Rhino Richards

The fact of the matter at tea on the 4th day was that you had 127 overs at the opposition. Clearly not running out of time. History has shown at a variety of grounds that on a fifth day wicket with Warne in play that no side would reasonably survive so the declaration was both reasonable and logical. The South Africans had a flat deck and 4 runs an over to get. Not impossible. By your estimation they would have had 420 to get in just over 140 overs at 3 an over. Even more achievable. The fact that we only got 5 wickets in 127 overs would pours cold water on the fact we declared too late. We would never have got the 10 wickets. The declaration at the time was reasonable and fair. You've only got hindsight to support your position and its nebulous at that. By the way should we have had 254 overs to get them out?

No. 127 overs was more than enough time to achieve a result. We bowled them out for 296 in the first innings in 83 overs without the monkey of survival on South Africa's back. We would not have done any better had we had 137 overs or 147 overs or 157 overs. By just after lunch on the last day it was clear where the game was going....nowhere. The pitch was as dead as a dodo and had got more benign as the game went on. The game limped through the motions for the last session. Its a pity the pitch killed the contest not the decision to declare. Any takers on any other team batting a draw in the 4th innings after facing 127 overs?

If you think 491 runs for a win is unrealistic then deciding oh well lets be content to bat out 127 overs on a fifth day wicket against Warne. How many sides in a 4th innings have ever batted out 127 overs on a fifth day content on a draw? By doing what we did we had well and truly closed out the Sth Africa out of the game and given us more than sufficient time to bowl out them. Hindsight is a wonderful skill. It does not matter about the runs so much as giving yourself enough time to bowl them out given you had closed them out of the game. With 127 overs we could have reasonably expect the game to be done by tea. And the fact it wasn't points to other issues bar the captain's decision It took one unique and very special innings of concentration from Rudolph with some minor support to keep us out. And given the state of the wicket there is no evidence that declaring an hour earlier would have made any difference given they were only 5 wickets down. Really if there is any condemnation then CA and the curator should be hung for prepare a truly crap pitch. Given we got 5 wickets in 127 overs what would an extra 40 minutes have given us? And how many fourth innings have gone for 127 overs to save the game. The South Africans would not have gone for 420-430 against Warne anymore than they would 491. Crap. Warne has regularly taken wickets at the WACA over his career in Tests. Perth used to be a quick wicket but has not been so for 15 to 20 years. Since then it has deteriorated into lifeless uncompetitive dead strip of turf.

Kerry O'Keeffe described Henriques as the player Portugal will be rueing as the one that got away. Golden.

Ponting declared giving him easily enough time to bowl them out. Given the placidity of the pitch, setting the South Africans anything sub 400 would have been treacherous and given them an outside sniff. Asking for 490 plays Sth Africa out of the Test. We had 4 sessions (1 &1/3 days) at the Sth Africans where we bowled 127 overs at them. They had Rudolph who played the innings of his life against the best fifth day bowler in the world. How much earlier should you realistically declare to given yourself a good chance of getting 10 wickets? If you cant get 10 wickets in 127 overs, you might want to look at your bowling attack.

It was a belter of a WACA track for batting and Sth Africa had a very pedestrian attack. Hodges first 100 was a battle but the 2nd 100 was against an attack that had its back broken. I think these conditions lead to a re rating of the innings beyond the runs. We did not declare too late. Warne had a full day on the 5th day WACA wicket and could not bowl them out. Speaks volumes for the how insipidly placid the deck was. Why do Test Curators prepare such characterless, benign, dead cricket wickets? Its been stuffing the Test competition for years.

This site goes into meltdown for less than that. Hell, Chris Johnson generates 5 pages!!!

Nice hissyfit.

There you go again with the hyperbole WUL. The Indians at tea were already 250 in front and Australia were challenging from a weakened position. One wicket still would have left the Indians at least 250 runs in front on a turning crumbling wicket with a superior bowling attack. The Indians had the winning hand since they won the toss on day 1. After tea Ponting bowled the only seemingly reliable wicket taker in the series we had in Krezja who was also bleeding runs at 5 an over. And its not as though we had reliable quicks who were likely to run through the Indians in reserve. Ponting made an error of judgement but to make a mountain out of molehill is self serving. Rogue, I dont think our chance of winning was that strong at tea given the state of the game and the lead to Indian. It was chance but not a winning position.

