Anyone for cricket?

[dee-luded 2,959]

Hayden hits out at Australia's leadership void

Matthew Hayden believes the decision to anoint Michael Clarke as the next Australian captain from a young age instead of grooming a group of candidates contributed to a lost generation of leaders, and has implored Cricket Australia to invest heavily in the next group of potential captains.

Hayden, the Test great and former CA board member, said he raised concerns about the leadership void when he was a director, between 2009 and 2011.

''If there is one element in my time that has lost its way it's the development of a leadership culture. The fact that Michael Clarke was promoted at 21 to be the next captain was a mistake.

Whilst I think he is now a natural choice as captain, I think it needed a lot more behind-the-scenes support and resources into developing a really strong, vibrant community of leaders,'' said the man who shared Australia's most successful opening partnership with Justin Langer.

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/sport/cricket/hayden-hits-out-at-australias-leadership-void-20130822-2sekp.html#ixzz2chgqx9jO

[Macca 16,903]

Hayden hits out at Australia's leadership void

Matthew Hayden believes the decision to anoint Michael Clarke as the next Australian captain from a young age instead of grooming a group of candidates contributed to a lost generation of leaders, and has implored Cricket Australia to invest heavily in the next group of potential captains.

Hayden, the Test great and former CA board member, said he raised concerns about the leadership void when he was a director, between 2009 and 2011.

''If there is one element in my time that has lost its way it's the development of a leadership culture. The fact that Michael Clarke was promoted at 21 to be the next captain was a mistake.

Whilst I think he is now a natural choice as captain, I think it needed a lot more behind-the-scenes support and resources into developing a really strong, vibrant community of leaders,'' said the man who shared Australia's most successful opening partnership with Justin Langer.

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/sport/cricket/hayden-hits-out-at-australias-leadership-void-20130822-2sekp.html#ixzz2chgqx9jO

At issue here is whether a batsman who has made it all the way to the best 6 batsmen in the Country needs a captain or a coach to make him play better. This is not footy where you're one of 400 who play every week. The different circumstances are extreme. You're either an A grade batsman or you generally won't have a long career - it's as simple as that.

When you're out in the middle you're on your own (although whilst there is a lot to be said about batting as a partnership, you've still got to negotiate top quality bowling on your own) Boof and/or Pup have way less influence than many might think. They can't hold their hand. By the time a batsman reaches Test level he should know what to do. Even at 22 years old.

Our lack of leaders within the team is a cyclical thing. I maintain that cricket needs a highly active selfish gene. Many just play for themselves and whilst this contributes to the overall team effort, it doesn't necessarily mean they're ever going to be good leaders.

It's said that the best captains generally are batsmen who bat in the top order - our top order has been largely dysfunctional for a while now. Therefore we lack leaders. It's fairly simple. Once our top order gets to be good again, another leader or 2 might emerge.

Watson made 176 yesterday. Did he bat for the team or for himself? Did he lead by example? Did he show leadership out in the middle? Was his performance great for himself or for the team? Or both?

Who's the next obvious captain for England? It might be Prior as Trott, Pietersen or Bell don't stand out as likely candidates. KP has been tried before and the other 2 just don't seem the type. Maybe even Swann would be the next choice.

Cook isn't going anywhere so it's not an issue for them right now. We should be saying the same about Clarke. I just hope all these losses isn't going to effect his batting. It's not his fault we're not a good team - in fact, he's doing more than enough and is a tactically sound captain.

Edited August 22, 2013 by Macca

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I've defended Clarke numerous times on this thread and continue to do so (see the post below for another example) Those who are overly critical of Clarke are damned by their own words. Same as those who have been overly critical of the much maligned Watson. By the way, Shane has made the most runs in this series by an Aussie (392 - which is the 2nd most runs in the series by any player)

As for Faulkner, if he picks up a few wickets in this Test anything could happen in the future. He's a bowling all-rounder (his figures indicate this) so he doesn't necessarily have to bat in the top 7 going forward. I've never regarded him as anyone who could bat in the top 6 (and have said so in this thread) but believe he might make it as one of the 3 seamers. If he does have a good all round game then it's a nice problem to have. Aren't we looking for competition for all the spots?

