How refreshing to play a side who want to play good tough cricket but within the boundaries of the game. And to hear a captain so modest about his own contribution not just with the bat but the decision to bowl first.
That's why they've only beaten us 10 times in 88 years.
He can hold a bat, but is Woakes worth picking outside of England?
That is a debatable point and obviously we are talking Test matches as opposed to white ball.
The difficulty is that if we replace Woakes with say Wood and we drop Ali for Leech then, all of a sudden, you have someone like Overton batting at 8. Which is fine when the top 7 are firing but ours haven't been doing so for ages and we have become reliant on the likes of Woakes and Ali to get us runs and out of trouble.
It says it all that Ali has a better Test average than Malan and Woakes a better one than Stoneman! It shouldn't be like that but, unfortunately, it is.
He can hold a bat, but is Woakes worth picking outside of England?
That is a debatable point and obviously we are talking Test matches as opposed to white ball.
The difficulty is that if we replace Woakes with say Wood and we drop Ali for Leech then, all of a sudden, you have someone like Overton batting at 8. Which is fine when the top 7 are firing but ours haven't been doing so for ages and we have become reliant on the likes of Woakes and Ali to get us runs and out of trouble.
It says it all that Ali has a better Test average than Malan and Woakes a better one than Stoneman! It shouldn't be like that but, unfortunately, it is.
I get want you are saying, and the reality is his runs have been very handy. But we need to take 20 wickets, and can't pack the team with average allrounders like Ali and Woakes (in test cricket)... But of course we need decent front line bowlers and batsmen first!
While normally I would have wanted England to save the match, unless they batted magnificently today (e.g. finishing 340-3 with Root on 156 no) they're pitiful preparation and 1st innings shambles deserved a humiliating defeat.
When over 1 1/2 days are lost to rain and you still lose, that's pathetic
He can hold a bat, but is Woakes worth picking outside of England?
That is a debatable point and obviously we are talking Test matches as opposed to white ball.
The difficulty is that if we replace Woakes with say Wood and we drop Ali for Leech then, all of a sudden, you have someone like Overton batting at 8. Which is fine when the top 7 are firing but ours haven't been doing so for ages and we have become reliant on the likes of Woakes and Ali to get us runs and out of trouble.
It says it all that Ali has a better Test average than Malan and Woakes a better one than Stoneman! It shouldn't be like that but, unfortunately, it is.
A little bit misleading AA, in that Stoneman and Malan have only played most of their tests in Australia, whereas Ali has had the opportunity to boost his average periodically by spanking Bangla Desh or the Windies around the park in England. I think that most people believe that 2 'successes' out of Oz were Stoneman and Malan, so I think a little bit more time should be given for them to add to their Test aggregates before any comparison is done with existing batters. Where does Vince's average stand up in all this?
Malan has had 19 innings - 10 against Windies, S A & NZ as against 9 in Australia and averages 31.42
Stoneman has had 16 innings - 7 against Windies and NZ and 9 in Australia and averages 27.86
Vince averages 22.7 in 20 innings and shouldn't even figure.
And there is the problem. With an out of form Cook (one massive score of 244* representing his only 50 in his last 17 innings) and Root consistently scoring 50s but failing to convert, it's little wonder that our bowlers have nothing to bowl at.
So I am not suggesting that Woakes or Ali should be in the side for their batting but, with the top order so brittle, I'm not sure that we can afford to dump both of them and would keep Woakes in the side.
