Cricket VIII

[williamjm]

Yeah I meant Flintoff. According to cricinfo Swann has a Test avg of 35.61 while Flintoff has 31.77. Of course Flintoff played many more matches (130 innings to Swann's 17) so we'd have to wait a few years to make a decent statistical comparison.

They've both played approximately the same number of First Class matches so we can do a proper comparison there (although we'd have to take into account a large proportion of Flintoff's 'first-class' matches were Tests so he'd have more challenging bowling that Swann would be facing). Swann averages 27 with the bat Flintoff averages 34, which is probably a better illustration of their comparative batting talents - I don't think Swann will ever be as good a batsman as Flintoff when he was in top batting form, although he was very rarely in top batting form. Surprisingly, Swann has the higher first-class score of 183.

In terms of bowling they are roughly the same statistically, Swann has 500 first-class wickets at 32.7, Flintoff has 350 at 31.6.

Broad averages 26 and 29 with bat and ball in first class cricket, which would suggest he's similar to Swann with the bat with a slightly better bowling average.

Although if you are right, then he should probably swap places with Malfoy in the batting order.

I don't think there's much to choose between the two of them at the moment so they could easily be swapped. I think Broad has a better technique and has the potential to be a much better batsmen, maybe even a true all-rounder, in a few years time, but Swann probably isn't as likely to improve from his current abilities so that might be one argument in favour of giving Broad the higher place in the batting order to help him develop if there's not a huge difference in average.

[Jeor]

I don't think there's too much doubt that Flintoff was a better batsman than Swann currently is. Flintoff was more of an 'impact' player and his potential upside (thrashing opposing attacks out of the ground) was far greater than Swann's. You have to also account for Flintoff's terrible start to his career. If you take out those early Tests where he was thrown in too early at too young an age, his averages would look a bit better.

Although it's hard to compare a spinner with a paceman, I'd say that Swann is the better bowler in the sense that he is more of a pure bowler. You can get way more overs out of Swann than Flintoff ever bowled. Swann could be easily picked on his bowling alone as part of a four-man attack, whereas Flintoff was picked as an all-rounder who the England selectors never used as part of a four-man attack.

I agree with Will that Broad's batting has greater potential than Swann's. Broad has a more classical technique and bats more like a top-order batsman, whereas Swann's technique still has a bit of the swashbuckling cowboy in it. To be sure Swann has a better technique than your average lower order slogger but his batting style is more suited to a counterattacking No. 8 than a middle-order bat. Broad's style has a better chance of surviving a second new ball and for batting longer periods of time than Swann, so I think it's right that he's higher in the order.

[Jeor]

Well, the opening at the SCG shows what I know. Aamer is out, which is a grevious blow for Pakistan, and they responded by picking Mohammad Sami. Somehow I didn't think that going back to the past to a guy who has a bowling average of 50+ was the right move. Anyway, he comes on, bowls swinging balls at 145 kph and gets two wickets in his second over of the day. One wonders how a guy like that could have a 50+ bowling average from 34 Test matches.

Pakistan do have a much better attack than the last match though. They may have lost Aamer, but they traded in Saeed Ajmal for Danish Kaneria, which is a definite upgrade in the spin department, and Umar Gul comes in for Abdur Rauf, which is a massive improvement. By the looks of it, Sami will be able to fulfil Aamer's role as the fast pace bowler. No changes to the batting though, so that will still require some work. With the overcast conditions, if the Pakistani bowlers fulfil their potential it could be a rather low scoring match.

[Multaniette]

oki that was fun :D:D:D:D

[Jeor]

An amazing day at the SCG - a great one for Pakistan, and I'm glad they managed to close out the day on a high. It could have all gone wrong after that first dropped catch but 127 all out is the lowest Australian total I've seen in a while, I'd have to go back over a decade to Edgbaston 1996-7 or the Ashes after that when Gough bowled us out for 120 or something like that.

