In my media release for downthewicket at the Boxing Day test i mentioned how one of the things i was most enthusiastic about now with the blog and going to the game was gauging first-hand peoples thoughts about issues within the Australian side and the match.
It took very little effort to extract conversation about three main topics:
Firstly- and unsurprisingly- Matt Hayden. Only one person i spoke to (out of dozens!) thought Hayden should now retain his place. The general consensus was that he is obviously finished if he can't "knock himself into form" on the G.
A few people said that they would change that opinion if he got over 50 in the second knock (admitting it would have to be the start of a form turn-around with no early failures!), and still more added a ton would see Hayden safe for a while longer in their eyes. Going out for 8 caught -no questions asked- attempting a loose drive just so wasn't the best career choice Matt!
Next port of call M.Hussey. The Mr Consistent of the last few years is truly showing consistency now with ANOTHER (!) duck. Most people just scratched their heads (or shook them) when he went out so indecisively. How do you drop someone with a 60 average? How do you keep them in the side when they are playing so poorly? Who'd want to be a selector? Me! Isn't that what downthewicket is also about?
And thirdly D.Steyn. Early on we (other patrons i spoke with- all Aussies admittedly) all thought "I don't see what the fuss is about!"
Well an innings card of 5/87 off 29 o, 6 m has -for now- answered that. He looked like he was engaged in his task without acting like a hot-headed fire-brand.
Worthy of mention too is the concern held for Brett Lee's ability to break through at the moment.
This topic was harder to gauge due to support of Lee clearly well divided. Some spoke of never being fans; others were and thought he should retain his place for the season regardless of wickets taken given he still bowls good containing spells; and others said they like him, but he needs to get his life/head and bowling sorted out from the sidelines for a while.
Results: inconclusive!
My overall findings for the day: People that love their cricket think about it analytically and logically. There is little "following with my heart... not my head", and the general attitude is one of concern with being informed before shooting the mouth off. Unless you are writing a cricket blog!
stoph verismo
downthewicket
Sunday, 28 December 2008
Saturday, 27 December 2008
People, Police, Ponting
Much can be said about the play on the day; I want to make a few other observations and comments.
Firstly, while there have been many comments about the size of of the crowd made in the media, to me it was irrelevant, as those there were in fine voice and the atmosphere was terrific.
And even though it was warm, there didn't appear to be to be too many trouble makers although police reports are that there were 109 evictions and 14 arrests- it didn't feel like the yobbos had taken over.
Whilst on the subject of the police, I'd like to congratulate the Victoria Police for the wonderfully approachable and friendly demeanour of the officers i encountered. They showed a very fair and even-handed approach to a few "issues" i witnessed.
To the two officers i spoke to outside the Richmond social club room entrance, thanks again for the conversation and down to earth way they dealt with our group... it was greatly appreciated and we had fantastic day; i hope the two of you did also.
More to come as the test goes on!
ps. Congrats Ricky Ponting for a fine knock.
stoph verismo
downthewicket
Firstly, while there have been many comments about the size of of the crowd made in the media, to me it was irrelevant, as those there were in fine voice and the atmosphere was terrific.
And even though it was warm, there didn't appear to be to be too many trouble makers although police reports are that there were 109 evictions and 14 arrests- it didn't feel like the yobbos had taken over.
Whilst on the subject of the police, I'd like to congratulate the Victoria Police for the wonderfully approachable and friendly demeanour of the officers i encountered. They showed a very fair and even-handed approach to a few "issues" i witnessed.
To the two officers i spoke to outside the Richmond social club room entrance, thanks again for the conversation and down to earth way they dealt with our group... it was greatly appreciated and we had fantastic day; i hope the two of you did also.
More to come as the test goes on!
ps. Congrats Ricky Ponting for a fine knock.
stoph verismo
downthewicket
Thursday, 25 December 2008
BOXING DAY, hip, hip HOORAY!
IT IS NEARLY HERE!
THE TIME WE WAIT 364 DAYS A YEAR FOR!
BOXING DAY TEST!
I wish there were more people clicking on here to feel my excitement about boxing day, not through lack of trying on my behalf!
I have written in sooooo many other blogs, forums and press releases to try and drum up more interest in the angle we have taken here... but alas, to little avail.
On this, the lead up to MY favourite day of the year, can i just say thank you to you that have become involved in this blog. I value EVERY contribution- i hope that is evident by the fact i try and respond to every point made in your postings- that you all have made here, i hope you had a safe and bla bla pagen/christian/whatever/family day today... i did! But t kids made that happen, not me!
