Australia v West Indies test series

First topic message reminder :

This series promises to be very one-sided, offering the Aussies plenty of opportunities to boost both their batting and bowling averages.

After day 1, Australia in an enormously strong position, having rattled along at almost five an over and only lost three wickets. Windies briefly threatened to compete when they had Australia at 121 - 3 with Steve Smith out cheaply, but after that it was downhill all the way. Voges already has his highest test score, and Shaun Marsh is likely to better his previous highest score when play resumes.

If you could point out exactly where the risk lay in Australia chasing 370 lay I'd be pretty grateful. Its a big chase in a day but hardly a risk when they almost certainly can't lose.

331 wasn't it? In about 60 overs. Not as easy as it might seem.
It even took Bradman, Morris & Co. the best part of 114 overs to chase down 403 that day.

I think the point is that the Windies were not really being offered much time to take the wickets. So from a certain draw, they then have a scenario where they could draw or lose with a pretty small chance of a win.

So not an easy chase to win, but fairly easy for the Aussies to still draw unless there was some commitment to keep going for the runs that I am missing? Not sure how that would work in practice either.

Putting some arbitrary stats to it, you could say the offer turned things from 100% draw to something like 20% Aus win, 75% draw, 5% Windies win

EDIT: Should add my initial reaction to all this was the Windies should have taken the offer. But then I thought about it more, using the logic above and I could see why they didn't, especially with a young team who are getting very used to losing

what VTR said. Also, without wishing to nitpick, the first ODI also involved England, who of course had been playing the limited overs format for many years domestically prior to that. England also came up with the idea for T20, so really you meant to say that England has been at the forefront of all innovation, up to and including the switch-hit, pioneered of course by an England cricketer oh and Bodyline, tactical genius

[quote="The Loaded Dog"]

SimonofSurrey wrote:As many suspected, the Windies Player of the Match and, indeed, most influential performer of the series, was Mr Inclement Weather,  
PS: the way he was going, what chance Warner would have beaten Pranav's record by the end of Day 3 given fair weather on all five days?

Actually, anyone following the series properly would know that it was already wrapped up 2-0 well before this last match, Simon.

Not sure I follow, LD. My(ok, maybe rather heavy handed) attempt at irony/humour was suggesting that the bad weather in the 3rd Test was the only positive for the Windies in the whole series and it deserved therefore to be named Windies Player of the Series. Perhaps I should have said "...and, indeed, their (ie Windies) most influential performer of the series [etc]" for clarity. I was in no way ignorant of, less still belittling, any of the Australian players achievements in nailing so comprehensively such modest opposition. Of course I realise the series as a contest - if ever it was - was wrapped up by the Aussies at the end of the second of these embarrassingly one-sided Tests.

Who was the last Test captain to fix such a deal again? Hansie Cronje? We know how that turned out....

Holder was never going to accept that. If the WI bowlers couldn't bowl out Australia in an innings in the series to date, they weren't going to do it in 70 overs. Smith made that suggestion knowing full well that there's no way this West Indies team could win....

Couple of points on this :  I am pretty much with Ian Chappell in disliking the idea of contrived finishes in Tests .  Was ambivalent when the Cronje inspired effort originally happened ...regardless of the later revelations that he may have had a pecuniary interest in ensuring a result , the initiative at least produced an exciting finish in a seemingly dead match - and it didn't involve any joke bowling ; but it still didn't feel quite "right" ; so I am on balance happy we haven't seen any other such events.  And with all the fuss around match fixing probably better there have been none , however well intentioned.

As to this one : fair enough for Smith to raise the idea - but eminently sensible for Holder to decline.  West Indies have taken about ten wickets in the whole tour so how were they going to bowl Australia out ? Plus as others have said Australia could easily have shut up shop had they lost a few wickets...the phrase " on a hiding to nothing" comes to mind...
Having batted quite well for once , I think Holder was justified in wanting his team to go away with their competitive score as a limited achievement to finish the tour rather than risk a final disaster with the ball , however unlikely.

The one thing I didn't like was the post match quotes of Smith (and Lehmann) essentially having a bit of a go at West Indies for being somehow lacking in spirit for not taking up the challenge.  I thought the comments were unnecessary , unfair and a little bit like kicking a man when he is down.  They've won the series - convincingly - and should have been happy to walk away with that : no need for a parting shot.

Little or no chance of Windies winning so why should they hand Aus a victory on a plate. Haven't heard the post-match comments from the Oz camp but if, as suggested, they were somewhat churlish it's the sort of thing one has come to expect from them.

Some wild slogging from LD there! Think it happens ones a year or so, otherwise he's neet and compact and plays proper.......
Anyways, it was an utter farce of a series, not because Australians were wildly inconsistent as there were during the Ashes, but the opposition was a total disgrace. And the pitches were generally poor, and the last test was ruined by the rain. More than anything else, it was the West Indies lack of quality that made it a farce of a series....... Don't think they should be offered more than 2 tests in a series. The proposed 4 test series with India could be terrible. Then perhaps not, as we don't tour all that well.......

I think they could give India a run msp. I mean India should and probably will win, but if Gayle comes back as he's hinted at, then they suddenly have on paper one of the better opening acts in Test cricket. Create pitches which arent snake pits and I think Kohli will struggle a bit to get wickets from his fast bowlers up front. The you have Jerome Taylor who was at times unplayable at home with the Duke. I wouldn't be surprised to see them give you a push for extended periods before succumbing.

West Indies should do something about their batting lineup. First and foremose, drop Marlon Samuels. Get in young Hope or Dorich or someone. Though Carlos Brathwaite and Jason Holder are unlikely to run through batting lineup, they both have to play as it stretches the batting and would offer then the chance of going in with 5 bowlers. Devendra Bishoo should be back and he should be cked to be theier led spinner. Pick him for a couple of games, then drop him for a game or 2 for no clear reason, not going to help the legspinner. Kemar Roach used one of my favorite bowlers, but seems injuries have prematurely cut him off as a serious fast bowler. Or perhaps he needs some time at domestic level to work himself back into shape. If they have some decent young quicks other than Gabriel who can bowl fast and not much else, then they should be given an opportunity.......