Anyone for cricket?

[QueenC 74]

Captaincy is more than just the toss in both ODI and Tests.

Who is the person that controls the bowling changes and the field in ODI?

Geez Rhino, where in my comments have I ever given you the opinion that I am so stupid as to require your condescension.......

Bollinger should be congratulated ...but then again so should Ponting for excatly the reasons HT gave. The fact that he was prepared to back Johnson (incredibly inconsistent) and Bollinger (young, inexperience) is a credit to Ponting.

True but IMO his captaincy skills get lauded a little too much.....

He is perfectly fine captain in most situations, that had little choice but to show faith in the inconsistent and the young.

And he came out trumps so well done to him for doing it, but his captaincy can be sketchy and as inconsistent as Johnson's bowling at time.

Just my opinion <_< !!!

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Geez Rhino, where in my comments have I ever given you the opinion that I am so stupid as to require your condescension.......

True but IMO his captaincy skills get lauded a little too much.....

He is perfectly fine captain in most situations, that had little choice but to show faith in the inconsistent and the young.

And he came out trumps so well done to him for doing it, but his captaincy can be sketchy and as inconsistent as Johnson's bowling at time.

Just my opinion <_< !!!

Your comments about not winning the toss lacked emoticons.

FWIW, I think Ponting has received a bum wrap on this site. He not a great captain but he is not a bad captain either.

HT's comments were about the first compliment I have seen anyone give Ponting around here. Obviously one to many for some.

Every captain looks bad if his bowlers fail their task.

Just my opinion

[QueenC 74]

Your comments about not winning the toss lacked emoticons.

Fair enough but it was just a simple question in that it was clearly a wicket that if you win the toss you would bowl first on.

Ponting didn't make that decision (not a criticism) so the Indians copped (by their own design) most of the difficulties the pitch had to offer.

FWIW, I think Ponting has received a bum wrap on this site. He not a great captain but he is not a bad captain either.

HT's comments were about the first compliment I have seen anyone give Ponting around here. Obviously one to many for some.

I think he has his good moments as a captain, but I have real and long term issues with a number of aspects of his leadership.

Every captain looks bad if his bowlers fail their task.

Just my opinion

True as is the reverse, so the criticism and compliments should go both ways then.

But you don't hear "oh the captain made a poor decision bringing this bowler on" do you? !!!

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Also when you win a toss. One should always Bat.

...... but its Basic cricket Knowledge that when you win a toss YOU BAT in either format of the game.

I have been involved in cricket for over 35 years so i don't just write crap. How often does the chasing side win on a dodgy pitch?? One day or test??? Not Fackin often.

"Any credit to the captaincy ?"

Ricky's 35 and he's finally realised it's an advantage to bat first in cricket matches.

Mahendra Singh Dhoni clearly agrees. Won the toss and batted first today. Doh!!!

As they say on Mythbusters....Myth Busted!!

[H_T 3,042]

He didn't win the toss did he? He batted alright but his bowlers did the damage.

So I'm more inclined to congratulate Doug Bollinger for the figures he got.

No, Dhoni won the toss. However, Ponting was well aware of the the early swing on offer given the conditions and they thought it might seam early on. Ponting said as much post match. Yes, contgratulations should alos go to the bowlers, including Douggie Bollinger. The bowlers made full use.

The manner in which Ponting has conducted himself through the ring of changes his side has endured through injury or rest, yet been able to maintain an excellent team performance in India as well as bat to his own well renowned level is most admirable I believe.

It's bloody hard to win on Indian soil, let alone against an Indian team in good form, and he has captained one of the most young -ever changing teams - to victory in a most impressive display of excellent cricket. Especially over the last couple of games.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Fair enough but it was just a simple question in that it was clearly a wicket that if you win the toss you would bowl first on.

Ponting didn't make that decision (not a criticism) so the Indians copped (by their own design) most of the difficulties the pitch had to offer.

I guess you can say the Ponting had to make the best out of Dhoni taking the initiative and then taking it away from him.

Anyway at least it provided me with a mythbusters moment.

I think he has his good moments as a captain, but I have real and long term issues with a number of aspects of his leadership.

There are some issues but he has had to lead Australia through an incredible transition which is not over yet. Filling the void of those great players may not be complete during his reign. Are the issues with him or where Australian cricket is at?

True as is the reverse, so the criticism and compliments should go both ways then.

But you don't hear "oh the captain made a poor decision bringing this bowler on" do you? !!!

