Rest of the World

First topic message reminder :

Big partnership in the context of the game. If they can add another 20-odd, the lead becomes noteworthy in a low scoring slug fest. As is Jansen showing he may well become a #7, while Keshav is playing with the poise of a man who has 3 Test 50s. Very organised. He probably has done himself a disservice, especially in a South African side both devoid of batsmen and obsessed with pace, in not working a little harder on his batting to be a #7.

Pretty good come back having been rolled twice for 100 a week ago. Barring weather or one of the more incredible day fives of cricket tomorrow, this summer would include a come from behind win over the #1 team in the world (at the time), and a draw against the World champs. Not bad for a cricket team and organisation written off three months ago.

Yeah I think you've got this one , raf. NZ would need a couple more Conways in their order to be able to bat out the fifth day ; so imagine it will be done and dusted mid afternoon at latest - weather permitting.

Real pity there isn't a third match as it has been all quite entertaining.

The young keeper finally making a mark with the bat in tests is probably the biggest news for SA from this test, beyond what should just be a comfortable stroll to victory now.

A potential successor to ABV and de Kock in the making? Has a FC average of 50 and some decent scores in ODI's.

Annoyed that Southee let the extra 9 runs go to mean only 3 of the 4 lead bowlers ended the innings 2/81 but still a nice meaningless statistical oddity.

Disappointing loss for NZ, I'm presuming it will be a loss! Means they've drawn both home series in their summer, and if there had have been a third test (all series should be three minimum) I would have backed South Africa to win. I think New Zealand will be in for a steep decline in this decade, with the main core of the team nearly all 30+ (Jamieson excepted) and not a lot coming through. They may end up like English rugby in the 2000s - briefly reached the summit, avalanche of retirements, struggle for adequate replacements, followed by steep decline. Not all bad for the Kiwis, however, they've got England next!

The South Africans were caught short in the first after coming in with zero preparation, but have clearly settled now. Two top quality innings from Erwee and Verreynne provide some promise for the future (not a long future for Erwee, admittedly) and the seam bowling led by Rabada remains a joy. I didn't consider them in contention for the WTC, but after this strong start they're certainly in the mix. Bangladesh and England next, followed by the West Indies, all very winnable series, before the big test in Australia.

Next test matches are on the 4th March. India home to Sri Lanka for a two game series for what should be a walkover, and Pakistan home to Australia for three. Really like the odds available on Pakistan for this one - about evens to win the series, 8/1 on a 3-0, and 6/4 to win the opening test. Australia have a side that is hugely inexperienced in sub-continent conditions, and it looks as though (surprise, surprise) they're going into the tests with zero FC warm-up games. What hope for Aus?

Why’s the New Zealand commentary so ridiculously biased? They act like this Latham fellow is some sort of world beater when he’s seems anything but.

Jeff Navarro wrote:Why’s the New Zealand commentary so ridiculously biased? They act like this Latham fellow is some sort of world beater when he’s seems anything but.

He is among the top five test openers so is pretty useful.

Soul Requiem wrote:

Jeff Navarro wrote:Why’s the New Zealand commentary so ridiculously biased? They act like this Latham fellow is some sort of world beater when he’s seems anything but.

He is among the top five test openers so is pretty useful.

I saw someone on Reddit compare him to Lukaku as a minnow basher

Soul Requiem wrote:

Jeff Navarro wrote:Why’s the New Zealand commentary so ridiculously biased? They act like this Latham fellow is some sort of world beater when he’s seems anything but.

He is among the top five test openers so is pretty useful.

Did say it before the series but of his 12 Test hundreds he has 9 vs SL, Bang and Zimbabwe. And his two vs Pakistan were in the UAE. He has serious issues vs decent attacks in seaming conditions. Albeit I suspect you could probably add up all the 100s made by England openers outside of Strauss and Cook since 2012 and not get to 12. So it’s all relative.

JDizzle wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

Jeff Navarro wrote:Why’s the New Zealand commentary so ridiculously biased? They act like this Latham fellow is some sort of world beater when he’s seems anything but.

