Target practice

Aussies typically announce well in advance that they're going to target the captain. In addition, when a captain performs poorly against Australia, invariably it was all a grand plan to target the captain. The assumption is that a weak and under-performing captain's performance would reflect in his decision making as well his team's performance.

Try this. The captain scored 268 runs from 7 innings, 140 of them coming on the flattest test pitch in the series. He also made 145 runs against a specific opponent from 6 ODI innings, 124 of which came on, you guessed it right, the flattest one-day pitch in the series.

Was this a case of India's bowlers and fielders targetting Ricky Ponting without actually announcing it well in advance, unlike McGrath's pre-series predictions which always had great media coverage?

Maybe, just maybe, Ricky Ponting isn't the great batsman everyone makes him out to be. Why? Try this.

One of the measures of great batsmen is their ability to be consistent in all conditions. After all, you're not considered a great batsman unless you've batted well on bouncy Australian/South African pitches or seaming/swinging English/New Zealand pitches or on spinning sub-continental tracks or cashed in against poor West Indian/Zimbabwe bowling.

Ponting's overall career summary is awesome (9776 runs with 34 centuries at an average of over 58). He averages very close to 50 against every single opponent (lowest of ~ 48 against England). So that tells us nothing.

Let's do some scratching - home average 62, away average 51 and neutral average 85. Are we getting somewhere? Hmm ... let's see. Let's throw out the numbers that don't have enough data (2 neutral venue tests, 2 tests in Bangladesh, 1 test in Pakistan & 1 in Zimbabwe).

He averages 42 in England, 12 in India, 97 in New Zealand, 65 in South Africa, 54 in Sri Lanka and 98 in the Caribbean.

Twelve! That's how pathetic he has been in India. Hey, so let's give him some benefit of doubt. Maybe he had one bad tour which screwed up his numbers.

Nope. On 3 successive tours (and I'm ignoring the last one where he failed twice in his lone test in 2004, at the Wankhede), he averaged 13.5, 21 and 3!

But let's give him some credit. On the 2000-01 tour, he actually hit a six in a test match in India, lofting Harbhajan (yes!) in the direction of the Buckingham canal perhaps.

67.6 Harbhajan Singh to Ponting, SIX, steps out and does the charge, hits it very well and clears the long on fence, Ponting atlast sorts Harbhajan out a bit

Ricky Ponting gets runs against India only at home. He averages 79 at home and 12 in India.

Labels: australia, Commonwealth Bank Series, india, ponting, statistic

Thus spake Jagadish @ 8:13 pm | Sledge/Read 7 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Some nitpicking on a superb day for cricket fans

This isn't a party-pooper sort of post, but I guess its the right day to get it off my chest, in no particular order.

• Harbhajan and Yuvraj shadow-boxing after Hayden got out was totally hilarious. I'm very surprised Ponting doesn't see the funny side of it. He told NDTV something like "Harbhajan finds new ways to celebrate. It wasn't very funny". I agree with you, Ricky. It's hard to find it funny when you're copping it! Then again, it certainly wasn't an unprovoked celebration!
  
• Apparently Harbhajan is in trouble with the match referee for making monkey gestures and spitting, both directed at a section of the SCG crowd. Is this guy a moron or what? He's just about managing to get into trouble every week! He was in a definite soup over the 'monkey' abuse issue, and evaded a ban because of a combination of inter-board politics, administrative gaffes and a lack of conclusive evidence.
  
• Brett Lee's beamer to Sachin Tendulkar is just another beamer in his international career. Notice how none of the commentators actually says 'beamer'. He seems to keep bowling one so regularly. Please find me other bowlers who do that. In 2005, he bowled one to Abdur Razzaq in retaliation to Razzaq bowling him a beamer. Then, it was McCullum's turn, which drove the Kiwis mad even as some Aussies made some pathetic excuses about lack of height, the ball slipping, it wasn't high enough to qualify as a beamer, etc.. He didn't apparently learn from his 'mistake', for he then bowled one to Trescothick during Australia's Ashes tour in 2005. I have absolutely no doubt that Tendulkar accepted the apology mainly to avoid yet another controversy.
  
• Was it really tough to lipread what Virat Kohli, the India under-19 team captain, was shouting after his side won the tournament? Hint #1: There were two words he kept repeating. Hint #2: The first word has 4 alphabets, the second has 3. Hint #3: The first word starts with f, the second starts with o. I know he was letting off steam. It's huge pressure for a young kid. But there're younger kids watching the television, those aspiring to be under-19 captains one day. Such language is unacceptable. After all, if the national team cricketers abuse opponents, or their mothers, it is assumed that it is a must-do thing in international cricket!

