I mean, Kane Williamson and Ross Taylor might fire in every game. That way, the series might be at least vaguely competitive. I like the look of this McLenaghan chap - the new Geoff Allott?
Oh god - I just looked up Geoff Allott's record. I think my memory of him is something at odds with an average of 58. Hopefully McLenaghan will have a slightly more successful career!
OK and this is embarrassing - McLenaghan isn't even playing! NZ's attack will be Southee (good bowler tbf), Boult (jury's out), Wagner (ditto) and Butler or a debut spinner. The main three bowlers can at least move the ball around a bit, but you'd hope England's batsmen could largely cope...
You'd hope. We need to take this series seriously. Broad needs to fire, because Onions is struggling and I'm not sure about Woakes. Can Root carry on his form? Can Compton step up? And can the likes of bell, KP, cook and prior deliver when the ball is swinging? We have to win this, and lost the warm up. England lack real depth.
A few interesting questions even if the series is unlikely to be too competitive. We need to roll up to the ashes on fire, because this time I want the Aussies destroyed!
first Test side to declare in the first innings and lose the match by an innings
Clarke was not wanted by the majority of Aussies to replace Punter, he was seen as selfish and had upset many by not following the legacy left by Border, Taylor, Waugh in particular and Ponting. There were not many alternatives and he won people over with an extraordinary run of form. His days may well be numbered now after these two matches, his comments after the declaration were as contemptible as the decision itself. I would not be surprised if Australia bites the bullet and dumps him before the Ashes to make a true clean break from the golden era. They know they have 3 Ashes series in such a short time and may concede this one to build for the following ones.
first Test side to declare in the first innings and lose the match by an innings
Clarke was not wanted by the majority of Aussies to replace Punter, he was seen as selfish and had upset many by not following the legacy left by Border, Taylor, Waugh in particular and Ponting. There were not many alternatives and he won people over with an extraordinary run of form. His days may well be numbered now after these two matches, his comments after the declaration were as contemptible as the decision itself. I would not be surprised if Australia bites the bullet and dumps him before the Ashes to make a true clean break from the golden era. They know they have 3 Ashes series in such a short time and may concede this one to build for the following ones.
The declaration made some sense even if it didn't show much faith in his last two batsmen, both of whom have FC 50s I think - if he'd gotten a wicket that evening it would have lifted the whole team
You're applying football management logic to Test cricket captaincy which is totally different. Clarke has to work with what he has and he's not done a terrible job - even if he himself is holding the batting together virtually single-handedly
Are you advocating Australia sacks him as captain but keeps him in the side? Virtually everyone's getting undermined there. I know, I know, '81 Ashes, but Australia don't have a Brearley in the offing, nor is there any way a specialist captain will play these days. If you're suggesting that Australia drops Clarke entirely then I think you need your head checked. If anything, Clarke should drop Australia!
first Test side to declare in the first innings and lose the match by an innings
Clarke was not wanted by the majority of Aussies to replace Punter, he was seen as selfish and had upset many by not following the legacy left by Border, Taylor, Waugh in particular and Ponting. There were not many alternatives and he won people over with an extraordinary run of form. His days may well be numbered now after these two matches, his comments after the declaration were as contemptible as the decision itself. I would not be surprised if Australia bites the bullet and dumps him before the Ashes to make a true clean break from the golden era. They know they have 3 Ashes series in such a short time and may concede this one to build for the following ones.
The declaration made some sense even if it didn't show much faith in his last two batsmen, both of whom have FC 50s I think - if he'd gotten a wicket that evening it would have lifted the whole team
You're applying football management logic to Test cricket captaincy which is totally different. Clarke has to work with what he has and he's not done a terrible job - even if he himself is holding the batting together virtually single-handedly
Are you advocating Australia sacks him as captain but keeps him in the side? Virtually everyone's getting undermined there. I know, I know, '81 Ashes, but Australia don't have a Brearley in the offing, nor is there any way a specialist captain will play these days. If you're suggesting that Australia drops Clarke entirely then I think you need your head checked. If anything, Clarke should drop Australia!
agree with this.
clarke at the moment is all australia have got. they need to move watson back to the top of the order.
I know nothing about football management. I know a hell of a lot about cricket though. I didn't advocate anything, I just said I wouldn't be surprised. Have a cup of tea, calm down and read what people say rather than what you want them to have said.