He is among the top five test openers so is pretty useful.

Did say it before the series but of his 12 Test hundreds he has 9 vs SL, Bang and Zimbabwe. And his two vs Pakistan were in the UAE. He has serious issues vs decent attacks in seaming conditions. Albeit I suspect you could probably add up all the 100s made by England openers outside of Strauss and Cook since 2012 and not get to 12. So it’s all relative.

That applies to every opener at the moment; Warner has scored 18 of his 24 test centuries at home with another three coming in South Africa. Rohit has scored a single overseas test century with none at all coming against Australia or New Zealand.

At least those two names have got runs at home against good attacks. Latham doesn’t even do it in NZ vs good seam bowling.

NZ weather trying to come to the rescue...has left it a bit late as they're nine down ; but for now the covers are on and the players are off as they take an early tea.

SA deserve a win - and I think they will still get it as there is still plenty of time to get back on and finish the job. But with the rain quite solid and the light poor they might be watching the sky with some anxiety...

And indeed the rain has relented and they are back out there so justice will soon be done...

And indeed it didn't take long - Maharaj getting his second to win the game and tie the series.

Good comeback for SA after getting smashed in game one. Basically won this game on day one when they reached 199 for just one wicket : rest of the match saw early wickets fall to the new ball and most runs scored by the late middle order - a slightly unusual pattern.

Do think it is a pity there isn't a third match but many series in NZ seem to be limited to two - financial reasons I suppose. Will be interesting to see both these sides in action in England in a few months.

Yet Braithwaite who doesn't score runs against anyone anywhere is good right?
Jokes aside ... fair to say Latham gets overrated and Braithwaite underrated but Latham certainly isnt bad and Braithwaite certainly isnt more than adequate.

Long rambling thought dump....

In regard to the age of NZ side its certainly a thing, even Conway is 30 ...somehow only got capped in 2020 inspite of a FC average a shade under 50 and now a test average 63, ODI 75 and T20 50 .... arguably the most successful batsman in the world through the Covid era. That hes only just getting a chance does show that NZ have had a their best ever set of players, as well as notoriously flat decks at home (and Latham).

The decline does seem somewhat inevitable, although SA themselves seemed to be staring down a similar hole and frankly every team other than India has struggled to bring through test players as good as those leaving over the past decade. Going into this series NZ were ranked 2nd in the world, think this drops them to 3rd below India who were only just behind. Its still a big gap to England, who are still on a downcurve themselves, and then SA who have a fair chance of catching them up over the next couple of years. Even with a real slump in results NZ arent likely to drop below 4th anytime soon, and certainly not below 5th which is still historically pretty good for them. Think a downturn in results was always inevitable, how long and how sustained it is a bigger question but they have a hell of a long way to fall to be a bottom half team especially with England, SL, WI and Bangladesh continuing to get worse and worse.

They have been a bit of an outlier in actually producing decent test cricketers. Cant think of anyone from England, Sri Lanka, West Indies, Bangladesh or Pakistan who's come through post 2010 and would be considered a top class test player. NZ managed almost an entire team. SA and Aus have a few, India.

Feels a bit of mystery as to how and why NZ managed it with such limited resources in an era when most of the rest of the world was seeing a slump in the test talent pipeline. And why has it now seemingly dried up for them? An element of luck to just get a group together who spurred each other on? Strauss could do with bottling whatever it was.


Great result for SA, but still the same issues facing them for the future. Endless pipeline of fast bowlers (again Strauss needs to bottle this) all of the top 5 has an age about the same of their batting average. Elgar has been decent for an opener in current times, but alongside him they have another journeyman with a mid 30s FC average. Makram is the only one who has the potential to be a useful player through the rest of the decade, but still finding his way and may have to go back to opening soon. Verryene and Mulder look pretty key to propping up their batting in the future.

I wouldn't bother buying a ticket for day 4 of a test in England when SA come over, going to be a case of seeing who's batsmen are the most incompetent! As things stand its likely Root will be the only player with a batting average above the mid 30s in the series.