Asif bowled excellently, his control was crucial on a wicket and conditions offering assistance. But to be fair it wasn't the pitch that did it, most of the top order dismissals (Hughes, Ponting, Hussey, Haddin) were simply poor shots that had nothing to do with movement off the pitch or swing through the air. I hope Pakistan get to amass a good total, and Aussie though I am, it would be a rather nice thing for the the last Test of a series to be a decider if it goes 1-1. There may be some more rain on the way though so I really hope that this doesn't end in a draw after Pakistan have bowled well enough to give themselves a good chance of a win.

The radio commentators were discussing it and I had thought about it too - Australia could have declared, got Pakistan in earlier and a few cheap wickets before the day ended. The conditions today were ideal and the combination of grassy new pitch, moisture and dark overcast conditions wold be wasted if you didn't get a good bowl on them. That being said, at the time no one questioned Ponting's call at the toss, although Yousuf said correctly that he would have bowled anyway. I think with Kaneria in the side and at the SCG Ponting wouldn't have been wanting to bat last in any case, and although the conditions were good for bowlers, a few wickets by the Aussies were really just thrown away.

The early declaration was an interesting mental exercise...it's the sort of thing that would happen in a club game. But I suppose with Johnson still at the crease (and hence still the possibility of some sort of total), and in an international Test match, you don't really seriously think of taking those options. I often wonder if international captains ever had to make the same sort of decisions and tactics that club captains had to (for the record, I wasn't a grade cricket captain, although I stood in occasionally). Matches would be played over two weekends so the pitch could change remarkably in between. Our illustrious leader and other senior players would often trot out lines like:

"Dave (opening bowler) is hungover today so we're going to bowl first because I want to see him cry."

"I forgot to bring my protector today, we're going to bowl."

"This pitch looks like crap. Dave and Tony (No.s 8 and 9 in the order) are going to open the batting just so we can see how bad it is before we real batsmen go in."

"I dropped that guy on purpose, he was scoring so slowly it's better if we keep him in."

"Don't try and hit a six. My brand new car is in that carpark."

"I want to go home early. Jeor, get on and bowl your pies (I was a very bad part-time medium) so we'll get this over with quickly."

[ljkeane]

England will be disappointed that they didn't really take advantage of the opportunity to bowl South Africa out cheaply today, apparently the pitch at Cape Town tends to deteriorate as well so they might come to regret it.

The first day of the test in Sydney was very entertaining as well. It had pretty much everything you want in a day's cricket, good bowling, Australia getting bowled out cheaply, those little cartoon ducks they have on Australian tv and Micheal Clarke getting hit in the balls.

It will be interesting to see how Pakistan do with the bat.

[Jeor]

England will be disappointed that they didn't really take advantage of the opportunity to bowl South Africa out cheaply today, apparently the pitch at Cape Town tends to deteriorate as well so they might come to regret it.

The first day of the test in Sydney was very entertaining as well. It had pretty much everything you want in a day's cricket, good bowling, Australia getting bowled out cheaply, those little cartoon ducks they have on Australian tv and Micheal Clarke getting hit in the balls.

It will be interesting to see how Pakistan do with the bat.

Kallis really is cementing his reputation here. More than a few times now he's held an innings together single-handedly while wickets are falling regularly and the pitch and game conditions call for a good defence. Great counterattack from Boucher as well and interesting to see Steyn up at 8.

Pakistan seem to be doing quite well although they're scoring slowly. But if they can build a big innings no matter how long it takes, they may only have to bat once in the game while pushing Australia onto dodgier batting days like 4 or 5 with Kaneria bowling spin.

[Stubby]

Pakistan seem to be doing quite well although they're scoring slowly. But if they can build a big innings no matter how long it takes, they may only have to bat once in the game while pushing Australia onto dodgier batting days like 4 or 5 with Kaneria bowling spin.

Yeah I agree with that. There has been some media commentary (on-line) that was a bit critical of the slow run-rate. I don't see it that way - its the last session of day two and they are 65 in front with 8 wickets in hand. They have outplayed Australia in every session so far IMO.

[Hereward]

"Dave (opening bowler) is hungover today so we're going to bowl first because I want to see him cry."

"I forgot to bring my protector today, we're going to bowl."

"This pitch looks like crap. Dave and Tony (No.s 8 and 9 in the order) are going to open the batting just so we can see how bad it is before we real batsmen go in."

