South Africa in Australia 2016

by msp83 Wed 02 Nov 2016, 3:03 pm

First topic message reminder :

Quite a bit of test cricket around. New Zealand in India and England in Bangladesh are done, West Indies is starting to look like a test side towards the end of their series against Pakistan. England in India is about to kick off. And along side that series, is the South Africa in Australia series.
First test to start at the WACA tomorrow. South Africa usually are at their best when traveling though they were utterly thrashed by India last year, and they don't seem to have completely recovered from that. However, the Australian chasllenge should see them refreshed and ready to go, particularly after inflicting a home ODI whitewash on the Australians in a 5 match series recently. Australia on the other hand, remain as formidable at home as ever. Their home record is consistently challenged in recent times by the South Africans and Steven Smith's side would want to set the record right.
All in all, a good series on the cards.

by alfie Tue 08 Nov 2016, 10:57 am

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Presumably people are grumbling that not enough of the ball was hitting the leg stump? Haven't the guidelines on umpire's call been changed on that point recently? Might have been what got the commentators confused... Had no problem with it myself, those can always be tricky for the umpire because the batsman's foot is sliding around a fair bit so hard to know exactly where the impact was, but I'm sure if you showed Dar the path of the delivery up to the impact he'd agree that it was hitting the stumps.

Well I am even as I type watching an Australian sports panel show : and people are asserting that the ball tracking was faulty ...saying , apparently in all seriousness , that the ball would have missed the stumps by some distance...they just don't believe the technology works.
Some of these are just sports writers with little real grasp of reality . But ex- players are saying similar things : perhaps M Johnson's views can be disregarded ; but I expect more from Clarke and Taylor.

I watched it again. Looks marginal ; but I have no problem believing it was clipping the stumps.

by msp83 Fri 11 Nov 2016, 2:18 pm

So 2nd test to get underway tomorrow.
Selection calls to be made for both sides. Who would come in for Dale Steyn for South Africa? Morne Morkel? Kyle Abbot? Or will they both play with the left-arm spin of Keshav Maharaj considered not quite suitable to conditions? I would get Morkel in, provided he's fully fit and ready, and retain Maharaj......
As for Australia, Shaun Marsh, finally seeming like settling into test cricket, is out injured, and so is Peter Siddle. Joe Burns and Joe Menny are likely to come in. The big question is on Mitchell Marsh. Will they drop him and go in with a 6th specialist batsman?

by msp83 Fri 11 Nov 2016, 2:19 pm

Think they should.......

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Fri 11 Nov 2016, 4:16 pm

Judging by Smiths comments Ferguson will come in for Marsh and Lyon will be retained instead of going with 4 seamers

Personally think SA should go with 4 seamers and drop Maharaj - Alfie what's the weather meant to be? Reports are the pitch will be very seamer friendly

by msp83 Fri 11 Nov 2016, 7:29 pm

If it is going to be a very seamer friendly pitch, Philaner, and then Rabada, will be more than a handful. And Morne or Abbot would be enough of support. But if the life is gone from the pitch, and if it is required in the 3rd/4th innings, Maharaj would provide the spin option. Unless the spinner would be unlikely to bowl anything significant in terms of overs, there has to be a proper spin option. Only on a greenest of green top would I favor going in without a spinner.

by JDizzle Fri 11 Nov 2016, 11:42 pm

Well, just as I was about to go to bed, SA have AUS 2/2 after winning the toss! And who wouldn't stay up for a bit more of that!

by JDizzle Fri 11 Nov 2016, 11:45 pm

And the sensational work of Mark Taylor to try to claim Joe Burns was unlucky to be given out LBW to a ball that was hitting the stumps. You have to admire Channel 9's commitment.

by alfie Sat 12 Nov 2016, 12:25 am

Voges the fourth to go...first ball to Philander. Nice start for Ferguson to come in on a hat trick Smile

Survived it - just.

8/4 and looking like another 60 all out. Or even less.

Olly , the weather is supposed to be showery for much of the match...it might be Australia's best chance is for the rain to be torrential...

by alfie Sat 12 Nov 2016, 12:27 am

JDizzle wrote:And the sensational work of Mark Taylor to try to claim Joe Burns was unlucky to be given out LBW to a ball that was hitting the stumps. You have to admire Channel 9's commitment.

Taylor is still claiming Marsh was dudded in Perth...

Technology is apparently fine unless you don't like the results Smile

by JDizzle Sat 12 Nov 2016, 12:34 am

After Philander's first over (which was pretty rancid, despite the wicket), he has been exceptional. Doing all sorts with it. Interested to see how Rabada goes on this deck...

by alfie Sat 12 Nov 2016, 12:45 am

JDizzle wrote:After Philander's first over (which was pretty rancid, despite the wicket), he has been exceptional. Doing all sorts with it. Interested to see how Rabada goes on this deck...

