Harris in for Hilfenhaus too. Another good call.

And we won the toss and are batting.

Edited December 2, 201014 yr by titan_uranus

Australia 2-0....Long Summer... B)

see ya ashes.. we are woeful

Katich out without facing a ball, Ponting out for a golden duck. Cracking start that

Katich out without facing a ball, Ponting out for a golden duck. Cracking start that

I wonder how good Michael Clarke's Back is this week?

Ohh late news Clarke out for 2!!!

Australia now 3-2 What a team!!

Edited December 3, 201014 yr by why you little

I wonder how good Michael Clarke's Back is this week?

Not real good apparently, gone for 2. Three wickets for two runs. Won't make double figures at this rate.

Heard a rumour that Hilfenhaus's omission from the side is considered permanent. The rumour goes that Greg Chappell believes Hilfenhaus has had an extended run in the side, and has proven that he is unable to take enough wickets at Test level, and therefore will not be considered for future Tests.

Source is only of moderate credibility, so take this with all appropriate grains of salt.

A good typical Adeliade pitch.

There is no excuses for this start. Its on the players shoulders.

Hope Watson and Hussey can turn things around.

How would things be looking if the catch was held when Hussey was on 3 ?! Handy 93 in the end and North got off to a start but failed.

The Punter a golden duck and Katich a diamond duck. They'd be livid.

i was working all day without TV and radio, only had score updates, so should the Poms make a Big score or is the Pitch helping the Bowlers??

i was working all day without TV and radio, only had score updates, so should the Poms make a Big score or is the Pitch helping the Bowlers??

Poms should makes runs. Poms bowled well - particularly Anderson. Bowled well apparently (listened to 774).

Poms should makes runs. Poms bowled well - particularly Anderson. Bowled well apparently (listened to 774).

Yes i feared that was the problem.

The Aussies are trying to fix problems on the run. This is such bad planning considering what last summer represented, i know it is different circumstances but, Last summer we should have been more prepared to take a loss in order to give more players "game time" just like the Dee's.

Things could get very nasty by late January because we won't have a settled side.

Disturbance in the Force.

Yes i feared that was the problem.

The Aussies are trying to fix problems on the run. This is such bad planning considering what last summer represented, i know it is different circumstances but, Last summer we should have been more prepared to take a loss in order to give more players "game time" just like the Dee's.

You have yet to put one plausible change to the side in the last 12 months that the selectors should have undertaken despite repeating being asked to do so.

The selectors have chosen the sides on the basis of who they believe would be the best side to take on the Ashes. You need to prepare 12 to 18 months out.

The only bright ideas you have put is the sacking of Hussey (288 at 144. Good one) and the selection of Smith over Hauritz (bizarre).

How can the selectors properly plan for the next 12 months when 4 of the mainstays of the side....Ponting, Clarke Johnson, Hify are not performing. You cant cover that sort of underperformance.

And part of the issue is that the players that could potentially replace them are not stepping up when it counts. There is no certainty that "punting on youth" would have had us in any better position today. Cricketers are not "made" in 12 months as Smith for Australia and Anderson, Cook and Broad would attest for England.

The Punter a golden duck and Katich a diamond duck. They'd be livid.

Punter got a cracker from Anderson first up and was good enough to get a touch on it.

Katich's run out was 80% Katich and 20% Watson. While Watson apparently did not call, surely an opening batsman knows to watch his partner at the other end for the split second opportunity to turn the strike. If he wants to watch the ball he may have his opportunity from the other side of the fence sooner than he thinks.

Hopefully Doherty learns from his error.

North is one fail away from being dropped. Slack shot at the wrong time.

England shot Australia out for 245 on a belter and neither Broad or Finn bowled well and up to Hussey's dismissal, Australia had Swanns measure too. Anderson has been the pick of the bowlers throughout this series. Every spell has been a trump.

Unless something strange happens, Australia could be batting again to stave off the innings defeat on day 4 about 250 to 300 runs behind. That after spending 2 days in 35C+ weather chasing the ball.

You have yet to put one plausible change to the side in the last 12 months that the selectors should have undertaken despite repeating being asked to do so.

The selectors have chosen the sides on the basis of who they believe would be the best side to take on the Ashes. You need to prepare 12 to 18 months out.

The only bright ideas you have put is the sacking of Hussey (288 at 144. Good one) and the selection of Smith over Hauritz (bizarre).

How can the selectors properly plan for the next 12 months when 4 of the mainstays of the side....Ponting, Clarke Johnson, Hify are not performing. You cant cover that sort of underperformance.

And part of the issue is that the players that could potentially replace them are not stepping up when it counts. There is no certainty that "punting on youth" would have had us in any better position today. Cricketers are not "made" in 12 months as Smith for Australia and Anderson, Cook and Broad would attest for England.

RR we have had this discussion before, and basically we fundamentally disagree-That's fine, but i will say this. Since the Ashes series in 2006, that is when all this rebuilding should have begun in earnest.

3 different sides should be selected, Test ODI & 20/20-i don't like players playing all 3 forms.