Agree wholeheartedly with the bolded statement.

[QueenC 74]

Anyway at least it provided me with a mythbusters moment.

You seem so proud, congrtaulations !!!

There are some issues but he has had to lead Australia through an incredible transition which is not over yet. Filling the void of those great players may not be complete during his reign. Are the issues with him or where Australian cricket is at?

Him, and they date back years........

And I have no issue with where Australian cricket is at, a step back from near invincibility was always going to happen, and they have to work through it as best they can.

But there is a lot of talent in our country, however not all of it is going to match what we had, nor is it automatically going to be ready on command.

So to me that is not an issue, it's just time, although that being said we still should have kept a hold of the Ashes !!!

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

.....although that being said we still should have kept a hold of the Ashes !!!

I'm not sure if Ponting is being scapegoated for that but I did think we chose one of the weakest and poorly balanced squads for an Ashes that I can remember.

And when your two key strike players from the previous series self destruct or lose form then it does not give the Captain alot of options.

FWIW, if Mitchell Johnson had bowled anywhere near his past Australian or South African form then we would have been holding the urn.

[Sir Why You Little 36,744]

It's bloody hard to win on Indian soil, let alone against an Indian team in good form, and he has captained one of the most young -ever changing teams - to victory in a most impressive display of excellent cricket. Especially over the last couple of games.

Pity he didn't captain the same way in india during the lat test series.

More worried about over rates and his own wallet than trying to win.

But the aussies have been great this series, i concur. To me though it just highlights how lazy the selectors have been over the last few years.

Look at the amount of local good talent in this country (Victoria on saturday) & i should add Tasmania.

[H_T 3,042]

Pity he didn't captain the same way in india during the lat test series.

More worried about over rates and his own wallet than trying to win.

Ponting is always trying to win. Your disrespect for Ricky Ponting is bordering on ridiculous.

But the aussies have been great this series, i concur. To me though it just highlights how lazy the selectors have been over the last few years.

Look at the amount of local good talent in this country (Victoria on saturday) & i should add Tasmania.

Come on WYL, the side has gone through many changes. Plenty of players have had their chance. ie. Spinners, bowlers,... .

If anything I'd say the selectors have been pro active not lazy.

[Sir Why You Little 36,744]

Ponting is always trying to win. Your disrespect for Ricky Ponting is bordering on ridiculous.

Come on WYL, the side has gone through many changes. Plenty of players have had their chance. ie. Spinners, bowlers,... .

If anything I'd say the selectors have been pro active not lazy.

Selectors have not been busy enough, and when they have selected a new player that player is only given one or two games to settle in.

Contracts are worth too much money now, its a problem when there are only 12 spots.

With the Amount of money being thrown around in cricket now, we should have at least 20 selectors & scouts covering every state.

The Talent is there.

BTW when a captain comes out after tea in a test match more concerned about over rates, he is NOT always trying to win.

The ACB contracts are too lucrative, yes its a tough schedule but with too much cricket on the incentive to win diminishes.

It's Human nature. I have never doubted Punter as a Cricketer, just don't rate him as a captain. Never have....

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Selectors have not been busy enough, and when they have selected a new player that player is only given one or two games to settle in.

While there has been situations of question, would you have given McGain another Test?

Contracts are worth too much money now, its a problem when there are only 12 spots.

There are actually about 25 contracted players for the ACB.

With the Amount of money being thrown around in cricket now, we should have at least 20 selectors & scouts covering every state.

The Talent is there.

There are at least 20 selectors and scouts covering every state. There are some good cricketers but few of the calibre we have been lucky to witness in the

past decade.

BTW when a captain comes out after tea in a test match more concerned about over rates, he is NOT always trying to win.

Your 35 years of cricket should have taught the goals arent mutually exclusive.

The ACB contracts are too lucrative, yes its a tough schedule but with too much cricket on the incentive to win diminishes.

It's Human nature.

The last week has shown that to absolute crap. You really do come out with some ignorant garbage.

I have never doubted Punter as a Cricketer, just don't rate him as a captain. Never have....

...because he does not always bat first when he wins the toss.

But you rated Warne as an Australian Captain.....

[Sir Why You Little 36,744]

While there has been situations of question, would you have given McGain another Test?

There are actually about 25 contracted players for the ACB.

There are at least 20 selectors and scouts covering every state. There are some good cricketers but few of the calibre we have been lucky to witness in the

past decade.

Your 35 years of cricket should have taught the goals arent mutually exclusive.

