Tuesday, 4 January 2011

SCG day 2

Lunch day 2- 8/230

Jono batting well, but you can bet it will be over soon after lunch. But if he can get Australia to 270+ at least Beer can be used for attacking.

With the track flattening out England could still be batting late on day 4!
Here's what HAS to happen.
Smith must get some wickets to justify his inclussion, he has not kept his head down while batting so i hope he can hit the spot.

Jono and Hilf must get wickets too otherwise they'll just have to wear the label of "conditions" bowlers.

I hope the players have a bit of self belief because i think this next session is the one where Australia either lose the Ashes or square the series.

a dry one from me, but that was
stoph verismo
down the wicket


  1. Australia don't deserve this partnership from Hilf & Jono. The constant failure of our top order has been masked somewhat even in the test we won but is still glaring.

    If England can bat the test out, they will. I predict a good bowling performance from Jono as well. He loves bowling after making runs.

    Let's hope for some good beer this afternoon.

  2. they don't deserve it, and i've said, if we get thrashed it can only mean some change...you'd hope.

    3x6 in 3 balls has pumped it up a bit.

    Jono just out for 53...good knock.

  3. England off to a flyer.

    Come on Hey Diddle Diddle

  4. The Test is in a very interesting position now.

    2 0r 3 quick wickets this morning and we are game on.

    Beer's no-ball was a bit heartbreaking, but a spinner should never bowl a front foot no-ball! hopefully it will inspire him though because Cook would have been a fine first scalp.

    Also, i was mostly impressed with his flight and length, he certainly landed it around where it needs to be to have the batsman wondering which way to go... time will tell.

  5. Well, we got two quickish wickets. But I am afraid a drawn series is slipping away from us.

    We don't deserve it anyway.

    3-1 is a more suitable result given the dominance of England.

  6. England are just too good. A lead of 300 doesn't seem out of the question.

    It's a pity for Cook this series. How many runs would he have made if we actually made them bat twice in each test?

  7. Bell and Cook are taking the game away from Aus now with the bowling looking fairly impotent. We're bowling better than in Melbourne but when Watson is outshining the others you know we're in trouble. Credit to the English batting which is so difficult to penetrate. Beer has looked decent and you can see the difference between Clarke and him; Beer gets some loop and drift!

    Border said on a cricket show on fox that in 1986/87 'they' drew a line in the sand saying 'that's it, we're not going through this shit again' and that this is what the current group need to do. Unfortunately the context is very different but perhaps the same rule applies. Hussey, Haddin and Clarke need to step up and find some bloody cajones quick or Aus cricket is going to slide even worse. Geelong had a player evaluation with very frank and honest appraisals within the playing group. The cricketers could do well to do the same thing and not shy away from brutal honesty of Johnson's waywardness, Hughes', Clarkes' and Smith's shot selection and so on.

    I finally see what people mean about characters of the game. There are no Borders, Waughs, Boons or Marshes in this side. That determination and sacrifice is absent with impatience and petulance in their place. Look at how England won this series. They were disciplined and stuck to their plans. This wasn't good enough in Perth but everywhere else it's worked perfectly. Bowlers have stuck to a line and length and just nagged away giving few easy runs while their batsmen have been patient and dug in when required and rarely missed scoring opportunities (which admittedly have been frequent). Their top 4 have scored heavily while ours have failed miserably. Their pace attack has ripped through our batting while our bowlers have just toiled hard for little reward.

    Give Hussey the captaincy, ask him to play 2 more years, get Ponting to retire from test cricket as his time is up as both captain and player, stick with Khawaja no matter what, give the young pacers around the country their chance and drop Clarke til he finds form. After showing some guts in leaving out Hauritz and dropping North selectors would be remiss not to apply the same principles to the rest of the team.

  8. Cook has at least got opportunities; how about poor old Bell! This is really one of only 2 chances he's had to spend hours at the crease without the tail.

  9. I don't care what anyone says. If you nick it and you know it and the umpire gives it YOU WALK! You don't go upstairs just in case the technology has made an error. It's not what it is for. Bell CHEAT!