Should find out soon - a lot left up to him now as Steve Smith has taken out Philander with a shoulder charge Smile

Ferguson run out...

Suicidal picard

by JDizzle Sat 12 Nov 2016, 12:51 am

Big fan of the third umpire telling the camera team to 'get off this Poopie' whilst they were showing Philander down instead of the review too.

Not only Ferguson run out. Not only run out on debut. Not only run out by the sub fielder. But run out on debut by the sub fielder who is a wicketkeeper. This is amazing. When you are 17/4 too!

by alfie Sat 12 Nov 2016, 12:55 am

Philander really not looking good. Second match in a row that SA will have lost one of their main bowlers early in the first innings.

Perhaps when the opponent is 18/5 it is less of a concern Smile

But the second innings might be a real problem , if Hobart goes the way it often does.

This pair Australia's last chance of mounting a serious recovery. Nevill did well at the WACA so Smith will hope he can stick with him here.
Mind you , Smith not looking that secure himself...this is at least a chance for him to show he can make runs in "sporty" conditions.

I was critical of Ferguson for his run out ; but viewing it again that pick up and return from the deep was quite exceptional ! May be more bad luck than bad judgement. Though perhaps when four down for nothing one should be extra careful with the running...

by alfie Sat 12 Nov 2016, 1:16 am

Excellent review by SA sees Nevill on his way...

31/6

Sixty all out looms ?

by alfie Sat 12 Nov 2016, 1:20 am

Joe Mennie at eight on debut.

Well I gather he was picked over J Bird for his batting Smile

Got off the mark with a nice four down the ground. Australia will need a few more of those...

by alfie Sat 12 Nov 2016, 1:28 am

A great session for SA. Can Australia fight back after lunch ?

I will find out later...off to play my own game now...

by msp83 Sat 12 Nov 2016, 6:52 am

South Africa lost 4 before they managed to go pass the Australian total of 85, but they have been positive and full of intent with the bat, and are building the lead. At 160-5, they are ahead by 75 already.......

by msp83 Sat 12 Nov 2016, 7:12 am

South Africa end the day on 171-5. Temba Bavuma on 38, Quinton de Kock on 28. Hashim Amla made a very crucial 47 in the top order that was as valuable as a big half-century under the circumstances.

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Sat 12 Nov 2016, 7:53 am

Joe Mennie is just an average county trundler - surely he's not the 4th best seamer in Aus? (Behind the injured Siddle)

Here's a funny stat - two times Australia have played six specialist batsman in the past 4/5 years, they've been bowled out for 60 and 85 in the first innings

by KO-KING Sat 12 Nov 2016, 11:20 pm

Kp more happy with South Africa winning/performing than he ever was with England

Loves his voice too, kn**head

by msp83 Mon 14 Nov 2016, 7:26 am

Quinton de Kock, who scored twin 50s in the last test, has gone on this time and converted into a hundred, 104, and Temba Bavuma produced another excellent knock of 74, and when Big Vern powered a 28 ball 32, South Africa stretched their first innings to 326, for a small lead of 245. Now that the pitch has become rather flat, the bullies are back to run-scoring mode and are 121-2 at stumps on day 3.
Is there a greater FTB batting lineup in the world today than the current bunch of Australians? Can't play swing, can't play seam, can't play spin. Give them a flat track, they'll be all over you!
Think that's the way to go for Australia at present, the presence of the likes of Starc who can take wickets on any road might just give them an edge., provided they don't bowl him to the ground. Needs to go in with 4 bowlers and a decent all-rounder on a road and expect Starc to blast the opposition out and their batsmen to then put on the runs.......

by alfie Mon 14 Nov 2016, 12:11 pm

Australia not folding up second time around as it appeared they might when Burns went fourth ball...

Half way to erasing the deficit . Enough to have some local radio experts talking up the chances of getting a lead of 180 or so and bowling SA out on the last day ; which strikes me as unduly optimistic Smile

Can't fault the spirit though. Wonder if the players share that confidence ?
Truth is this pair are about it as far as genuine Test batting goes (assuming Voges has , as it appears , come back to the pack after a rather startling run of form last year.) One early wicket tomorrow and it could still be over shortly after lunch.
Actually think they will make SA bat again ; but I am not sure they'll be setting them much of a target ; and if they are able to do so it will indicate the pitch is playing too well for any fanciful rout of the SA batting.
But at least this resistance will ensure something for the spectators tomorrow : I believe the rain is going away.

by Gooseberry Tue 15 Nov 2016, 5:43 am

alfie wrote:Australia not folding up second time around as it appeared they might when Burns went fourth ball...