The last week has shown that to absolute crap. You really do come out with some ignorant garbage.

...because he does not always bat first when he wins the toss.

But you rated Warne as an Australian Captain.....

Your opinions and my opinions differ RR, thats all it is.

Yes there are around 25 ACB contracts given But only 12 spots on the team,

Which is why i was saying a few days back that there should be 3 distinct sides.

There is too much cricket on now, because of the size of those contracts they have to be paid for TV and sponsorships.

so we have all these "meaningless" Games that are played and forgotten as quickly, right before a Test Series.

No i wouldn't have played McGain again, but i certainly would have persisted longer with jason Kreyser.

[titan_uranus 24,912]

BTW when a captain comes out after tea in a test match more concerned about over rates, he is NOT always trying to win.

I believe he was under orders to speed up the over rate.

Regardless, as RR said, the two aren't mutually exclusive. White and Krejza were taken to India as designated spinners. The selectors put the burden on their shoulders to take wickets, especially 4th innings wickets. The fact that they didn't should have reflected more on them than Ponting, but it didn't.

It was not the best way to go about winning the match, but that's not to say Ponting lost us the Test.

[Sir Why You Little 36,744]

I believe he was under orders to speed up the over rate.

Regardless, as RR said, the two aren't mutually exclusive. White and Krejza were taken to India as designated spinners. The selectors put the burden on their shoulders to take wickets, especially 4th innings wickets. The fact that they didn't should have reflected more on them than Ponting, but it didn't.

It was not the best way to go about winning the match, but that's not to say Ponting lost us the Test.

No he didn't lose us the match, BUT as Australian Capt. for the first 10-15 overs after tea he should have had a crack at it. That's the Australian way. If the Indians had held firm fair enough. But you gotta have a go, we took 3 quick wickets just before tea as i recall. The door was ajar...

Maybe Ponting was under orders, who knows. I still say he should have had that 40 minute crack at it.

A.B Tubby Ian Chappell, & S.R. would have...& you know that.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Your opinions and my opinions differ RR, thats all it is.

No you have passed many of your opinions as statements of fact and I have established a number of them as pure myths.

We cant afford contracts for 36 players and cannot provide them with enough cricket to justify their professional status.

Krezja could not survive leaking over 4 runs an over against the Sth Africans and took 1-240. He is not sustainable at Test level unless he can contain as well as take wickets. Mind you Ponting gave him 50 overs in the 1st Test in Australia..More fool punter.

[titan_uranus 24,912]

A.B Tubby Ian Chappell, & S.R. would have...& you know that.

Not if they were told to bowl spinners to ensure enough overs were bowled.

Ponting had no choice. I'd be happy to bet that he would have prefered to bowl the quicks, but he had no choice but to use White and Krejza to get through the overs.

[Sir Why You Little 36,744]

Not if they were told to bowl spinners to ensure enough overs were bowled.

Ponting had no choice. I'd be happy to bet that he would have prefered to bowl the quicks, but he had no choice but to use White and Krejza to get through the overs.

Sure he was put on the spot, but should he have gone for the win. I say he should have had a crack for 40 odd minutes.

If we had broken through, the over rate issue would not have been mentioned.

But he Led the Team out after tea with the white flag up.

I almost broke a really expensive Radio!!! & i am guessing i was not alone around the country.

[Sir Why You Little 36,744]

No you have passed many of your opinions as statements of fact and I have established a number of them as pure myths.

We cant afford contracts for 36 players and cannot provide them with enough cricket to justify their professional status.

Krezja could not survive leaking over 4 runs an over against the Sth Africans and took 1-240. He is not sustainable at Test level unless he can contain as well as take wickets. Mind you Ponting gave him 50 overs in the 1st Test in Australia..More fool punter.

I know he leaks runs, but he still took 12 for in his first game, & he should have been percervered with a bit longer. Fair enough he turned out to be another Darren Cuthbertson but i don't think the selectors helped his confidence much.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I know he leaks runs, but he still took 12 for in his first game, & he should have been percervered with a bit longer. Fair enough he turned out to be another Darren Cuthbertson but i don't think the selectors helped his confidence much.

His 12 wickets were a great effort but there were some prevailing factors at hand that contributed to the unusual haul. His lead up form to that Test had been poor, really poor.

The first Test in Australia after he returned was a green top in Brisbane. Australia bowled seven overs of spin in the game. The next test they went in with Hauritz who justified his selection with an accurate tight performance that was beyond Krejza.

