titan_uranus

I cannot wait for NFL to start. With Melbourne and the Australian cricket team absolutely stinking, I need to see the 49ers again. Something that resembles a professional, successful team.

As I read this, I heard 'Trengove kicks into the man on the mark'. Apt.

Terrible results from the Sussex game. Cowan 66, Hughes 84, Smith 98*, Khawaja 40. Smith may go on to make a 100, which will save his spot, but what do we do about the rest? Can we drop Hughes after making an 84, to go with his (superb) 81* at Trent Bridge? Can we drop Khawaja for only making 40, despite being better than Smith and Hughes at Lord's? Can we drop Watson despite not giving him a chance at Hove? Warner's 193 now also looks just OK given the South Africans' batting. You'd expect Warner to get back in, which means someone has to go. I think it should be Watson but surely he can't be dropped without getting a chance at Hove, so if it's not him, I'd pick Hughes, even though this 84 is good. Khawaja looked maybe like he was getting comfortable at number 3. If Lyon bowls well, don't be surprised if Agar gets 'rested' or something along those lines (I maintain he never should have been picked). Bird and Starc have Pattinson's spot to play for, too (maybe they'll both play if Harris isn't fit).

There was an article in the paper today about Simon Katich, the forgotten man. Should never have been dropped when he was. He's currently in good form in English County cricket and has said he has not retired from international cricket. We could do a lot worse.

It's actually worrying. We have one Test quality batsman in the entire country (Clarke). There are 0 players not in this squad who are threatening to become a Test player, whilst the current side is made up of barely first class talent.

He's a one-dimensional fail of a Test player. Another useless, standard Watson innings. 20 off 23, out LBW. Get him out.

That catch that was turned down by the third umpire was disgraceful. Far too many poor umpiring decisions for what is supposed to be the most important Test series of the year. Doesn't make much difference to our ineptitude, though. The pitch is a road, but the bowling wasn't very good. Pattinson's having an absolute shocker, might not hold his spot for the next match. Agar's also not good enough. His 98 makes it hard to drop him, but his bowling isn't close to Test quality. Again, that 98 makes this sound unfair, but he shouldn't have been picked in the first place.

I think that's the damning point - I don't think England are playing that well at all. Cook and Pietersen are struggling, Trott's had two ducks already, Root's not firing like he was going into the series, and Prior's struggling too. All they've had with the bat is Bell (outstanding so far) and helpful but not huge contributions from others (e.g. Trott, Broad in the first Test, Bairstow in the second). Bowling-wise, Anderson obviously has stood out, but even though Swann took a 5-for, he didn't really bowl as well has he has in the past. We are just awful. Our shot selection essentially killed off our whole innings (Watson, Rogers, Khawaja, Hughes, Smith, Haddin all got out to poor shots, and Clarke didn't deal well with the bouncer-yorker combo).

This article sums it up well, I think. Well you've pretty much thrown out the entire side. A bit OTT, maybe? The players who, IMO, need to be replaced are Watson, Khawaja, Hughes and Smith. Problem is, we don't have enough batsmen in Australia to fill four spots at once. Warner shouldn't play Test cricket again (not because of behaviour, but because he's simply not good enough). Cowan probably isn't good enough. Shaun Marsh I still rate, but he can't make the Australia A side at the moment. Maxwell and Henriques are those classic players Australia's been attempting to find for a while now - all-rounders who aren't good enough at either trade. Doolan made a 50 in the Australia A side and has made some runs, but he seems a limited batsman and hasn't done a whole lot to warrant selection. Matthew Wade could be a left-field selection, as a batsman only. His batting is better than the four I mentioned above. Probably not the best move, but we're that short on batsmen it's not completely out of the question.

I'm done with Shane Watson. That review was 100% selfish, nothing else. He's a petulant boy who wants to be everything; he wants to open the batting, he wants to open the bowling, he wants to field at first slip, he wants to be captain, he wants to be everything. We will go nowhere while he keeps opening the batting - you need more from your number 1 than 30s and 40s and 50s with no prospect of 100s and a constant worry of being out LBW, a flaw he's not been able to fix in 6 years. Khawaja is terrible. The fact he's getting a game speaks volumes of our complete lack of batting depth. Smith and Hughes will occasionally give a good knock, but generally lack the technique to be consistent. Rogers and Clarke are our only two Test-quality batsmen, with Clarke out of form and Rogers copping some really rough LBW decisions and good bowling. Major, major struggle street.

We shouldn't be dropping any of our bowlers, I don't think. If we do, Starc is the one to go, but I'm not sure dropping him after one game is going to help much. Apparently, yes. Pretty disgraceful, really.