"I dropped that guy on purpose, he was scoring so slowly it's better if we keep him in."

"Don't try and hit a six. My brand new car is in that carpark."

"I want to go home early. Jeor, get on and bowl your pies (I was a very bad part-time medium) so we'll get this over with quickly."

I believe this is how England used to operate in the 1990s.

PS Looking at the score in reply I'm not sure much has changed.

[Sir Thursday]

I don't understand why Pakistan decided to be quite as aggressive as it sounds like they were in the final session today. They didn't need to score especially quickly - they were in an amazing position with a ton of time left in the match. They've converted their 8 wickets in hand into a 200 run lead, but it could have been more and they really should have been looking to bat until at least the middle of tomorrow.

England have been playing some old school cricket with Cook and Bell digging in - nice to see that we can still do that when required. Nice half century from Cook, hopefully with that century in the last test he'll have overcome his penchant for getting out in the 60s/70s.

Sir Thursday

EDIT: My bad about the bolded :(

[Jeor]

Hereward, I'm honoured even by the mere suggestion that an international cricket team such as England of the 90s would take their cue from a little Sydney club playing in the lower divisions of grade cricket. ;)

I'm also enjoying the Foxtel cable service newly installed in my apartment (I bought a place and just moved in a couple of weeks ago and so the Foxtel is in). Believe it or not this means I have cricket from 10am to 6pm during the day (Pakistan vs Australia), with a dinner break until about 7pm, and then cricket from 7pm to 2am (England vs South Africa). It's a great time to have holidays. Ok, so I'll occasionally take a break to do other stuff, but in theory it's awesome to have almost 16 watchable hours of cricket per day. ;)

I think England are still reasonably placed here. 100 runs behind, but still with PRior and broad at the crease and Swann to come, I think the England lower order has a few runs left in it. At the least they'll get very close to matching South Africa's total. Harris has looked innocuous and the pitch doesn't seem to be playing any tricks, although the England seamers made it look like a minefield earlier, which will worry South Africa. That, and the fact that Prince is an automatic wicket as an opener.

[williamjm]

I think England are still reasonably placed here. 100 runs behind, but still with PRior and broad at the crease and Swann to come, I think the England lower order has a few runs left in it. At the least they'll get very close to matching South Africa's total. Harris has looked innocuous and the pitch doesn't seem to be playing any tricks, although the England seamers made it look like a minefield earlier, which will worry South Africa. That, and the fact that Prince is an automatic wicket as an opener.

By the close England were 50 behind with three wickets remaining, so they'll probably be roughly level with South Africa by the end of the innings. After two poor batting performances from both sides they both seem to have a good chance of winning the game, although England might be under the most pressure since they'll have to bat last.

[ljkeane]

By the close England were 50 behind with three wickets remaining, so they'll probably be roughly level with South Africa by the end of the innings. After two poor batting performances from both sides they both seem to have a good chance of winning the game, although England might be under the most pressure since they'll have to bat last.

I'm not too confident about Prior and Swann having to start again tomorrow morning so I think there's a good chance England might end up a few runs behind. The general consensus seems to be that if you're batting last on this Cape Town pitch you want to take a reasonable lead in the first innings, on that basis I think South Africa will be by far the happiest of the two teams.

[williamjm]

I'm not too confident about Prior and Swann having to start again tomorrow morning so I think there's a good chance England might end up a few runs behind.

You could be right (especially since I think South Africa still have a new-ish ball), but being 20 or 30 runs behind probably won't make a huge difference (of course, it is possible that it could turn out to be crucial).

The general consensus seems to be that if you're batting last on this Cape Town pitch you want to take a reasonable lead in the first innings, on that basis I think South Africa will be by far the happiest of the two teams.

I agree they are the better-placed of the two at the moment, but I'm not sure they'll be entirely happy until they've put up a decent second innings score and put the memory of the mostly fragile first innings performance behind them. If they lose a few quick wickets when their innings starts then the pressure is going to be back on them immediately.