Last summer they picked a side to win the series, i would have picked the side to gain more experience. Who cares whether we beat the Paki's or the windies. To me our important games are the Ashes & the World cup games.

Ponting,Clarke Johnson & Hilfy are all mentally exhausted IMO & this is something that should be looked at more seriously.

It is not an easy problem granted, but i don't think Cricket Australia have managed this nearly as well as could have been done. That has always been my view, & will not change.

Comments like Michael Clarke made a few weeks ago that "I will play every game of all forms of cricket this summer" are just ridiculous-He has always had a suspect back, and thus should be managed very carefully.

(Hussey has just dropped a decent chance-better get back to the TV!!!)

Last summer they picked a side to win the series, i would have picked the side to gain more experience. Who cares whether we beat the Paki's or the windies. To me our important games are the Ashes & the World cup games.

There is no evidence to suggest that the selectors only chose a side to win the series last summer. That's your self serving spin on it. And even if they did do that then I dont see how it could be an objective that is mutually exclusive from winning the Ashes.

And throughout this process you have not come up with one plausible selection change that could have been reasonably expected to have had an impact on a side whose Captain and VC are not firing and their strike bowler has lost his mojo.

And for the record the most important games are the Ashes. nothing in the world comes close to history, integrity and prestige. I think the Cricket Australia realises that.

WYL - for old times sake, could you list the starting 11 you would've liked to see for the Pakistan/Windies tour last year.

And for the record the most important games are the Ashes. nothing in the world comes close to history, integrity and prestige. I think the Cricket Australia realises that.

Well when pointless ODI games and 20/20 games are scheduled before the Ashes series as warm up games i question that.

WYL - for old times sake, could you list the starting 11 you would've liked to see for the Pakistan/Windies tour last year.

45 i am more interested in the philosophy of the selectors over the last 4 years. i feel they got it wrong, they have stuck with far too many players for too long before making decisions.

If a player has a bad run for 5 games, i would drop them-let them find form in the domestic comp. I do not care who they are. Play some hungry young guys-take a chance, see what they do in the heat. I don't think this has been done nearly enough. And we are paying for it right now. (Cook just got his ton).

To be honest with you i would not know the exact side for last years series. But i still say it was the perfect time for the selectors to be far more bold than they were.

From 1989 till 2006 it was a tight knit Boys club, and why not-it worked. But once the Backbone retired it was time for a completely different philosophy, which i don't feel has happened.

It's like Hawthorn after 1991, it took them a decade to realize they needed to completely turn over their list.

Cricket australia missed a great opportunity to do that after the 2006 ashes, and particularly last summer.

Michael Clarke playing in the first test clearly injured summed it up for me. The selection process is way to conservative, and needs to be revamped.

Domestic Australian cricket is strong, and they don't use it enough IMO

Ponting is so stressed right now, he can't bat at 3-Put him down the order.

More insipid bowling and fielding. This test is gone.

No swing, no control. No plan at times. And catches dropped again.

Batsmen were also poor. No call from Watson, loose from Clarke and North. Anderson did bowl well but I don't rate the batting performance at all.

North must be dropped. David Hussey in. Pressure on Clarke too, but I'll back him in to pick up.

Pressure on Clarke too, but I'll back him in to pick up.

Clarke is injured. He should not be playing, it only puts more pressure on the rest of the team.

But a lot of this work should have been done last summer against Pakistan, it wasn't because certain players were not retired, Hard decisions were not taken. So now those same decisions are even tougher-Shocking planning and foresight. If this happened in a football club it would be laughable.

Don't Worry Cricket Australia are just as much to blame as the selectors-the whole last 12 months have almost been a waste of time leading up to this series, we are no further down the track than we were last year against the Paki's.

Last summer they picked a side to win the series, i would have picked the side to gain more experience.

45 i am more interested in the philosophy of the selectors over the last 4 years. i feel they got it wrong, they have stuck with far too many players for too long before making decisions.

Errr...

Errr...

so you disagree?

But a lot of this work should have been done last summer against Pakistan, it wasn't because certain players were not retired, Hard decisions were not taken. So now those same decisions are even tougher-Shocking planning and foresight. If this happened in a football club it would be laughable.

Don't Worry Cricket Australia are just as much to blame as the selectors-the whole last 12 months have almost been a waste of time leading up to this series, we are no further down the track than we were last year against the Paki's.

Last summer they picked a side to win the series, i would have picked the side to gain more experience.

WYL - for old times sake, could you list the starting 11 you would've liked to see for the Pakistan/Windies tour last year.

45 i am more interested in the philosophy of the selectors over the last 4 years. i feel they got it wrong, they have stuck with far too many players for too long before making decisions.

The posts above indicate that you believe that last summer's selections were wrong (as evidenced across multiple threads/forums), I asked you to select the 11 that you wanted - you then backtrack to talk about the last 4 years.

The posts above indicate that you believe that last summer's selections were wrong (as evidenced across multiple threads/forums), I asked you to select the 11 that you wanted - you then backtrack to talk about the last 4 years.

The last 4 years is the problem, or do you think the selectors have been doing a wonderful job?