Rest of the World

First topic message reminder :

KP_fan wrote:

msp83 wrote:So India is getting back on the field tonight, kicking off their WTC campaign. Rohit has already confirmed Jaiswal will open, and Gill drop down to 3. When all the talk of Yashasvi taking over from Pujara at 3 was going on, I felt he should open, particularly since the team views Gill as the eventual successor to Virat Kohli at 4. Going forward, I see a top 4 of Jaiswal, Abhimanyu Easwaran/Devdutt Padikkal/Rohan Kunnummal, Gill, Ruturaj Gaikwad.

Eswaran has been hard done by......Jaiswal was jumped over him
Mayank Agarwal should not be ruled out...he has batted very well in FC and has a decent test match showing also.

And don't forget the favorite boy of seniors and BCCI in KL Rahul...as soon as he is fit he will walk back into the 11

Its been tough on Easwaran. Think Mayank and KL might find it difficult to now fight their way back in. Particularly if Yashasvi has a good start to his career. KL might still make a comeback when Rohit leaves, but I hope Easwaran, Rohan and even Padikkal will make better cases for themselves.
As for Yashasvi jumping over Abhimanyu, though its tough on the latter, think is the right call. Jaiswal scored hundreds on his Ranji, Duleep and Irani trophy debuts. He's versatile and has shown adaptability as indicated by his IPL success. And, its not much noted these days, but he's a handy parttimer with the ball, he very much was for the U-19s, hope he'll get a few chances right away to work on that secondary skill of his...

Green scored more than NZ, but I can see he did not get any wickets, didn't even bowl.

Smith out for a blob and he might demand his no.4.slot back soon

Two for Southee as Marnus is strangled down the leg side...4/2 in a very shaky start (Khawaja has already underedged just past his stumps as well as the outside edge). Night watchman time for Lyon with fifteen minutes to go...

They didn't really need Green to bowl , KP_fan

But I do think he will probably be more of a batsman than bowling all rounder...a handy fourth seamer but not one who is going to bowl a lot of overs. Saw very little of his innings but obviously a cut above anything he's done before with the bat.

Survived to the close without further damage ...just ! Southee dropped a sitter from a Lyon edge on the last ball of the day .

13/2 which should have been 13/3 ...Australia in command despite really struggling for those eight overs. Basically Green Day...

If Green can deliver more of these game changing innings they'll feel better about him at 4. Even 3 if Marnus can't address this slump.

Said it before, young all rounders usually need a lot of time to mature, so I can see why Australia persist with Green, because if it comes off he can balance the side for the next decade. Took England years to fully bring Flintoff and Stokes through. Even the much maligned M Marsh could be considered an example as well

I'd tend to call Marsh "a batsman who bowls" , given he has barely more wickets than matches , averages over 40 , and really doesn't bowl much lately. Not that he's needed to : as long as Australia can rely on Lyon , the fourth seamer is often redundant.

Fair to say Marsh has played some fine hands recently - and has enjoyed playing against - England ! But I am not too excited over him as he averages just 30 with the bat : think Green will do a bit better. (Was actually surprised to see just how poor Marsh's record is outside of Ashes Tests ! Other than a few Pakistan games he's been - well , frankly : complete rubbish ) Earned his spot for now ; but as Green settles he might struggle to hold down a place .

Yeah I don't think M Marsh is a potential great allrounder or anything, more that he seemed finished but has come back and had a good year. Definitely warranting his place on batting alone and can send down a few overs to relieve the big three. Becoming more than useful and not only against England

New Zealand's innings was a mess, but the Australian bowling quartet were superb. Starc on the money straight away, Cummins and Hazlewood with a superb length troubling the New Zealanders all day, but Lyon taking the headline figures as he ran through the tail.

Phillips, Henry and Blundell sparing NZ from complete humiliation; no one else scoring higher than 11. 179 wasn't too bad after being 29/5. Williamson's run out was a calamity, though largely one of his own making.

Good call from Australia to bat on - not making the same mistake England did last year - though they won't like that start with the bat. Should get above 400 and declare early evening tonight. Rain forecast for day five, so they don't want the game going into day five if they can help it.

Elsewhere, Ireland tentatively closing in on history. They bowled well this morning and left the batsmen with 111 to chase for a first ever test win. In trouble at 13/3, the captain is steadying things to take Ireland to 48/4. 63 away...

alfie wrote:They didn't really need Green to bowl , KP_fan  

But I do think he will probably be more of a batsman than bowling all rounder...a handy fourth seamer but not one who is going to bowl a lot of overs. Saw very little of his innings but obviously a cut above anything he's done before with the bat.