The fact both Watson and Warner are in the test team show how little batting Australia have. They are both one day players, unable to apply themselves sufficiently at test level. Just look at Watson's conversion rate. He is a man who gets a good start, and will often get just past 50, but lacks the concentration of discipline to convert those into big scores.
The less said about Phil Hughes the better. He was ruthlessly exposed in numerous Ashes tests, but they still pick him, there truly can't be anybody else worth picking if they are sticking with Hughes.
Remember, this is an Indian side we recently beat in India, whilst Australia have been completely blown away in both tests so far.
Sacking the captain at this stage will do nothing apart from remove one of their few competent batsmen from the team.
I know nothing about football management. I know a hell of a lot about cricket though. I didn't advocate anything, I just said I wouldn't be surprised. Have a cup of tea, calm down and read what people say rather than what you want them to have said.
I would be surprised, and therein lies the antagonism. Your condescending tone completes the job.
However, I'll drop it if you can name a credible replacement who will definitely play every single Test :P
I mean, Ed Cowan is extremely intelligent (and a superb cricket-writer) who would doubtless do a great job, but he needs to worry about his own form first - he's by no means cemented in the side. He's literally the only outside option I can think of.
Let me make it clear, I did not say Aus should or will dump Clarke, I said that if they did I would not be shocked. Their cupboard is bare in pretty much all depts save seamers, although fit ones are rare. From what I have read and understand from my contacts over there Warner is next in line, Cowan a possible too yes. The difficult thing for them is that for the first time since the end of Greg Chappell's time there is no obvious candidate.
Warner, a Test captain? I guess stranger things have happened. His captaincy is virtually untested - you'd think he'd have to have a go captaining NSW or something first...
I'm enjoying watchin Lolstralia crumble. Clarke has made a few attacking declarations that have paid off recently, and in the current case we are talking about the last wicket, with a few more overs on a moving pitch at the end of the day. India's innings was based on knocks by Pujara and Vijay - nobody else got a notable score after that, for either team. As someone said above, if a wicket (especially Vijay) had gone cheaply after the dec, we might be having a different discussion. At least Clarke rolls the dice, something Cook rarely seems to do.
Having said that, I've heard rumours that Clarke's man-management leaves a lot to be desired. For example, he allegedly orgnaised a team party that conflicted with Mike Hussey's leaving party, which left a sour taste. Cook may not be a tactical genius, but he can manage the likes of KP from what we have seen, and he seems popular.
Yeah, really like Mclenaghan too - very similat to Allott - very surprised about Allott's average ! Pity for NZ that he is not going to be playing. Since Shane Bonds retirement they have struggled to find a quick at world class level. I think Guptill is out too injured?
In terms of Oz, they are really struggling, although i wouldnt read (too) much into their results in India. Basically, in India if you have shit spinners (as they do) then there is no way you are going to win there. Their new quicks, Pattinson,Starc and Cummins (although he may not be fit after coming back from stress fracture of back) will make more impact in English conditions than India. Its their batting which is so fragile. What i dont understand is how they continue to play the likes of Hughes,Cowan and to a lesser degree Warner, when they have talent such as Shaun Marsh,David Hussey,Khawaja, not even being picked. Pie chuckers Doherty and Lyon are going to be murdered by KP this series. I would like us to absolutely murder them - oh yes, how sweet would that be !
Agree it has been highly amusing watching Australia implode (on this tour at least) but as a Test fan I'm beginning not to enjoy watching a series of poor sides get rolled over every time they leave their home countries - India turning over the Aussies at home, but utterly abject away. Sri Lanka thrashed 3-0 by Australia in Australia. New Zealand and Pakistan both all out for less than 50 in South Africa. I mean, really? The less said about the bald-men-fighting-over-a-comb series that will be West Indies v Zimbabwe the better. Fact is, South Africa and England are the only two Test teams worthy of the name, competitive home and away.
Re Aussies - desperate. Clarke should have moved up to 4 years ago, with Hussey 5 at the time. Watson and Warner should open and potentially score runs at a decent rate, Cowan (who I would drop if there was anybody better) at 3 to stick around if they lose an early wicket. Khawaja in at 5 - better bet than Hughes. Wade is ok and has a bit about him; Pattinson will be very good if he can stay fit. The rest of their seam attack are pretty much pie-throwers, who in the case of Johnson is either the most dangerous fast bowler in the world or can't hit the cut bit. Worth including for his batting, though. As for their spinners, they're the worst in serious world cricket apart from maybe NZ, for whom Patel has lost all confidence - watching him face Steyn batting from square leg was the funniest thing I've seen in ages.
