titan_uranus

To move on from the above banter and assess the match, I thought Lyon did a pretty decent job when he was asked to this match, and rewarded the selectors' faith. I also think South Africa really messed up playing Kleinveldt over Tahir. Lyon got good bounce and spin, and didn't shy away from Amla and Kallis going after him, which they're going to keep doing, as they seem him as weaker than Siddle and Pattison (fair). I think he bowled quite well, to be honest, and he got Rudolph, the leftie, out twice. Thought Siddle and Pattison were enormous with their lines and lengths today. No balls killed us, but that's easier to fix (hopefully) than being crap. Hilfenhaus was ordinary and surely will be under pressure from Starc. Mitchell Johnson always bowled well against South Africa; I wonder if the left arm angle is something Amla/Kallis/de Villiers/etc don't like that much. Either way, I think Hilfy's in trouble. Batting wise, Clarke is just a legend (average now above 50, as deserved), and proved yet again that he is in the top 3 or 4 in the world right now, and that has come from batting where he belongs, at 5. Cowan showed he has the perfect opener's technique, leaving the wide stuff and defending when he has to (similar to Katich in that regard). If Watson's fit for Adelaide then sadly I think Quiney makes way, but Warner and Ponting need to make some runs. Ponting's age is a huge concern for him; despite the stack he made last summer, if he slips out of form he can't hold his spot forever. Warner is on thin ice IMO: one proper opener's innings (v NZ last year). The 180 in Perth was amazing, but he's not Hayden and can't do that regularly. The rest of his career is all little innings with no substance. Isn't there yet.

According to this, you will only enjoy Tests whereby the game goes into the last session of Day 5, and all wickets fall to good balls and not batsmen undoing themselves. I don't think that's really fair or realistic, do you? Fact is, despite losing a day, this Test was still completely alive on Day 5, and that's surely all anyone can ask for.

The 'conditions' you speak of were primarily, if not solely, the weather, not the pitch. At tea on Day 5 a result was a distinct possibility, and you're whinging about the game being dead. This was not a road. The bowlers bowled well and would have taken more wickets if they'd not bowled no balls. As I said, and you conveniently ignored, if Kallis had gone for 43 on Day 1, this game would have been entirely different.

It hasn't 'heavily' favoured the batsmen. All five centurions were either out to a no ball (Kallis, Cowan) or dropped (Amla, Clarke) or extraordinarily close to being out LBW (Amla, Hussey). Today we knocked over their top 3 in short succession. There has been some great batting, sure, and it's been a good deck to bat on, but this game would have played out very differently if Siddle hadn't overstepped on Day 1 when he got Kallis out. As for your crowd rubbish, the initial 25,000 happened to be the best non-Ashes crowd in years. And then you're surprised people haven't come back after whole day's play was lost? The result was nearly put beyond doubt because of that, and you're surprised people didn't come. Wow.

Best team - Houston. Atlanta is the most underrated team, despite the Saints loss. Worst team - Kansas City (just so that I don't say Jacksonville like everyone else). Mind you, they put in a good show on MNF today. Biggest surprise (positive) - Indianapolis (didn't think Luck could get them from 2-12 to 6-3 so far. And it's not just Luck either). Biggest surprise (negative) - toss up between Carolina, New Orleans (although they could yet make a run at a wild card; this is mainly for the 0-4 start), Cincinnati (alleviated by the win this week) and Washington (RG3 should mean more wins).

They never upped the tempo. Look at their strike rates. de Villiers, Rudolph, Philander and Steyn all struggled to make runs. Two wickets off no balls, dropped catches, edges between slips and poor umpiring decisions on LBWs have meant batsmen have had a lot of luck. Of the 4 centurions, Amla could easily have been given out for 0 (look at it live, it was close enough to be out) and should have been caught on 75, Kallis was out on 43 but for the no ball, Cowan was out for 40-odd but for the no ball, and Clarke edged about 10 deliveries and a decent fielder at mid on would have caught him for 50-odd (or whatever he was on when he skied the edge to mid on and Philander insipidly tried running back to get it). This pitch wasn't the road you make it out to be. Cowan, Clarke, Amla and Kallis batted enormously well (Hussey and Peterson too). Note that South Africa lost 6/74 from when Kallis went out. Our bowlers took regular wickets but for that partnership, which should have ended well earlier anyway. South Africa erred by not playing Tahir; if they'd had him, things would be different I suspect.

