titan_uranus

Watch the game. Then comment. Of course, if you have watched it, then you aren't the greatest analyst of cricket, in which case ignore the latter instruction.

No I don't mean he is worse than Clarke. Form ruts are just that. Ruts. Both Clarke and White are class players with the long-term form to prove it. Short term, neither of them is playing well, but they are terrific ODI batsmen. White needs to lift his game, no doubt, but if he does the team lifts to another gear (keeping in mind we just beat England 6-1).

Played well in the warm up against India for about 70 overs. Then we were owned by decent spin. Clarke, White, Hussey, Ferguson all dismissed by spin for 8 or less. White is in an horrendous form slump at the moment. Not great timing. We bowled well, but let them get from 8/138 to 214. But the batting needs work.

(Without having seen a single ball...) What a game! Victoria chasing 259 after Cosgrove and Bailey made centuries, slumped to 8/192 in the 39th over (of 45). Then Glenn Maxwell hit 61 off 27 and Peter Siddle 25* off 16 to win off the last ball of the match! Wish I was down at Bellerive to see that one!

Also, Mike Hussey and Hauritz are out of the World Cup. Shaun Marsh unluckily misses out on being the replacement, Callum Ferguson gets that job, and Krejza is in for Hauritz.

Fair enough. Of course, there is one simple solution to that problem, but let's not go into that now. Let's instead debate whether Trent Copeland will get a game for Australia this year. Surprised some by beating Chris Lynn to the young cricketer of the year award. I think I read he took 60 wickets in 11 matches. That's a pretty darn good effort. Given our lack of pace bowling options (well, decent pace bowling options), and the injuries to Harris, Starc and Hazlewood (who might not get back to full fitness before August, I don't know), maybe Copeland will head the queue.

Agreed. 'Floaters', as they are sometimes called, can be a useful tool in ODIs and T20s. Batting orders aren't as important in limited overs cricket. Hopefully he, like Clarke, will get back into some form before the World Cup. With him on-song we'll lift another notch from where we are now. At the moment I think he's just not timing the ball well and that leads to him trying the big shots to hit one in the middle or just get some bonus runs or something. But I'd prefer to see him bunker down and score slowly, and not go out, than try for a couple fo boundaries and get out. Ultimately, though, we need him playing his usual game with a SR of over 100. Maybe it was a confidence thing as well? I mean, I thought it was because they had the spinner on and he plays spin well, but maybe he thought that we might as well utilise his hitting early on and have the more stable back ups of White and Hussey down the order should it fail.

South Africa needed to end their innings a bit earlier, and preferably for a few less runs, to entice India to go for the win. 340 off 90 overs was never going to happen when Sehwag got out early, so it was tailor-made for Gambhir, Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman, who are tough enough to dismiss normally, to drop the anchor and bat the day. Which of course, they did, because they're capable batsmen. Imagine Australia trying to bat out a day. I totally agree that saying Haddin has less catches means Prior is better. Clearly the quality of the bowling and opposition batting translates into the number of catches. In saying that, I look at the way each has batted when they have come to the crease. To be fair to Haddin, he has certainly had a tougher time, being asked to rescue innings at 5/150 odd, whereas in most of Prior's innings he's come in with plenty on the board. But I still look at Haddin and see a batsman who is more than capable of scoring centuries, and showed it, but whose innings ended prematurely due to poor shot selection. There were runs in every pitch we played on, maybe Perth aside, and in almost every Test Haddin got himself in before getting out to a flat-footed drive, a waft outside off, or an attempted slog. It's a line-ball debate at any rate.

Watson's now been involved in 7 run outs. The ones I can remember were all his fault too. It's really unbelievable that he can continue to run like he does, head down, not looking at his partner, ball watching, whatever it is, he isn't good at it. Hughes got a good ball but didn't score freely at all. But Haddin throws his wicket away with careless shots far too often. His 5 in Melbourne, his 6 in Sydney were both thrown away. Sure, batting's been a lot easier for Prior, but when he's had the chance he's made the runs. Also, his glovework has been better. Haddin's dropped at least two catches and he let one go between him and Watson. I can't think of any dropped catches from Prior.