England will win the series because NZ have no bowlers - Boult isn't terrible, McClenaghan useful but dodgy fitness. They have no openers so they'll be 20 for 2 most innings but Williamson, Taylor, Brownlie, McCullum and Watling can get runs, including against the South Africans, so they should win the odd session, maybe even scrape a draw somewhere.
Agree with virtually all of the above, aside from the 'rest of their seam attack are pretty much pie-throwers' - i wouldnt call Starc and Cummins pie-chuckers - especially as they will be chucking pies in excess of 90mph!
It's an interesting problem they have. They can't keep their bowlers fit, so they can't have a consistant attack. Speed is all well and good, but players regularly bowling over 90mph (as compared to the majority of bowlers who may have a change up ball that can get above 90mph, but are generally bowling in the mid to high 80s) tend to lack control. They can be destructive, but more often are wayward and expensive.
Usually the best way to utilise the really fast bowler is in conjunction with a very controlled bowler at the other end. One who bowls a lot of maidens, doesn't give anything away and forces the batsmen to chase after the more erratic quick at the other end.
It's no coincidence that Brett Lee was at his best when partnered with either Warne or McGrath, both bowlers who would tie up the other end, giving the batsmen nothing to hit.
Unfortunately Australia have no body who can play that McGrath or Warne role. Their spinners aren't good enough and their seamers are controlled enough, they'll always give you the odd bad ball to score off.
Obviously a quick can have a day when they're unplayable. Johnson in the last ashes down under, Devon Malcolm against south africa, etc., but they can't and won't do it with any sort of consistency, and you can't build a game plan around that.
Agree with virtually all of the above, aside from the 'rest of their seam attack are pretty much pie-throwers' - i wouldnt call Starc and Cummins pie-chuckers - especially as they will be chucking pies in excess of 90mph!
Its great to 'talk cricket' with like-minded !
Fair point, Starc is a bit better than that - Cummins may be useful, though not much good if they can't get him on the paddock! Isn't he still out for months?
Tbf, was thinking more of the likes of the worthy-but-limited - eg Siddle, Hilfenhaus et al - even John Hastings played a Test against the Saffers. Almost had me reaching for the pads and trusty willow myself when I saw him rock up!
Agree with virtually all of the above, aside from the 'rest of their seam attack are pretty much pie-throwers' - i wouldnt call Starc and Cummins pie-chuckers - especially as they will be chucking pies in excess of 90mph!
Its great to 'talk cricket' with like-minded !
Fair point, Starc is a bit better than that - Cummins may be useful, though not much good if they can't get him on the paddock! Isn't he still out for months?
Tbf, was thinking more of the likes of the worthy-but-limited - eg Siddle, Hilfenhaus et al - even John Hastings played a Test against the Saffers. Almost had me reaching for the pads and trusty willow myself when I saw him rock up!
Cummins is due back next month - however, it seems like he can only play a couple of games before he gets crocked again. Also, i think they are looking to re-shape his delivery because of the stress fracture - in my opinion, unlikely to make Ashes, and even if he was fit, would they risk him?
yes, I'll waych as much as I can - probably fall asleep during the last session and will drag myself off to bed when I wake up to find its stumps........
unlike for the ashes which i stayed up to watch most of it live. I had broken my ankle at the time so had nothing on during the day anyway. for this i think anything beyond the first session is pushing it a bit for me.
Comments
A few interesting questions even if the series is unlikely to be too competitive.
We need to roll up to the ashes on fire, because this time I want the Aussies destroyed!
Clarke was not wanted by the majority of Aussies to replace Punter, he was seen as selfish and had upset many by not following the legacy left by Border, Taylor, Waugh in particular and Ponting. There were not many alternatives and he won people over with an extraordinary run of form. His days may well be numbered now after these two matches, his comments after the declaration were as contemptible as the decision itself.
I would not be surprised if Australia bites the bullet and dumps him before the Ashes to make a true clean break from the golden era. They know they have 3 Ashes series in such a short time and may concede this one to build for the following ones.
You're applying football management logic to Test cricket captaincy which is totally different. Clarke has to work with what he has and he's not done a terrible job - even if he himself is holding the batting together virtually single-handedly
Are you advocating Australia sacks him as captain but keeps him in the side? Virtually everyone's getting undermined there. I know, I know, '81 Ashes, but Australia don't have a Brearley in the offing, nor is there any way a specialist captain will play these days. If you're suggesting that Australia drops Clarke entirely then I think you need your head checked. If anything, Clarke should drop Australia!
clarke at the moment is all australia have got.
they need to move watson back to the top of the order.