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Tue 15 Nov 2016, 7:18 am

Bahahahaha australia are truly truly woeful

SA are missing their two best seamers! Imagine if Steyn/Morkel were playing!

by alfie Tue 15 Nov 2016, 10:04 am

Well that went downhill fast for the home team. I did suggest last night that the loss of a wicket early in the morning might see another collapse...but I thought they'd at least survive to lunch !

8 went for just 32 at the end so it's right up there (or down there) with recent Great Australian Batting Collapses. I know there are some dodgy techniques and just plain not Test quality players in there ; but I'm also wondering if a bout of losses has just about drained the spirit out of this team.
Immediate solution not obvious. But Smith and Lehmann are under a lot of pressure.

by alfie Tue 15 Nov 2016, 10:38 am

Now those who know my views on selection will be aware I never endorse kneejerk wholesale changes to a Test side in the wake of embarrassing defeat . It may satisfy the public demand for vengeance ; but generally doesn't result in either the choice of the right replacements or an improvement in team confidence. I do however concede that the present situation in the Australian squad requires some action. (They actually made three changes for Hobart , two of them forced , to be fair , with no discernible improvement.)
So this won't be easy.

Obviously Warner , Smith and Khawaja (who still seems a bit overrated to me , but did a good job second innings here) must stay.
I would retain Burns for now , though I am by no means convinced he will be a long term opener : just don't think changing openers each week is a recipe for stability. And he did make runs - albeit , arguably , soft ones , last season.
Voges also made runs last year but it really does look to be time to put him out to pasture. Selected as a Chris Rogers template experienced stop gap ; but he isn't stopping anything at the moment - not the ball , or the rot. Main argument for keeping him on is to make sure his ridiculous Test batting average comes back to more nearly reflect his , fairly average , ability Smile

In the same way , Ferguson probably deserved selection a few years ago ; but may have been brought in after the boat sailed . Not a spring chicken , unimpressive on debut...is he a long term prospect ? Or a waste of a development spot ?
To be honest I'd like to replace both of them ...but I'm not sure who I'd bring in ; which isn't very helpful. Positions five and six are probably the best places to introduce new batsmen ; so I'd certainly like to see one of these spots used to try the young player the selectors deem most likely to grow into the job . If that means the other place remains with the incumbent for now : so be it. In any case I think this is the spot that has to be dealt with - decisively - at the moment. (No plans to return MMarsh to the job with a pink ball Test coming up as they won't need his bowling.)
Nevill I would keep . Have heard advocates for Wade ( in fact have seen him touted as a candidate for the number six batting slot rather than as keeper ; might not be the worst choice ? At least in short term) but I think you must retain the best gloveman. And although he joined the lemming rush in Hobart , Nevill did fight with the bat in Perth.

Bowling is less of a problem. Starc and Hazelwood pick themselves , I didn't watch enough of Mennie to judge but suspect Bird would be better (even if he can't bat Whistle

). Lyon is the other issue at the moment : seems down on confidence as well as wickets ; though his team's batting frailties are leaving him very exposed. He could lose his spot (to O'Keefe ? ) but I doubt it. Needs wickets soon though as his credit balance won't last for ever.

Am going back to think about the New Middle Order batsman who should be installed ; though I fancy the selectors have more knowledge than I . And they will have plenty of advice from tomorrow's morning papers...

by kingraf Tue 15 Nov 2016, 10:50 am

Three series wins in Australia on the bounce. This is probably the poorest Australia side we've had to put away, but they'd only lost one home test in 25, so it's not like everyone's been putting them away.

AB will be back in a month, and it will be the mother of all squeezes to get him in.

by Gooseberry Tue 15 Nov 2016, 11:41 am

Id agree alfie. Theres onlybso much sweepingbout ifnthebdead wood you can do. They turned to dads army in the first place because the kids kept failing.

Voges though seems the most vulnerable, followed by Neville. The all rounder spot maybe is an open question too but surely Mennie deserves another game. Going back to Marsh is unthinkable even is his dad has influence.

Bird obviously is waiting in the wings for an injury to give him a place

In terms of senior batsmen is anyone beating down the door for selection? Aside from Bird.

by VTR Tue 15 Nov 2016, 11:45 am

alfie wrote:Well that went downhill fast for the home team. I did suggest last night that the loss of a wicket early in the morning might see another collapse...but I thought they'd at least survive to lunch !

8 went for just 32 at the end so it's right up there (or down there) with recent Great Australian Batting Collapses. I know there are some dodgy techniques and just plain not Test quality players in there ; but I'm also wondering if a bout of losses has just about drained the spirit out of this team.
Immediate solution not obvious. But Smith and Lehmann are under a lot of pressure.