Labels: australia, beamer, Commonwealth Bank Series, harbhajan, hayden, india, lee, ponting, tendulkar, under-19 world cup

Thus spake Jagadish @ 12:35 am | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Harbhajan v/s Hayden & Ponting

Apparently during an India v Australia game at Adelaide ten days ago or so, there was a fair amount of banter between Ponting and Harbhajan, going by this PTI report.

Apparently, Ponting kept having a go at Harbhajan in Adelaide, asking him "to show what he had got" in the middle.

Harbhajan, on his part, had then cheekily remarked: "Mate, whatever I have shown in the middle has been better than yours' in the series so far."

It appeared to have stung the Australian captain who asked Harbhajan to "f... off" after the latter was dismissed.

If the dialogue reported did indeed happen, it is a superb response from Harbhajan! Remember that at that point in time, Ricky Ponting had scored 25 runs from 5 innings, which he duly rectified the moment he got a nice batting track at Sydney to score a century. Harbhajan, in contrast, had 3/74 from 22 overs.

I totally loved that retort. Does anyone else also think that Hayden's comments to the Brisbane radio station on Harbhajan being an 'obnoxious little weed' and about taking on Ishant in a boxing ring should land him in quite a lot of trouble?

As per the ICC's code of conduct, using language that is obscene, offensive or insulting is a level-1 offence (upto 50% of the match fee penalty). Using language that is obscene, offensive or of a seriously insulting nature (barring the verbals that happen during a game) is a level-2 offence (upto 100% of the match fee penalty and a 1 test/2 ODI ban). After the appeal hearing, Harbhajan was found guilty of a level-2 offence.

Obnoxious implies Harbhajan is annoying, offensive or disgustingly objectionable. Little refers to Harbhajan being smaller-built in comparison to Hayden (and the rest of his teammates). This is obviously a case of racial stereotyping, and hence vilification (just like Tony Greig's "Those little Shri Lonkans" chant). Weed again refers to Harbhajan being obnoxious and detrimental.

Clearly this is a case of offensive and seriously insulting language. If someone tells me I'm a weed, I'd be pretty offended and feel insulted about it, since it implies that I shouldn't be existing. Add in the 'little' part and this very clearly qualifies as a racist remark. Actually this also makes for a libel/defamation suit since Hayden said "That is why he's been charged more than anyone that has ever played in the history of cricket." while referring to Harbhajan. That is totally incorrect. As pointed out in an earlier post, Inzamam has been charged the most number of times.

Yet, I have this nagging feeling Hayden will be let off by Cricket Australia and the ICC, despite being charged with breaching the Code of Behaviour, with a minor slap on the wrists and receive a letter that reads something like

Dear Matthew,
I saw your remark on Harbhajan being an 'obnoxious little weed' the other day.

I'd be really grateful if you could tone down your language. We've got tons of problems with those BCCI buggers. We need the money!

We'll be putting out a media release soon charging you under some clause of our code of conduct. Let me know if that is ok with you.

Cheers

James (CEO, just in case you forgot)

PS: I loved your imitation of Ishant's Indian accent *ROFLMAO*

Update at 6.30 pm: Was I clairvoyant or what? Hayden has been 'reprimanded'. Basically, he's got away with it. Perhaps insulting opposition players is acceptable for Cricket Australia.

Labels: australia, Commonwealth Bank Series, harbhajan, hayden, india, ponting, racism, sledging

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:35 pm | Sledge/Read 4 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Hayden is definitely lunatic

What else do I conclude for this comment from him on Ishant Sharma?

He is 19, why doesn't he just worry about his bowling for a while? I like the idea of actually getting into the ring. I like that, let's bring that one.

Labels: australia, Commonwealth Bank Series, harbhajan, hayden, india, ishant, racism, sledging

Thus spake Ganesh @ 3:04 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Australia helped by ICC rules?

Australia was fined for a slow over-rate in yesterday's ODI against India at Sydney. Ricky Ponting copped a 20% match fee fine under Clause J-5 of the ICC code of CONduct which prescribes a 5% match fee cut for the players (and 10% for the skipper) for the each of the first 5 overs short of the minimum overs which should have been bowled.

