Rhino Richards

There is no doubt Warne sees himself in that light too.Through the difficult times in his life, drug taking, teammate sledging, accepting bribes, serial womaniser and cheating that Warne has this surreal ability to brush these issues off as something thats neither here nor there when all the world realises its different and has serious implications about judgement and good character. Its a quality that has allowed him to endure personally the strain of public life in his own unique way. In another way it shows he repeatedly does not understand the fundamental responsibilities and accountabilities he has to people in his cricket life and his private life. Deep down he is a simple bogan from the burbs who just does not get it. He is respected and revered as a cricketer but not on the same level as a person. There is a number of skills Warne has on the field that dont translate off it...one of them is character. FWIW, Warne is the best bowler I have ever seen and the demonstration of his rare skills to world cricket came at a price.

Agree that he had brilliant cricket mind and was a great bowler but.... Not a leader's bootlace who was a loner with litle rapport with teammates and few if any real friends in cricket. And after Tubby and S Waugh were both made Australian of the Year it is hard to think that a serial pants man, a smoker, a pathological liar and a convicted drug taker was ever going to be the high profile and high prestige captain of Australia. Unfortunately brilliance in some areas was countered by an perpetually embarrassing personal profile that makes Wayne Carey look like a Saint.

Blah Blah Blah. He won the Test at Melbourne so how could it possibly be a mistake? The follow on and the amazing freakish comeback by the Indians in a record stand does not negate the argument about batting first and is irrelevant to the the discussion. However for all of Waugh's alleged greatness, the decision cost us that series in India. Nobody is criticising SR Waugh. They just recognise he was a captain with a great team (one of the greatest ever at his disposal). Was he a great captain? Gien the side he had it hard to tell. He rarely had the pressure on him (ex India) during his captaincy. And for the record Warne made four captains look better than they were....Border, Taylor, Waugh and Ponting. Great players do that. Just spare us the meldramatic crap.

S.R. Waugh had McGrath, Gillespie and Warne at his disposal in the fourth innings and then he had Hayden, Langer, Ponting and Gilly ably supported by M Waugh and Martin. I like Steve Waugh but honestly it was easy to Captain a side with 4 all time greats in it ably supported by another four very good players. And a quick scan of Cricinfo shows that SR Waugh as captain of the Test team won the toss in the 2nd Test at Melbourne in 2000/2001 and bowled. http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63965.html Who would have thunk it? HT is right. "The crux of my post is, in Test Matches (5 day format) you analyse the pitch first and look/consider at the pitch & weather conditions. Including forecasts. It helps determine results." Winning the toss and deciding correctly does have a huge bearing on a Test. While the majority of time the winner does bat it is not a golden rule and it is feasible to bowl given certain circumstances and conditions.

I trust you are not judging B'desh on the effort against sub club X1 from Zimbabwe. They are a third rate country that was given first class status a generation before it should have. Zimbabwe cricket mirrors the country itself. An appalling tragedy being destroyed by Mugabe and his goons.

I said I dont think its a given that you bat first every time in a ODI. How much is the pitch going to deteriorate over 8 hours when it has been specifically made for a run feast? And there is only 4 hours in duration difference between a 20/20 and a 50 over game so if it doesnt matter for a 20/20 then the it should hardly matter for a ODI. And the main issue with the pre Test series games is not so much the 20/20 (and its not good) but the lack of quality opposition games. Without looking at the fixture there was British Lions 3 dayer and a game against a watered down county side. It affects the start of a series but is no excuse for the player's peformance over the whole of the series. Exactly

Its another celebration of the malaise that is international cricket managed by the ICC. To think a game involving either or both teams is accredited as a first class match is the embarrassment

The conditions cancel each other out because the moisture in the air also causes moisture on the ball which destroys the laquer on the ball. The conditions vary between countries but there is not the same "bat first" mentality in ODI as there is in Tests. Katich has sealed one of the opening positions and come out of the Ashes OK. Hughes is young but a wonderful talent with a couple of tchnique problems. They should have taken an extra batsman to the Ashes and piffed McDonald. I am no fan of Hussey's but given the injuries to Clarke and Ferguson and co and the lack of ready replacements, it only highlights the Australian predicament Wrong again. The Ashes side we took to England was arguably the weakest and most inexperienced side to tour in the past 50 years. The bowling attack was green and relying on a bowler who is brilliant but terribly inconsistent. Hughes replaced Hayden but was man of the series leading into the Ashes. Go figure. What could have been possibly done? Give specifics not bloated theories. The era of Warne shadowed the fact that aside from McGill there wasn't a competent spin bowler with the talent to cut it at Test level. Post Warne only established the truth of the situation. 35 years wasted....