[Stubby]

From cricinfo:

Umar Gul to Watson, OUT, caught! surprised by a ball that rose on him quickly, he tried to guide it to the off side but the ball struck him on the glove and spooned to Faisal Iqbal at slip for an easy catch

SR Watson c Faisal Iqbal b Umar Gul 97 (158b 11x4 3x6) SR: 61.39

:rofl:

:rofl:

Oh yeah, and :lmao:

[Jeor]

Haha....although if bloody Abdur Rauf had hung onto the catch on 99 last match, Watson would have had five scores in the 90s with no centuries.

Strange as it may seem, I'm actually barracking for the Pakistanis now. I feel sorry for them that they can't play any home Tests, they've only had two Test wins in the last three years, and Yousuf is a reluctant but dignified captain. If not for Kamran Akmal who has dropped Hussey three times off the spinner today, Pakistan really should be in the driver's seat. As it is, they need to break through Haddin-Hussey quickly before the lead gets too big. The Pakistani batting is still fragile and the Australian bowlers have been performing well throughout the series so far. The pitch has looked reasonably ok today but it's the SCG and will get worse. What's more it's clear that No. 10 (Kaneria) and No. 11 (Asif) are automatic wickets, almost at the Chris Martin level, given the way that Kaneria was ridiculously backing away and never got behind the line of the ball.

I think to be sure of a win, Pakistan need to be chasing 150 or less. Anything around 180-220 would be an even game, and anything 250+ I would definitely fancy the Aussies bowling Pakistan out.

For Australia to win Haddin needs to play a proper innings. Throughout his career I've found that the commentators are too easy on him. Every time he gets out cheaply playing an aggressive shot, they say, "Well, that's the way he plays" (they said that in the first innings of this match too). If that's the case, then he's just a bad player. ;) He's got to figure out a way to make bowlers earn their wicket against him.

[Stubby]

Every time he gets out cheaply playing an aggressive shot, they say, "Well, that's the way he plays" (they said that in the first innings of this match too).

Truly? That was a shit shot in a whole septic tank of an innings.

At any rate, he's out now.

[jumps on the Pakistan bandwagon]

[Jeor]

Truly? That was a shit shot in a whole septic tank of an innings.

Yeah. Every time Haddin gets dismissed when trying to hit out, the commentators say he's an aggressive player, that's how he does it, lives and dies by the sword etc. I think that's really giving him too much credit. No doubt about it, he's a wonderful attacking batsman and has won some matches with tremendous strokeplay and big scoring. But in my mind he is yet to play a good defensive innings in his Test career. When Australia need to fight out a draw (not this match, there's too much time left) or when they need to be patient, tighten up shop and accumulate, Haddin is not the man for the moment.

Kaneria bowling well, Johnson gone too. As long as they can get that target under 150 Pakistan should be ok. Anything over 150 gives Australia a bit of a chance. Kudos to the Pakistani selectors too. The bowling attack last match couldn't bowl Australia out in either innings. But they've made two changes (three really, but Aamer's change was forced through injury) and bringing in Gul and Kaneria for Rauf and Ajmal has proved a godsend. Both innings the Pakistani bowling has looked dangerous.

Then you've got to think what will happen in the Third Test. They could keep the same attack, but if you want to bring Aamer back, you'd have to drop Sami or Gul. Based on this second innings I'd be tempted to say Sami. The time when Sami got all his wickets were admittedly excellent bowling conditions. Gul has bowled really well today.

[Stubby]

Could be all over today now that Hauritz is gone too.

[Jeor]

Well, stumps now, Australia effectively 8/80.

Pakistan have got to be careful here. Siddle can hang around, and Hussey doesn't look in any danger. I still remember that match a few summers ago when the Windies were last here, Hussey put on 100 runs for the last wicket with MacGill. It's unlikely of course, but as time goes on it'll start to get in their minds (particular Kamran Akmal who dropped Hussey three times). So tomorrow they want to clean it up quickly. I would possibly even give Umar Gul a run with the new ball tomorrow. He's a brilliant Twenty20 bowler, so some swinging yorkers might be in order to blast out the last two wickets.

Now it's time for my dinner break...and then later tonight watching England vs South Africa. Woohoo!