: with Oram injured NZ just went with their 5 best bowlers, Kyle Mills batting at 7, and they're all doing a decent job. Vettori and Mills the obvious spearheads, but nobody's giving much away here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NZ making hard work of the chase, but some of it isn't their fault. McCullum was out LBW to a shocker of a decision - a massive edge onto his pads. And now Broom is out to a ball that didn't bowl him. Haddin's gloves knocked the bails off, yet Michael Clarke celebrated like he got the wicket and then Haddin just went along with it and the wicket was given. Absolutely terrible. I suppose if you're Haddin you get caught up in it all and you don't want to give it back, but he had to have known that he'd knocked the bails off himself and it wasn't out.

The fact that it was Michael Clarke that got the 'wicket' makes it even worse. ;) He's always very smug, throws balls back at the batsmen when runouts aren't even remotely on. And I still remember how he stood there petulantly at the wicket when he clearly edged a ball to slip in the infamous Sydney Test, thinking he could somehow con the umpire. Well, he conned a wicket just then.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was bizarre. And right on the anniversary of the underarm incident? ;)

I'm still blinking when I see we're only 5 down with Kyle Mills out there, but can't complain about his innings so far. And in Taylor we might just have a consistent top-order batsman, touch wood. With Ryder opening again we should be more solid next game.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 off 22 with 5 wickets still in hand, NZ are going to take this game, and they deserve to.

Is it just me, or does Mitchell Johnson bowl a real dud ball every now and then? He's bowled a couple of waist-high full tosses this innings, and it's not the only time it's happened. He needs to cut out those types of balls if he wants to become a truly good, consistent bowler. He's already a wicket-taking bowler and has had some fantastic performances (and his batting is getting to the point where he could almost be called an all-rounder) but that's one area of his game that still needs a bit of work.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8/185, Vettori with a boundary off the last ball of the game. Scores were tied and Patel took off all his gear.

Not a particularly convincing performance from either batting lineup, during the middle 20-30 overs the Kiwis completely froze but we were the reverse - regularly chucking away wickets in pursuit of our old intimidatory swagger.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was too close. Tried to sleep a few hours back with the wire on. Forgot how awesome radio commentatry can be, painting deliveries and shots so they seem larger than life. Taylor's despatch of Tait for six sounded astronomical. And when Bracken cleaned out Southee with 4 balls remaining I started running through my call in sick to work routine for the morning. But it sounds like Dan at the end had it under control all along, that sly dude.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tense game tonight at the WACA. Not a game of great quality (particularly in the batting department), but enjoyable nonetheless. I have been very lucky this season - first watching one of the best run chases in test cricket history and now watching one of my favourite teams getting home in an ODI thriller. Makes the WACA membership worthwhile. Anyway, Taylor and Mills were the standout players in this game, and it seems that both have taken their game to a new level. Broom was also fairly impressive. It was a typical NZ performance really: tight bowling, fantastic fielding with a great catch from Fulton and two awesome run-outs and plucky lower order batting. Their performance was even more impressive when you consider that two of their most outstanding ODI players (Ryder and Oram) were absent and they had two shocking decisions go against them.

Side-note: not sure why Elliot was playing for NZ. If he's not going to bowl then he shouldn't be in the team IMO.

ETA: and yes ithanos, the six off Tait was awesome ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some post-match comments from Brad Haddin following Vettori's complaints:

[quote]“I was unaware at the time my hands were in front of the stumps.

“After looking at the replay (I realise) my hands were in front of the stumps but the ball, I'm 100 per cent positive, hit the bails first and then came up into my gloves.''[/quote]

I'm sorry Haddin, but that is utter bullshit. Firstly, the replay clearly shows that the_gloves_dislodged the bails before the ball reached the top of the stumps. There is no way in this world that he could conclude that the ball "hit the bails first" based on that replay. So his comments about being "100% certain" that the ball hit the bails are simply baffling.

Secondly, how can he not have been aware that his gloves were in front of the stumps? His gloves were on top of the stumps and clearly made contact with them_before_the ball had entered his gloves! When he felt the contact of glove on the top of the stumps he must have known at that point that his gloves were not wholly behind the stumps. Hence, the correct call in those circumstances shoud have been a no-ball:

[quote]3. Position of wicket-keeper
The wicket-keeper shall remain wholly behind the wicket at the striker's end from the moment the ball comes into play until
(a) a ball delivered by the bowler
either (i) touches the bat or person of the striker
or (ii) passes the wicket at the striker's end
or (b) the striker attempts a run.