Its easily the worse one since that shambolic 85 all out..................3 days ago!

by alfie Tue 15 Nov 2016, 11:56 am

kingraf wrote:Three series wins in Australia on the bounce. This is probably the poorest Australia side we've had to put away, but they'd only lost one home test in 25, so it's not like everyone's been putting them away.

AB will be back in a month, and it will be the mother of all squeezes to get him in.

I think you'll find room , raf Smile

Has been a fantastic performance by SA . Even pretty ordinary Australian teams are generally hard to beat at home ; and this one was in a strong position three and a half sessions into the series ...since then it's been one way traffic.

Congratulations thumbsup

by Mad for Chelsea Tue 15 Nov 2016, 12:15 pm

Yes I think for all Aus's woes you have to give lots of credit to SA. Let's not forget that after day one of the first Test Australia were well on top, looking set for a sizeable first innings lead and to dictate terms from there. SA's seamers have really been tremendous, with Phillander back to his best, while Rabada continues to look like a real star - his spell today was awesome, well backed up by Abbott here. De Kock also building on his recent form, looks a seriously good player to me (has to work on moving to his left off the seamers, though took a good one there today), and Bavuma has nailed his position.

As for AB coming back, the obvious choices to leave out would be Duminy. Yes he scored a fine hundred in the first Test, but overall his career (in Tests) has been a bit inconsistent you'd have to say. Another option would be dropping one of the openers, who haven't really fired in this series, but that would require a re-shuffling of the batting order, with probably either Bavuma or De Kock being asked to move up. Not sure that's an ideal option, with both looking so at ease in their current positions.

For Australia, I'm not sure there's a huge amount they can do. I don't think Mennie really looked like much here, though obviously one shouldn't blame the bowlers too much for this debacle. I'm one of the rare (perhaps the only) Marsh fans on here, I think he fills the fifth bowling spot well, and has plenty of ability (also a fine fielder) but have to admit he simply hasn't scored enough runs to justify his spot. Wasn't overly impressed by Ferguson, though he came in at difficult times in both innings and of course was run out in the first. Either way, he deserves a bit of a chance to impress.

Burns just isn't very good, and he's also hugely vulnerable to the ball angling in, fancy him as an LBW/bowled candidate all day long. Yes he score runs against a disinterested WI side on flat pitches, but good bowlers will get him out. Warner and Smith are obviously fine players, and Khawaja looks to have sorted his attitude out somewhat, so you have the basis for a solid top order there. The biggest issue is the middle order, with Voges looking a little old, no number 6 to speak of, and much as I like Nevill, he's a bit of a throwback to the 90's and won't score that many big runs and certainly won't take the game away from the opposition or counter-attack. Given their tail doesn't have England's depth to it (though they're all capable with the bat), you have potential for serious batting collapses there. I think the main thing they have to look at is solidifying that 5-6-7 area, but I'm not sure how many better options are out there.

by kingraf Tue 15 Nov 2016, 12:19 pm

Yeah, he does come straight back in of course, but I meant it when I said it was hard to fit him in. Everyone has done really well in recent history. Even Stephen Cook, Saw off the new ball twice in the last two innings, and then let's not forget he scored a fifty three tests ago and a 100 five tests ago, so It's really not like he's been in a drought form wise. Amla averages 55 for the year. Faf scored a hundred three tests ago and is a REALLY good shout for being made permanent captain. Quinton and Temba are averaging 80 and 58 respectively for the year.

There's also the political sphere to put into play, muddies waters even more. Cook PROBABLY loses out, if for no other reason, because he's 34, then Temba probably gets to open, AB comes in at 4, JP 5, Faf 6. OR, and this is just me going on a flight of fancy here...

Cook drops out. AB takes the pads, Quinny goes to open. AB slots in at five or six, and JP bats at 7 as the all rounder (it's been mentioned that he's stats aren't too dissimilar to Moeen's).

by msp83 Tue 15 Nov 2016, 8:03 pm

Don't think de Villiers would be keeping on a regular basis, and I don't think he should, neither should de Kock open. QDK is the one Gilchrist player who can change games from that number 6 or 7 position. He has already showed that potential side of his game in these 2 tests. Think he very much should be left there.
Raf, what are the chances of Hashim opening? I really, really like to see Bavuma coming in at 6 rather than at first.......
Elgar
Amla
Faf
AB
Duminy/Morris(latter batting 7)
Bavuma
de Kock
Philander
Maharaj
Rabada
Steyn........

And if Dale's playing, I would hope it to be Morris rather than Duminy.......
JP I don't really think is good enough with bat, and certainly with ball to hold on to a consistent test place.

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Wed 16 Nov 2016, 12:06 am

Aussies have one good batsman - Smith

When has Warner scored some hard graft runs? All well and good scoring a 110 ball century when your team has a lead of 200 on a flat deck, but maybe ya dig in and don't waft outside off stump when it's moving around? See Usman Khawaja here also

Burns stinks, Voges isn't facing county attacks anymore (West Indies C left), and Nevill is a test 8/9 at best.