To Gab and Ponsford, thanks for your friends-ship and support as i got this under way, Ponsford, a special thanks for contributing your own postings (that is by way of an invite to the rest of you if you are keen to write a piece- try my contacts for details and i'll hook you in- i openly encourage other opinion).
Leftriteout, you are so broughtritein as far as i'm concerned; as a croweater you are amazingly able to produce thoughtful and factual contributions to the forum that despite your anti-Vic slant (I know that deep down in your grotty little heart-of-hearts you know S.K.Warne should of had a LONG career as Aus cap), are valuable, welcomed and enjoyed!i hope we can continue to stimulate you and elicit the same quality responses as you have so far produced.
NL, it is so good to have you on board. You have already contributed heaps and shown a real incite and thoughtfulness towards what we are trying to achieve from this. Thanks so much for straight-away adding really thought-out posts that truly add value to the discussion and exhibit a deep understanding for this game that I think is the greatest.
So now for the business: Boxing Day test.
Well the big issue that is now no longer an issue is the weather: it is going to be perrrrfect!
so that now the uncontrollable is settled, the side:
I claimed (and support) that the inclusion of Hauritz in the NZ 2nd test was an act against further development. while i enjoyed Hauritz performance and believe he bowled well enough, it still went against my "blood the youth" policy. the fact he has been held in contention for this test is astounding!i don't dislike the bloke, but...
every man and his dog in the know has said it is a waste of a player running with a tweaker! as I'm sure you know, those every man etc are the curator, and everyone that has watched a Vic game this year!
And according to my info at this time of night Siddle is still in! What do you have to do to get dropped!
As i've said, if Hayden doesn't...
Hussey better....
Lee...
Ponting, don't get me started! Captain like you are making the plays, not reacting to the lack of performance from your bowlers! And get some runs before i start a petition!
stoph verismo
downthewicket
ps.
downthewicket will have some low rez shots of the day... for you Luke and Gab (ya soft co...)
iI we lose this test, there are some favourite moustaches at CA i want to lay a fist into.
top blokes maybe, but as selectors!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THE TIME WE WAIT 364 DAYS A YEAR FOR!
BOXING DAY TEST!
I wish there were more people clicking on here to feel my excitement about boxing day, not through lack of trying on my behalf!
I have written in sooooo many other blogs, forums and press releases to try and drum up more interest in the angle we have taken here... but alas, to little avail.
On this, the lead up to MY favourite day of the year, can i just say thank you to you that have become involved in this blog. I value EVERY contribution- i hope that is evident by the fact i try and respond to every point made in your postings- that you all have made here, i hope you had a safe and bla bla pagen/christian/whatever/family day today... i did! But t kids made that happen, not me!
To Gab and Ponsford, thanks for your friends-ship and support as i got this under way, Ponsford, a special thanks for contributing your own postings (that is by way of an invite to the rest of you if you are keen to write a piece- try my contacts for details and i'll hook you in- i openly encourage other opinion).
Leftriteout, you are so broughtritein as far as i'm concerned; as a croweater you are amazingly able to produce thoughtful and factual contributions to the forum that despite your anti-Vic slant (I know that deep down in your grotty little heart-of-hearts you know S.K.Warne should of had a LONG career as Aus cap), are valuable, welcomed and enjoyed!i hope we can continue to stimulate you and elicit the same quality responses as you have so far produced.
NL, it is so good to have you on board. You have already contributed heaps and shown a real incite and thoughtfulness towards what we are trying to achieve from this. Thanks so much for straight-away adding really thought-out posts that truly add value to the discussion and exhibit a deep understanding for this game that I think is the greatest.
So now for the business: Boxing Day test.
Well the big issue that is now no longer an issue is the weather: it is going to be perrrrfect!
so that now the uncontrollable is settled, the side:
I claimed (and support) that the inclusion of Hauritz in the NZ 2nd test was an act against further development. while i enjoyed Hauritz performance and believe he bowled well enough, it still went against my "blood the youth" policy. the fact he has been held in contention for this test is astounding!i don't dislike the bloke, but...
every man and his dog in the know has said it is a waste of a player running with a tweaker! as I'm sure you know, those every man etc are the curator, and everyone that has watched a Vic game this year!
And according to my info at this time of night Siddle is still in! What do you have to do to get dropped!
As i've said, if Hayden doesn't...
Hussey better....
Lee...
