England v Australia - Test 1, Cardiff 8th - 12th July

First topic message reminder :

England

Lyth
Cook
Ballance
Bell
Root
Stokes
Buttler
Ali
Broad
Wood
Anderson


Australia

Warner
Rogers
Smith
Clarke
Voges
Watson
Haddin
Johnson
Starc
Lyon
Hazlewood



Officials

Umpires - HDPK Dharmasena and M Erasmus
TV umpire - CB Gaffaney
Match referee - RS Madugalle
Reserve umpire - NGB Cook



Toss

Won by England who choose to bat.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

PaulHv2 wrote:I know Smith has been scoring a lot of runs, but his technique is awful.

It is the most baffling thing in all of cricket that Hampo, his average is far higher than his talent should allow, for a top order batsmen he has the most fundamental of anyone I can think of.

To be fair, Alastair Cook's technique means he struggles against the moving ball. As an opener in England you'd think he'd be in trouble, yet he averages nearly 47. Getting runs anyway possible is the only thing that matters in the end.

Having said all that, I do think Smith will end up being better at 4/5 rather than at 3 in Tests.

Funny enough, Smith's dismissal had less to do with his technique than intelligent adjustment from Moeen.

As for his technique. A few years ago, Mike made an interesting post, the key sentence for this matter, though was that cricketers could learn a lot from tennis players. And he's right. Smith's technique isn't textbook, but it adheres to a few key components which make him a dangerous once hes in.

- Plays to his strength. It looks kinda odd, but it allows him to flick good balls to his hearts content. To get him to play through the covers, you need to push it a little. When you do that, the ball doesn't move as much, and it's easier to play on the off side.

Legs are crouched - This gives him a great power base

head still - Rather obvious, but I once chatted to Sunny Gavaskar (rather serendipitous, as it wasn't even work relates), and he reckons the head is everything. If its still, you can get away with other deficiencies. He's right.

JD - to quote from Mark Butcher:
''It's not how, it's how many.''

guildfordbat wrote:JD - to quote from Mark Butcher:
''It's not how, it's how many.''

No pictures in the scorebook etc. etc.

England's road map for tomorrow will be to reduce Australia to around 350 for 8 at lunch. Bowling them out for anything under 400 by mid-afternoon and by tea being no worse than 40 for 1. They'd hope to be no worse than 150 for 3 at close of play with a lead approaching 200.

Australia will be hoping for a much better road map for them. Getting to lunch for no worse than 350 for 6 and then by tea having edged into the lead on 450 for 9 and posting about 475. By close they'd want to have England reduced to around 60 for 3 leaving them only about 20 runs behind and into England's middle order in the second innings.

I find it odd that Australia have used a nightwatchman here. They're 166 behind with 10 overs to the new ball. If they had got a flying start tomorrow against the old ball and then a couple of good overs with the new one, then England would be rocked onto the defensive. But England can now get at Australia tomorrow with the old ball and then hopefully get at Haddin, Johnson and Starc with the new ball.

England will want to obliterate the Australian lower-order tomorrow; make a statement of intent. It was the Australian lower-order that frustrated England in 2013, and it was the Australian lower-order that hindered England so greatly in the last series.

Change the tune, England.

Remove Lyon and one of Watson/Johnson in the first ten overs, then pummel the rest with the new ball.

310 all out. Done by 12:40. Pitch the bloody thing up etc.

This is not your most unrealistic prediction, Duty. England have a huge opportunity to grab the game by the scruff of the neck tomorrow morning.

guildfordbat wrote:JD - to quote from Mark Butcher:
''It's not how, it's how many.''

Well this is the point Guildford - he's obviously got a great mental aptitude, and has a technique in which he is comfortable. No everyone can be a Tendulkar/Sangakkara!