I agree we were mounting a good challenge at the time. Its different to a winning position. B)

We were in as much in a winning position as the horse that came last on Cup Day. We were still 200+ behind and given the history of 4th innings run chases it would suggest the game was open. But dont mind your hyperbole. Steve Waugh and Mark Taylor both enjoyed having Glenn McGrath, Gillespie and Shane Warne at their peak. They also had the Waugh brothers, Gilchrist and Langer and no real opposition during the period 1994 to 2005. We batted poorly in Day 5 and each batsman should take responsibility for their failures in the 1st and 2nd innings not just the Captain. Yes continue to blame Ponting. And if he does replace your broken radio then could he also replace my broken lawn mower. He did not break it but I will continue to blame him for it. The Bastard.

Firstly we were never in a winning position but we had the chance to push for better advantage which was no certainty. In addition, the way we batted on the final day made us no certainty to win the match anyway And your comparison to Steve Waugh is flawed And why was Steve Waugh so successful??? Because of the arsenal he had throughout his captaincy period. The Australian side that was sent to India has to be the weakest side to have left Australian shores in years with the very real prospect of failing to take 20 wickets in a Test. Steve Waugh would have struggled with this side on the continent. Despite this unfortunate situation, Ponting is a far better choice to lead than Michael Clarke. No need to get the knickers in a knot.

While there are questions that can be asked about Ricky Ponting, how intuitive did Mark Taylor have to be when he had access to McGrath, Warne, Waugh brothers and Healy? With class like that you have the ability to gamble and gamble hard. The quality of opposition that Taylor had to deal with in general was far less competent than Ponting. And why is Australia struggling? We got a pace attack that one paced, pedestrian and lacking the killer strike and we are playing a very competitive side at their home. Lets not forget the Australians have taken a lame squad to India without a recognised spinner at the start of the tour. Thats an observation they were making on the radio. I share your doubts that it was a sole decision. However the Captain is going to carry the can for this. It would not surprise at all if they went for the 8-1 field early

I would love to have been a fly on the wall at tea to determine what gave way on the thinking to bowl the part timers. If anything had Ponting pressed for victory and got it. He may have been suspended but he would have been a hero for it! I expect the India's to bowl a foot outside off stump at 12 overs an hour with a 9-0 field and kill the game in the first session. It really is a pity that a game that should give rise to an exciting final day will have any challenge squeezed out of it. The dullard and negative captaincy is but just one element sending Test Cricket to a grave and its wrong. Despite the colour and pizazz of the limited forms of cricket there is nothing to beat a stirring memorable tight conclusion to a Test match. I hope for the games sake this is a ripper of a final day with both sides actually going for the win.

They may win the series but are they world champions? No. Unlike the Australians at their best, they cant keep their foot on the opponent's jugular vein. India will be interesting in the future, Kumble and Ganguly have retired. Tendulkar, Laxman and Dravid are sure to follow soon. That's a huge hole in talent and experience and is not easily replaced.

What was Hayden thinking when he took that run? Kreja should be congratulated for his perseverence and performance. 8 wickets on debut. However, at 3/195 he was looking out of his depth and despite the two catches dropped offf rash strokes from Tendulkar, he had been dominated by the bats and got three fortuitous wickets through poor batting. Indeed at 5/404, India will lament they could not and did not put the Australias to the sword. The collapse started by Ganguly and Dhoni was through lazy cricket shots. He may have been pounded at times but was certainly given some lifelines by indiscreet Indian batting. This will surely beg the question "Why wasn't he picked sooner?" Then again if his figures were 3/200+ the question would then be didnt we have anyone better in Australia? Funny game cricket. Best Figures on Debut Best figures in a innings on debut Player Overs Mdns Runs Wkts Econ Team Opposition Ground Match Date Scorecard AE Trott 27.0 10 43 8 1.59 Australia v England Adelaide 11 Jan 1895 Test # 44 RAL Massie 27.2 9 53 8 1.93 Australia v England Lord's 22 Jun 1972 Test # 699 ND Hirwani 18.3 3 61 8 3.29 India v West Indies Chennai 11 Jan 1988 Test # 1089 L Klusener 21.3 4 64 8 2.97 South Africa v India Kolkata 27 Nov 1996 Test # 1341 ND Hirwani 15.2 3 75 8 4.89 India v West Indies Chennai 11 Jan 1988 Test # 1089 RAL Massie 32.5 7 84 8 2.55 Australia v England Lord's 22 Jun 1972 Test # 699 AL Valentine 50.0 14 104 8 2.08 West Indies v England Manchester 8 Jun 1950 Test # 323 JJ Krejza 43.5 1 215 8 4.90 Australia v India Nagpur 6 Nov 2008 Test # 1892

Thought the same thing, India out by lunch or under 400. I am not sure from what I have seen that Australian bowlers have it in them. The only bright spark is the Indians seemed to lack proper concentration to the task. Aside from Dravid who IMO is finished at Test level. The retirement of Ganguly, Kumble and the historonics over Gambhir may be taking their toll. FWIW, I did not think Sharma and Zaheer bowled well in the last test and this pitch aint for them. Sharma should be remembering to that he "lost" the last test with that dropped catches. Is Harbijan fit? Brett Lee has never risen to level many Australians had hoped for. Has his moments but he has relied on blast them out tactics for too long, is not the smartest quick bowler and lacks the ability to consistently swing the ball. Where is he at now?