Gooseberry wrote:Yet Braithwaite who doesn't score runs against anyone anywhere is good right?
Jokes aside ... fair to say Latham gets overrated and Braithwaite underrated but Latham certainly isnt bad and Braithwaite certainly isnt more than adequate.

Long rambling thought dump....

In regard to the age of NZ side its certainly a thing, even Conway is 30 ...somehow only got capped in 2020  inspite of a FC average a shade under 50 and now a test average 63, ODI 75 and T20 50 .... arguably the most successful batsman in the world through the Covid era. That hes only just getting a chance does show that NZ have had a their best ever set of players, as well as notoriously flat decks at home (and Latham).

The decline does seem somewhat inevitable, although SA themselves seemed to be staring down a similar hole and frankly every team other than India has struggled to bring through test players as good as those leaving over the past decade. Going into this series NZ were ranked 2nd in the world, think this drops them to 3rd below India who were only just behind. Its still a big gap to England, who are still on a downcurve themselves, and then SA who have a fair chance of catching them up over the next couple of years. Even with a real slump in results NZ arent likely to drop below 4th anytime soon, and certainly not below 5th which is still historically pretty good for them. Think a downturn in results was always inevitable, how long and how sustained it is a bigger question but they have a hell of a long way to fall to be a bottom half team especially with England, SL, WI and Bangladesh continuing to get worse and worse.

They have been a bit of an outlier in actually producing decent test cricketers. Cant think of anyone from England, Sri Lanka, West Indies, Bangladesh or Pakistan who's come through post 2010 and would be considered a top class test player. NZ managed almost an entire team. SA and Aus have a few, India.

Feels a bit of mystery as to how and why NZ managed it with such limited resources in an era when most of the rest of the world was seeing a slump in the test talent pipeline. And why has it now seemingly dried up for them? An element of luck to just get a group together who spurred each other on? Strauss could do with bottling whatever it was.


Great result for SA, but still the same issues facing them for the future. Endless pipeline of fast bowlers (again Strauss needs to bottle this) all of the top 5 has an age about the same of their batting average.  Elgar has been decent for an opener in current times, but alongside him they have another journeyman with a mid 30s FC average. Makram is the only one who has the potential to be a useful player through the rest of the decade, but still finding his way and may have to go back to opening soon. Verryene and Mulder look pretty key to propping up their batting in the future.

I wouldn't bother buying a ticket for day 4 of a test in England when SA come over, going to be a case of seeing who's batsmen are the most incompetent! As things stand its likely Root will be the only player with a batting average above the mid 30s in the series.  

Ahem ... Root ?

Otherwise I think your post is pretty insightful...

Perhaps shouldn't read too much into it , but apparently Lawrence has been listed as the number four bat in England's warm up game - while Pope is among the "substitutes"

Seems reasonable though : Pope had a shocker in Australia and Lawrence (who never got a chance to fail on the tour ) surely deserves the first opportunity on this trip... Obviously they will all bat anyway over the four days ; but it suggests what England are thinking.

At the same time I see Overton Woakes Wood and Robinson are the four bowlers listed which may or may not mean something. Again I presume they will all get a workout - you'd think one of the spinners will play in the Tests even if they aren't expecting much of them.

Hope it doesn't rain for three days...

Great win - I'm not sold on Verreynne, who somehow managed to go from age cricket to Test cricket without a single modification made to his technique. Markram's career is hanging on you'd think, with Keegan Petersen being the incumbent #3, and Ryan Rickelton caning runs domestically. Overall, I feel this was a bit of a miossed opportunity, and if we had a third Test/warm up FC game to start, I think we win this series going away. Anyway a series draw is still a decent result, and hopefully we avoid the potential banana slip that is Bangladesh. A series win there, with a home Windies series series on the horizon, and we might really crack a final spot as long as we can get a result either against Aus or England.

alfie wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:They have been a bit of an outlier in actually producing decent test cricketers. Cant think of anyone from England, Sri Lanka, West Indies, Bangladesh or Pakistan who's come through post 2010 and would be considered a top class test player. NZ managed almost an entire team. SA and Aus have a few, India.