Good Test Match so far . England have certainly played the better cricket over these two days ; but I'm not sure they are as far in front as it might seem. Australia are 166 behind , but have fair bit of batting left. Watson , Haddin - who loves batting against England - and  the bowlers can all give it a clout...plus England have to start again with ten overs to the new ball , which they should not waste just trying to contain. I would bowl Broad first up and push for wicket(s) before the 80 overs is up : they need to keep the pressure up , remembering how Haddin and Johnson changed the game in Brisbane in 2013.
Actually quite impressed with England's bowling on this placid strip . Anderson in particular has been consistently threatening , and economical ; and Cook has handled his bowlers , and fields , very well. I'd hope they are able to keep it up tomorrow and complete the good work of the first seventy overs. Just not taking anything for granted...
If England can get a decent lead then they will be in a pretty strong position , with Australia to bat last. Still have to make sure they don't have one of those second innings meltdowns that cost them against West Indies recently , of course , but the speed with which both teams have scored leaves plenty of time to push for a result - although I see Duty is convinced Sunday will be largely washed out ?
A word in praise of Moeen , whose place was much discussed in the lead up to this game. Two good wickets , a reward for some decent bowling : he didn't panic when Smith went after him, and had his revenge with a shrewd adjustment to counter the batsman's early movement. Will bowl his share of bad balls (though less here than in West Indies : getting into his rhythm after more match practice ?) but he seems to be a wicket taker. Plus his batting , which was pretty impressive in this game. Slow pitch , true ; but he played the short ball much better than last year , I thought. Having a good match

Will leave the projected scoreline detail to Craig , but hoping England can increase their advantage on what promises to be another fascinating day.

kingraf wrote:Funny enough, Smith's dismissal had less to do with his technique than intelligent adjustment from Moeen.

As for his technique. A few years ago, Mike made an interesting post, the key sentence for this matter, though was that cricketers could learn a lot from tennis players. And he's right. Smith's technique isn't textbook, but it adheres to a few key components which make him a dangerous once hes in.

- Plays to his strength. It looks kinda odd, but it allows him to flick good balls to his hearts content. To get him to play through the covers, you need to push it a little. When you do that, the ball doesn't move as much, and it's easier to play on the off side.

Legs are crouched - This gives him a great power base

head still - Rather obvious, but I once chatted to  Sunny Gavaskar (rather serendipitous, as it wasn't even work relates), and he reckons the head is everything. If its still, you can get away with other deficiencies. He's right.

Very much agree with this. Far too much made of "technique" , I think...in the sense that anything a bit unusual tends to be frowned upon. Gavaskar knew a bit about batting...

He certainly does, Alfie. Nice guy too. When Steve Smith is going really well, you'll often hear commentators say he's playing on a different pitch. And in many ways that's true. The magical fourth/fifth stump is effectively his Middle/Off. So you have to go even wider to get him driving, but of course he's a good driver when he wants to be, especially at balls pushed wider. I'm a huge fan of his technique. Not because it's "different" etc; but because it's genius. It's such a maximisation of his strengths, eliminating weaknesses. A few times this year, I've read really smart people say Smith has "figured out batting", tell you what... I think they're right.

kingraf wrote:Australia have been incredibly generous today. England's day, and they should be looking at a 70-100 lead now.

No more so that England were in their innings, and certainly taking no more risks than England did. The difference in results is that Root got away with it. Looking ahead Australias lower half is less likley to contribute as many runs as Englands did, theres really not a great deal of batting left ..both Watson and Haddin have seen better days and none of the bowlers are exactly in Moeen Alis class.
Bit of discpline from the English bowlers and they should have a healthy leadee with the 70-100 estimate), itll be far from a match winning one though. Whilst they shaded both days they are far from running away with this.

Plenty to play for still, both innings have been up and down. Did anyone not expect this to be a tight contest ( except KPs publicist and Shane Warnes surgeon)?

Well one thing I know is that if the Aussies are batting after lunch they'll be fairly close - none of there lower order hang around

Look at the weather Sunday morning is forecast to be rainy but sunny form lunch. They may miss most of a session but it still should be a result in this game, Especially with the way both teams have gone about moving things on with the bat.