There may also have been other reasons that we played 5 bowlers (if we assume Watson isn't bowling in this game) Maybe the selectors have drawn a line through 3 batsmen (for now) and have decided (already) to go in a different direction for the 1st Test in Brisbane. Selectors have been known to do this sort of thing at all levels of sport. (deny opportunities as part of a selection strategy)

Harris and Siddle are our only shoe-ins right now although I'd agree that Starc would be next in line (if Pattinson isn't ready) However, Mitchell is no world beater and needs to bowl with more penetration (he may well do that in this Test) Starc now bowls at 135k's which is a maximum of 10k's short of his top pace. From the outside, it looks like the selectors are trying to send him a message (bowl well enough that we can't drop you or 'rest' you)

Faulkner deserves a chance at least and I hope he does well when he gets his opportunity.

Fair enough you did make a sensible and ratoinal position about Clarke some time ago.

In regard to Faulkner, if he bats below seven then he aint an all rounder. I dont think he is good enough to sustain a Test career at this point as a bowler especially given Harris and Siddle are shoe ins and there is a need for a strike bowler. While I did not see Starc bowl in this Test, I would have thought 135 kms in England, he is comparable in pace to the English quicks and Harris. He has bowl well in his last Test so I cannot figure why he was dropped in the first place.

IMO Faulkner got his chance because:

1. He is on the touring party

2. Its a dead rubber

3. Australia is one batsman short at No 6 with Cowan, Hughes and Khawaja failing

4. They would have considered spin at the Oval but Agar went home early with a virus.

As a result they have picked a team with 5 batsman and 5/6 bowlers. Its unbalanced.

Faulkner needs to do well in this Test otherwise for the foreseeable future he will be squeezed out by other options. And as you said he is not a No 6 batsman and thats the pressing gap the team has going into the Gabba Test.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Whilst I think he is now a natural choice as captain, I think it needed a lot more behind-the-scenes support and resources into developing a really strong, vibrant community of leaders,'' said the man who shared Australia's most successful opening partnership with Justin Langer.

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/sport/cricket/hayden-hits-out-at-australias-leadership-void-20130822-2sekp.html#ixzz2chgqx9jO

Exactly right. The lack of leadership traits outside the captain in Australian cricket is a pressing CA problem that been recognised by a number of formal players and cricket commentators. Its ironic that the next potential future captain (Cowan) is unable to grab a spot in a weak batting line up.

Arthur's comments were with respect to the vacuum created by the departure of senior players Ponting and Hussey in a short space of time coupled with the lack of leadership of senior players like Shane Watson and the huge egos of younger players who earn exorbitant money through IPL.

It's worthwhile considering Watson's behaviour as senior player and the leadership and public behaviours of senior players like Ponting and Hussey. It's a chalk and cheese comparison at best.

[Haddin] Provides leadership assistance that Clarke has lacked with the retirement of Ponting and Hussey.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Great knock by Steve Smith. Most deserved.

Pity about the rain.

[MadAsHell 4,212]

One of the joys of sport is when a team or a player comes out against the odds and does something quite substantial. I had Watto out of the 1st Test in Brisbane for a number of reasons but mainly because he just seemed to have had too many chances and he wasn't delivering.

Following on from his solid 68 in the 4th Test he comes out and makes a fantastic 176 in this Test. Not only did he go on with it but he was also was struck a fearsome blow behind the ear from Broad that looked awful in real time. (and in replay) The fact that he batted on for another 80 odd runs was great stuff.

Well played Shane Watson. A grand innings and if we win this Test, he'll be largely responsible.

Oh and 'TD', you might have to make a provision for Watto at the no.3 spot in the 'Poll' (not that I would change my vote!)

Haha, not wrong Macca, he's certainly proved me wrong and good on him I say!

He was out of my XI also, as was Smith!

Fair enough you did make a sensible and ratoinal position about Clarke some time ago.

In regard to Faulkner, if he bats below seven then he aint an all rounder. I dont think he is good enough to sustain a Test career at this point as a bowler especially given Harris and Siddle are shoe ins and there is a need for a strike bowler. While I did not see Starc bowl in this Test, I would have thought 135 kms in England, he is comparable in pace to the English quicks and Harris. He has bowl well in his last Test so I cannot figure why he was dropped in the first place.

IMO Faulkner got his chance because:

1. He is on the touring party

2. Its a dead rubber

3. Australia is one batsman short at No 6 with Cowan, Hughes and Khawaja failing

4. They would have considered spin at the Oval but Agar went home early with a virus.

As a result they have picked a team with 5 batsman and 5/6 bowlers. Its unbalanced.

