titan_uranus

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.

Really, what today showed was that Perth was won more by an accidental Johnson spell of swing than anything else. We cannot bat against the moving ball. Watson, Ponting and Hussey got hood balls but the other 7 just pushed too hard at the ball outside off. Hughes and Smith are not good enough. Hilfenhaus is useless. He is possibly the least threatening new ball bowler in the world. But the problem is the batting. It's not good enough.

That's true, but I don't think a conference system really fixes anything. The bottom 2-3 teams, who will be out of the running for the wildcard anyway, will put their players out to pasture and prepare for the next year regardless of the system that is in place.

Disagree. Having one, or even two, wildcards does not fully rule out the possibility of a team missing out on finals despite winning more games than a team who makes it. At any rate, it's no different to what we have now, it's just dressed up. Right now everyone plays each other at least once, and for almost every team the big rivalries are played twice a year. So if we changed to a conference system nothing would really change except the possibility for teams to beat better teams to a finals spot. However, for NFL I think it works as well as they could get any system to work.

He'll play for sure. No way they'd let Khawaja play for NSW in a 50 over game if they thought there was any chance he was going to bat at 3 on Boxing Day. Plus Ponting is strong enough to play through it.

The whole wildcard thing shows exactly what's wrong with the conference system. Of course for NFL they have little choice but here for AFL the mere suggestion of it is ridiculous.

That's not what I said. I said it was a 'benefit' of having four quicks. We did not choose to play four quicks for this reason, we did it because the Perth pitch offered something for pacemen and this was a good way to avoid the spinner issue. Not only has England played just four bowlers for each match, but Anderson and Finn have played all three Tests so far, whereas for us Siddle is the only one to have played them all. And for England, Anderson and Finn bowl lots and lots of overs because there's not a lot of support, whereas Siddle didn't have much to do in Perth.

If Anderson doesn't play and Ponting does, this could be the spark Ponting needs to make some runs. This is another benefit of playing four quicks, they get to bowl shorter spells to stay fresher for longer. Anderson and Finn will be exhausted and there are still two Tests to go.

Glad South Africa won. Hopefully they keep this form up and knock India over another two times to become the number 1 side. They deserve it more than India does. India just accrues points by belting teams at home without putting in decent performances on the road.

Well that was quick. Reminds me of last year, this big turnaround. We thrashed them at Headingly, they came back and won the next game at the Oval. Despite him being woefully out of form we need Ponting to be fit to play. Otherwise we'll be playing someone new at number 3 for the most important Test in the last four years. I don't want Clarke at 3, he's not good enough, and how would Khawaja go debuting on Boxing Day in front of 100,000 people at number 3? It could be David Hussey or Cameron White but they're probably not in selectors' minds, so we need Punter. The other call will be the bowlers. Will we go with the same four quicks and use Smith as the spinner? I think Melbourne demands a spinner much more than Perth, and unfortunately that makes Siddle a possible casualty. It's down to Siddle and Hilfenhaus, they each only took one wicket but I reckon they like Hilfenhaus' outswing with Johnson's inswing.

Hussey's now gone past Cook for series runs. What a legend. Those pull shots he kept playing, despite men on the legside boundary, which he regularly beat, were outstanding. Pity he ended up going out to a pull shot. Ponting's got a fractured finger. If he can't play in Melbourne things get very interesting. I suppose Clarke will captain the side, which I don't like at all, and I suppose one of Khawaja or Ferguson comes in for Ponting. I'd prefer to see David Hussey or White though. And what will the batting order be? Clarke is hardly in the form required to bat at 3, so will we throw a youngster in the deepest of deep ends and send in a debutant at number 3 in a crucial Ashes Test? What other choices do we have? Ain't hindsight wonderful?

Watson made his fourth 90 today. He is worse than Slater. Good lead now, 323, another 100 and that will be very nice.

If Johnson bowls in the second innings like he did in the first, we will need only 250-300 runs on the board to win. Of course there's no certainty at all in that. I'd hope we bat for the majority of the day and get at least another 200 runs, which would push the lead over 400. South Africa made 414 two years ago but the pitch was dead that game and England's batsmen, for all their success so far, aren't as good as the South Africans were. Hughes' technique is flawed, possibly fatally. He is riding on the credits he received from the tour of South Africa. The only reason he made runs then was because the Proteas kept giving him full stuff, not short stuff. I don't think his technique is anywhere near sound enough to be a Test opener. Ponting is basically gone. He will never move down the order, so it's number 3 or retirement I would have thought. And he's not making runs. Problem is, I'm sure he'll want to stay as long as he can, his ego is enormous. It's a problem.

Mitch!! 3/4! Swinging it nicely, getting Cook Trott and Pietersen with swing. Life back in the test.

Crap start. Haddin and Watson let an edge go without moving, and far too many runs are being scored on the leg side.

India 9/136! Go South Africa. Steyn and Morkel showing Harris and Hilfenhaus how to use a new ball. Finally, the criticism is being heaved upon our batsmen. Watson, Katich, Hussey and Haddin seem capable of playing against swing. Hughes, Ponting, Clarke, North and Smith don't. Funnily enough, the first four have all done OK so far this series, Hussey and Haddin especially, whilst the last five have hardly looked like scoring runs.

Oh geez, Harris was terrible. Hilfenhaus was OK, but far too much rubbish overall. This Test is going to be a lot like Adelaide I think.

Im afraid of what their batsmen will do...this pitch isn't that bad. Siddle and Hilfenhaus showed that. Poor top order batting.

Argh, Hussey just went out. To Swann. And we don't have a spinner. Smith is not good enough for no. 6 and thus shouldn't be in the side.

Not sure. Bravo and Ross Taylor were last year. Will have to investigate.