Ahem ... Root ?

Otherwise I think your post is pretty insightful...

All depends where you define top class. If we mean all time great for their country then there will of course be very few.

Personally I'd define Stokes and Woakes as top class. Stokes has struggled with injury and Woakes is home conditions dependent but that is true of many top class players down the years.

From the Windies I'd rate Holder and Roach as top class as well. Both terrific bowlers.

Babar Azam and Shaheen Afridi are definitely top class. Afridi has the talent to be an all time great, he's spectacular. Mohammad Rizwan is also a very good player indeed but needs to play more Tests. I'd rate Abbas and Hassan Ali as top class Test bowlers too.

Sri Lanka have really struggled, sadly. Karunaratne and Chandimal are good Test batters but short of top class. Embuldeniya looks a really good bowler too me though, I'm looking forward to watching his career progress. 25 is young for a SLA, he could go on a long time and keep improving as Herath did.

A word for Rashid Khan as well. Afghanistan just have too few Test opportunities, likely to be even fewer now, for him to prove it either way but I think Rashid could be a top class Test player in the right environment. He's certainly that level of talent.

Sorry in my head Root was pre 2010 ...which is maybe a function of my own age! But anyway the general point is there, the pipeline of genuine test talent has been pretty dry, NZ's "golden generation" is a bit of an outlier for them and the global game. Like I said bit of a thought dump rather than well thought out / fact checked arguments, but I still think the point holds up.

Has it not usually been the case that most eras have had one or two standout sides, 2 or 3 OK Test sides and a lot of poor to dismal ones with the odd good player propping them up though?

I tend to think we remember the good and forget the bad with previous eras. In my head as a cricket nerd I can reel off a list of 11 names that played roughly around the same era and think, "cor what a side". When I actually look back at scorecards that list of players in my head almost never actually played together though!

During the Ashes I was having a look back at sides from eighties Ashes series to look at overall quality. In my head it was a cricketing nirvana as I can reel off Gooch, Gower, Botham, Greig, Willis, etc and Chappell, Border, Walters, Lillee, Thomson, Lawson, etc. When I actually went through scorecards there was a lot more Derek Randall, Eddie Hemmings, John Dyson, Graeme Fowler, Chris Tavare, etc than I'd have thought off the top of my head.

Test cricket is meant to be brutally tough. Most shouldn't succeed, every era is littered with good F-C players who couldn't quite make it but picked up a lot of caps anyway due to lack of alternatives putting their hands up.

The 80s Windies, 90s and early 00s Aussies were two teams stacked with absolutely incredible Test players pretty much from 1-11. Outside of that other brilliant Test teams I can think of still had some notable weaker spots.

England under Flower - Brilliant batting, fantastic spinner in Swann, two gun seamers in Broad and Anderson but the support acts in the seamers were mostly good bowlers at home who could do a job away

India in Tendulkar era - Exceptional batting from 1 to 7 but other than Zaheer struggled for seamers, couldn't find an all-rounder

SA under Smith - This side was terrific as seen by their remarkable away record but only ever had holding spinners, even they had players such as Petersen and Nel who were in the good rather than great bracket but filled needed holes

Current New Zealand side - Struggling for top spinners, trying to balance their side has meant making the most of CdG as a useful role player rather than having a genuine all-rounder

Current India side - Brilliant side that has played very entertaining cricket with great spinners and seamers but their batting has certainly been up and down especially away from home

I think the NZ seam attack and Matt Henry is a good present day example of what I'm saying. Fast forward twenty years and in my head the NZ attack of this era will have only ever been Boult, Southee, Wagner, Jamieson in their prime. Some of them only fleetingly overlapping, Southee taking a long time to become the bowler he is now, those guys being injured or rested, Henry sneakily getting probably around 30 caps averaging in the high thirties by the time he retires won't stick in my mind. To my brain Black Caps seam bowling in this era will solely consist of those 4 guns, all in their primes, all fully fit and I'll look at batting lineups of the 2040s and think, "these muppets could never survive against the bowling in that era!"