In the event of the wicket-keeper contravening this Law, the umpire at the striker's end shall call and signal No ball as soon as possible after the delivery of the ball.[/quote]

Haddin is seriously kidding himself here. If I was Vettori, I wouldn't even bother commenting. I would just go to a press conference armed with a tv and vcr and replay the incident over and over again. It really is quite clear. Mark Nicholas and Mark Taylor called it immediately on commentary.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And once again the Australian team is behaving like spoilt brats.

Haddin's denial is absolutely gobsmacking - he even had the gall to call Vettori 'poor' and 'low' for making those comments. Ponting also came out and said Vettori was out of line. It's this sort of attitude that gives us a bad name and I absolutely abhor the terrible sportsmanship of this Australian team over the years. The siege mentality is completely unwarranted and the constant denials of wrongdoing when all evidence points to the contrary is ridiculous.

Haddin should be lucky he's not being called up to the referee's office and getting suspended for not playing in the spirit of the game. The fact that none of the Australians have even conceded the blindingly obvious fact it wasn't a wicket really doesn't do the image any favours.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Ponting's after-match comment:[quote]"Out on the field (Haddin) said he was certain the ball had flicked the top of the off stump. The umpire gave it out and the batsman walked off, and the next I heard of it was when I was asked about it at the end of play."[/quote]
I mean, is it usual to have a discussion amongst yourselves about whether the ball hit the stumps or not after a batsman gets bowled?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the face of the video evidence which seems plain to most eyes it would appear that Haddin has dug himself a nice hole to get out of. If he wants to enjoy a long international career and hit the right notes [i]off the field[/i] then he can do one of two things;

i) a complete about turn on this stance and admit the evidence at hand or

ii) stick to his guns and claim that in his mind in the heat of the moment he was 100% certain that the ball hit the bails first.

The former sounds so easy but It looks like he's doing the latter and he'll then need to stick to that story for the rest of his carreer or face the derision of a lot of folk. This scenario is not hard to imagine and in fact becomes easy to get away with as a player's achievements build and time ebbs away the public's memory.

[Unsubstantiated anecdote: Google is no help\]
Many years ago a promising young S.Fleming fielding for Canterbury in a NZ domestic championship game collected a dubious catch which on the replay clearly hit the ground first. His captain asked him if he was certain of the catch or whether a recall was in order but the young fielder nodded he'd caught it although the replay immediately after the catch showed a hint of uncertainty on his face. My buddies & I would bring this incident up whenever Fleming made the headlines and when he eventually became NZ captain there was still an element of doubt in our minds about his integrity. He's definitely proven his integrity over the years [i]as a leader[/i] and I might be misremembering except every now & then my buddies who saw that footage also bring up the incident. I'll put it down to an eager young player caught up in the heat of the moment keen to please his team and captain.
[\end unsubstantiated anecdote]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[url="http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ausvrsa2008_09/content/current/story/388867.html"]a wise decision[/url]

[url="http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ausvnz2008/content/current/story/388834.html"]this may improve things[/url]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Symonds dropping from the South African tour - sounds like something is being done to punish Symonds once and for all. The guy has so many off-field misdemeanours, it seems every time he opens his mouth he says something idiotic. Let's hope the selectors put a specialist batsman in at No. 6 to replace him and not some dibbly-dobbly all-rounder.

Ponting being rested - I'll be interested to see what the captaincy of the team is like without him. Never really had the chance to see what Michael Clarke is like with the reins. I don't like the guy but it will be interesting to see what his captaincy moves are like, not that ODIs are nearly as strenuous as Tests when decisions have to be made.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jeor' post='1671956' date='Feb 3 2009, 19.17']On Symonds dropping from the South African tour - sounds like something is being done to punish Symonds once and for all. The guy has so many off-field misdemeanours, it seems every time he opens his mouth he says something idiotic. Let's hope the selectors put a specialist batsman in at No. 6 to replace him and not some dibbly-dobbly all-rounder.[/quote]

Personally, I don't think the Symonds decision should just be about punishment for off-field misdemeanours - he also doesn't deserve to be in the test team on merit. His form since his return to first-class and test cricket has been, quite simply, atrocious. In 15 first-class innings this summer (inc. the test innings), he has scored 255 runs @ 17. If that is good enough to get into the Australian team, than they have lowered their standards considerably.

Side-note: I was surprised to see Clarke and Ponting jointly win the Allan Border medal. I assumed Johnson would win it - he was more consistent across both tests and ODIs in 2008 than Clarke and Ponting (who both had a good 2008 in tests, but were relatively poor in ODIs).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...