Faulkner needs to do well in this Test otherwise for the foreseeable future he will be squeezed out by other options. And as you said he is not a No 6 batsman and thats the pressing gap the team has going into the Gabba Test.

You make some good points re: Faullner RR and I can see where you're coming from.

I think what it will come down to with Faulkner, apart from his performances obviously is what they decide to do with Watson?

Obviosuly Watto hasn't bowled yet in this test. So going forward will the selectors now look to play Watson as a specialist batsman only at number 3 and instruct Clarke only to bowl him as a partnership breaker for no more then about 6-10 overs an innings, for example Steve Waugh's medium pacers in the 2nd half of his career. If that is the case then there may be a potential spot for an all rounder still in Faulkner. This would require him to average at least around 35 with the bat though you'd think and the same would be required of Haddin or whoever the keeper is at number 6. If would also require to top 5 to be averaging over 40 each like the good old days to still give you a solid batting line up.

If this isn't the case and they still wish Watto to play as an all rounder while batting at 3 then I agree, the side does look unbalanced and you'd like to see them get another specialist batsman in so they and Smith can hold down 5 and 6, whether that's Maddinson or whoever?

As for the state of the match a good days play by the Aussies and at least it now looks extremely unlikely that we'll loose 4-0. Sorry Beefy Botham! Well done to both Watto and Smith who before this match I said were playing for their careers and I expected to both be playing their final tests. Fingers crossed we can knock England over for under 320 by stumps day 3, go out and make a quick 250 and set them 420 in 4 sessions and then push for victory.

Back onto England however, pretty ordinary I say that Kerrigan wasn't even given the opportunity to come out on Day 2 and attempt to bounce back from the previous day. Even if he was only given 1 or 2 overs and if he still looked ordinary then drag him. The guys been picked as a specialist bowler and to not even get a chance to redeem himself was pretty ordinary I thought, but that's just me.

[MadAsHell 4,212]

And in other news, another Australian fast bowler is injured!

http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2013/content/story/664283.html

For the GABBA test the 3 seamers will probably be Harris, Siddle & Starc as there won't be any others fit available! And you know it's only a matter of time before Harris goes again....

[Macca 16,903]

And in other news, another Australian fast bowler is injured!

http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2013/content/story/664283.html

For the GABBA test the 3 seamers will probably be Harris, Siddle & Starc as there won't be any others fit available! And you know it's only a matter of time before Harris goes again....

I reckon there's not enough down time for the quicks these days. Fairly sure McGrath made mention of this some time ago. Fast bowlers used to get long lays offs but with the 3 forms of the game and all the money involved, there just isn't the same opportunity to rest up as there once was. Either that, or it's just a coincidence (and you know what they say about coincidences!)

Both Patto and Bird were bowling without a lot of penetration in England and now that we know about their respective back injury's, it can now be explained. If it is too much cricket, how is that fixed? Harris played in the IPL on a nice contract and broke down with an achilles injury. He's come back well but if the injury was worse, we could have been in dire straits.

Cummins, Pattinson and now Bird. Harris and Starc have had their issues. The most common problem is related to the back which can be a sure sign that it's related to too much cricket.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Agree Macca.

The preponderance of meaningless one fixtures in IPL and elsewhere.

The evolution of short duration fly in fly out Test series.

The compression of Test Series into short time frames.

Lack of time between the end of one Test to another.

In Australia's case opening up the 2nd innings on the same day you have completed a Herculean effort in 1st innings.

I don't have the link but Peter Bruckner wrote a succinct explanation of the problem.

If they don't wind back the schedules then you just need a panel of bowlers to use. Anyone for rotation of bowlers?

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Oh and the 200 is up in the thread...well played.

[dee-luded 2,959]

At issue here is whether a batsman who has made it all the way to the best 6 batsmen in the Country needs a captain or a coach to make him play better. This is not footy where you're one of 400 who play every week. The different circumstances are extreme. You're either an A grade batsman or you generally won't have a long career - it's as simple as that.

When you're out in the middle you're on your own (although whilst there is a lot to be said about batting as a partnership, you've still got to negotiate top quality bowling on your own) Boof and/or Pup have way less influence than many might think. They can't hold their hand. By the time a batsman reaches Test level he should know what to do. Even at 22 years old.