So far so good. Except, Australia were well in excess of 2 overs short. They bowled 49.1 overs in 225 minutes. Being 2 overs short implies they overshot the time allocation by ~ 10 minutes. Which is obviously untrue since they overshot it by 25 minutes!

During the Perth test match last month, Australia were fined for being 2 overs short. This, when they bowled 98 ov in 450 min (> 45 min delay => at least 10 ov lag) and 80 ov in 360 min (> 30 min delay => at least 7 ov lag). Yet, the penalty was for being 2 ov slow.

The code of conduct considers a 5 over lag in a test and a 2 over lag in a ODI as a level 2 offense (50% or more of the match fee as penalty and/or a 1 test/2 ODI ban). The match referees' decisions to report that Australia were lagging by 2 overs implied that Australia couldn't be charged with a level-2 offense. Further, a repeat of a level-2 offense within 12 months upgrades the 2nd offense to a level-3 offense which warrants a 2-4 tests or 4-8 ODIs ban.

Ergo, Ricky Ponting should have actually been banned after this hearing. Yet, like we've pointed out here, some get away, and some don't. Maybe the fact that the penalty for the Perth game isn't even listed on the ICC website in the 2008 breaches & penalties section means that he managed to get away thanks to yet another ICC administrative screw-up.

PS: Were you surprised when Ponting made runs on the best batting track in the one-day series? I'm not! You can also vote in the new poll: "Are Ricky Ponting and Andrew Symonds cricket's worst whiners?"

Labels: australia, ban, Commonwealth Bank Series, icc, india, match referee, over rates, umpires

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:41 pm | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Rohit Sharma fined 10%

Rohit Sharma was found guilty of violating clause 1.3 of the ICC's code of conduct and he was fined 10% of his match fee for showing dissent at an umpire's decision in the game against Sri Lanka yesterday.

I wonder if there was any attempt by the Indian representatives (Rohit Sharma & the manager, Chetan Chauhan) to tell Jeff Crowe (who has previously let off Brett Lee despite being a repeat level-1 offender and Ricky Ponting for disgracefully attempting to get the on-field umpires to re-refer a decision to the third umpire) that Rohit Sharma was terribly disappointed that Rudi Koertzen (who has a habit of apologizing after screwing up with his decisions) gave him out stumped when his foot was very firmly behind/in the crease.

The sub-text is that Rohit Sharma was bloody obviously not out caught, since he never even touched the ball! This is yet another instance of the hopeless quality of umpiring, especially in the last few months.

At least someone like Rohit Sharma is unlikely to be dropped on the basis of one duck. There are several instances of players not being considered after an inning or two, or after bowling a handful of overs, in international cricket. How likely is it that some of those players copped horrendous decisions from the umpires?

Labels: Commonwealth Bank Series, icc, india, rohit sharma, sri lanka, statistic, umpires

Thus spake Jagadish @ 3:17 pm | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Thanks, Geoff and Stuart

When Stuart and Geoff joined us in our coverage of the Ashes (which got extended into the tri-series), a test series score of 5-0 for Australia and a one-day series win for England were perhaps very far on the horizon, the latter being quite unthinkable. Perhaps only Lillee and Marsh would have bet on those kind of odds!

We now head into the World Cup, with several questions asked about Australia's invincibility and England's resurgence.

We'd like to thank Geoff and Stuart for their wonderful and passionate posts during the last three months. Of course, this doesn't mean that Geoff and Stuart stop contributing! They'll continue to comment, and who knows, even guest blog again!

- Ganesh & Jagadish

Labels: ashes, ashes 2006, Commonwealth Bank Series, guest blogger

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:24 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

England pose questions galore

England's victory in the CBA series was, if nothing else, utterly bizarre. Their best batsmen and their best bowler in the series both went home. Their revenant captain came, saw, scored little, masterminded an excellent win, and returned to the ranks of the mortally wounded. Their full-time stand-in captain, known for explosive batting and expected to be a leader long on inspiration, short on nous, led the team to three consecutive wins against the side that had trounced him and his team 5-0 in the Tests. Even more, these wins weren't explosive, outstanding, once-in-a-lifetime efforts - they were workmanlike. Or, to be more generous, professional.