I think he hit it, but the evidence was inconclusive. The hot spot potentially only showed up after the ball passed the bat (it was inconclusive FFS!). The sound was there, sure, and probably was bat hitting ball, but with no deflection, it only gets to the likelihood, not the conclusiveness, of Dar making an error. In the end, Erasmus should have told Dar that the evidence was inconclusive, and Dar should have stuck to his original not-out call. The end result may have been the right one, but it wasn't produced for the right reasons. All in all, a sad way to end a great Test which unfortunately has been marred by poor umpiring and the DRS. As for changes, Cowan was ill apparently, so give him another Test before making the switch. Harris/Bird would be handy, but who gets dropped? Starc to me was the worst of the three bowlers. I'd leave them be, though. And, Clarke needs to learn to stop using referrals on 50-50 LBW decisions.

I've been away for the weekend so I've just caught up on the past few days' happenings. The Broad decision is a disgrace from most parties. Firstly, Dar should have paid it out. I struggle to think of what he must have thought happened - off Haddin's gloves? I don't get it. Second, Clarke will hopefully have learnt his lesson - stop reviewing marginal LBW decisions and retain the reviews for the howlers. The referral of the LBW call going down leg was pathetic. Finally, Broad. It happens all the time, batsmen choosing not to walk when they're clearly out and waiting for the umpire. But I've never seen someone edge the ball to slip and pretend it didn't happen. When it's to the keeper and it's a straight line and/or a faint edge, I can understand a player using the doubt to hide. But there was no doubt with that. We've been pretty good in this Test, except for all four evening sessions. After tea on Day 1 we lost 4 wickets. After tea on Day 2 we let Cook and Pietersen cruise. After tea on Day 3 we let Bell and Broad cruise. After tea on Day 4 we lost 4 wickets. It's killing us. This Test is still winnable, but we need Haddin to be mature and play the guiding knock that Hughes played in the first innings. All of Agar, Siddle, Pattinson and Starc can bat. A useful 10-30 runs from each, maybe with one pushing closer to 50, and with Haddin batting through at the other end, and we're not out of it. Still plenty of problems, though. Cowan's not good enough, neither Smith nor Hughes have the techniques to be consistently good players, Watson's horrendously over-rated (he averages 35, two centuries ever and hasn't hit one for 3 years), and Clarke's out of form and injured. It's not a great batting line-up.

This is incredulous.

The news continues to indicate that Warner's going to play the first Test - e.g. http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2013/content/story/648105.html Disgraceful, if true.

Watson is going to open, says Lehmann: http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2013/content/story/645441.html. He's opened in the tour match with Cowan, who made 3. Currently Watson's on 72. Watson opening means, you'd think, one of Cowan and Rogers will shift down the order, probably to 3. Cowan's opened in this match with Watson, so maybe it will be Rogers to bat at 3? Amazing innings for Somerset. 2/304, then 3/310. Then 9/310. They lost 6/0. Six wickets. For. Zero. Runs. Amazing. Pattinson and Starc took 4 each, Siddle couldn't get one. With Watson, Cowan, Rogers and Clarke the presumed top 4, Haddin and the bowlers from 7-11, we now have Hughes, Khawaja, Faulkner and maybe Steve Smith battling for the last two spots. I'll ignore Smith because he didn't make the tour match, so it's Hughes, Khawaja and Faulkner for those middle two. You'd assume that Watson opening means he can't bowl too much, so maybe we'll lean towards Faulkner for a fifth bowler. He sure as heck better make some runs though.

The Australian side playing Somerset right now is this: Cowan Watson Hughes Khawaja Clarke Faulkner Haddin Siddle Pattinson Starc Lyon Before the game Haddin said that Rogers wasn't playing because he's had a lot of time in the middle for Middlesex already, so he's already got his form. What worries me is the inclusion of Faulkner. Not a fan. I think the idea is that we get more from playing Faulkner than we do from playing the weaker of Hughes/Khawaja. I don't like it. I'd hope to see Rogers open, Watson to bat at 6, and Faulkner not to play the first Test. But I'm guessing that, unless Hughes and Khawaja both pile on the runs (that's not going to happen), the weaker of those two will be dropped to make room for Rogers.

Also, Fawad Ahmed comes home, Steve Smith is added to the squad (what joy!), and Ashton Agar is going to stick around the squad like he did in India.

Brilliant: http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/australia-sacks-cricket-coach-mickey-arthur-on-eve-of-ashes-20130624-2orlv.html Mickey Arthur has just been sacked.

Locked to the top of the first page (like the Code of Conduct thread).

Forgot about Bird. He might get a game over Starc. But Siddle surely starts, surely. Our best and most consistent fast bowler both against India and over the summer. Also just cracked his maiden first class century.

I don't know what to do with the batting. It's so weak. I want to see Watson bowling - he's not good enough as a batsman only, so he has to bowl or just not play. One or the other. He should be batting lower down the order to accommodate the bowling (i.e. not 1-3). Rogers and Cowan should open. Clarke to bat at 4. Outside of that, I don't know. Hughes is crap. Khawaja is worse. Haddin and Wade can't bat higher than 6, really. So maybe this: Rogers Cowan Hughes Clarke Watson Haddin Wade Starc Siddle Pattinson Lyon This isn't a team that is going to win the Ashes, unfortunately. We'll do OK bowling England out, but we're not going to be able to put enough runs on the board. Rogers and Clarke are the only batsmen that give me confidence; one of them has a dodgy back and the other, knowing the selectors, might not get a game in favour of the most undeserving hack in Australian cricket right now. Also, Lyon has to start over Ahmed. Ahmed needs to find his feet at this level. Give him time to just be around the side and to get a feel for what bowling at a high level consistently is going to take. Rushing him in to an Ashes XI could break him.