Hmmm, interesting. Personally, I think that Ali will keep his place as long as we don't have a decent spinner come along - not sure Leach or Crane are there yet, but maybe not too far away. I also think Wood (fitness prevailing) should be in the side as 3rd bowler (if not 2nd), therefore surely this puts Overtons position in jeopardy rather than Woakes , therefore... Baristow,Ali,Woakes,Wood,Broad,Jimmy
After watching interviews on Youtube of Gilchrist,Warne,Turnbull and even Jim Maxwell, this has clearly rocked them all to the core, and most show embarassment at what has happened. One thing that JIm Maxwell mentioned is that he feels some sorrow for Bancroft as he was clearly made to be the 'patsy' in the whole sorry event as Warner has always been the ball-shiner for Oz and then all of a sudden its Bancroft. I cant help thinking of Mohammed Amir and his situation. This will affect them for the rest of their lives - certainly dropped from OZ squad in the short term, and then possibly banned by CA for an indefinite period, Smith i would expect would be released by Rajasthan Royals , and his chances of punditry after his career is finished (if it isnt already) would, i expect, be limited- he will forever be tainted by this event.
Just a bit of a shame that The Ashes wasnt 12 months later.
As I've said before the art of "batting and batting" is disappearing from the game. The odd exception is someone like Haseeb Hameed who will, I suspect, still prove himself.
"David Warner is emerging as the central character in Australian cricket's ball-tampering crisis and the deposed vice-captain will not be allowed to play in the fourth Test against South Africa starting on Johannesburg on Friday."
In other news Smith and Warner have both stepped down for the rest of the test v SA.
They gonna play with 9 men ?!
As captain and vice captain. The clue to the whole situation I would suggest is Warner.
The look on Warner's face when Bancroft and Smith were being confronted by the umpires said it all. For a bloke who has the biggest gob in cricket he has been remarkably quiet and this whole episode has his fingerprints all over it.
In other news Smith and Warner have both stepped down for the rest of the test v SA.
They gonna play with 9 men ?!
As captain and vice captain. The clue to the whole situation I would suggest is Warner.
The look on Warner's face when Bancroft and Smith were being confronted by the umpires said it all. For a bloke who has the biggest gob in cricket he has been remarkably quiet and this whole episode has his fingerprints all over it.
Was he wearing that wrist support during the Ashes tests ?
In other news Smith and Warner have both stepped down for the rest of the test v SA.
They gonna play with 9 men ?!
As captain and vice captain. The clue to the whole situation I would suggest is Warner.
The look on Warner's face when Bancroft and Smith were being confronted by the umpires said it all. For a bloke who has the biggest gob in cricket he has been remarkably quiet and this whole episode has his fingerprints all over it.
Was he wearing that wrist support during the Ashes tests ?
He's always come across as someone likely to be in need of a wrist support.
There is a growing feeling here, that Warner was the main instigator of this, speaking to Bancroft at lunch and saying that the cameras were on him too much, and that he would have to pass the ball shining duties to him (Bancroft). It is alleged that it was run past Smith, who gave it his approval, and it all unfolded disastrously from there.
The other thing that has been raised is that Smith is a pretty decent guy, but who was probably over -promoted to Captain, whilst lacking the street smarts to realize when he was being led down a blind alley such as this.
I don't think that Warner will play for Australia again, and that CA will do a KP on him, and ban him for 12 months and basically then never pick him again. They want to move on from the dreadful image that the team has, and that is just not going to be possible with Warner still around.
Alternatively Smith will face a 12 month ban, and will return to score big runs in the future, but he will of course be forever tainted by all of this.
Bancroft will probably face a similar fate to Warner, in that he will be seen as expendable by CA, who can easily replace him with 2 or 3 other openers, and consign him to infamy for all eternity.
There is a growing feeling here, that Warner was the main instigator of this, speaking to Bancroft at lunch and saying that the cameras were on him too much, and that he would have to pass the ball shining duties to him (Bancroft). It is alleged that it was run past Smith, who gave it his approval, and it all unfolded disastrously from there.
The other thing that has been raised is that Smith is a pretty decent guy, but who was probably over -promoted to Captain, whilst lacking the street smarts to realize when he was being led down a blind alley such as this.
I don't think that Warner will play for Australia again, and that CA will do a KP on him, and ban him for 12 months and basically then never pick him again. They want to move on from the dreadful image that the team has, and that is just not going to be possible with Warner still around.