Hi KC

Comparisons across different time periods  - of teams or players - is always a bit iffy. Conditions - even rules - change ; and both the actual merits of a player or group and the standard of opposition they meet help to form a historical record...

With regard to my original cheeky response to goose I was only highlighting Root as the most obvious example of post 2010 "top class" arrival. Agree there are others arguably deserving of similar status - though again , class is partly a subjective judgement and depends on how picky the observer

Good point about memory often thinking of a "perfect team" that in actual fact rarely played together. Though in passing , KC , you are surely guilty of that even in your post when you speak of Flower's England as lacking true pace support for the main pair : in their famous win in Australia in 2010/11 , Broad was gone halfway through the second Test in Adelaide...and Broad also missed the decisive third match of their rare triumph in India the next December. Back up seamers like Tremlett Finn and Bresnan didn't have sustained careers but for a brief time they were a bit better than just "doing a job away".

But I am nit picking , sorry. Your main point stands . After all , if all teams were pretty much OK , we wouldn't have any truly great ones to salute , would we ?

As a side note , I reckon the present era lacks any truly outstanding team ; and any that do from time to time look really good tend to drop back when least expected. Which actually makes most series more interesting as almost anyone can surprise . The concerns I have at present are that the abbreviated nature of tours these days has inflated home advantage somewhat beyond the desirable - and more importantly that the lure of franchise cricket , and financial considerations generally , risks destroying the smaller cricket countries at Test level. Would be ironic if while we try to take the game to more countries , the pinnacle form of the game reverts to just the two countries that began it along with one modern behemoth while all others see Tests as an occasional distraction from the briefer formats...

"Was it ever thus" is definitely a condition which befalls cricket fans. I'm not even sure there's an opener whose record actually does stand up to scrutiny. Matty Hayden had 30 tons in 100 Tests and an average of 50, but on closer look he averaged 34 in SA, 34 in England, and 28 in New Zealand. His average of 50 in the subcontinent looks great to the modern eye, but the truth is when he was active, opening the batting in the sub continent was comparatively easier given the flatter surfaces. Similarly while the memory bank remembers a dominant Ricky Ponting, he did average 26 in India, 41 in England, and somehow managed to find South Africa hobbled every time we faced peak Ponting (six centuries in his first 12 Tests vs SA, compared to 1 in his last 11). It shouldn't really be a surprise. Batting is a tightrope walk and more often than not, if you do it against a good team on a good pitch, you come second.

Possible teams for tomorrow's first test between Pakistan and Australia, from Cricinfo.

Pakistan (possible) 1 Shan Masood/Imam-ul-Haq, 2 Abdullah Shafique, 3 Azhar Ali, 4 Babar Azam (capt), 5 Fawad Alam, 6 Mohammad Rizwan (wk), 7 Mohammad Wasim Jr, 8 Nauman Ali, 9 Sajid Khan, 10 Shaheen Shah Afridi, 11 Naseem Shah.

Lots of absentees for Pakistan, with Abid Ali, Hasan Ali, Haris Rauf and Faheem Ashraf all injured. Shaheen had a phenomenal 2021 in test cricket, taking 47 wickets @ 17 and he'll need to continue that quality form as he leads this attack. Wasim Jr., only seven FC games in his career, could make a debut. From 3-6 it looks full of runs, and Pakistan will be in highly confident mood having won seven of their last eight tests (the sole defeat being that one wicket loss in the Caribbean), plus playing at home where they have a naturally formidable record.

Australia (possible) 1 Usman Khawaja, 2 David Warner, 3 Marnus Labuschagne, 4 Steven Smith, 5 Travis Head, 6 Cameron Green, 7 Alex Carey (wk), 8 Pat Cummins (capt), 9 Mitchell Starc, 10 Nathan Lyon, 11 Josh Hazlewood.