I'm sick of David Warner. I want him out of the side, and I guess this is a good way to start. Hopefully, if the selectors have any sense, they won't pick him for the first Test. To do so would be to say 'if you have talent, then it doesn't matter if you're stupid, rude, uncouth, ill-disciplined, or immature, you can still walk into the Australian side'. Moreover, he'll have had 0 warm-up games, and his recent 'form' is despicable. Warner is not a required player. Not even close. Rogers and Cowan to open.

Take the Indian squad: Warner, Cowan, Hughes, Clarke, Watson, Smith, Khawaja, Wade, Haddin, Henriques, Maxwell, Doherty, Lyon, Siddle, Starc, Pattinson, Johnson. I cut from that squad Khawaja, Watson, Haddin, Henriques, Maxwell, Doherty and Johnson. Henriques, Maxwell and Doherty drop themselves. Khawaja isn't good enough, and I don't think ever will be good enough. He struggled against swing bowling when he last played Test cricket, continually pushing outside off without covering the line, so I can't see how England will suit him. Watson doesn't add to the side. He doesn't score enough runs to hold his spot as a batsman, and even if he bowls, he still doesn't score enough runs to be in the top 6. Time to cut our losses, find a real batsman, and move on. Johnson is just too far back in the queue for a fast-bowling spot (provided we have a full choice of players). His form in England also requires him to be injury-cover at best. Haddin didn't do anything to disgrace himself, but I feel we need to move on with our keepers. To that squad, then, I add Jackson Bird, Pat Cummins, Shaun Marsh, George Bailey, Chris Rogers, Tim Paine and Fawad Ahmed/Jon Holland. Bird, for mine, starts the first Test in the Ashes as the third pace option behind Siddle and Pattinson. Starc is inconsistent and doesn't swing it as regularly as Bird does. It's line ball though, but Bird's on the plane regardless. Cummins also heads over as a back-up paceman, but to me he needs to show form for Australia A in the lead-up series before he edges into the top three pacemen. Handy back-up, though. In terms of batsmen, Shaun Marsh is more than good enough to be a Test cricketer. He was in a terrible mental state in 2011/2012, which saw him capitulate over our summer. He's been reprimanded and disciplined for being a loose cannon, but since he's returned, his form has been great, and much better than his 'rivals' for the batting spots. Mainly, though, he's actually a batsman, unlike the attempted all-rounders we've been trying to use. Bailey can't do much more before getting selected, and it's a good idea to get someone in there who can lead if Clarke can't be on the field (especially with Watson and Haddin staying in Australia). Chris Rogers has a proven record in England, averaged 50 this Shield season with three 100s, and deserves to be back-up. Tim Paine is a better batsman than Haddin, and would have been our first-choice keeper if it wasn't for his hand injury. He deserves to be around the squad and learning, rather than wasting away in Australia. Fawad Ahmed gets to be the back-up spinner, but doesn't play unless Lyon gets injured (can't imagine any pitch in England warranting two spinners). If he is ineligible, Jon Holland hopefully has healed by then, and gets the spot. Stay away from Doherty and Maxwell. If Cummins and Bird aren't fit, Ryan Harris is next, and then it's a toss up between reinstating Johnson, or Ben Hilfenhaus. Or Josh Hazlewood. Warner stays, but with Rogers in the squad, he has to make runs early. We shouldn't persist with him if his tendency to flash outside off with no technique continues to reap him sub-20 scores. Hughes stays, but moves down the order, to take the pressure off him batting at 3. Smith also stays, to my chagrin, because we need to reward players who perform and show application, and, as much as it pains me to say it, he did this in India. He doesn't bowl as anything other than a part-timer, though. My XI for the first Test: Cowan Warner Marsh Clarke Hughes Smith Wade Pattinson Siddle Bird Lyon

Pity we're frittering away our bowlers' good work with more insipid batting. Opening with Maxwell = attempt to prevent backlash for picking him in the first place. He's crap. Shouldn't play for us again in the near future. Watson and Warner are living on credits long, long used up. I don't want to see them in the first Ashes Test (I know they'll be there, but undeservedly). Our bowlers haven't been great this series, but our batting has been worse (as per usual). We need refreshment of the top 6 for England. Marsh, Doolan, Rogers, Burns, Maddinson, White, McDonald, I don't care who. We can't keep playing Warner, Watson, Hughes and Smith as four of our top 6/7. Edit: Heard an interesting fact today. Apparently, from three Tests each, Nathan Lyon has faced more balls batting than Shane Watson. Don't know what the actual figures are though.