The kidney condition limiting the amount he can train and determining parts of his diet will likely make it very difficult for him to have a big bowling workload. Considering that the setup obviously knew about the condition before it went public, I think there's an argument that Green has probably been over bowled. Which tends to happen with most seam bowling all-rounders. They're so rare. Green even more so given in that Ashes down under he was scratching 90mph and has such a high release point.

Nelson is lucky for Ireland as they chase down 111 to upset the odds in Abu Dhabi and win their first ever test.

Balbirnie's measured half-century assuring Ireland's victory, though I imagine Adair will pick up MOTM for his 8 wickets. Ireland's next test is home to Zimbabwe in August.

Pleased for Ireland and that their skipper Balbirnie was there at the finish with an unbeaten 50. As I've said before, a handy and unselfish player whose day in the sun was overdue.

alfie wrote:I'd tend to call Marsh "a batsman who bowls" , given he has barely more wickets than matches , averages over 40 , and really doesn't bowl much lately. Not that he's needed to : as long as Australia can rely on Lyon , the fourth seamer is often redundant.
.

The number of wickets
47 off 40 matches Marsh
and 32 off 27 matches Green

I have heard Aussie commentators in ogling tone for a while now....
Ohh he is tall and can hit 90mph and can ball bouncers off a length.....and look how well he can bat and he can be our next Kallis.
But only 32 wkts off 27 matches ......materially not different from Marsh

Where is Green heading to?
A batsman who can bowl occasionally ( i.e batting allrounder) ? ......OK......then that's Marsh too an occasional bowler and in a purple patch over a much larger span of  tests recently with the bat.

Or a bowling allrounder?.....where you are expected to hold you place and perform as a designated bowler
If so, that's exciting  and to be deemed so....one has to push his wk/ test count towards 2.5

Big rivalry on this board.

My dislike of Moeen vs KP_Fan's dislike of Green vs MSP's dislike of Pope vs everyone else's dislike of Dawson.

Duty281 wrote:Big rivalry on this board.

My dislike of Moeen vs KP_Fan's dislike of Green vs MSP's dislike of Pope vs everyone else's dislike of Dawson.

I'd like my hatred of Chris Gayle to be taken into account too please

Every hundred they score must be like a pin going in the eye of their respective voodoo dolls, and both could play for at least the next decade. Probably best not to get so emotionally invested in such things (says the guy who is still getting over Ravi Bopara's Test career)

The look of scorecard Lyon 5+2, Philips 5, and Head 1wkt, would suggest the pitch has become a rank Turner of thr type that was awaited, but never arrived in India

Phillips was ragging them on D3, KP. A surprise Bunsen.

It's an interesting corollary to not having a front line spinner that NZ didn't see that in the 1st innings though. It looked like a seamers pitch but because Oz lean on Lyon to bowl economically they put him on to bowl dry and realise it's ripping. Then the Black Caps follow suit by using Phillips in the 2nd innings and he takes 5. Whereas NZ only used Ravindra for a few overs as their 6th option in the 1st innings because they've got seamers plus a couple of part timers.

The difference so far is Green's daddy ton in a game of low scores. Given that Green looks awkward and lungey against spin, it's safe to say in retrospect that only bowling Ravindra for 7 out of 115.1 overs in the 1st innings was a hefty error.

It's fair to say NZ made the wrong call. They were weighing up Santner v Kugg pre-game, went for the latter, and it hasn't paid off (unless Kugg bats incredibly well in the fourth innings!).

Ravindra and Mitchell's partnership has given NZ a little bit of hope, after Australia failed to put the game to bed in the third innings. NZ need 258 more, seven wickets left, 39 overs from the second new ball. Ravindra's played very nicely for the most part*, Mitchell hasn't. The pitch, as already noted, has sharp turn, plus quite a bit of extra bounce, so Australia are still the overwhelming favourites to get the job done here. Not very much batting for NZ to come, except Phillips who top-scored in the first innings.

*Ravindra survived, quite fortunately, on DRS. He missed a full toss and the ball hit him full on the toe. Ball-tracking could only predict the ball going straight on and down the leg-side, hence not out. But had the ball bounced first, the ball-tracking would have predicted it to be turning in and smashing the stumps.

The game should almost certainly finish on day four, which is good because there's lots of rain forecast for day five. For now, it's looking like the difference will be that 116 stand between Green and Hazlewood!

Two wickets in four balls for Lyon seems to have ended any remote hopes for NZ. Ravindra cutting straight to the man at point, a disappointing dismissal. Two wickets Lyon has got in this innings from short, wide deliveries.