Full strength team for Australia, but will it be enough to overcome their side's general lack of experience in the sub-continent? They also haven't played an away test series since the 2019 Ashes. It has been quite cool in Pakistan, so the pitch isn't expected to break up and become a raging turner such as a stereotypical sub-continent wicket. With that in mind it seems Australia are only going for one spinner, though a late call for Swepson or Agar may still happen. Steve Smith has only averaged in the mid-30s in test cricket since Archer struck him with a bouncer - maybe he's under pressure for the first time in his career?

Should be an excellent series. I think that while Australia look stronger on paper, the lack of experience in the sub-continent will tell, and this has been exacerbated by the fact they've had practically no preparation for this series. I'll go for Pakistan to win 3-0 (11/1 currently available), but if Australia were to win one test I wouldn't be surprised. Very tough to make a case for Australia winning the series, however.

Also the start of India/Sri Lanka tomorrow, which will be Kohli's 100th test. India are strong favourites, but this is perhaps the best chance Sri Lanka have of toppling India in India as the Indians are a side undergoing a messy transition phase, with the middle-order and bowling choices mired in confusion.

I'd be quite surprised if Pakistan were to win 3-0 !  Granted Australia haven't a great record in these parts - and they might find touring after a couple of years a bit harder than playing at home  - but I think they are good enough to make a proper contest of this.

Not sure yet how strong this Pakistan outfit are : I am inclined to slightly discount wins over Bangladesh and Zimbabwe as a form guide ; and they are missing a player or two for this game. We still don't really know how the pitches will play but I wouldn't be surprised to see at least one high scoring draw in the series.

Should be interesting.

Pakistan winning the toss and choosing to bat first. Circumspect start as they're 14/0 after ten. Australia have only picked one spinner; judging by how he's already bowling and is getting turn, they may regret not picking two.

Not so circumspect for India - 99/2 after 22 overs.

Duty281 wrote:Pakistan winning the toss and choosing to bat first. Circumspect start as they're 14/0 after ten. Australia have only picked one spinner; judging by how he's already bowling and is getting turn, they may regret not picking two.

Not so circumspect for India - 99/2 after 22 overs.

Yes I’ve turned it on to see Lyon getting turn and bounce in the first hour, checked the scorecard and gone “oof” at not seeing another spinner on there. Going to be a long shift for him today I fancy

They're getting the part-timer Head in already. Barely an hour played.

Been a frustrating morning for Australia so far. They've had a few half-chances, one spurned review, but no joy as yet. The ground is apparently sold out for all five days...empty seats currently due to Friday prayers.

And now Travis Head is bowling 16 overs into day one…

All a bit odd. Cummins musing the other day about a possibility of playing two spinners - and then sticking to Plan A despite the pitch from all accounts looking not much help to the seamers ?
Rawalpindi is supposed to be the most "pace friendly" pitch in Pakistan (all things are relative) so perhaps they thought it's now or never...

Or they have taken their cue from England's habit of misjudging pitches

Might be a surprise result brewing in the very first game in the Women's World Cup : West Indies set NZ 260 ; and they looked to be cruising at 120/2 but three wickets falling has left a lot of work for Sophie Devine - who is on 86 but might need some support.
Need 100 off 16 , five wickets in hand...

Lyon gets the break ! Needed that... 105/1

That is a gift from Shafique on the stroke of lunch

He's played a few like that already, but to do so again three minutes before lunch was especially reckless.

105/1, big advantage for Pakistan already and a superb platform for their middle order. There was some swing very early on, that's abated now. Australia have the wrong balance to their side, they're batting fourth and there's no control to their bowling. They've gone a long way to losing the test in the opening session.

Can the schedulers have a word? 3 series at once .....seems an age since we had this.

Fancied Aus might be able to thrive on the Pakistan pitch which doesnt seem a mile from what they tend to have at home now, but losing the toss is never great. As someone noted above that they turned to their emergency wicket keeper to bowl so early shows the gaps in their attack when the seamers arent getting joy ...are they England in disguise?