You cant play a McGain or Krezja when they simply do not put up Test standard performances. Both players were woefully under the level required. Who'd be a Captain for that?

A.B Tubby Ian Chappell, & S.R. would have...& you know that.

You dont know that at all. The rules have changed since Taylor, Chappelli and Waugh were around and the penalties for breaching over limits are severe and they mount with each penalty. The extent of the severity of the penalties can lead to the suspension of Captain for one or more Tests plus individual and team fines. I think its a horrible position for a Captain. If I remember carefully, had Ponting breach the requirements then he would be suspended for the next Test, fined and Australia loses its premier batsman and captain for the next test in the tough climate of India

[titan_uranus 24,912]

The first Test in Australia after he returned was a green top in Brisbane. Australia bowled seven overs of spin in the game. The next test they went in with Hauritz who justified his selection with an accurate tight performance that was beyond Krejza.

You do realise that they were going to play Krejza in Adelaide, but had to use Hauritz because Krejza rolled his ankle a couple of days before the match?

Hauritz was picked from the wilderness, and has done well, but he might not be where he is right now if Krejza had not have rolled his ankle that day. Krejza got one more Test in Perth, in which he did poorly, and hasn't been seen since. But his Sheffield Shield form has been OK. The big thing I've noticed is his economy rate is down.

If I remember carefully, had Ponting breach the requirements then he would be suspended for the next Test, fined and Australia loses its premier batsman and captain for the next test in the tough climate of India

You also do realise that the Test we're talking about was the 4th and final Test in India in 2008. If Ponting had been suspended, he would have missed the Brisbane Test.

[45HG 1,539]

I don't take much notice of his 12 wicket match.

It was a fantastic effort by him, but if not for some outrageous batting he may have ended up with 3/200+ and match figures of 7 or 8 for over 350.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

You do realise that they were going to play Krejza in Adelaide, but had to use Hauritz because Krejza rolled his ankle a couple of days before the match?

Hauritz was picked from the wilderness, and has done well, but he might not be where he is right now if Krejza had not have rolled his ankle that day. Krejza got one more Test in Perth, in which he did poorly, and hasn't been seen since. But his Sheffield Shield form has been OK. The big thing I've noticed is his economy rate is down.

Thanks for filling in the gap on Adelaide. You are right. Only backs the point. I am not sure at Shield level Krejza has been that convincing to be back in the selectors vision just yet.

You also do realise that the Test we're talking about was the 4th and final Test in India in 2008. If Ponting had been suspended, he would have missed the Brisbane Test.

Thanks for that. The problem is that not only do you lose your Captain for a Test but any further infringements involve heftier penalties. Its a really tough law.

[Sir Why You Little 36,744]

His 12 wickets were a great effort but there were some prevailing factors at hand that contributed to the unusual haul. His lead up form to that Test had been poor, really poor.

The first Test in Australia after he returned was a green top in Brisbane. Australia bowled seven overs of spin in the game. The next test they went in with Hauritz who justified his selection with an accurate tight performance that was beyond Krejza.

You cant play a McGain or Krezja when they simply do not put up Test standard performances. Both players were woefully under the level required. Who'd be a Captain for that?

You dont know that at all. The rules have changed since Taylor, Chappelli and Waugh were around and the penalties for breaching over limits are severe and they mount with each penalty. The extent of the severity of the penalties can lead to the suspension of Captain for one or more Tests plus individual and team fines. I think its a horrible position for a Captain. If I remember carefully, had Ponting breach the requirements then he would be suspended for the next Test, fined and Australia loses its premier batsman and captain for the next test in the tough climate of India

I Agree with what you are Saying RR, But i still believe trying to win an away series in India is more important than being suspended for the following Test in Brisbane.

Any Fines could have easily been paid by the Australian Public as there would have been "Civil Outrage" (Qick Whip around in every local Pub!!)

Remind me-Who did we play in that first Test in Brisbane...New Zealand i think. Personally i would Prefer to try & beat India over there.

If Ponting's hands were tied with that decision then it is an ICC digrace i believe...

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Re -read the last paragraph of my previous post. I understand the penalties mount with each contravention. Both suspensions and fines. Its not a whip around the pub to cough a few cents. And its not just about the NZ test. If my understanding is correct the penalty escalations cover a 12 month period.

Your last sentence shows the clouds might be clearing. Well done.

I dont mind the rule because its means the paying public get to see 90 overs of cricket and value for their ticket. Some of the over rates of the Windies made a mockery of a full day's value.