What a week so far. I'm crapping myself watching this OT finish between St Louis and SF. Missed field goals by both sides. Smith down with concussion. What a game. Bengals over Giants is huge. Giants falling apart (I hope. I hate them). Saints over Falcons is enormous, Saints have Oakland next week to go 5-5 after being 0-4. Wildcard chance for sure. Bills almost finally won at New England, but didn't. Vikings over Lions puts the Lions almost out of it. Huge. Edit: AS IF HE PULLED THAT OUT! 24 yard pass on 3rd and 23 at the STL 25 with 10 seconds left in the OT period. We're baked I feel. Edit 2: They have ties in the NFL?! How did I not know this? We just tied. Wtf. I thought they played till there was a score. Wow.

Haha 'noodle arm'. He went 18 of 19 against Arizona though! Had a great game, got NFC Offensive player of the week for that effort. Our offence goes well beyond Smith though. Gore, Moss, Davis, Crabtree...not so bad. That was such a disgusting blip though. I hope we learnt some lessons from that game. I didn't see it, and pretty confident I don't want to.

Fair comment, I think Jacksonville's secondary made some of his throws look better than they actually were. Agree re: the athleticism, he moved out of the pocket really well and knew when to move and when to throw. Also: no. We've got your mob covered, thanks. Also coming of a bye week, so we'll be eager to beat up on your travelling crew.

Can't wait for Houston-Chicago, should be a corker. The Colts looked pretty good on TNF, even if it was against the Jaguars. If Playoffs started today they'd be in there, so that's a testament to Luck and their improved defence from last year.

Day 1 really wasn't as bad for us as people seem to think. Amla was one millimetre from being out LBW for 0, Peterson should have been given out LBW for a bit less than what he made, Amla also edged one between Wade and Clarke which Clarke should have gone for, and had he, could have caught him, and Kallis was saved by the most minute of no-balls which Rauf wasn't prepared to call at the time (and which, IMO, should therefore mean it's not a no ball and so be it. Let the on field umpire decide. If it's too close to call, or even if he misses a bad one, so be it. None of this referring it upstairs or, as is now the law, requiring the third umpire to check each delivery). People seem to hate Lyon but he bowled well yesterday. Got good bounce, which is a weapon he needs. It was that bounce which got Amla's edge, and Clarke should have gone for it. Hilfenhaus was pretty average yesterday, if he doesn't lift I don't see him holding his spot over Starc (or Hazlewood/Harris/Cutting). As much as I am sorry for Greig's terrible sickness, I really am not missing his voice at all, nor his 'banter' with Lawry (or anyone). I would never wish that illness upon anyone, and I hope he recovers 100%. But I do not miss his commentary one bit.

Looks like Quiney will get the nod in the now likely event Watson doesn't pull up for Friday: http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia-v-south-africa-2012/content/current/story/589712.html Good on him. If he plays, there will be 4 Victorians!

I can't wait for the Test to begin. For one, it will be a good distraction from the whole tanking crap. For another, it should actually be very entertaining. It's very interesting to consider who is the '7th best batsman' in Australia. If the top 6 starts with Warner, Cowan, Watson, Ponting, Clarke and Hussey, then the question of who's next in line is very important, not least because there are injury concerns with Watson and Ponting, and there's no certainty at all that Cowan will hold his spot through the six Tests we have. IMO, Andrew McDonald will be a smokey to get a game if Watson goes down. Watson's clear value is the bowling he brings, and there's no doubt that McDonald's bowling is as good, if not better, than Watson's, whilst his batting has improved considerably since he last played a Test in 2009. The fact he's captain of the Australia A side must surely show the selectors have some faith in him. He'd have to bat low, though, at 6 or so, which would push Ponting to 3 and Clarke and Hussey up a spot probably, but I think Clarke would enjoy having the extra bowler. In saying that, Steve Smith just made a half century for Australia A, and whilst most people recognise he's a shocking bowler at first class level and his batting is sporadic at best, the selectors and Clarke seem to love him. Another option I think. If Cowan fails (I hope he doesn't, I like him), whilst Hughes would be considered, I'd be looking for someone more like Rob Quiney or Alex Doolan. A steadier hand to bat alongside Warner would be preferable to Hughes. Also, I have no confidence in Hughes at Test level after that NZ series a year ago. Having said this, I think Cowan is good enough to hold his spot. In terms of bowling in Brisbane, if it's a toss up between Starc and Lyon (as I think it is), I hope they pick Lyon. Lyon bowled well at the Gabba last year. He's actually had a good year at Test level; he bowled well in the Windies. He bowls best when he gets drift and bounce, which the Gabba suits, so I hope they recognise that and give him his deserved spot. He's the best spinner we have at the moment (especially with Holland injured), so we need to persevere, and South Africa have a bunch of lefties (Smith, Rudolph, Duminy) who are all susceptible to off-spin, unlike the Indians who only had one left-handed batsman.