Our lack of leaders within the team is a cyclical thing. I maintain that cricket needs a highly active selfish gene. Many just play for themselves and whilst this contributes to the overall team effort, it doesn't necessarily mean they're ever going to be good leaders.

It's said that the best captains generally are batsmen who bat in the top order - our top order has been largely dysfunctional for a while now. Therefore we lack leaders. It's fairly simple. Once our top order gets to be good again, another leader or 2 might emerge.

Watson made 176 yesterday. Did he bat for the team or for himself? Did he lead by example? Did he show leadership out in the middle? Was his performance great for himself or for the team? Or both?

Who's the next obvious captain for England? It might be Prior as Trott, Pietersen or Bell don't stand out as likely candidates. KP has been tried before and the other 2 just don't seem the type. Maybe even Swann would be the next choice.

Cook isn't going anywhere so it's not an issue for them right now. We should be saying the same about Clarke. I just hope all these losses isn't going to effect his batting. It's not his fault we're not a good team - in fact, he's doing more than enough and is a tactically sound captain.

At issue here is development... the environment that will allow young players entering this level to be able to grow to this level of competition.. the supportive environment so they can focus and not overly worry about other issues going on.

a harmony with laughter to break any tensions arising that can take a further edge off the players ability to focus on their craft.

I don't know how many test greats need to allude to this, before you may be finally able to allow yourself to open up.

* talent is a prerequisite, but not all the most talented will be able to cut it... a broad spectrum of skills are required to achieve, especially in a mixed social environment where sharp & precious Ego's are involved.

the coach & off field leadership are required to steer this environment towards success.

Boof is doing a great job repairing the damage of the past 5 or so years.

Edited October 23, 2013 by dee-luded

[Macca 16,903]

Dee-luded ... I don't discount the importance of a good environment with the proper leadership values and coaching etc. Just don't see all that as importantly as you do. Especially in cricket.

Maybe you need to give a bit of ground here. Let's not forget we only have 1 world class A grade cricketer in the team. Awfully difficult to win games of cricket against quality opposition given that scenario.

[Macca 16,903]

Harris bowled really well again in this session - give him a good spell after this series and let him play a maximum of 2 Shield games before the 1st Test in Brisbane. Same goes for Siddle. They don't need to play in the ODI's (if the selectors are considering either of them)

Starc probably needs some more work before that 1st Test. He's got his pace up so far today - a little wayward early but some good signs. Clarke was at wide mid off for parts of his spell and as long as Mitch doesn't mind that, it's an excellent move by Pup. I like the idea of having the skipper giving some sage advice to the young quicks. Clarke reads the game very well.

Definitely bending his back today is Mitchell. When he gets it up to 145k's (90mph) he looks far more dangerous. He bowled a good sustained spell in this session. I've heard Boycott, Lillee and a number of others say that line and length can always happen eventually - but first of all get the pace up.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Dee-luded ... I don't discount the importance of a good environment with the proper leadership values and coaching etc. Just don't see all that as importantly as you do. Especially in cricket.

Maybe you need to give a bit of ground here. Let's not forget we only have 1 world class A grade cricketer in the team. Awfully difficult to win games of cricket against quality opposition given that scenario.

the more difficult the team game, the more important the team cohesive environment needs to be...

... even golfers have to have a great repore with caddy, & their coach, & freinds around, look what happened to the greatest golfer when his world tipped upside down... & he owned Golf, just prior..

you say this game is the hardest to adjust to, & I say all the more reason to have players come into a mature environment, (mature, meaning they all are considerate & supportive & understanding of one another) ..... then the coach can weave his secret spells, whilst the team focuses on the game before them.

look at Clark last night, all of a sudden he's becoming more fatherly & supportive.. helping Starc was one I noticed early... Boof is really teaching this Mob, & Clark is all ears... you can see him up on the balcony, many times working with Clark, philosophising to him. & he's learning

.... the results are there for all of us to see, the changes happening before our eyes.

culture/environment: for those kids... & khawaja, coming into the septic team in the last few years would be impossible...

now he has so much doubt after past failures he needs to come in via the back door this next time, or he's finished. he has to bat at 5, or even 6, to find form, before later elevation.

the other kids coming in need to arrive to a happy environment were the theme is supportive, & disciplined to cricket & fun.