And the worst thing? You've got nobody coming through because you have 6 state sides only.

What a shambles

by alfie Wed 16 Nov 2016, 9:59 am

Just a little hard on Warner there , Olly.

I have seen him make runs in difficult conditions : most notably at this same ground against NZ in 2011 , when he made a hundred and very nearly singlehandedly saved his team from defeat. But it is true he does thrive on the fairly benign home pitches ; and perhaps has become a bit too accustomed to them ? (You could actually say the same of Smith , to a degree ; though he played a very out of character hand here in the face of his team's collapse)
I agree the jury is still out on Khawaja , despite his prolific 2015/16 season.

Replacements are needed : as you'd expect after several experienced players departing more or less together . You don't always get the right ones in straight away. And I think the selectors would concede they haven't got it right lately (Rod Marsh has already announced his resignation several months ahead of the original plan).
I suspect also the fascination with white balls (which has worked pretty well for Australia , who remain the World Cup champs) and now Pink ones (Marketing gone mad , in my books) has hurt them : it confuses form judgements and undermines preparation time.

Last year's home success against a woeful West Indies and a NZ team that didn't seem at its best somehow ( largely because the key bowlers , for whatever reason , didn't perform) led to a false sense of security - hell , they even got a number one ranking for a week or two ! But the truth is , the team as a whole is fairly mediocre at the moment ; though the bowling remains quite strong.

Haven't seen much Shield cricket recently so I cannot definitively attest to a slip in standards. Perhaps the absence of many of the stars so often due to endless limited over competitions has dragged it down ; but I believe there are good batsmen out there who will sooner or later replace the Clarkes and Pontings - though I can't guarantee they'll be as good.

Local media is going nuts . But if I know Australian cricket at all they won't remain a basket case for too long ...and that same media will be very forgiving as soon as they start winning again.

by Gooseberry Wed 16 Nov 2016, 10:13 am

Well Marsh has quit, no great shock after hes come in from a bashing in the press and Smiths comments regarding selection policies.
The stop gap mentality worked for a short period and to be frank most of the young guys who have been given a go havent produced the goods. Marsh seems to be the focus of the blame but its maybe unfair.
I guess the real issue is that Smith doesnt agree with some of the selections being made, and having a capatin with no faith in the players hes given isnt great.
There most likely will be some significant changes in the side and some new or newish faces appear. It may well take some time for these players to make a difference though. Guys like stokes bairstow and woakes for england had quite a long bedding in period before looking like real test players.
But the change alone may be enough to spark a change in attitude and break the negativity around the side....much as it did when Lehman came in.
Unless things turn around for the final test theres a good chance he will go too

by sirfredperry Wed 16 Nov 2016, 10:17 am

For decades Australia Test selectors went for youth - sometimes being forced to by the fact that many players retired comparatively early.
Of late, much older players have been selected and the Aussie sides have resembled the Dad's Army teams normally associated with England.
Are there any good young Aussie players demanding selection at the moment? Contrast the situation with England with players such as Gubbins, Foakes, the Currans et al waiting for their chance.

by alfie Wed 16 Nov 2016, 10:56 am

That's just it's, Sir Fred : there are some talented young players ; but they aren't demanding selection. To the chagrin of the selectors , too many are scoring a big hundred one week and not following it up.
Haven't checked the figures lately ; but I fancy there aren't too many consistently turning in high averages in the last two or three years.
Not that figures are everything : in the past a few players have been identified early on as having the potential and have grown into their roles ...which I guess is another problem now : with several top players leaving in a short space of time it has not been possible to bed in newcomers one at a time while keeping a solid core ...

by Gooseberry Fri 18 Nov 2016, 1:23 pm

Faf is being investigated for ball tampering.

by alfie Sun 20 Nov 2016, 7:43 am

Aussie selectors really did hit the panic button !

Six changes. Three uncapped batsmen. A recycled keeper and at least one different bowler in the final XI...Lyon survives but may not play if conditions look juicy for the seamers ?

Can't accuse them of not taking strong action Smile

But what will they do if the newcomers prove less than effective ? You'd imagine that Ferguson , for one , is effectively ruled out after just a one Test career as it would be odd to go back to him now if this lot don't fire...there must be a danger of "burning" too many prospects with this kind of turnover.

by alfie Sun 20 Nov 2016, 7:57 am

One odd aspect of the selection is the immediate axing of Mennie : if he is so clearly not up to it (despite his superior batting Smile

) : why on earth was he selected ahead of Bird for Hobart ? Really does make that selection a howler...
Will Bird play this one ? Hohns says "Sayers bowls well in Adelaide" ...but he also says Bird is in form so "both deserve their chance" ...which sounds ominous for Lyon...