As others noted Pakistans lack of meaningful test cricket recently could hurt them, but seeing a 22 year old opener in his 3rd test getting a decent score Starc, Cummins and Hazelwood must be galling for Silverwood. It is pretty vital for Pakistans openers to give some protection to the middle order who all have very good test records, the tail is an absolute joke. As it stands they look in a really strong position, a big first innings total makes the game hard to lose and puts all kinds of pressure on Australia's batting.

India did have some worries about the fitness of their spinners, but looks like its just Patel they are missing which is easily covered. Their bowling attack is about as good as you could hope for in Sri Lanka, and bat pretty deep. Important to remember just how awful Sri Lanka are (and underline just how bad the England side that went there recently was Root aside). Again batting first pretty big, but Sri Lanka certainly making a good contest of it so far.

4 down as I type...Sri Lanka actually on top here, although we always need to see both teams bat before knowing what a par score is but keeping India below 300 batting first would be a huge show and give some confidence to SL for sure.

alfie wrote:Might be a surprise result brewing in the very first game in the Women's World Cup : West Indies set NZ 260 ; and they looked to be cruising at 120/2 but three wickets falling has left a lot of work for Sophie Devine - who is on 86 but might need some support.
Need 100 off 16 , five wickets in hand...

Whew what a finish to the first game and what a knock by Devine…just short in the end!

Why on earth would you only pick one spinner in Pakistan?

Ball doing absolutely nothing for Australia. They already look plenty laboured in the field. Since lunch they've forgotten about taking wickets, instead they're trying to bowl dots and build pressure - but the run rate is still around three. Imam closing in on his first test ton. Lovely player to watch.

Imam goes to a maiden hundred!

Ball is beginning to reverse a touch for Starc, and there is some spin for Lyon but otherwise not a lot going on pitch wise. Does look to be some footmarks already appearing, and with Starc/Shaheen playing they will be there both sides of the wicket for the spinners later in the game

Think we can safely call that Pakistan's day...

Run rate didn't go crazy as all the main pace bowlers were pretty economical ; but with just one wicket down the hosts look set to go big tomorrow. Australia will need to bat well in their first innings.

Great maiden hundred for Ul-Haq

Lyon should sleep well tonight. Might be busy again tomorrow...

Soul Requiem wrote:Why on earth would you only pick one spinner in Pakistan?

One spinner who's style works brilliantly in Australia but struggles in the subcontinent at that.

Seems a bit hollow now, but an outstanding knock from Imam to put his team in command. Really admired how he reset from the emotional high of reaching the ton to push on to 131* overnight. And, at the other end, Azhar Ali being typical Azhar Ali and quietly going about his task at the other end. Then you look at the scoreboard and realise Azhar has glided to 64 with almost no fanfare.

Australia got the selection hopelessly wrong and their seamers bowled a fraction too short, particularly with the new ball. I think Shaheen will really enjoy bowling with the new ball on this.

245/1, with Babar Azam in next. Pakistan have to be looking for 500 minimum from here and then let the spinners go to work.

India 357/6 v Sri Lanka on a hectic opening day. Five of the top six getting starts but not converting them, except for Pant who scored 96 in classic Pant fashion at nearly run-a-ball pace.

Long road back for both visiting teams.

Classic Pant fashion sums it up well. That's what turned it from a solid day for India into a likely winning position.

He gets stick when it doesn't come off, especially when dancing down the track to quicks early in his innings, but he seems to keep playing knocks in every series that heavily influence Tests. If he can keep doing that in each series I think you just accept how he plays and that it might look silly if it doesn't come off at times.

king_carlos wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Why on earth would you only pick one spinner in Pakistan?

One spinner who's style works brilliantly in Australia but struggles in the subcontinent at that.

TBF Lyon took a bundle of wickets last time they were away to Pakistan. But its looking an increasingly poor decision now, especially when their second spinner can actually bat and did really well in his two Asian tests. Only bowling Green for 5 overs draws even more attention to the choice.

Misreading the pitch? Is this England in disguise?