Where did this come from? Aside from going some way to proving Matthew Hoggard right in his debate with Jagadish, this has been a victory for sensible (perhaps boring) cricket, as well as a victory for shambolic preparation. Without Pietersen, England have been reduced to two hitters: Mal Loye, who runs very few singles; and Andrew Flintoff, who has often come in to situations where he could not risk his wicket. England could struggle on small grounds with this approach, especially if Vaughan returns to join Bell and Joyce at the top of the order. If Sri Lanka brought pinch-hitting to the world in 1996, England might well end up with the batting equivalent of Dibbly, Dobbly, and Wobbly. Even despite this result, I'm struggling to see England making the semi-finals of the World Cup.

And that's just the England team. With the World Cup on the horizon, what has happened to Australia? They have the class players, of that there is no doubt. Ricky Ponting continues to be an unspeakably brilliant batsman. But, in an ironic twist, their side is packed with bowlers who have failed to make an impression in the county game. Shaun Tait was by far the worst, with the ludicrous figure of 18-0-176-0 from 2 games for Durham in 2004. Brad Hogg, Shane Watson, and Cameron White have all put in excellent batting performances and mediocre bowling performances in the past few seasons for their counties.

From the outside looking in, there isn't too much of a problem with Australia. They are still the best fielding side in the world, bar none. (South Africa are good, but drop too many catches.) Their batting line up is, if not clearly the best, certainly not clearly not the best. Their bowling has been average, but there isn't a whole lot wrong with a pace attack of Lee, McGrath, and Clark. The problem is the back-up. I like Brad Hogg and I think he should play, but it seems that if he plays, Shane Watson plays. Despite a decent record, I simply do not rate Watson's bowling. He doesn't obtain much movement, and he just looks hittable. With his injury record, he seems unlikely to ever be able to make himself a fixture in the side. Unfortunately for Australia, neither Hilfenhaus nor Tait can bat. Michael Clarke is a good spin option, but Australia's only other batting all-rounder who bowls seam-up appears to be Symonds.

Finally, South Africa are in with a very real chance of being the top-ranked side going in to the World Cup. They need to beat Pakistan and hope New Zealand beat Australia to knock the Aussies off the top for the first time since the rankings were introduced.

Labels: australia, Commonwealth Bank Series, england, rankings

Thus spake Geoff @ 3:57 pm | Sledge/Read 8 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Aus v Eng - CBA Series - Second Final

From the sublime to the ridiculous. Australia's dominance of this CBA series ended with a thud, in rain affected scenes that reseembled the scenario last time England took a trophy off the Aussies. England fans, singing in the stands, rejoicing the announcement that the game was over, and England have won - Aussies, beware the washout.

Like that fateful Test at the Oval in the darkening September days of 2005, England completely outplayed Australia again in this match - albeit just a 50 over game. Australia fought their way back into the game in the field after a good start by England had made a 300 total possible - and restricted them to a very 'gettable' 246.

From there Australia were never in the hunt. To sum it up quickly, 2 early wickets put pressure on the Australian middle order, that I still believe it is not built to cope with. Hodge was good again, but had no support. Hussey may finally be heading into the downside of the curve everyone has been warning about - although not there yet let's be honest. Gilchrist continued to struggle against the moving ball and while batsman after batsman fell away, England went from strength to strenght, all culminating it what was easily, the catch of the summer, by Dalrymple at backward point - completely airborne, projecting himself metres to his left to snaffle Shane Watson and start tapping that final nail into the coffin.

So, as much as it aches to say it, well played Poms! To pick yourselves up off your collective backsides, after losing Pietersen and Vaughan, and inject the momentum into the camp just prior to the World Cup, is a credit to you - not to mention the joy you will no doubt take, from sticking a little seed of doubt into the Aussie camp, just a month out...

So a few questions - why was Stuart Clarke dropped, and when Cameron White was seen as a luxury in a side that contained Andrew Symonds, why the hell drop him, once Symonds is out.

Aussies will say this was just a warm up to the World Cup, and they were probably quite honestly trying a few combinations, but they have always prided themselves on winning every contest they turn up for - now they haven't, if things don't go according to plan in the Carribean, we may well look back and wonder...

Cross-posted on STUmpcam

Labels: australia, Commonwealth Bank Series, england

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 8:00 am | Sledge/Read 6 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Finally, a twist...

Not so much a "final twist" as "finally, a twist!". In a game reminicent of the changing fortunes and quality cricket of the 2005 English summer, than the borish domination of the Australians counted by meek submission of the English, we've become accustomed to over the past 3 months - England did a job on the Aussies last night at the MCG.