  10. I saw a replay of Bell's expression after calling for the review which indicated he didn't think he'd hit it. If I'm wrong though it is an abuse of the system and only justifies what many people feel in that it should only be called for and used by umpires alone. If he hit it, knew he did, was given out and then wagered that hot spot may not pick it up then this becomes a UDRS issue which the ICC need to address. Only on it's use for catches have they advised umpires on what they want to see happen so it's time for some clarity on what the UDRS is for and what it's not; as well as how it should be used. If a player can legally use the system for their own advantage - as opposed to ensuring a correct decision is made - this is not in the spirit of the game.

  11. Bell knew he nicked it, you can tell by the time it took him to refer the decision...if he didn't nick it he would have referred it immediately NOT after having a chat to Priors.
    Dar was clearly upset when signaling the reversal, shaking his head whilst doing it.
    Dar should be able to call for a referral of the referral if he knows it is out....and then if Barry, sitting on level one M23 seat A 14 isn't happy he should also be able to call for a referral.

  12. Exactly Sledgey. Batsmen who know they haven't hit it straight away call for a review almost in disgust.

    I bet the conversation with Prior was something like "Well we've got 2 referrals left and it was only a fine nick, maybe I'll get away with it"

    And Lefty I said some time ago it should only be the umpires who can call for a review so it is used for what it's meant to be used for.

    While I'm on the subject why do umpires only refer close no balls when there is a wicket? If it's close and they don't call it and the team loses by a run it's just as important.

  13. Yep, sounds like Bell had to think about whether he hit it or not - not something you need to on edges generally. Pretty disappointing but highlights a major problem with the UDRS system that allows players to abuse it legally.

    Re no balls in essence Nos you're right and I don't see why the 3rd umpire can't point out a no ball that's missed when it happens since they're watching every ball anyway.

    The reason I don't want only umpires using the system is the risk fewer and fewer decisions are made on the field. To be clear I don't want any system at all; I was perfectly happy with the organic nature of sport and its unpredictability to play out. But when you allow players to call for a referral you will always have the situation where they use it in the way Bell did. Unfortunately I think therefore the ICC has no chance but to take it away from players and leave it to umpires. Mark my words though, this will not be a good thing either. Expect more and more delays where even plum LBWs are referred upstairs because they can be. What about basic dismissals like clear nicks and bowled - will umpires check if the ball was legal? May as well get rid of onfield umpires altogether and use tennis-like sensors under the crease to detect noballs and then you only need to let players know when it's 'over'.

  14. What an embarrassment this morning is to the Aussies. How often has our attack been made to look pedestrian?

    I hope they make 700+

  15. Really there's not a single department that Aus can reflect positively on. Certain individual performances have been excellent but the top and middle order has largely failed, spin and pace has not been good - that's it. I guess Haddin has done well behind the stumps......

  16. Yeah, i've got nothing too.
    You guys have done a good job here though. I missed the Bell replay, but have an opinion on the Botham comment regarding Hughes "catch".

    Botham says you 'know' when it has bounced, and some pople at my work say you can even hear it.
    Well 2nd point first- it is completely different in the middle of a well populated capital city oval during a test than Hampton #3 oval- a lot more noise.

    Botham is more entitled to an opinion given he has played in that situation, but i know of times i thought it had bounced and i'd just fielded it - pure reflexes sticking my hand down low without really seeing it, just the direction off the bat- and it was given out and even the batsman knew it and didn't dirty up. and other time when i was more sure i took it clean.

    My point is, if you are diving to the side you have a better idea if it was taken on the half volley; but directly above the ball it is much harder.

    Botham is only trying to increase his media exposure with remarks like "cheat!"


  17. Hughes even said at the time he wasn't sure! It's not like he claimed it wholeheartedly when he knew it had been grassed. I haven't taken a half volley yet that I didn't know had bounced but this point is fairly subjective. Hughes didn't 'cheat' at all and Botham should just stick to remembering 1981 and be done with it.