India's stance is both provocative and disturbing similar to their audacious and unsportsmanlike support for the rogue Harbijan. This does not shy away from the debacle the Australians have made in selecting the Indian tour party and the Test teams chosen. Why they selected Krejza to tour when they weren't going to select him is puzzling? Also the Test selection of Cameron White as a no 8 batsman and a part time spinner is baffling? Where is Beau Casson? Why did they "force" Brad Hogg to retire last season? Its unbelievable that we could have been undertaking a tour of India without a recognised spinner. If we are to have any hope in this Test then we need to win the toss, bat and hit 550+ then two or more of the bowlers needs to have a day out. Here's hoping!

Some years ago when Bangladesh won the honours in a one day game against Australia, I said that regardless of this, its a travesty to Test cricket that Bangladesh and Zimbabwe were given and retained Test cricket status. There were howls of protest from posters about my comments. Then a couple of weeks later Jason Gillespie hits an unbeaten double century in a Test against B'desh. All the howling posters went very quiet. Since then nothing has changed and ICC has another embarrassment it does not address, particularly Zimbabwe. Is there a global sporting body around who has had the game its supposedly regulating pass it by as much as cricket? As for NZ, I dont think I have seen a greener, more inexperienced NZ line up that Vettori has to lead. He has done very well with such a side. NZ are on the rebuild. However, I have read an article saying that the Australians have just figured that the Indians are reverse swinging after 10 overs. Australia is doing after 70 overs. What the FFS is Troy Cooley doing? IMO that a massive oversight by a side supposed to be world champions (ATM).

Well done Adam Gilchrist on his remarks about last summer. The Indian behaviour on that tour on and off the field was reprehensible and unsportsmanlike. Their threat to boycott the tour over Harbarjan was a joke and the low character of the player concerned was for all to see during the IPL series. How stupid the Indians looked standing up to the character of a player who was a front page embarrassment back home. The label of Australians before this series as cheats by Indian players was unprecedented and appalling. This will obviously upset the Indian cricket community but they should remember that its not up to them to make the rest of the world walk on rice paper from their whims

I would have thought the Ashes 2005 was a period where there were a few home truths laid out and 18 months later there was an Ashes whitewash. Skipper's credit???? I dont find arrogance and stubbornness a problem with Ponting. As a batsman he is likely to surpass Tendulkar Test runs record within 2 years. So much for his ability to bat! Great pick 45HG. A Vic win inside three days at the Gabba. Rare as hen's teeth!

They have two spinners. We have none. Its like swimming at the Olympics without goggles. On a hiding to nothing. Some of our batsman have not performed well at all. Lee is lacklustre.

The fragility of the middle order and the question about our abilty to take 20 wickets (particularly 10 on the last day) remain challenges. I wonder if the crowd will greet Andrew Symonds nicely onto the ground.

IMO, the following players could either make their futures or finish them after India. Batting (based on my belief that they need to goo series to establish themselves) Jacques, Hodge, Katich, Haddin (keeping as well, I think Ronchi is talent). IMO Ponting, Clarke, Hussey and Hayden are sub continent experienced established players. Hayden is on his final overseas tour so he wants to make it a good one. Bowling (Same criteria as batting) Aside from Lee and Clark. Johnson and Casson will have a baptism of fire over there. Possible chance for an all rounder Watson to make a play.

For all the flack its forgotten that the Australians on two occasions (Ponting one of them that a seemingly clear catch was not). I hav yet to see such actions by other nations. The Australians copped an unbelievable hard stick from the media here and in India while the Indian rajs were at their unsporting best seeking to undermine and overthrow the ICC's powers of reviews. The media onslaught against the Australians for the misconduct charge on Harbijan Singh blew up against the Indians big time in IPL. Singh is an habitual and appalling poor sportsman who should have been collared well before he was in the IPL. India was made to look stupid for threatening a tour for someone who is a rancid cancer in the sport.