Alternatively Smith will face a 12 month ban, and will return to score big runs in the future, but he will of course be forever tainted by all of this.
Bancroft will probably face a similar fate to Warner, in that he will be seen as expendable by CA, who can easily replace him with 2 or 3 other openers, and consign him to infamy for all eternity.
And Lehmann? And Saker? What do you think will become of those two?
I understand Lehmann is likely to be off in the morning, despite being determined to stay in place only a few hours ago.
Lehman is going to resign in the next few hours, and Saker will be quickly following him.
There is a real desire from within CA to get this dealt with quickly and ruthlessly - zero tolerance if you like.
It would be nice to think that this was driven by a love and care for the spirit of the game, but seeing as they are in the middle of a multi billion dollar TV rights deal, then you can probably join the dots up for yourself!
Comments
The difficulty is that if we replace Woakes with say Wood and we drop Ali for Leech then, all of a sudden, you have someone like Overton batting at 8. Which is fine when the top 7 are firing but ours haven't been doing so for ages and we have become reliant on the likes of Woakes and Ali to get us runs and out of trouble.
It says it all that Ali has a better Test average than Malan and Woakes a better one than Stoneman! It shouldn't be like that but, unfortunately, it is.
When over 1 1/2 days are lost to rain and you still lose, that's pathetic
Where does Vince's average stand up in all this?
Stoneman has had 16 innings - 7 against Windies and NZ and 9 in Australia and averages 27.86
Vince averages 22.7 in 20 innings and shouldn't even figure.
And there is the problem. With an out of form Cook (one massive score of 244* representing his only 50 in his last 17 innings) and Root consistently scoring 50s but failing to convert, it's little wonder that our bowlers have nothing to bowl at.
So I am not suggesting that Woakes or Ali should be in the side for their batting but, with the top order so brittle, I'm not sure that we can afford to dump both of them and would keep Woakes in the side.
Personally, I think that Ali will keep his place as long as we don't have a decent spinner come along - not sure Leach or Crane are there yet, but maybe not too far away. I also think Wood (fitness prevailing) should be in the side as 3rd bowler (if not 2nd), therefore surely this puts Overtons position in jeopardy rather than Woakes , therefore...
Baristow,Ali,Woakes,Wood,Broad,Jimmy
Ballance anyone ?
This will affect them for the rest of their lives - certainly dropped from OZ squad in the short term, and then possibly banned by CA for an indefinite period, Smith i would expect would be released by Rajasthan Royals , and his chances of punditry after his career is finished (if it isnt already) would, i expect, be limited- he will forever be tainted by this event.
Just a bit of a shame that The Ashes wasnt 12 months later.
Should it be stamped out of the game or would it change things ?
PS I meant what I said apart from Ballance.
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/david-warner-at-heart-of-ball-tampering-scandal-20180326-p4z6d3.html
The other thing that has been raised is that Smith is a pretty decent guy, but who was probably over -promoted to Captain, whilst lacking the street smarts to realize when he was being led down a blind alley such as this.
I don't think that Warner will play for Australia again, and that CA will do a KP on him, and ban him for 12 months and basically then never pick him again. They want to move on from the dreadful image that the team has, and that is just not going to be possible with Warner still around.
Alternatively Smith will face a 12 month ban, and will return to score big runs in the future, but he will of course be forever tainted by all of this.
Bancroft will probably face a similar fate to Warner, in that he will be seen as expendable by CA, who can easily replace him with 2 or 3 other openers, and consign him to infamy for all eternity.
I understand Lehmann is likely to be off in the morning, despite being determined to stay in place only a few hours ago.
There is a real desire from within CA to get this dealt with quickly and ruthlessly - zero tolerance if you like.
It would be nice to think that this was driven by a love and care for the spirit of the game, but seeing as they are in the middle of a multi billion dollar TV rights deal, then you can probably join the dots up for yourself!