On international cricket: no idea why Dan Christian is playing. He bats at 8, which adds nothing, and bowls medium pace rubbish without being threatening. He's doing nothing special. David Hussey's bowling is better anyway, and would add impetus to the batting. On domestic cricket: how did Brad Hadding get man of the match in this game: http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia-domestic-2012/engine/current/match/576083.html? Haddin: 114, then 7. Henriques: 161 not out, then 50 not out off 51 balls, then 3 wickets (including Cosgrove). Would have thought old Moises had that one wrapped up.

Can't believe we (49ers) lost. The way the Vikings moved the ball through our defence was unheard of. Well played. Ridiculous Week 3 so far. Jacksonville over Indianapolis, the Saints 0-3 in OT, Jets-Dolphins going to OT, just insane.

You referred to King, which I don't agree with. As in, I don't see the point in mentioning his views. Outside of your reference to King, your post was good. That is all I meant.

I wouldn't put stock in anything that comes out of David King's mouth, after the year he's had. Agree with the rest of your post though: that shoulder reconstruction may have something to do with his low averages this year. At least, if we're going to shop around first-round picks for him, you'd hope so.

No idea why Harris was 'rested'. With Siddle out with back soreness, that opened the door for Beer as our second spinner. No need to change Harris (MoM in Barbados, and with good reason too) for Pattinson. He shouldn't need a rest. I guess he must be injured then, and they don't want to admit it. Slow day's cricket. Tough to score runs on this pitch it seems. Watson and Clarke were batting quite well until Clarke threw it away. Watson scored his umpteenth 50 that didn't make it to 100.

Unbelievably good Test. It will undeservedly not get the praise/attention it deserves, not being an Ashes Test or a win against India, or in our home summer even. But to be so far behind in the middle of Day 4, and to turn things around like that, no matter who the opponent is, is brilliant cricket. Kudos has to be given to Clarke. Only the second time ever that a team has declared behind on first innings and gone on to win the match. I'm sure that's in part due to the total lack of captains declaring behind on first innings. It's hard to be anything other than mighty impressed with Clarke's captaincy so far. Not sure about our side for the next Test. Pattinson is a great bowler, but I can't see any room for him at the moment. Siddle is our 'leader', if you will, and it would be extraordinarily harsh to drop him after one Test, where previously we'd said we were grooming him to be our long term Test bowling leader. Harris and Hilfenhaus pick themselves, and we won't go without a spinner. Pattinson may have to sit this one out. I agree, I think Pattinson (or even Cummins) will be the number 8. Siddle and Harris aren't consistent enough, but their best is good enough to bat at 8. As I've always said, though, it doesn't fuss me much at all, and I'm confident that we will make enough runs whether our number 8 is more like Johnson or more like Lee, or worse than both.

Shaping up for a big Day 5. I think all four results are possible. If we bowl well and their lead is under 200, and we get about 2 sessions to chase it, we'll certainly give it a crack, with Warner and Watson at the top of the order. Not sure what our limit is on runs, but I would have thought, if we do in fact bowl them out halfway into the day, we wouldn't want much more than 200.

Pity England won that Test. They remain number 1. But they play South Africa in our winter, so that should be a good contest. As for our match, we're not inspiring much with the ball at the moment. Chanderpaul and Bravo are both class batsmen. We're going to have to lift if we want to bowl them out. Surprised we didn't play Pattinson.

Ah good call. NZ didn't play a lot of cricket in 2011. I don't think he took a great deal of wickets either.

Definitely deserving. Swann had a poor year, Tahir from South Africa, Lyon, and Bishoo from the Windies are just developing, Sri Lanka and India rotate their spinners too much for one sole spinner to get a long period of wicket taking, and Shakib al Hasan from Bangladesh is good but doesn't play anywhere near enough cricket to be close to in a 2011 XI. Ajmal, really, is well in front of anyone else, although Ashwin is good on turning pitches and Bishoo looks a promising prospect (as does Lyon, really). In other spinning news, Brad Hogg is back in Australian colours, picked in the squad for the Australian T20 series against India. He's 40. Also, Cameron White has gone from captain of the T20 side to not being in it, with George Bailey doing the opposite. He's never played for Australia before, so his first game for the side will be as captain.

Agreed. They may have played much of their cricket against NZ, WI and Zimbabwe, but that doesn't change the fact that they have developed a side that is beginning to gel as an XI, and is playing consistent cricket. They have done a lot of work to find a group of players who actually care, and it seems to be working. Of course, if they were to lose the series to England and lose future series to sides like South Africa, India and Australia, it might all be for nought. But you have to be pleased with what they've achieved over the last year or so, and I see a bright future for them.

They have managed to ditch the unpredictable, wildly swinging form of the 2000s and for the last 12-18 months they've been quite solid. They've had their current top 6 settled for about a year now, which is highly unlike Pakistan.