I didn't advocate anything, I just said I wouldn't be surprised.
Have a cup of tea, calm down and read what people say rather than what you want them to have said.
The less said about Phil Hughes the better. He was ruthlessly exposed in numerous Ashes tests, but they still pick him, there truly can't be anybody else worth picking if they are sticking with Hughes.
Remember, this is an Indian side we recently beat in India, whilst Australia have been completely blown away in both tests so far.
Sacking the captain at this stage will do nothing apart from remove one of their few competent batsmen from the team.
However, I'll drop it if you can name a credible replacement who will definitely play every single Test :P
Their cupboard is bare in pretty much all depts save seamers, although fit ones are rare. From what I have read and understand from my contacts over there Warner is next in line, Cowan a possible too yes. The difficult thing for them is that for the first time since the end of Greg Chappell's time there is no obvious candidate.
Having said that, I've heard rumours that Clarke's man-management leaves a lot to be desired. For example, he allegedly orgnaised a team party that conflicted with Mike Hussey's leaving party, which left a sour taste. Cook may not be a tactical genius, but he can manage the likes of KP from what we have seen, and he seems popular.
In terms of Oz, they are really struggling, although i wouldnt read (too) much into their results in India. Basically, in India if you have shit spinners (as they do) then there is no way you are going to win there. Their new quicks, Pattinson,Starc and Cummins (although he may not be fit after coming back from stress fracture of back) will make more impact in English conditions than India.
Its their batting which is so fragile. What i dont understand is how they continue to play the likes of Hughes,Cowan and to a lesser degree Warner, when they have talent such as Shaun Marsh,David Hussey,Khawaja, not even being picked.
Pie chuckers Doherty and Lyon are going to be murdered by KP this series.
I would like us to absolutely murder them - oh yes, how sweet would that be !
Re Aussies - desperate. Clarke should have moved up to 4 years ago, with Hussey 5 at the time. Watson and Warner should open and potentially score runs at a decent rate, Cowan (who I would drop if there was anybody better) at 3 to stick around if they lose an early wicket. Khawaja in at 5 - better bet than Hughes. Wade is ok and has a bit about him; Pattinson will be very good if he can stay fit. The rest of their seam attack are pretty much pie-throwers, who in the case of Johnson is either the most dangerous fast bowler in the world or can't hit the cut bit. Worth including for his batting, though. As for their spinners, they're the worst in serious world cricket apart from maybe NZ, for whom Patel has lost all confidence - watching him face Steyn batting from square leg was the funniest thing I've seen in ages.
England will win the series because NZ have no bowlers - Boult isn't terrible, McClenaghan useful but dodgy fitness. They have no openers so they'll be 20 for 2 most innings but Williamson, Taylor, Brownlie, McCullum and Watling can get runs, including against the South Africans, so they should win the odd session, maybe even scrape a draw somewhere.
And I'm not at all bored at work!
Its great to 'talk cricket' with like-minded !
Usually the best way to utilise the really fast bowler is in conjunction with a very controlled bowler at the other end. One who bowls a lot of maidens, doesn't give anything away and forces the batsmen to chase after the more erratic quick at the other end.
It's no coincidence that Brett Lee was at his best when partnered with either Warne or McGrath, both bowlers who would tie up the other end, giving the batsmen nothing to hit.
Unfortunately Australia have no body who can play that McGrath or Warne role. Their spinners aren't good enough and their seamers are controlled enough, they'll always give you the odd bad ball to score off.
Obviously a quick can have a day when they're unplayable. Johnson in the last ashes down under, Devon Malcolm against south africa, etc., but they can't and won't do it with any sort of consistency, and you can't build a game plan around that.
Tbf, was thinking more of the likes of the worthy-but-limited - eg Siddle, Hilfenhaus et al - even John Hastings played a Test against the Saffers. Almost had me reaching for the pads and trusty willow myself when I saw him rock up!
Siddle and Hilfenhaus are 'stock' bowlers - although Hilfy does impress when the conditions suit him (swinging). They also have Mckay and Cutting in the background. However, the spin dept looks really bare of any quality - i notice in the paper they were looking to fasttrack some 30 year old Pakistani for the Ashes....http://metro.co.uk/2013/03/03/australia-fast-track-pakistan-spinner-fawad-ahmed-in-bid-to-win-ashes-3523747/