Forecast for Sunday is improving quite rapidly. Desired outcome today - wrap up the last 5 wickets for about c.50 runs

Likely outcome: England gift a career best performance to some random member of the tail and end up 50 behind

VTR wrote:Forecast for Sunday is improving quite rapidly. Desired outcome today - wrap up the last 5 wickets for about c.50 runs

Likely outcome: England gift a career best performance to some random member of the tail and end up 50 behind

England would be hoping that that 'career best performance' won't come from Johnson or Starc. Johnson's career best so far is 123 and Starc has a test top sscore of 99. If either of them better that, Australia would be in a very happy position indeed!

Gooseberry wrote:

kingraf wrote:Australia have been incredibly generous today. England's day, and they should be looking at a 70-100 lead now.

No more so that England were in their innings, and certainly taking no more risks than England did. The difference in results is that Root got away with it. Looking ahead Australias lower half is less likley to contribute as many runs as Englands did, theres really not a great deal of batting left ..both Watson and Haddin have seen better days and none of the bowlers are exactly in Moeen Alis class.
Bit of discpline from the English bowlers and they should have a healthy leadee with the 70-100 estimate), itll be far from a match winning one though. Whilst they shaded both days they are far from running away with this.

Plenty to play for still, both innings have been up and down. Did anyone not expect this to be a tight contest ( except KPs publicist and Shane Warnes surgeon)?

Goose - the generosity for me related to the old maxim that whilst anyone can get out for next to nothing, you shouldn't get out having got yourself in. Admittedly, a really good ball can account for anyone at any time. Nonetheless, I feel there's still some credibility underlying the saying and the appropriate charge can be levelled against each of Warner, Smith, Clarke and Voges. Of England's main line batsmen, only Cook falls into the same category. Lyth and Bell went for less than a song before they had got near to getting started.

I do very much agree with your comment that whilst England have shaded both days, they are far from running away with this. We need to at least do the same again today [Craig's route map to follow, I trust]. One horror session from England will undo all the good work and give the game a very different look.

Indeed, Goosey, England also went after the leather on day one, but they went reckless. At times, Australia seemed to get a sniff at smashing England, or at least really damaging them, and seemed to get too excited by the prospect. Reading Cricinfo yesterday, the author of the article said words to the effect of "Any team coached by Darren Lehmann was unlikely to be circumspect". To which you can only say, there's a reason Lehmann averaged 58 in FC, but only had 27 Tests (another member of the 27 Test Club LT, maybe he replaces Afridi?). You've got to respect good bowling, and taking the initiative isn't synonymous with some blind rage.

Guildford

Agree with much of your post, although I will say that for Bell the tendency to get out before he gets started has become a trend of very worrying proportions.

In some ways, getting to 20 or 30 and then getting out is worse than going cheaply, as by that point you should have done the hard part and started to get your eye in and movement going. Should at least push on to getting 50+ and ideally at least one or two will go on to get a big score - England obviously had Root make the big score and a few guys making healthy contributions around him, while the Aussies so far have only really had Rogers get anything really worthwhile.

Yes, England have had the better of both days, but only sort of 60/40, so are not that far ahead of the game. Had they not got Voges last night I'd even reckon on it being about even. Admittedly it appears Australia have had slightly the better of the conditions - more swing and uneven bounce on the first morning than later on.

Best case (realistic) scenario for England is getting rid of Lyon and one of Watson or Haddin inside the first hour and cleaning up the lower order reasonably quickly for a lead of about 50-75.

Worst case obviously is the two remaining batsmen and the tail scoring heavily to give the Aussies a significant lead. Still not a disaster as 3rd innings scores are typically better than 4th innings.

msp83 wrote:

VTR wrote:Forecast for Sunday is improving quite rapidly. Desired outcome today - wrap up the last 5 wickets for about c.50 runs

Likely outcome: England gift a career best performance to some random member of the tail and end up 50 behind

England would be hoping that that 'career best performance' won't come from Johnson or Starc. Johnson's career best so far is 123 and Starc has a test top sscore of 99. If either of them better that, Australia would be in a very happy position indeed!

Don't rule it out - both can hold a bat to much better effect than the likes of Tino Best!

Tino Best! An absolute legend. "Mind the windows Tino"

The early wicket England wanted, let's hope the can blow the tail away now.