I forgot to post this the other day. This is one of the best articles I've read over the last couple of months regarding Australian cricket. Written by Geoff Lawson: http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cricket/wanted-people-who-know-the-game-of-cricket-20110101-19cno.html

Yes, a case can be mounted, but it wouldn't win. He's leaning on his superior average, that's it.

You could take the captaincy out and Strauss would still get in. Watson has run his opening partner out twice. He hasn't scored a century despite reaching 50 four times. He might look like he's settled but he will find a way to get himself out. When Australia has needed a solid opening partnership we have struggled to get one. Even if Watson's not the first one dismissed part of the blame rests with him. He needs to score big runs at the top of the order to give our middle order a platform. Strauss has a crucial century which helped save the Brisbane match, and has worked much better in partnership with Cook than Watson has with Katich/Hughes.

Up until this innings I would have picked Haddin over Prior but Haddin continually throws his wicket away and Prior's batting chances have been limited until today, where he's made 100. Siddle might have been close but Finn and Bresnan have taken wickets in wins, not losses, so one of them would pip him. So yes, Hussey's the only Aussie who would make the series best team.

What a match. From 4/74 they managed to get to 342, meaning India needs 340 in a day to win the series, and South Africa needs 10 wickets in a day to win. Epic stuff. Kallis now past Ponting on the list of century scorers. Trails Tendulkar by 11, and currently averages more than him. Did it all with a crumbled top order and a side strain. But great support from Boucher, Steyn and Morkel to get the score up where it is. Oh, and in that other Test that no one cares about anymore, England has passed 600. Again. Apparently it's the first time the 6th, 7th and 8th wickets have all put on 100. To think that we'll have lost three out of our last four Tests, each by an innings (can anyone see us not losing this one by an innings?) is staggering, even if you'd said it before the Ashes no one would have believed you. This will be Hilfenhaus' last Test, and it should be the last for a while for Smith and possibly Hughes.

I wouldn't. I've seen enough to know that his technique isn't going to get him anywhere in Test cricket. There are options. First off all, what if Ponting returns for the next series? They won't (and shouldn't) drop Khawaja, so Smith's spot down the order could be an option (i.e. Ponting at 6). Secondly, Andrew McDonald is more than capable of batting at 6. Plus, in Sri Lanka most teams play two spinners, which sounds ridiculous for Australia but if we wanted to go down that path we could have McDonald as the third seamer whilst batting at 6. There are, of course, the old chestnuts of David Hussey and Cameron White too. I'd go with any of those before I play Smith again. Unless, of course, Smith becomes a spinner, not a batsman. But at the moment his bowling isn't good enough either.

You know things are going badly when Michael Hussey starts bowling... Siddle's not bowling anywhere near like he did in Melbourne, Johnson is all over the shop, Hilfenhaus is about as damaging as Hussey, Beer is trying but isn't special, and Smith is worse. What is Smith's role in the side? If you can't bat in the top 6 you have to be able to bowl, and he can't. Hopefully this is the last we see of him until he either learns to bat or learns to bowl.

Classic Test in South Africa atm. RSA were on top at 6/247 but Harbhajan and Tendulkar are evening the game up nicely.

He now is level with Ponting on 39 centuries. And he takes wickets, which none of the others do. Surely he's at least as good as Punter now. Sehwag has never had footwork. Most of the time he flays the good-length stuff early and the bowlers sh!t their pants and end up feeding him full stuff. He's a superb striker of the ball and when he gets going nothing is a good ball but early in his innings a level-headed bowler can pick him up for nothing if the field's right. Smith's technique needs a lot of work. He plays like it's a ODI. Open stance when driving, doesn't have a sound defence, chases the moving ball to try to put some bat on it. He's not a Test player. The argument that we need to stick with him because he's our future misses the point that he isn't good enough and hasn't shown anything to suggest he will ever be good enough for Test cricket. We definitely need to look to youth but the youth that get selected need to show something at state level. Like Khawaja. And eventually, Maddinson, Starc, Pattinson, Hazelwood and Copeland. Smith isn't good enough. If he can't bat in the top 6 he needs to be out number 1 spinner. Since he's not that either, he shouldn't be there. Picking someone to bat at 7 and bowl as the second spinner isn't smart.