Mitchell and Phillips together looking for a miracle. Still 242 to get.

172 run win for Australia. All done before lunch, absolutely no drama. Lyon 6/65 and 10/108 in the match. Green with 208 runs, including that huge hundred in the first innings. Close battle for MOTM...I'd favour Green, personally.

Second and final test on Thursday.

Duty281 wrote:172 run win for Australia. All done before lunch, absolutely no drama. Lyon 6/65 and 10/108 in the match. Green with 208 runs, including that huge hundred in the first innings. Close battle for MOTM...I'd favour Green, personally.

Second and final test on Thursday.

Me too and, yes, Green got the award.

NZ certainly seemed to have misjudged the conditions in choosing Kuggeleijn over Santner. But I'd suggest their bigger blunder was in pensioning off Wagner before the series ! Bet Australia wouldn't have had a 116 run last wicket stand with him bowling...

May well be just about time to look at refreshing pace stocks. But I rather doubt Kuggeleijn is any great prospect (he's 32 , for heavens sake !) and surely a contest with Australia was hardly the time to move on from a renowned fighter like Wagner ?

Now I see Southee "not ruling out " an SOS to Wagner for a quick comeback

NZ's bowling stocks are in a bit of a state. By the time England tour later this year the bowling attack could be O'Rourke, Kuggelein, Tickner/Duffy and Santner, which isn't pulling up many trees.

O'Rourke's got fantastic potential, only 22, still quite raw, but the rest...

Southee might still be playing by then, but he looks well over the hill now. They desperately need Jamieson to stay fit. A bowling attack led by O'Rourke and Jamieson is a force to be feared, but Jamieson breaks down more times than some of England's bowlers (in fact, I'm starting to think Jamieson is English).

O'Rourke is out of the second test, so NZ have looked to the future by calling up Ben Sears, rather than going back to Wagner.

Sears is 26, has played 13 T20s for New Zealand, and has a respectable FC record of 58 wickets @ 27, although his economy is quite high at 3.62. He has only played five FC games in the last two seasons, taking 12 wickets @ 32.

Nothing on those numbers to suggest he'll worry Australia if he plays in the second test, but NZ's resources are scarce.

Yep cupboard looks bare with Boult not around, Wagner seemingly forced out....Henry and Milne can never stay fit, and Southee dosen't look like he will be around for much longer either his powers are certainly on the wane, could be a struggle in next few years for NZ, especially given they don't play much test cricket as it is, so lack of exposure won't help the next crop of quicks coming through

Might get a more competitive test in New Zealand, starting later. NZ's last selection call is again Santner v Kuggeleijn. They've regretted not picking Santner before, but this ground is generally terrible for spinners. Though Kuggeleijn is so bad I think they should just pick Santner anyway!

Australia's team is the same. Their continuity is the envy of everyone. Will be Australia's last test until next November.

They won't go with Santer, they have combo of Phillips and Ravindra, they just need a better 4th seamer...

Labuschagne's form is now a worry for OZ, he needs big runs in this test

Aussies winning the toss and fielding first.

Marais Erasmus will be retiring from umpiring after this test. He's been on the elite panel since 2010.

47/0 became 162ao for NZ, no batsman scoring 40+, and another low score for Williamson against top opposition. Hazlewood 5/31.

Australia 124/4 in reply, so they've not quite put the game to bed. Smith only made 11, out to debutant Sears, so he's still a long way from securing the opener berth (I still don't see why they moved him to be honest); but Labuschagne has an unbeaten 45, much needed for him to build on that into day two.

Duty281 wrote:Marais Erasmus will be retiring from umpiring after this test. He's been on the elite panel since 2010.

Anyone have any guesses on who replaces him, or is that too niche even for here?

That's a good question. Last time an umpire stepped down (Aleem Dar) they added two new umpires. But they don't always add a replacement if they feel the numbers are adequate.

Erasmus' retirement leaves Tucker, Kettleborough, Dharmasena, Reiffel, Illingworth, Gaffaney, Wilson, Gough, Menon, Raza, and Holdstock on the elite panel.

Any one who gets promoted to the elite panel has to come, as far as I know, from the international panel. That panel currently looks like this:



So it'll be one or two of those, I imagine. England currently have three on the elite panel, so I doubt there'll be any further English umpires added for now. India have only got one, so they may get another representative. Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Ireland have never had an elite umpire, so this could break new ground.

Personally, I'm hoping for either Hannibal or the Indian chap with a rather long name.

So I had a look at the list of Test umpires on Wikipedia, and the most recent additions seem to have been promoted pretty quickly after their first Test. On that basis I'd say Sharma if they go Indian, while Sharfuddoula or Pakteen would be strong potential 'first-timers' off that list.