Ponting, don't get me started! Captain like you are making the plays, not reacting to the lack of performance from your bowlers! And get some runs before i start a petition!
stoph verismo
downthewicket
ps.
downthewicket will have some low rez shots of the day... for you Luke and Gab (ya soft co...)
iI we lose this test, there are some favourite moustaches at CA i want to lay a fist into.
top blokes maybe, but as selectors!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tuesday, 23 December 2008
Hilditch handball!
Firstly I'd like to start with an apology to our readers for not posting in a few days; given how entertaining the 1st test against South Africa was- with quality cricket and few controversies- it is no wonder i was AWOL! Secondly, congratulations to South Africa for a wonderful win of an intriguing test.
With the NZ minnow bashing series well and truly a thing of the past- and the opportunity to try out new player and combinations at this time also lost- Australia have to deal with their imminent dethroning from the coveted top-side position. More importantly, Ricky Ponting and the chairman of selectors Andrew Hilditch are scrambling for a bowling combination that can bowl out a quality batting line up twice in a test.
Now two summers after their retirement, it has become boring that the media add to this problem with the repetition of remarks about Australia missing the legendary Warne/McGrath combination. These comments are self evident and do nothing to address the fact we have not really had a policy of re-building -as is stated time and again- but as I've said in previous posts, it has purely been a program of filling in the gaps and hoping that players not performing will lift.
Obviously it is impractical and ridiculous to just scrap the current line up and replace the entire team with new players; a core of performing experienced players is needed to carry on the traditions and pass on their experience to the new players. With that said, it doesn't take an expert to see who needs to have their position assessed. So who do i think is secure? Simon Katich is clearly solid as an opener. Brad Haddin has answered my concerns about settling into the side. Mitch Johnson is having a blinder of a year. Surely Andrew Symonds has answered his critics. Michael Clarke has performed well and is showing good leadership on the field and with his media statements. That's it... I'm finished!
I'm the first to admit that R.Ponting, M.Hussey, M.Hayden and B.Lee are champion players that have served their country well... but they also must be answerable when their form is off.
Firstly, why do we have an attitude now that once a player becomes test captain, they have that position until they retire? While it would be a massive concession to make, why can't Ponting step down (or be nudged!) from the stresses of captaincy for a test or two to concentrate on his batting? For the first few years of Pontings leadership he bucked a trend for batting captains to have their average suffer. But now with good knocks the exception not the norm i think he needs to step back and correct his form problems; Clarke is more than capable of holding the reins.
Lee is obviously in a slump; even though he bowled a great spell late on day 4 against SA. He needs a spell for the Blues to correct a few things like his front foot/run-up.
Huss is a bit of a mystery. He looks "heavy" at the crease and appears to be lacking his amazing shot selection and confidence. Haddos, for all of his wonderful service to the team is now past his used by date, and while luck goes against you when you are down, it is time -unfortunately- to go even though he won't be going out on top.
Who then is accountable for these problems? Typically Hilditch has claimed the onus is on the senior players to lift their game and has held them culpable for the SA loss. This is clearly dodging his own responsibility as a selector. Is it too much work for the selectors to actually select players? When players aren't performing, the selectors must take the time to personally warn the player and ensure that failure to achieve will result in new players filling their position!
For so many years now we have had MANY very talented cricketers unable to get into the national side due to every position well and truly secured by a top play... why aren't they getting their turns now? M.Klinger has over 900 runs for the season... and it isn't even the new year yet!
The announcement that B.Hilfenhaus is likely to get a cap for the Boxing Day test is a welcome change of selector form; but i can't help think that CA are scrambling to save the series instead of securing the future.
stoph verismo
downthewicket
With the NZ minnow bashing series well and truly a thing of the past- and the opportunity to try out new player and combinations at this time also lost- Australia have to deal with their imminent dethroning from the coveted top-side position. More importantly, Ricky Ponting and the chairman of selectors Andrew Hilditch are scrambling for a bowling combination that can bowl out a quality batting line up twice in a test.
Now two summers after their retirement, it has become boring that the media add to this problem with the repetition of remarks about Australia missing the legendary Warne/McGrath combination. These comments are self evident and do nothing to address the fact we have not really had a policy of re-building -as is stated time and again- but as I've said in previous posts, it has purely been a program of filling in the gaps and hoping that players not performing will lift.
Obviously it is impractical and ridiculous to just scrap the current line up and replace the entire team with new players; a core of performing experienced players is needed to carry on the traditions and pass on their experience to the new players. With that said, it doesn't take an expert to see who needs to have their position assessed. So who do i think is secure? Simon Katich is clearly solid as an opener. Brad Haddin has answered my concerns about settling into the side. Mitch Johnson is having a blinder of a year. Surely Andrew Symonds has answered his critics. Michael Clarke has performed well and is showing good leadership on the field and with his media statements. That's it... I'm finished!