Fun & laughter the complete antidote to stress & fear.

Edited August 24, 2013 by dee-luded

[dee-luded 2,959]

I've just read an article in the cricket pages... >

http://www.news.com.au/sport/cricket/captain-michael-clarkes-power-games-are-ruining-australian-cricket-writes-paul-kent/story-fndpt0dy-1226703041598

[jazza 1,323]

put this earlier in the wrong spot

does watto get 328 tests now that hes made runs

aussies uncover a true no3

btw deluded an interesting question,does anybody think our use of the DRS was pitiful in the first 2 tests?

Edited August 24, 2013 by jazza

[dee-luded 2,959]

put this earlier in the wrong spot

does watto get 328 tests now that hes made runs

aussies uncover a true no3

btw deluded an interesting question,does anybody think our use of the DRS was pitiful in the first 2 tests?

I think we've used it poorly as everyone has said, but this is also a reflection of a struggling playing environment under strain, making off pulse decisions..

a clear head comes from an environment where stress is reduced, & support aplenty. happy souls have healthy minds.

Edited August 24, 2013 by dee-luded

[jazza 1,323]

I think we've used it poorly as everyone has said, but this is also a reflection of a struggling playing environment under strain, making off pulse decisions..

a clear head comes from an environment where stress is reduced, & support aplenty. happy souls have healthy minds.

where I come from

after the second test when everybody was screaming at watto and the skip in media interview said "we got DRS wrong"

so at lords

chairman of the ACB

chairman of selectors

coach

captain

and not one of them shuts the door and has a quiet word about us not being a good team atm ,

but lets at least get something right.DRS

nope 3rd,4th test just a shambles on DRS again

severe lack of leadership atm. this includes all of the above

great to see smith,harris,siddle, have good series, not great but good

[dee-luded 2,959]

where I come from

after the second test when everybody was screaming at watto and the skip in media interview said "we got DRS wrong"

so at lords

chairman of the ACB

chairman of selectors

coach

captain

and not one of them shuts the door and has a quiet word about us not being a good team atm ,

but lets at least get something right.DRS

nope 3rd,4th test just a shambles on DRS again

severe lack of leadership atm. this includes all of the above

great to see smith,harris,siddle, have good series, not great but good

I think what we're reaping now has been on the brew since Tugga finished, but it wasn't on the surface for a part timer like me to see. I lost interest at that time of tugga going. & pretty much stopped watching tests.

this is the result of poor off field leadership creating a vacuum from weak board leadership. they should be on the pulse & quickly fix things years back.. But these modern days 'Spin' has tried to control the public's perception with false media.

pulls the wool only for a short time, til the reality becomes obvious to our eyes witness.

we should have a cleanout of the ACB at the end of this test series, prior to the boys coming home.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

The stats for DRS provided by the GEM commentary team showed the DRS success rate between Australia and Ngland has not been all that different with a slight shading to England. This would have been even close had the Khawaja decision correctly assessed by the 3rd umpire.

There is no doubt we were poor with the DRS early ( re Watto and Hughes) relative to England.

But I thought we had smartened up in that area while England have lapsed badly in the past two tests.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Harris bowled really well again in this session - give him a good spell after this series and let him play a maximum of 2 Shield games before the 1st Test in Brisbane. Same goes for Siddle. They don't need to play in the ODI's (if the selectors are considering either of them)

Starc probably needs some more work before that 1st Test. He's got his pace up so far today - a little wayward early but some good signs. Clarke was at wide mid off for parts of his spell and as long as Mitch doesn't mind that, it's an excellent move by Pup. I like the idea of having the skipper giving some sage advice to the young quicks. Clarke reads the game very well.

Definitely bending his back today is Mitchell. When he gets it up to 145k's (90mph) he looks far more dangerous. He bowled a good sustained spell in this session. I've heard Boycott, Lillee and a number of others say that line and length can always happen eventually - but first of all get the pace up.

Fair points on all counts. I really like Starcs potential. Tall left hand that's quick and can move the ball. We had not had that since the beanpole Bruce Reid played. Starcs a good bat also.

[titan_uranus 24,969]

Watson and Smith have both hit centuries right at the right time. Heard someone liken Watson to Marcus North - approaches being dropped, pulls a 100 out of nowhere, then (probably) proceeds to stink again. Hopefully Watson can actually convert this 100 into a run of form.