Its an issue in 5 day cricket where the state of the wicket can change over that period and ideally in most cases batting first gives you the ability to get best use of the wicket. Its not so much issue an issue in one day forms of cricket. Titan has covered it. Is that as invaluable as your media experience? I dont see what relevance your stated involvement in cricket has to the discussion. It does not lend any further credibility to your comments. How often is the pitch the difference between one side and another in one day cricket? Not facking ever. There is a huge difference between batting last in a Test match and a one day game. Ever considered that in 35 years? Geez, how could the selectors and Ponting not dug replacements for the greatest spinner ever, one of the best quicks and arguably the greatest keeper batsmen ever? Geez it should be a sinch... 35 years would have least taught you that Warne is a freak and a once in a couple of lifetimes bowler. They would never have replaced one of those greats let alone 3 greats in a short period of time and possibly ever. No. On one hand you whinge about no planning over Warne, Gilly and McGrath (include Langer as well) then you complain that Hayden played too long. Given the holes left by the absence of 3 and 4 greats the rebuild was a massive task anyway. This coupled with injuries and demise of Lee and McGill only made the planning more fraught. The retention of Hayden was necessary at the time to bolster the batting Hayden was batting capably up to six months before he retired. When he was cut that brought in Phil Hughes. It won them the unwinnable series. Well done selectors Great another whinge without an alternative. And I cant think of a captain who is not "stiff" when his bowling attack is unproven, unreliable and at times not up to it.

I guess the question is what would you (or another captain) have done differently. I have only seen the final 15 overs of the India innings and if ever there was a game when a Captain was let down by his bowlers... this was one of them. I dont wish to exonerate Ponting as at times he looks wooden under pressure. However, "off with his head" calls are too often made without a preferable or sensible solution.

All the best two sheds. Lets hope the good news keeps coming. You deserve it. Thanks for the update.

I dont think so for the current state of Test pitches. And the points are some of the issues you make undermine the value of the exercise particularly the last issue. The quality of a pitch can change dramatically over one year. Much depends upon the competence and integrity of ground management and administration. The English tour of the WI recently highlights this. I sometimes feel that curators are got at by Ground Management and TV rights stakeholders to provide "insurance" that the Test will go the full 5 days. They nullify the pitch for bowlers and effectively kill the contest between bat and ball by the end of day 1.

Correct. Stuff it. I tossed the coin. Called incorrectly. Thanks for that. The results of a game often depend upon the quality of the teams playing, attitudes of the Captains, etc. If you are going to look at the results then you have to look at the components of each one. I reckon all of the Test results in Perth for the past 5 years or so have been on sub standard wickets. And I think its getting worse. However when you have over 1000 runs struck in a Test with less than 25 wickets taken over the 5 days then questions should be asked about the wicket. It happens way too often to pin it on the quality of the attacks.

It was a joke back then when the cooch grass caught some type of fungus and pitch was rubble. There is still a concern about the consistency of bounce in the MCG drop ins. Regardless the wicket quality list IMO is Sydney Brisbane Adelaide Melbourne Launceston Perth

I think Perth is a very poor pitch at the moment.

Agree about the 1st dig especially after NZ (yes NZ) hit 619 after being 3/23. I know they batted for more than 2 days.....they could have batted for 2 weeks....its so ho hum. Particularly after the quality of the SA -Aust tests where when the wickets gave an equal opportunity for bat and ball great cricket arose. I just dont get the habit of global groundsmen who continually turn out too many batting paradises. Or in the WI, sandpits with cut grass on top!

Or maybe another Test wicket with the life rolled out of it..... I like good batting but 22 wickets over 5 days...spare me the explanations.

With Our Kimmy coming back to join Our Jelena, Channel 7 commentators will gush that Australian womens tennis is flush with home grown talent!!