I'm the first to admit that R.Ponting, M.Hussey, M.Hayden and B.Lee are champion players that have served their country well... but they also must be answerable when their form is off.
Firstly, why do we have an attitude now that once a player becomes test captain, they have that position until they retire? While it would be a massive concession to make, why can't Ponting step down (or be nudged!) from the stresses of captaincy for a test or two to concentrate on his batting? For the first few years of Pontings leadership he bucked a trend for batting captains to have their average suffer. But now with good knocks the exception not the norm i think he needs to step back and correct his form problems; Clarke is more than capable of holding the reins.
Lee is obviously in a slump; even though he bowled a great spell late on day 4 against SA. He needs a spell for the Blues to correct a few things like his front foot/run-up.
Huss is a bit of a mystery. He looks "heavy" at the crease and appears to be lacking his amazing shot selection and confidence. Haddos, for all of his wonderful service to the team is now past his used by date, and while luck goes against you when you are down, it is time -unfortunately- to go even though he won't be going out on top.
Who then is accountable for these problems? Typically Hilditch has claimed the onus is on the senior players to lift their game and has held them culpable for the SA loss. This is clearly dodging his own responsibility as a selector. Is it too much work for the selectors to actually select players? When players aren't performing, the selectors must take the time to personally warn the player and ensure that failure to achieve will result in new players filling their position!
For so many years now we have had MANY very talented cricketers unable to get into the national side due to every position well and truly secured by a top play... why aren't they getting their turns now? M.Klinger has over 900 runs for the season... and it isn't even the new year yet!
The announcement that B.Hilfenhaus is likely to get a cap for the Boxing Day test is a welcome change of selector form; but i can't help think that CA are scrambling to save the series instead of securing the future.
stoph verismo
downthewicket
Wednesday, 17 December 2008
Who's day was it?
It's a funny game cricket.
At 3/15 who would have thunk the aussies would have finished the day at 9/341?
If you were told before the start of play that that would be the score would you have been satisfied that that was a good score?
Is it a good score anyway?
Always hard to tell after a team has batted on a first day pitch (was it a first day pitch....or a third?? maybe the title of another post...)
Ntini bowled exceptionally well, this guy has been around so long it is hard to believe he is only 31! He bowled in perfect areas never distracted or affected by the state of play...he had a job and stuck to it, for mine the player of the day.
Steyn bowled quick, but what does 5 or 6 k's quicker than everyone else mean on a pitch like this? The Aussies have yet to experience him at his best and they wont at the WACA.
Hayden got out to a ball that I would have left (that says alot) Ponting got a peach but he did go a bit hard at it, same with Hussey. Symonds played as he does and didn't show enough respect to the ball that got him. and Clarke had a brain fade...
After so many failures the Aussies have managed to make nearly 350 in a day. Good cricket by anyones standards, but the proof will be in the pudding that can only be tasted once the South Africans have batted once.
To be continued.
At 3/15 who would have thunk the aussies would have finished the day at 9/341?
If you were told before the start of play that that would be the score would you have been satisfied that that was a good score?
Is it a good score anyway?
Always hard to tell after a team has batted on a first day pitch (was it a first day pitch....or a third?? maybe the title of another post...)
Ntini bowled exceptionally well, this guy has been around so long it is hard to believe he is only 31! He bowled in perfect areas never distracted or affected by the state of play...he had a job and stuck to it, for mine the player of the day.
Steyn bowled quick, but what does 5 or 6 k's quicker than everyone else mean on a pitch like this? The Aussies have yet to experience him at his best and they wont at the WACA.
Hayden got out to a ball that I would have left (that says alot) Ponting got a peach but he did go a bit hard at it, same with Hussey. Symonds played as he does and didn't show enough respect to the ball that got him. and Clarke had a brain fade...
After so many failures the Aussies have managed to make nearly 350 in a day. Good cricket by anyones standards, but the proof will be in the pudding that can only be tasted once the South Africans have batted once.
To be continued.
Tuesday, 16 December 2008
It's elementary dear Watson
How many chances does Andrew Symonds get, or warrant?
After not setting the world on fire playing for Queensland he was brought straight back into the bosom of the 1st 11. The reason given? He was in good form last time he played for Australia...
Never mind that he was averaging in the mid teens with the bat and had only taken 1 wicket in several games.
His batting in the 2 tests against New Zulland were no improvement, neither was his bowling.
Bottom line: He took a couple of nice catches, thats about it.
What was Watson doing during this time?