Draw seems their best hope now, Pakistan have toiled for their runs. But really does strike as a time for a decent leggie to produce something from a nothing pitch.

king_carlos wrote:Classic Pant fashion sums it up well. That's what turned it from a solid day for India into a likely winning position.

He gets stick when it doesn't come off, especially when dancing down the track to quicks early in his innings, but he seems to keep playing knocks in every series that heavily influence Tests. If he can keep doing that in each series I think you just accept how he plays and that it might look silly if it doesn't come off at times.

Getting out in the 90s makes it even more classic. The new old Joe Root?

Averaging over 40 now in tests makes him more than a flash in the pan player (which sums up most of Stokes' career). Having plenty of batting below him gives that license too. The series clinching knock in Australia was at a modest rate so he is capable of playing for the team if needed.

Still young and early in his career, has the potential to be a real star of his generation if he can keep building on this.

Must make India strong favourites after looking vulnerable at 4 down.

Pant's 50 at the Oval was at a strike rate of less than 50 as well. Rohit's century won the match but that measured 50 from Pant coming in with India 5 down with the lead just over 200 was vital. His partnership with Kohli sapped the last energy from England's bowlers, then Thakur and the tail took it out of sight.

Playing like he does he will always get knocked by some but if he keeps making match winning contributions I doubt his teammates or coaches will care!

His keeping has come a long long way as well. Just a very good cricketer.

Excellent start to Kohli's 100th test match, though the man himself had yet another unconverted start. Fabulous from Rishabh Pant, but I knew the moment he destroyed Embuldeniya in that 22 run over, that that was going to end in the 90s! Fine solid hand from Ravindra Jadeja too, yet again in a crucial situation. Hanuma Vihari, playing his 2nd home test, made a 50...

India and Pakistan building on those good positions, looking like it could be two very one sided tests. Reckon Woakes could've done a better job than the Aussie attack

For some reason SL also went into the test with just 1 proper spinner, which given how mediocre their first choice is shows how poor their talent pipeline is now.

As I type 67 overs of seam in the Aus test for no wickets ...brutal. SL at least had some early success but lost Kumara to injury to really rub things in, 55 overs for 4 wickets. Across the two tests spinners have taken 5 wickets in 105 overs .. not that much better but a big chunk from part timers and this is the first day.

300/1 ...yikes. The sort of test where under other circumstances the commentators would be joking with Warne that he might have to come out of retirement. What price a magic leg spinner now?

Pakistan certainly building an impregnable position here. Might need to up the scoring rate later though : reckon taking twenty wickets on this could require rather a lot of work - and a lot of overs.

India with 477/8 now and probably have enough runs already. Suppose might as well let Jadeja enjoy himself a little longer as it's only been 116 overs...

Apparently only Jadejas second century in tests, quite a surprise for a guy whos averaging in the mid 30s. Much more reliable bat than Ashwin who has 5 but averages mid twenties.

With Pakistan sure they are bringing the draw into the equation but its very much the way they go about test cricket on these pitches. If it does break up as the game goes on the wickets will come for them. They do have to make every run from the top 6 they can, their tail is truly woeful. Batting first really gave them a huge boost.

The other slight thread of hope for Aus is that the two Pakistan spinners are very inexperienced at test level, the quicks will struggle to bowl bulk overs, and they dont have a genuine fifth bowler. Going to be huge pressure on their batsmen to play the same way Pakistan have and stay in, maybe not their forte but a huge chance for Smith to show he still has it.

Yeah I think it will be very interesting to see whether Australia are able to bat with the patience and concentration required on these pitches when facing a - likely huge - first innings score.
To be fair , they played very patiently more than once in the recent Ashes series - and reaped the benefits later when the England bowlers tired. Suspect a lot of responsibly on Smith and Labuschagne in that role.

Australia actually got Imam out for 143, but they didn't review and missed the opportunity. Unless Pakistan up the scoring rate they may be batting into day three before declaring. With the three tests all packed closely together, keeping Australia in the field for 180 overs+ could have ramifications for the rest of the series.