The concern with McGann is that he "choked" under the pressure and did so across a number of spells. At 37, how long will it take to get over that? Regretfully it was one of the worst bowling performances since Johnny Watkins and Chris Mathews. We dont have the luxury of giving McGann another innings without giving him a five test tour of England! It would be like giving Meesen a 4 year contract! You are right. A good wrist spinner is valuable anywhere. McGann is a looonnnnggg way from that. We dont have a good wrist spinner. But be careful about Warne comparisons, not since Benaud had a leg spinner had an impact in England. Warne was a freak. Unless you can bowl good wrist spin, I think one Monty is enough for either side in this series.

Australia's answer to Ashley Giles.

Given Katich and Clarke have injury concerns then it is plausible that Hauritz may get an Ashes berth. Its not a great scenario unless the planets (and the umpires) line up and he gets stacks of wickets.

Over the six test in 12 innings Hussey made 219. Johnson in 11 innings made 401. A number of Johnson's innings reflected a situation of running out of partners. Awesome effort by the Queenslander.

Given McDonalds docile performance on good batting strip with the ball, I think the selectors will risk it against Peterson and Flintoff on small grounds. If they take S Clark then they have no requirement for McDonalds height. Was that after the finish of the Test? The commentary box (Maxwell, Roebuck and Coward) were gobsmacked that Katich was not bowled until the death against SA. His shoulder must still be an issue. 219 at 19.72 against SA in six tests. His only score over 50 was one of the most scratchy performances you could see. He is one more poor Test away from oblivion. He batted well in the 2005 ODI in England so I will give him some rope. Hodge and Klinger should fight the spot out. If North had been fit then McDonald would have been out of the side. His bowling was lacklustre against SA and on good decks he is too easily pulled apart. An all rounder needs to justify himself as either a bowler or batsman if not both with the other skills being competent enough to carry him through. In my mind he does not have either skill strength at a sufficient levels. He's a luxury in this side. Give you that. Klinger would be a better choice.

A great knock on a good batting strip by Mitchell Johnson who has definitely stamped himself as a world class bowling all-rounder. His performances make McDonald's role redundant and embarrasses some of the top order batsman. Mr Hussey.... the clock is ticking. Its a good point about contrasting Harris and McGain. Harris only reinforces the important of having Test standard competent spinner. Harris is not a great spin bowler and has been subject to some surprising attacks on these forums. Not every spinner is as good as Warne. He is a capable and competent spinner who will have his day out and get 5 or 6 once in a long stretch but will normally chime in 1 or 2 valuable scalps. Australia going into the Ashes without a front line spinner is going in very exposed. We will indeed be fortunate if the hole can be covered by Katich, North and Clarke. My touring team for the Ashes Tests (15 man squad). Hughes, Katich, Ponting, Hussey, Clarke, North, Haddin, Johnson, Siddle, Hilfenhaus, S Clarke, I would add: Nannes- My comments above. I think he might have pipped Greeves and Magoffin. Wade - Second keeper Hodge- Form with the bat and prior English experience. Bollinger- Another left armer for variety. Would have chosen a spinner here but why waste the spot. On the outer: McDonald - Not strong enough as a bowler and/or batsman. No place if we are play 4 front line quicks. McGain - Enough said. Watson- Injury prone and the same as McDonald Lee- No form in England. Lost mojo and at 32 I think Australia should prefer others. Hauritz- Went to SA but was not used for any game. Shown that at best he can dry up runs but not take wickets. I doubt they will waste a tour spot on him. Smoky: David Hussey to replace his brother in the side.... OK. I did say it was a smoky! I would not put money on it but if it does come off, I will claim "I picked this"!! :D

Didn't Bollinger come into the picture when Nannes was injured. Nannes has finished the season like a steam train. If they decide not to take a front line spinner, Nannes might be closer than you think. I think they will take Stuart Clarke to England as well if fit. He offers good variation on the others. I think Lee is finished. His last tour of England was mediocre and they want bowlers who can strike. His pilot light blew out 12 months ago. Once it is gone, it does not come back. I dont want to see another Jason Gillespie episode in England. I hope so. Correct. I dont think McDonald will go to England It will be interesting to find out why Katich did not bowl until there were 600 runs on the board. Surely after McGains murdering on the 2nd day, he should have been bowled. What's the story with Clarkes back? He seems restricted batting and I am not sure he is fit to bowl ATM. There will be a 2nd innings for the SA batsman!