Other than gnashing his teeth and trying to grow dredlocks?
Most recently he was quietly taking 7/69 against a South Australian side including Younis Khan, (match figures 8/120) and scoring 81 in the 2nd innings.
Nuff said.
It may seem that I am "Symonds bashing" again but I do love to see him play... and reckon that he is one of the top 2 or 3 all-rounders in the world when he is in top form.
Rather, if anything, I am "CA bashing" why?
The Australian side would be a better, more polished, in form, resourceful side with Shane Watson as the All Rounder.
Ponsford.
After not setting the world on fire playing for Queensland he was brought straight back into the bosom of the 1st 11. The reason given? He was in good form last time he played for Australia...
Never mind that he was averaging in the mid teens with the bat and had only taken 1 wicket in several games.
His batting in the 2 tests against New Zulland were no improvement, neither was his bowling.
Bottom line: He took a couple of nice catches, thats about it.
What was Watson doing during this time?
Other than gnashing his teeth and trying to grow dredlocks?
Most recently he was quietly taking 7/69 against a South Australian side including Younis Khan, (match figures 8/120) and scoring 81 in the 2nd innings.
Nuff said.
It may seem that I am "Symonds bashing" again but I do love to see him play... and reckon that he is one of the top 2 or 3 all-rounders in the world when he is in top form.
Rather, if anything, I am "CA bashing" why?
The Australian side would be a better, more polished, in form, resourceful side with Shane Watson as the All Rounder.
Ponsford.
Sunday, 14 December 2008
Pay to Stay and Play
More money for Australian contracted players; plus less commitments. Is the national side getting a bit full of themselves, or are they worth it? What do you think?
Let's look at the pros and cons:
1) The 11 players on the field represent our entire country; so therefore they are our elite. This should entitle them to remuneration that acknowledges them as such.
1a) Many players that pursue cricket show enough talent in other sports to put them in a position of having to choose ultimately which sport will serve them best, (or which one they have the most skill at).
2) Money is now flooding into the game via India, if CA are not prepared to ensure a player can effectively secure his financial future, why wouldn't players choose a career playing hit and giggle for the duration of their playing career?
3) With tour and sponsorship commitments (22 appearances a year- no more than 4 in any given month) on top of away time -up to 10 months a year, players need to capitalise on their money earning years to partially negate the lost time with families.
4) Players already earn incredible sums of money, (M.Clarke was 7 figures last year!). If you are in the national side, and are getting $5100-$12750 (plus OS loadings) in match fees, or nearly $700 a run, be grateful you represent your country and are raking it in... other representative sports-people pay their own way!
5) Cricketers are housed, fed, transported and catered for medically as soon as they are in the national side... no additional expenses.
6) On top of their CA money, cricketers receive huge amounts from sponsorships and endorsements- how dare they request less time doing such work.
I for one think that if they can get more from CA, why not! For top ranked players the draw of a few seasons of T20 in India must always be in the back of their minds; if you could earn a yearly income with only three months away, why wouldn't you? The privaledge of having played for your country won't pay the bills when you are too old to earn money from cricket!
stoph verismo
downthewicket
Let's look at the pros and cons:
1) The 11 players on the field represent our entire country; so therefore they are our elite. This should entitle them to remuneration that acknowledges them as such.
1a) Many players that pursue cricket show enough talent in other sports to put them in a position of having to choose ultimately which sport will serve them best, (or which one they have the most skill at).
2) Money is now flooding into the game via India, if CA are not prepared to ensure a player can effectively secure his financial future, why wouldn't players choose a career playing hit and giggle for the duration of their playing career?
3) With tour and sponsorship commitments (22 appearances a year- no more than 4 in any given month) on top of away time -up to 10 months a year, players need to capitalise on their money earning years to partially negate the lost time with families.
4) Players already earn incredible sums of money, (M.Clarke was 7 figures last year!). If you are in the national side, and are getting $5100-$12750 (plus OS loadings) in match fees, or nearly $700 a run, be grateful you represent your country and are raking it in... other representative sports-people pay their own way!
5) Cricketers are housed, fed, transported and catered for medically as soon as they are in the national side... no additional expenses.
6) On top of their CA money, cricketers receive huge amounts from sponsorships and endorsements- how dare they request less time doing such work.
I for one think that if they can get more from CA, why not! For top ranked players the draw of a few seasons of T20 in India must always be in the back of their minds; if you could earn a yearly income with only three months away, why wouldn't you? The privaledge of having played for your country won't pay the bills when you are too old to earn money from cricket!
stoph verismo
downthewicket
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)