Nice start!

Good captaincy by Cook; Broad immediately hitting the right areas and getting the wicket he so deserves.

What a start for England!

Watson out LBW, who'd have thought? Good ball from Broad, just nipped back a touch. Great start for England!

11 Englishman and Mitchell marsh celebrate

If Watson does get dropped now for Marsh, could he have got out in a more Watson way? Well set on 30, given out LBW, reviews, upheld. That's a career in a microcosm.

Indeed, Dummy.

I don't know if you've seen my earlier posts on this thread in praise of Moeen and, particularly, his batting which I feel too many under rate (or did at least until yesterday ). Although I didn't name Bell, it was very much him I had in mind concerning my thoughts of Moeen moving into the top 6 and assuming the role of second spinner / all rounder which would allow a number one spinner (if there is such an English creature) to come in lower down the order.

And now Watson becomes another to go for a neither here nor there score of 30! Bit unlucky I thought - looked high first time to my eye in real time. Anyway, I'll still have it for England and to back up the case I've been making about Australia's generosity!

I won't be happy if Watson gets dropped for Marsh. We know how to get Watson out so he doesn't tend to hurt us, Marsh could be more of a dangerous Stokes-type player for them

Watson and his pads!! Hope the umpires would remain consistent with such decisions though.

Shane Watson's career could have been so different if he didn't play around his front pad so hopelessly

msp83 wrote:Watson and his pads!! Hope the umpires would remain consistent with such decisions though.

You see it at every level of cricket. We have a guy who gets out LBW probably 10 times a season (18 games). He swears he is never out but he always looks stone dead.

Beautiful over by Wood - he gets the reward he deserved. Lyon absolutely clueless for five of those six balls.

robbo277 wrote:I find it odd that Australia have used a nightwatchman here. They're 166 behind with 10 overs to the new ball. If they had got a flying start tomorrow against the old ball and then a couple of good overs with the new one, then England would be rocked onto the defensive. But England can now get at Australia tomorrow with the old ball and then hopefully get at Haddin, Johnson and Starc with the new ball.

As some will already know, I'm no fan of nightwatchmen anyway and feel the use here was, at best, very odd. Just failed as well as Lyon is clearly lbw to Wood.

Watson has been LBW 26.66% of the time in test cricket. The highest of anyone with 100 innings. Sensational statting from the live text.

At 7 down and new ball so close, think Australia will have to play some shots here as England have the momentum big time with them and the new ball will give them even more to work with. Australia are not going to get through this period by defending.

Big wicket this. Mitchell will be itching to make a contribution, and he's the sort of who permeates energy. If he does well with the bat, England will know he could do damage with the ball.

JDizzle wrote:Watson has been LBW 26.66% of the time in test cricket. The highest of anyone with 100 innings. Sensational statting from the live text.

Another interesting stat is that it is the first time in test cricket that 3 to 6 in a lineup all got out in the 30s in an innings.

seanmichaels wrote:

msp83 wrote:Watson and his pads!! Hope the umpires would remain consistent with such decisions though.

You see it at every level of cricket. We have a guy who gets out LBW probably 10 times a season (18 games). He swears he is never out but he always looks stone dead.

Poor guy, I've only been out LBW three times in thirteen years of senior cricket and I can honestly say two of those I wasn't out.

A hopeless review just because England could.

New ball is due and Andersoin on straight away.

A beautiful spell of bowling from Jimmy, and he gets his reward.

Haddin outclassed by Anderson.

Be clinical, England!

Johnson gives it away.

All going to script so far for the day, fully expect the last wicket to go for 100 + in typical england fail style.

This is quite a collapse, 258-4 to 306-9 so far!

Next time England should have two tests with Australia and five with New Zealand...

Hell of a catch to wrap the innings up.

VTR wrote:

liverbnz wrote:Duty I admire you're optimism as always. Where are England getting these 10 wickets from though?

You beat me to it! How is the bowling attack that couldn't restrain such batting greats as BJ Watling and Luke Ronchi going to get the Aussies out for 300?!

Just like that, lads, just like that!