Rogers, Clarke, Smith and Watson form four of the top six (Rogers at 1, Watson at 3, Clarke at 4, Smith at 5). I'm not sold on Warner, but you'd assume he stays given how much the selectors love him, and the sixth spot is up for grabs. Come Brisbane, it won't be Faulkner. It probably won't be Khawaja either. It might be Hughes or Cowan, but they'll need to make some first class runs before the series.

As for the bowlers, Lyon clearly is our number one spinner, and that debate should be ended. In terms of pacemen, Harris and Siddle are the top two, with Pattinson IMO the third if fit. Starc is errant but has the advantage of being a leftie. Bird is back-up in the likely event Harris is injured some time between now and the Sydney test.

Haddin remains our keeper whilst his glovework continues to be of his high standard. Wade needs to learn to keep wicket if he wants to get back in.

So, Brisbane Test XI:

Rogers

Warner

Watson

Clarke

Smith

Hughes/Cowan/debutant batsman

Haddin

Siddle

Harris

Pattinson

Lyon

[Macca 16,903]

Starc has had a few injury concerns and the selectors might decide to put him in cotton wool until he starts getting prepared for the Ashes. I know we play a series of five ODI's against England before going to India for another seven ODI's (played in the month of October) No real sense having Harris, Siddle or Starc involved in these games. Those 3 need to rest up for 5 or 6 weeks. Those ODI's are an ideal time to give Faulkner, Coulter-Nile, Mitch Marsh, Hazlewood, Henriques and a few others some valuable exposure.

If our fast bowlers are definitely going to play t20 cricket (the money on offer is almost impossible to resist) then the Australian selectors might decide to keep our Test fast bowlers away from the ODI's and the domestic 50 over games*. England are in a unique position where their players are tied to central contracts. Because their season starts in late April, it means their players are largely unavailable for the IPL.

Shield cricket, Test cricket, the IPL and maybe the Big Bash is plenty of cricket for Harris, Starc, Pattinson, Siddle and Bird. (the IPL pays a truckload more than the Big Bash so the latter doesn't represent that much of an issue) For the batsmen, they just need to learn how to adjust their tempo within all 3 forms of the game. Many other batsmen around the World can adapt to the 3 forms of the game (especially the South Africans) so our players really don't have any excuses.

*Effectively, the ECB pay their players to not play in the IPL. Maybe CA could do the same with our bevy of fast bowlers. They've always had a few bob in the coffers so it might be money well spent

[MadAsHell 4,212]

Stumps Day 4

Australia 9/492

S. Watson 176

S. Smith 138*

R. Harris 33

J. Anderson 4/95 (29.5)

G. Swann 2/95 (33)

C. Woakes 1/96 (24)

England 4/247

J. Root 68

K. Pietersen 50

J. Trott 40

M. Starc 2/60 (26)

N. Lyon 1/41 (26)

R. Harris 1/41 (23)

Rain and negative cricket from England have ruined what was looking a good test for Australia. England going at 2.12 runs an over but still stating they were looking to win the test is an absolute joke! It's why they'll never be as good as we used to be back in the Days of Taylor & Waugh as captain and the positive cricket they had us playing no matter the position we were in.

Only way we could push for a result from here would be with a gentlemen's agreement with the English. 98 overs will be expected for the day to help make up for some time. First 24 overs for England to bat to avoid the follow on. Say they go at a normal rate of about 3 an over would take them up to about 320 and about 170 behind.

England declare, take the 2 overs off for change over and there would be 72 overs remaining.

Australia go out and bat for 20 overs at a rate of 4-5 an over taking our lead to somewhere in the ball park of 250-270.

Australia declare, take the 2 overs off for change over and there would be 50 overs remaining.

End of the match could then become like a ODI as England need 250-270 to win off 50 overs. In the spirit of the contest don't bowl any of our bowlers for more then 10 overs each and play it old school by not having anymore then 2 fielders outside where the circled area would be for the first 15 overs.

Won't happen, but it would be great for the spectators and great for test cricket!

Edited August 25, 2013 by Tall Defence

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

The 5th day will centre wicket practice where the real focus will be back in Australia when the Gabba Test starts.

And we have another meaningless ODI series to keep our interests up.....