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Sun 20 Nov 2016, 9:32 am

alfie wrote:One odd aspect of the selection is the immediate axing of Mennie : if he is so clearly not up to it (despite his superior batting ) : why on earth was he selected ahead of Bird for Hobart ? Really does make that selection a howler...
Will Bird play this one ? Hohns says "Sayers bowls well in Adelaide" ...but he also says Bird is in form so "both deserve their chance" ...which sounds ominous for Lyon...

Mennie looked truly woeful in SA ODIs too. As I said, nothing more than an average county trundler.

The Aussies seem to be having a selection meltdown - and it's not even the funny type (like when they opened the batting and bowling with Glenn Maxwell in India 2014). It's just tragic.

Nic Maddinson plays? Wasn't he the next big thing at one point? He seems to have fallen off the radar....

by ShankyCricket Sun 20 Nov 2016, 11:51 pm

alfie wrote:Just a little hard on Warner there , Olly.

I have seen him make runs in difficult conditions : most notably at this same ground against NZ in 2011 , when he made a hundred and very nearly singlehandedly saved his team from defeat. But it is true he does thrive on the fairly benign home pitches ; and perhaps has become a bit too accustomed to them ? (You could actually say the same of Smith , to a degree ; though he played a very out of character hand here in the face of his team's collapse)
I agree the jury is still out on Khawaja , despite his prolific 2015/16 season.

Replacements are needed : as you'd expect after several experienced players departing more or less together . You don't always get the right ones in straight away. And I think the selectors would concede they haven't got it right lately (Rod Marsh has already announced his resignation several months ahead of the original plan).
I suspect also the fascination with white balls (which has worked pretty well for Australia , who remain the World Cup champs) and now Pink ones (Marketing gone mad , in my books) has hurt them : it confuses form judgements and undermines preparation time.

Last year's home success against a woeful West Indies and a NZ team that didn't seem at its best somehow ( largely because the key bowlers , for whatever reason , didn't perform) led to a false sense of security - hell , they even got a number one ranking for a week or two ! But the truth is , the team as a whole is fairly mediocre at the moment ; though the bowling remains quite strong.

Haven't seen much Shield cricket recently so I cannot definitively attest to a slip in standards. Perhaps the absence of many of the stars so often due to endless limited over competitions has dragged it down ; but I believe there are good batsmen out there who will sooner or later replace the Clarkes and Pontings - though I can't guarantee they'll be as good.

Local media is going nuts . But if I know Australian cricket at all they won't remain a basket case for too long ...and that same media will be very forgiving as soon as they start winning again.

Smith averages 54 away from home, Warner averages 38.. Thats a difference of more than 15 runs! Not to mention that Warner's away average is helped by a series in conditions as identical to home as you could get and where he got dropped every other ball. Smith averages over 40 in each and every country he has played so far. Warner averages under 40 in 1, under 30 in another 3 and under 20 in another. Smith's centuries count is split evenly home and away - 8 at home and 7 away. Warner has 12 at home and 4 away (3 of which have come in 1 series, two of which in 1 Test). To suggest they are even remotely similar in terms of being home bullies and not scoring tough runs is just incredibly lazy. It seems that Englishmen's entire opinion on Smith is based on the 2 consecutive Tests he failed in England in 2015 at Edgbaston and Trent Bridge (ignoring the fact that he actually became the first Australian player to score a double hundred in England in ages and the first Aussie to aggregate over 500 runs in an away Ashes series in 18 years, not to mention a very good hundred at The Oval on a reasonably sporting track, not as seam friendly as the previous 2 but seam friendly enough for Cook to insert the opposition in but people are quite happy to put that century down as yet another flat track bullying!!). Smith also was one of the two players to cross 50 in the Day Night Test at Adelaide last year on a green top and he averaged 131 against NZ in NZ on pitches where the home batsmen (including the much loved and rated Kane Williamson) failed in the 2 Tests earlier this year. Clearly not the achievements of a flat track bully who can't play the moving ball. Suggesting that he and Warner are even remotely close is utterly disgusting. Warner has scored some tough runs too, the hundred at Hobart was brilliant as was his series in SA despite the conditions being identical to home and him having been dropped several times, it still counts as a great effort due to the quality of the opposition. But he is nowhere close to Smith as a Test batsman.

by Gooseberry Mon 21 Nov 2016, 8:44 am

alfie wrote:One odd aspect of the selection is the immediate axing of Mennie : if he is so clearly not up to it (despite his superior batting ) : why on earth was he selected ahead of Bird for Hobart ? Really does make that selection a howler...
Will Bird play this one ? Hohns says "Sayers bowls well in Adelaide" ...but he also says Bird is in form so "both deserve their chance" ...which sounds ominous for Lyon...