Could be a classic in Christchurch.

Australia were bowled out for 256. A bizarre scorecard - everyone apart from Marsh got a start, but only Labuschagne scored above 30 (90). Henry with 7/67!

In response, NZ got to 134/2 at stumps, losing Young early and, perhaps crucially, Williamson for 51. Makes them net 40/2 and an excellent third day is in store.

NZ lost Latham early, then a century stand between Ravindra and Mitchell put them back in front.

However, Hazlewood and Cummins have combined with the new ball to remove both. NZ's lead just over 200, but five wickets down and not a lot of batting left. Great test.

Kuggeleijn finally contributed with the bat, 44, but NZ did lose their last three wickets for one run, setting Australia 279 to win.

Henry and Sears then took apart the Australian top order*, leaving them 34/4. However, Head and Marsh have given some hope going into what will be the final day with an unbeaten 43 partnership.

202 more to win. Head, Marsh and Carey the main bats left, followed by whatever Cummins/Starc/Lyon/Hazlewood can stitch together. Australia likely to need a century from either Head or Marsh if they are to win this one. Set up brilliantly.

*Smith averaging under 30 at opener after 8 innings.

Marsh dropped in the second over, but Head fell on the very next ball.

However, Carey and Marsh have made a superb counter attack with a 94 partnership in 17 overs. Carey finally delivering on the scoreboard.

Australia need 105 with five wickets left. NZ grateful for lunch.

Real mess up from New Zealand there, they don't seem to have the belief to beat Australia. Also wonder how much the bowling attack of right arm similar became a factor once the ball started to age

Didn't watch but the view from look of the scorecard
From 80-5 and then 220-7 Aussies pulled themselves to 281.
Marsh delivers under pressure and Carey a mediocre batsman thru a low run stands up and play the test inning of his life

Cummins as expected and seen so often rises to a lower order 30 to 40 odd when needed.....plays very high pressure soaked cameos and bats better than Starc who bats above him

Just like they showed during the world cup, this Aussie side is not an imposing one. They stumble, and stutter and struggle but find just enuf resources from somewhere to go past the finish line  and in each adversity a different resource stands up.

Not a dominant team but nevertheless shaping up into one of the great Aussie sides on results .

Was indeed a classic.

Australia were cruising with Marsh and Carey, until Marsh got a harsh LBW call (marginal umpire's call, barely clipping leg stump). Starc was then caught first ball, putting NZ back in front, but Cummins and Carey combined with little fuss to get Australia over the line. Finish reminiscent of Edgbaston 2023.

It was an amazing innings from Carey. A bit like Pope's 196, there was nothing about him threatening a big score, but he delivered in emphatic fashion. However, I did think it very harsh that Cummins denied Carey a century. He could have stonewalled for an over then let Carey get the ton. Guess they wanted zero risk.

NZ again blundered by picking the dreadful Kuggeleijn over Santner. Kugg was entrusted to bowl just 3 of the 65 overs in the second innings, while Phillips, a part-time spinner, was given 12 overs (including bowling straight after lunch which I didn't agree with). Overall, Kugg only bowled 9 overs in the match, so it was an entirely wasted selection. Might as well have picked another specialist batsman.

Agree about NZ's lack of belief. Amazingly, they haven't won a single test against Australia since 2011, and haven't won a test at home to Australia since 1993!

Henry got a deserved player of the series award for his 17 wickets. He might be the leader of that Kiwi attack with Jamieson crocked, Southee fading, and Wagner/Boult disappearing.

Test cricket drying up now. Two tests between Bangladesh and Sri Lanka in late March/early April, a feisty rivalry due to the timeout drama at the World Cup which boiled over in the recent T20 series.

Duty281 wrote:Was indeed a classic.

Australia were cruising with Marsh and Carey, until Marsh got a harsh LBW call (marginal umpire's call, barely clipping leg stump). Starc was then caught first ball, putting NZ back in front, but Cummins and Carey combined with little fuss to get Australia over the line. Finish reminiscent of Edgbaston 2023.

It was an amazing innings from Carey. A bit like Pope's 196, there was nothing about him threatening a big score, but he delivered in emphatic fashion. However, I did think it very harsh that Cummins denied Carey a century. He could have stonewalled for an over then let Carey get the ton. Guess they wanted zero risk.

NZ again blundered by picking the dreadful Kuggeleijn over Santner. Kugg was entrusted to bowl just 3 of the 65 overs in the second innings, while Phillips, a part-time spinner, was given 12 overs (including bowling straight after lunch which I didn't agree with). Overall, Kugg only bowled 9 overs in the match, so it was an entirely wasted selection. Might as well have picked another specialist batsman.