Take two snapshots from the game - Australia 1 for 150 at one point, England 3 for 15 at one point, who could imagine England getting up? Well they did - and they did it in true Vaughan-led style - except for one thing, he is on a plane home! Freddie Flintoff finally managed to lead, as he leads best, by example, both with the bat and the ball, and he did it, while captaining. An awesome sign for English fans for the future. So far this summer, his leadership has been non-existant. When he wasn't captaining, he led the way with inspirational bowling spells and powerful batting - as captain all that had dissipated. Not last night. Both England and New Zealand have had the game plan to beat Australia in the 50 over form of the game this summer, they just haven't executed. And at times it's been woeful batting or fielding that has prevented that execution.

History would say, Australia will bounce back and probably even take this series still...but what a well timed reversal of fortune for England. Two wins in a row against the world champs. They came good late in the ICC trophy too - in time to win their last game emphatically, they've come good now...if they can manage to somehow start well in the world cup next month, who knows what may happen?

Back to the game - with Australia cruising at about the 30 over mark, they capitulated, some may say, English style, to post just over 250 - albeit a competitive score, but Collingwood saw to it, that it wasn't enough. Flintoff departed just before the game was safe, but Collingwood didn't follow. His form now shoes a wicked "J curve" as since his 200 in Adelaide, he's been on a pretty much downward spiral, but now wickets, catches and two consecutive hundreds and this series is well and truly up for grabs. You may remember that special Collingwood catch that sparked England into action in England in '05 - well who knows what's coming? From here, it's Sydney on Sunday, then, us Aussies are hoping, it's on to Adelaide for the decider - Flintoff may have other plans.

Just on that decider - did anyone catch Bill Lawry (on Channel Nine's coverage) doing the summary after the game, saying how exciting it all was and generally going over the top - did anyone notice how excited he was that "this now guarantees a third final" - I wonder if any English fans pointed out just how best of three works, should Australia lose on Sunday???

(Cross posted on STUmpcam)

Labels: Commonwealth Bank Series

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 10:40 am | Sledge/Read 2 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

England go 1-0 up!

For the second year in a row, Australia have lost the first final of the triangular series. Last year, it was Sri Lanka. Now, it is England. Yes! E N G L A N D!

In 2005, Ponting skippered Australia to an Ashes defeat. In ODIs, Australia's loss in the first game of the 2005 NatWest Series was it's second consecutive one to England, having lost in the 2004 ICC Champions Trophy. Now, Ponting's been in charge when England have beaten Australia twice in two games again!

Oddly enough, I felt a sense of glee seeing Australia slip. Especially when someone like McGrath drops a sitter or when the bowling seems so toothless or when I find out that Australia slipped from 170/1 in 30 overs to 252 all out!

Labels: australia, Commonwealth Bank Series, england

Thus spake Jagadish @ 5:02 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

England on a winning streak

Following India's exploits last month when they won two games in a row after a period of 7 months, England have caught up by winning two in a row (first Australia and then England New Zealand) after a similar gap of 7 months. In June 2006, they beat Ireland and Sri Lanka in consecutive games. Pakistan at Trent Bridge and Edgbaston to draw the series 2-2.

Labels: Commonwealth Bank Series, england, india, new zealand, streak

Thus spake Jagadish @ 6:00 pm | Sledge/Read 4 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Not so much a "New Zealand Day"

The frustration for Kiwi supporters continued yesterday as their side chocked a spluttered their way through the final overs of the final One Dayer in the preliminary stages of the Commonwealth Bank Series. So disappointing after such a great start.

Steve Flemming looked elegant at times during his 106 which while being the back bone of the innings, probably slowed them down at the critical time and left the very capable tail which includes the never-say-die Daniel Vetori and the sweet hitting, baby-face Franklin. NZ fell 14 runs short on their national day - why is it they play so much above themselves when they are against the Aussies - if it is just Trans-Tasman rivalry, they really ought to find a way to lift like that for all their games. They are a serious challenger for the World Cup at their best, and in danger failing in the qualifiers at their worst.

I for one find them one of the most entertaining sides when they're on, but they find so many ways to be off, it's frustrating.

Cross posted on STUmpcam

Labels: Commonwealth Bank Series, new zealand

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 5:49 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Questions unanswered?

England managed to "break the ice" with their first win against the Aussies since arriving back in November! I heard comments on the ABC coverage saying this performance leaves many questions unanswered about the current Australian side.