Theres a reason that Marsh stepped down, and a reason why he and Smith had fallen out prior to this.
The players he selected are the ones getting chopped.

I think its pretty widely recognised that Mennie was a mistake and that Smith wanted rid of Neville. This round of selections is being made as a clean start without the baggage of trying to back players or stick by previous decisions, if anything quite the opposite. Its deliberately showing that they accept the failure sof the past.

It is pretty extreme, and theres no garuntee that these replacements will do any better or last long themselves. But this approach did work for Bangladesh who finaly lost patience with mediocre players who were creaming a living, and have kept turning over youngsters till theyve found ones who can stand up and be counted. Its taken a couple of years but is now starting to show dividends in all formats. Theyve given everyone (Mennie included) a chance in Shield cricket to show they have some fight and form. Those that didnt have gone, including Fergusson ...he has been told that its not a closed door for him but that he needs to perform in domestic comeptitions to bang down the door, not just expect to walk into on the basis of what he did some time ago.

As for Lyon, I beleive Okeefe is injured which made that decision easier. Hes off form currently but has a good track record and on his day is Australias best spinner by a margin. The option is to play Maddison as the "all rounder" and see spin as a bit part only, enabling the best 4 seamers to be selected without comprimising on guys like Marsh Mennie Fergusson Henriques who smacked of the old Engand "bits and pieces/ new Botham" selections. The only problem is as I see it theyve only selected 3 proper fast bowlers and an out and out medium pace wobbler who cant bat for toffee.

Im really struggling to see how they can balance this side. They either have to pick the "all rounder" who cant bat or bowl very well, or the medium pacer. Either way theres a heck of a tail. If they play Maddinson it gives them some depth at 7, but puts a big load on 3 seamers and Lyon and just some occassional end change spin from him. Playing saysers would leave them with a huge tail. I guess there is an option of making Lyon carry the drinks and pretty much giving up on spin altogether. All in I expect SA are licking their lips at this even if they themselves have selection issues.

It may well be blind panic and a knee jerk reaction but the level of discomfort about getting so royally but humped by a flawed SA side missing key players cant be underestimated. Form and youth; isnt that how the internet keeps demanding we select teams?

Sa should be licking their lips at this. The reliance on Smith and Warner for runs looks pretty huge.

by alfie Mon 21 Nov 2016, 11:23 am

ShankyCricket wrote:
alfie wrote:Just a little hard on Warner there , Olly.

I have seen him make runs in difficult conditions : most notably at this same ground against NZ in 2011 , when he made a hundred and very nearly singlehandedly saved his team from defeat. But it is true he does thrive on the fairly benign home pitches ; and perhaps has become a bit too accustomed to them ? (You could actually say the same of Smith , to a degree ; though he played a very out of character hand here in the face of his team's collapse)
I agree the jury is still out on Khawaja , despite his prolific 2015/16 season.

Replacements are needed : as you'd expect after several experienced players departing more or less together . You don't always get the right ones in straight away. And I think the selectors would concede they haven't got it right lately (Rod Marsh has already announced his resignation several months ahead of the original plan).
I suspect also the fascination with white balls (which has worked pretty well for Australia , who remain the World Cup champs) and now Pink ones (Marketing gone mad , in my books) has hurt them : it confuses form judgements and undermines preparation time.

Last year's home success against a woeful West Indies and a NZ team that didn't seem at its best somehow ( largely because the key bowlers , for whatever reason , didn't perform) led to a false sense of security - hell , they even got a number one ranking for a week or two ! But the truth is , the team as a whole is fairly mediocre at the moment ; though the bowling remains quite strong.

Haven't seen much Shield cricket recently so I cannot definitively attest to a slip in standards. Perhaps the absence of many of the stars so often due to endless limited over competitions has dragged it down ; but I believe there are good batsmen out there who will sooner or later replace the Clarkes and Pontings - though I can't guarantee they'll be as good.