I'm with you. There's no other choice. Cameron White, IMO, would make a better captain, but there's no way he could captain a side he hasn't been a part of for 2 years. Nice argument. But surely the state that's won the past two Shields is the state with the best players? I'm talking White, D. Hussey, Hodge, McDonald, Nannes, Rogers, McKay. Over the last 2-3 years these players have been in their prime, and IMO these have been the best players in the country. Nic Maddinson will be an Australian player. But I don't want him in the side until he's had at least another year with NSW. Learn the craft there, get the runs, experience, form and fitness on the board with them, not with Australia.

No surprises with the squad for Sydney. Either Beer plays as the spinner, with Smith at 6, or we go with 4 pacemen again. There's also the choice between Hilfenhaus and Bollinger if we go with Beer. I'd go with Bollinger, he can't be worse than Hilfenhaus and he knows the SCG well. Plus I assume he's improved his fitness. I'd have preferred to see another batsman named. It's a very weak top 6, with Hughes, Clarke and Smith all out of form and a debutant at number 3. Squad: Watson, Hughes, Khawaja, Clarke, Hussey, Smith, Haddin, Johnson, Siddle, Beer, Bollinger, Hilfenhaus.

Good post, I agree with that. Hughes and Smith were picked because they are young. If they were 4-5 years older, with the same form and the same record, they wouldn't have even been on the radar. But this misguided notion that we need to play youngsters to inject youth into the side has let us down. What we needed to do was play our best XI. Anyone who thinks Hughes or Smith, in their current form, are a part of Australia's best XI, right now, aren't thinking clearly, because they're not. And consequently, we were let down. This is going to sound a lot like a WYL proposition, but I honestly feel that what needs to happen now is a full review of the entire Australian cricket industry. People say this isn't a time to panic, which of course it isn't, but if there ever was a time to be worried or to question what is going on with Australian cricket, it is right now. There's a much too strong focus on limited overs stuff, the selection process is unclear and has caused us problems, scheduling is a worry as well. There are problems all over the place. Also, why aren't Tim Nielsen, Justin Langer, and the other coaches, with Troy Cooley excepted, copping any criticism? Our batting has been woeful all summer, but no one seems to think that might be bpoor coaching? Plenty of people took to Josh Mahoney in 2009 when we weren't scoring, but when our cricket side fails both to make runs or to occupy the crease, Langer apparently had nothing to do with it. Final comment: moving Haddin to 6 is just another wallpaper-over-the-crack move.

Bloody Watson! That's his 15th 50, to go with his 2 100s. He never fails to go out, even when he looks rock solid. We needed someone to stand tall and make a big score, hopefully Ponting is the one to do that. Maybe Hussey will come out there with some runs on the board this time.

Pathetic run out. Watson really struggles to pick a good single. That's the third time he's run out his partner, all of them have been for the first wicket as well. He needs to turn this 50 into a minimum of 100, preferably 200.

How many times over the last 2 years have we taken 'wickets' off no-balls? This time Dar didn't call the no ball until he'd paid it out, but later saw the footmark was close. I'm not entirely convinced he did the right thing given at the time he didn't think it was a no ball but in the end the ball was illegal and the batsman shouldn't have been out. That's another thing England do better than us: their bowlers learn to bowl with their entire foot behind the line.

Siddle bowled a very nice line and length earlier today, got both openers. Seems he and Harris will get the new ball after lunch so that's a sign that Ponting respects his effort. Hilfenhaus won't play in Sydney. All cricket history in fact! Apparently it's only the second time ever that at the end of Day 1 a team has bowled its opponent out and then overtaken their score without losing a wicket.