That is because the only answer they are looking for is that "Australia are going to dominate the upcoming World Cup" or "Australia are going to maintain the current gap between them and the rest of the world" - this is not the case and that is why if they keep searching for this answer, it will remain unanswered.

Australia are favourites to win right now...sure! But are they dead set certainties - of course not, and people seem to delight in pointing this out. It's not big revelation really. They won the last World Cup as favourites, but if not for a couple of huge individual efforts, they would not have - Symonds vs Pakistan, Ponting in the final to name just two, completely changed the face of those games - now lets remember back to the Cup before that, in England, Australia shouldn't have made it - Pakistan were run away favourites, and probably should've been playing South Africa in the final. So why, with many of Australia's stars now 8 years old than back in England are people so keen to point out how we've slipped? I'm not sure. All I know is, while favourites, they are not certainties. If they weren't certainties in either of the last two world cups, why would they be this time.

I think this current side is more susceptible to an opposition that is just "on" - as indeed England were yesterday. The batting line up is more suspect under pressure and the bowling not quite as deep. That's not to say that any of these players can't be part of a World Champion side - of course they can, but in my opinion, so could a side containing Tendulkar and Dravid, or Flemming and Bond, Kallis and Ntini or Pietersen and Flintoff.

The World Cup in March, will, like all others have it's disappointments (sides that just don't perform like they should - South Africa last time) and it's surprise packets. My tip is still, Australia but again, not as condident as I was about this last time.

(As usual - cross posted on STUmpcam)

Labels: 2007 world cup, Commonwealth Bank Series, world cup

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 9:56 am | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Nicely fixed tri-series?

If Australia had beaten England today, there'd have been very little interest in the final game of the league phase of the on-going triangular series. This is how the points table currently looks.

Match 10 of 12	P	W	L	NR	T	BP	Points	NRR	For	Against
Australia	7	6	1	-	-	3	27	+0.912	1569 / 296	1536 / 350
New Zealand	6	2	4	-	-	1	9	+0.069	1470 / 300	1442 / 298.3
England	7	2	5	-	-	1	9	-0.904	1385 / 349.5	1446 / 297.2

England v New Zealand on Feb 6 is going to be a crucial game. New Zealand are sufficiently ahead on net run-rate to not be significantly affected even if they lose to Australia on Sunday. England and New Zealand are level on points, including bonus points. This is the kind of situation which tournament organizers dream of - a final day contest to determine a finalist. Especially a tournament such as this which has been as one-sided as it can possibly get, until New Zealand started spicing it up from last week.

Full credit to England, especially Ed Joyce, who'd have been wondering until today if his decision to ditch Ireland for England was right.

Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Australian team had been 'encouraged' to go easy keeping in mind the larger picture. Did anyone see the shot Clarke played? Glenn McGrath ... bowling second change in a one-day international which Australia was taking seriously? Yeah right! Glenn McGrath ... batting at #10? The only time he's batted higher than #11 so far was in the light-hearted tsunami relief game in 2005. Definitely seems to indicate some skullduggery going on!

Labels: australia, Commonwealth Bank Series, england, match fixing, new zealand

Thus spake Jagadish @ 4:10 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

It's going to be a long night

Also in the All-Star stakes is the England TMS ODI XI. Listening to this being debated in the lunch break of England's miserable loss to New Zealand, it was quite clear that Simon 'not good enough' Mann was one for the big names. He refused to even consider Nick Knight or Neil Fairbrother, who are two and five on England's all-time averages list, and the top two if you consider players who've played more than 50 matches. Don't even get me started on Hick's omission.

It's not just pretend cricket where England have selection troubles. Both Jon Lewis (average 27.28, economy 4.04) and Jimmy Anderson (average 26.99, economy 5.11) have picked up niggles. In their place could come Liam Plunkett (average 42.43, economy 6.04), Sajid Mahmood (average 44.80, economy 6.30), or Chris Tremlett (average 94.00, economy 5.22). All stats are excluding games against associate members, Bangladesh, and Zimbabwe.

It's going to be a long night.

Labels: Commonwealth Bank Series, england, odi, tms

Thus spake Geoff @ 6:24 am | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Help us to help ourselves - John Buchanan

Fed up with the standard of cricket dished out by Australia's opponents in the triangular one-day series so far, Australia's coach John Buchanan has lashed out in his progress report, on the Cricket Australia website.