Local media is going nuts . But if I know Australian cricket at all they won't remain a basket case for too long ...and that same media will be very forgiving as soon as they start winning again.
Smith averages 54 away from home, Warner averages 38.. Thats a difference of more than 15 runs! Not to mention that Warner's away average is helped by a series in conditions as identical to home as you could get and where he got dropped every other ball. Smith averages over 40 in each and every country he has played so far. Warner averages under 40 in 1, under 30 in another 3 and under 20 in another. Smith's centuries count is split evenly home and away - 8 at home and 7 away. Warner has 12 at home and 4 away (3 of which have come in 1 series, two of which in 1 Test). To suggest they are even remotely similar in terms of being home bullies and not scoring tough runs is just incredibly lazy. It seems that Englishmen's entire opinion on Smith is based on the 2 consecutive Tests he failed in England in 2015 at Edgbaston and Trent Bridge (ignoring the fact that he actually became the first Australian player to score a double hundred in England in ages and the first Aussie to aggregate over 500 runs in an away Ashes series in 18 years, not to mention a very good hundred at The Oval on a reasonably sporting track, not as seam friendly as the previous 2 but seam friendly enough for Cook to insert the opposition in but people are quite happy to put that century down as yet another flat track bullying!!). Smith also was one of the two players to cross 50 in the Day Night Test at Adelaide last year on a green top and he averaged 131 against NZ in NZ on pitches where the home batsmen (including the much loved and rated Kane Williamson) failed in the 2 Tests earlier this year. Clearly not the achievements of a flat track bully who can't play the moving ball. Suggesting that he and Warner are even remotely close is utterly disgusting. Warner has scored some tough runs too, the hundred at Hobart was brilliant as was his series in SA despite the conditions being identical to home and him having been dropped several times, it still counts as a great effort due to the quality of the opposition. But he is nowhere close to Smith as a Test batsman.

Steady on there ,Shanky ! I did not - well I did not intend to imply - that Smith and Warner were two of a kind. Smith is a far more reliable player , if less exciting ...when he gets set , he goes big. And you are correct in pointing out that Warner has virtually no away form of consequence , apart from the SA efforts - with the known similarity to Australian conditions.
So in the respect ,yes : big difference . (Though to call a comparison - even a remote one - "disgusting" is a bit over the top , I think)

The only reason I mentioned Smith in that context is that he is still perceived in some quarters as a bit of a FTB...probably because of the contrast between his huge scores on obviously flat wickets and the much more modest returns in games played on more bowler friendly surfaces : that tour of England obviously a case in point.
Now I don't think this view is entirely fair ; but I think it is quite reasonable to think that Smith needs to play innings like the one in Hobart the other day to convince those who would downgrade his accomplishments that he is a lot more versatile than they imagine.
I don't have Smith on quite the pedestal that you seem to believe he belongs ; but he is certainly the best current Australian batsman by a long way. (Unfortunately that means rather less than it might in most recent periods of history !)
Where he ranks in terms of batsmen of all countries is open to question , I think. There are a few around and different people have very different views ( I fancy you don't rate Williamson ? Correct me if I'm wrong)
Kohli , Root , de Villiers ... They've all got their fans.
I'm not all that concerned about trying to rank them. But I'm more impressed by Smith battling it out in adversity than collecting easy runs - home or away .
He might need to do so again if this pink ball game is provided with a juicy pitch like last year...

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Tue 22 Nov 2016, 1:46 pm

Steve Smith is like the 10th best batsman in the world at the moment

Also Matthew wade is colour blind - Chris Rogers said he'd have to pull out of a pink ball test cos he's colour blind. Be interesting to see how wade gets on

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Tue 22 Nov 2016, 2:02 pm

Wade has literally said he struggles to pickup the pink ball under lights after playing a shield game last year - struggles to judge it's depth.

That's kind of a big issue for a keeper. What a selection

by Gooseberry Tue 22 Nov 2016, 5:58 pm

Wades keeping has apparently improved greatly. The simple fact is Aus need his batting, theres no way they can build a five bowling option side without a keeper batsman. England have turned bairstow into a decent gloveman.
The pink ball thing could be interesting though ...but theres nothing to stop them picking him for the non floodlight games.

In other new faf has been fined pocket money for ball tampering. Repeat offence, ICC really dont take it that seriously.

by **Good Golly I'm Olly** Tue 22 Nov 2016, 6:09 pm

But the thing is wade isn't actually that good a batsman. Averages under 40 in first class cricket, only two runs more than nevill. Think that was a harsh selection decision myself

by Gooseberry Wed 23 Nov 2016, 11:06 am

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:But the thing is wade isn't actually that good a batsman. Averages under 40 in first class cricket, only two runs more than nevill. Think that was a harsh selection decision myself

Selective stats alert ... the diffence in tests is 22 to 36. So whilst Wade may be no Bairstow he has a much better track record than Nevilel who in now way could ever bat 6 and doesnt mach up to modern expectations of a 7. Nevilles been given an extended run and come up short, and Australia despertaely need to patch their batting line up to enable them to pick their best bowlers rather than all rounders who are rubbish at both disciplines.
Wade also fits the bill of being a few years younger and potentially part of team thats going to rebuild over a number of years, and hes seen as a bit more of an agressive "up for it" charachter. Wades also the better bowler, having one first class wicket ( he averages 32, that makes him an all rounder right? Whistle

) .. nevills one over bwoled went for 8 runs

I really dont see it as that controversial a change given the extent of the overhaul.

by Sponsored content