Agree about NZ's lack of belief. Amazingly, they haven't won a single test against Australia since 2011, and haven't won a test at home to Australia since 1993!

Henry got a deserved player of the series award for his 17 wickets. He might be the leader of that Kiwi attack with Jamieson crocked, Southee fading, and Wagner/Boult disappearing.

Test cricket drying up now. Two tests between Bangladesh and Sri Lanka in late March/early April, a feisty rivalry due to the timeout drama at the World Cup which boiled over in the recent T20 series.

I thought Sears looked a good prospect - but agree on Kuggeleijn, what a bizarre selection and usage. NZ not exactly in a spot where they can just waste a spot on someone, and to not recognise it after T1 too...very poor.

Actually got to watch that last session ... very good from Cummins to help Carey get Australia over the line. Suppose if Marsh had been caught early on the result would probably have been different but that's how it goes...

Quite agree re the Kuggeleijn selection : OK he did get useful second innings runs ; but no effect as a bowler in two games and is no spring chicken anyway. Santner might not have torn down any trees in this match either , of course , but would have supplied more variety. The really odd thing for mine , is why Wagner was nudged out the door to make
way for him in the first place ! Sears as a replacement looks a much better bet and would have probably made more sense in the first place. At least the other new chap , O'Rourke will give them another one when fit again , as Southee probably won't be going much longer.

A fit Jamieson would be handy.

Australia will be happy to have got that 2-0 in the end.

Not without their batting problems though. Bit early to say Smith as opener has failed but his results apart from one knock against West Indies have been rather underwhelming so far. Marnus got back in the runs in this one at least , as did Carey. But probably fair to say they look a lot more vulnerable with the bat these days and will be thankful their first choice bowling group has been maintaining a pretty good record of health and fitness .

The Indian visit will be interesting.

Wanindu Hasaranga has come out of test retirment for his side's series against bangladesh

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/cricket-australia-postpones-t20i-series-against-afghanistan-due-to-human-rights-issues-1425398

Australia's confused stance against Afghanistan continues. Happy to play them at World Cups, but not happy to play them in bilateral series.

Surely any boycott has to go all the way?

wisden wrote:Wanindu Hasaranga has come out of test retirment for his side's series against bangladesh

And immediately been banned for them. He had outstanding demerit points for telling an umpire, "to get a new job". The ban was going to be for the next 2 Tests, 4 ODIs or 4 T20is. Whichever came first. It looks like he came out of retirement to cop the ban here, rather than during T20 World Cup prep. Big brain stuff from Sri Lanka. 

Wonder if Sri Lanka will be in any trouble for that?

Reminds me of when Beckham got himself deliberately booked in an England game so that he would serve a suspension (for x number of yellows) during a time of injury.

Sri Lanka are arguing that an email shows Hasaranga wanted to return to test cricket prior to his suspension being announced, but his IPL team were entirely unaware of this.

The ICC do seem to have been pretty stupid and naive in allowing Sri Lanka and Hasaranga the possibility of such wiggle room.

Duty281 wrote:https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/cricket-australia-postpones-t20i-series-against-afghanistan-due-to-human-rights-issues-1425398

Australia's confused stance against Afghanistan continues. Happy to play them at World Cups, but not happy to play them in bilateral series.

Surely any boycott has to go all the way?

Also happy to have Afghan players play in the Big Bash...
Very odd stance flip flopping. I agree with you, all or nothing surely

Correct decision to postpone (indefinitely) the T20 series until the Afghans get their country's human rights issues in order. Won't hold my breath though. Don't think many, if any, played in the BBL this year.

As for the World Cup - the ICC condoned a brutal regime by allowing them to participate in last year's WC. That's not Australia's fault but I agree it obviously put them in an awkward situation.

Yet, you can only play what's in front of you in an international tournament such as a WC. It's a bit like if England had tp play North Korea in a football world cup group match. Do you think England would boycott that match? Nah... they'd take the points thank you very much.

Sounds like sour grapes, duty and olly. Probably because England got convincingly rolled by them and then Australia won that unwinnable match thanks to the marvellous performance from Maxwell. Perhaps England should have boycotted their match against Afghanistan? All teams should be in the same boat protesting against the Afghan regime but why should Australia have to forfeit points because of a pathetically weak and hypocritical ICC and other gutless participating nations?

Can't wait to see Afghanistan tour England... and see the ECB give a nod (and a wink) to the fair-playing Taliban.