Sources within Cricket Australia told this correspondent that they were considering talking to the US Library of Congress to license the famous poster and revamp it. The first draft of the poster looks like this.



Buchanan accused England's and New Zealand's batsmen of not forcing Australia's bowlers to bowl yorkers, bouncers etc. thereby stunting the development of his side's bowler's one-day skills and decision making skills when under the cosh as well as not giving his fielders enough balls to pounce upon.

Our ability to deliver yorkers, length balls, bouncers, variety balls (such as slower balls, cutters, etc) has not been placed under constant scrutiny by an opposition batting lineup.

This testing of our bowlers’ response to situations when we have lost control (temporarily hopefully) is not happening. In essence, the batting efforts of our opposition are not assisting the development of our bowlers’ One-Day skills and the decision making that accompanies being placed under the microscope of competition.

And while this is not occurring, we cannot have our fielding tested also for its ability to create and make opportunities.

If anyone's ever seen a more blatant case of self-aggrandizement, please let us know!

Hang on, Buck! If your fielders aren't getting enough opportunities to cause/create dismissals, then your bowlers are to blame for getting batsmen out lbw or bowled. If your bowlers aren't getting enough practice and are not being forced to adopt different plans to dismiss batsmen, its their fault surely. Why weren't they charitable enough to allow England and New Zealand to get over 280 each time?

The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings' - Julius Caesar, Act I, sc. ii

Labels: australia, buchanan, Commonwealth Bank Series, england, new zealand

Thus spake Jagadish @ 11:51 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Some CBA Tri-series observations

I haven't had much to say about the ODI's this summer just yet. Here's a few quick observations...

• The frustration of watching (and semi-supporting) New Zealand continues - they do so well, as Captain Flemming says, they have the game plan they need, they just keep failing. They've had so many good performances against Australia for so little return, it's must be tearing him up. My gut feel is they are thrashed by Australia far less than other countries - they never give up, and fight back so often.
  
• Craig McMillan is a cheeky buggar - complaining to Hussey after that last ball - the bouncer that he got no-where near and should've been called a wide - complaining that Hussey should've walked, after his innings on the back of one of the biggest let offs of the summer so far - anyway, it's good to see him back in form after being pretty much the scape-goat of NZ cricket lately.
  
• Bond - maybe one of the quickest to 100 ODI wickets in terms of games played but surely, one of the slowest to actually manage to play that many games - his continued injury woes adding to Flemming's frustration.
  
• Australia are not the certainties everyone thinks they are - if Gilchrist struggles, Australia stuggle - Symonds and White look terrific when the score is 3 for 200 but no so flash at 4 for 70. One of these days, Hussey won't save us, and it may just be the World Cup final...

Good luck to NZ today against England - I think ODI finals against them would be far more entertaining...

(Cross posted on STUmpcam)

Labels: Commonwealth Bank Series

Thus spake Stuart Helwig @ 3:35 am | Sledge/Read 1 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

Gilchrist gets away with it

Very early on in New Zealand's chase against Australia today, this happened:

2.2 Bracken to Astle, OUT, caught behind, it was bit wide outside the off stump, swings away, Astle cuts at it, gets the edge, Gilchrist takes the catch... loud appeal, Astle waits for some time, asking the umpire whether it carried. The umpire gives the nod, Astle has to go. The replays are not conclusive....

The square-leg umpire, Asad Rauf, gave a nod even though it wasn't absolutely clear first up that Gilchrist had caught it cleanly before the ball touched the ground. Was Asad Rauf influenced by the fact that Gilchrist keeps walking, even when it's bleedingly obvious that he is out, and thus plants a seed of doubt in umpires' minds that if he's been truthful earlier, he'd always be truthful? There was every case for the third umpire being asked to adjudicate on the issue, but Gilchrist's "righteousness" won the day.

Labels: Commonwealth Bank Series, gilchrist, walking

Thus spake Jagadish @ 10:58 am | Sledge/Read 3 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]

I paid for this

Gus Fraser, discussing how he thought England had done reasonably well in scoring 242, and why he thought England couldn't choose to start the innings off in blazing fashion:

England don't really have the depth of quality in their batting to lose three wickets in the first 15 overs

Clearly 17.3 overs is a much better time to lose your third wicket.

Labels: angus fraser, Commonwealth Bank Series, england, tms

Thus spake Geoff @ 12:24 pm | Sledge/Read 0 sledge(s)
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - | | Tweet ]