Tuesday, 9 December 2008

S.I.P cont

Self Indulgent Piffle

Well, on the first morning of the second test I thought it would be the perfect time to not talk about it (This is going to be a bigger defeat for the Kiwis than Brissie, I reckon), yawn, bring on the Saffers!
So Instead I am going to name my best Aussie team of all time, lets get stuck in.
1. B. Ponsford: He picks himself really, Bill O'Rielly reckoned he had more chance of getting Bradman out than him. He once had four consecutive scores of 437, 202, 38 and 336.
2. D. Boon: Tough, Stoic, Tasmanian with an ability to down drinks on planes that is unsurpassed.
3. Neil Harvey: Averaged just under 50 during 80 tests (ave:83 against South Africa).
4. D. Jones: Mercurial, magical batsman cut down by the stiffs in the ACB for having a personality, would have attained Demi-God status had he been allowed to play his whole career.
5. Doug Walters: The Quintessential Aussie cricketer, ocker, cheeky, loved a drink and a smoke, could bat a bit too (ave 48).
6. Keith Miller: The best all rounder Australia has produced, averaged 36 with the bat and 22 with the ball. Was a pilot with the RAAF during ww2.
7. Ian Healy: With a batting line up like the one above you don't need a batting keeper, just the best keeper. Having said that he scored 4 test centuries and 22 50's.
8. S.K.Warne (Capt.): Enough has been said about his bowling. He should have captained his country but wasn't from NSW.
9. G.McGrath: Picks himself in any team, there has never been a better Line & Length bowler in history in my opinion.
10. D.K : Didn't even need to add his surname, that's why he is in the side.
11. Thommo: Fastest bowler ever. Once stated on live TV before a test against old Blighty: "I enjoy hitting a batsman more than getting him out. I like to see blood on the pitch".
12. D.Bradman: As a teetotaller would be in no danger of drinking the refreshments of his team mates.

Well I have shown you mine how about you show me yours?

Ponsford.

Saturday, 6 December 2008

Pontings points perspective

What an interesting perspective Ricky Ponting has on world test rankings.

He believes,

"It has taken us a long time and a lot of great wins in different conditions around the world to get us to that No. 1 spot," Ponting told AAP. "If South Africa beat us 3-0 I don't know if that gives them enough points to get over us.

"But if they won the series 1-0 or 2-1, I don't think that would mean that they deserve to take over that mantle. It's a bit the same with India last series. Just because they beat us, the No. 1 team, doesn't necessarily mean they go from the No. 4 or No. 5 in the world to No. 1 in the world, because it's something that's accrued over a long period of time."


If Australia lose 3-0 to South Africa, and given we have recently lost to India 2-0, how can the standings not be affected given these are the two teams below us on the rankings? I appreciate that it is based on a points/rating system, but it is hard to imagine that if Australia get seriously rolled we won't slip a place.

What bugs me about Pontings statement, is that he says that because the lead was created over time, he can't see a team getting enough points to get over Australia from 4th or 5th position. Well Ricky, you might want to check your facts before making such announcements; Sth Africa are 2nd on the ICC rankings! http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/rankings/content/current/page/211271.html

Australia 34 4409 130
South Africa 37 4331 117
India 40 4659 116


Of course all of this could be mind games from Punter, which is good and well apart from getting the facts wrong; but does he think that Sth Africa are playing with the sole intention of ICC rankings, or just to finally beat Australia in a series since returning to world cricket? The tours here in the past have been pretty hard affairs for the Proteas, with Smith, Ntini and Steyn in the top ten of the rankings tables, they must be rating their chances!

stoph verismo
downthewicket

Thursday, 4 December 2008

Does the ICC like Bangas (or mash)

"How do you solve a problem like Bangladesh?"
sung to the tune of "How do you solve a problem like Maria" from The sound of music.


What can the ICC do to get some genuine competition from Bangladesh. A test nation since 2000, the scorecard for this country of over 150 million people is rather bleak!

It is rather easy for people to cry out and say that Bangladesh should have their test status denied through lack of results- probably many were the same that said Sri Lanka shouldn't have got their status in 1981... look how competitive they have become! So with that thought in mind, why are people so quick to right off a Bangladeshi test side becoming successful?

Given the desperately impoverished state of the majority of the population, surly the onus for serious cricket development goes back to the ICC? The Global Cricket Academy is a good start as long as it offers world class training without world class costs incurred to people attending.
http://icc-cricket.yahoo.com/development/global-cricket-academy.html

Then there is the ICC development plan and High Performance Program ( http://icc-cricket.yahoo.com/development/development.html ) both honourable objectives with long term outcomes. But the problem for Bangladesh is the lack of results NOW!
In the tradition of Sri Lanka, they have got an ex-first class cricketer from Australia as coach [Jamie Siddons] but for a team with only one win in forty seven tests, something more needs to be done.

It is great that the ICC has a swag of countries interested in more serious membership (104 Member countries including 10 Full, 34 Associate and 60 Affiliate Members), but let's not forget those that are holding up the bottom end of the test ladder, instead of just mashing more sides into the fray. If real dedication to advancement was applied by the ICC for Bangladesh, 150 million people would serve as a bloody deep pool of player talent!

Saturday, 29 November 2008

as per... day one, NZ

i won't lie to you... i loved the rapid fire nature of the GABBA test. until day 3 there were heaps of wickets and no way of really predicting the result.
But to be fair, i love the grind of an Adelaide test more- especially since the wonderful win in the 05/06 Ashes-(thanks again Shane for being the greatest cricketer of the modern age).

With the most batsman friendly pitch in the land- but not 'over-cooked' like many a foreign pitch- Adelaide offers the chance at real cricket competition, and more importantly- a result!
And so, once again, captain 'snake-eyes' has lost the toss- 5 in a row- and watched the opposition have the first go at an absolute belter. But that's ok.. as a steady head for the environment has prevailed- without spoiling the enjoyment with a guaranteed result. Getting off to a fine start, NZ had given away their lot straight after lunch until steadying for a slow, yet respectable
total
6/262... slow, but that is ok at Adelaide.. when we all want to see a test match.


A few good innings: Redman: 83 of 125 s/r 66.4
Taylor 44 of 88 s/r 50

but on a wicket for batting, a good spread across the bowling styles of :
Lee, Clarke and of course, the wonder kind/newby, M.Johnson, N.Hauritz has given away how wickets will fall: a bowler just needs confidence, and support, when being belted around

stoph verismo
downthewicket








Friday, 28 November 2008

CA, tell 'em they're dreaming

"His form so far this season, even if his first-class stats don't look that flash, his actual form and the way he has been bowling has impressed our selectors who have been to see him," Ponting said of Hauritz.

What on earth does that mean?

Does that mean he is landing them on the spot, turning the ball etc?

It would also imply that he is not deceiving the batsmen, who are still scoring runs from a bowler that would have been lucky to play as 12th man for NSW in their upcoming match.

I'll reiterate my previous statement: Given we are one match up in this "series" with New Zealand, why haven't CA given an un-capped rookie (even if we have to delve down into grade cricket) a chance at some international experience.

I hope Hauritz does have a great game, getting a bag of wickets and just maybe putting himself into contention for a regular spot within the side for the rest of his playing career... but it is unlikely given his form.

When is CA really going to start a proper rebuild of the side from the ground up?


If you too think CA need to re-evaluate their selection process- here is their contact link.


http://www.cricket.com.au/Default.aspx?s=contact-us



stoph verismo
downthewicket

Self Indulgent Piffle

Well, on the first morning of the second test I thought it would be the perfect time to not talk about it (This is going to be a bigger defeat for the Kiwis than Brissie, I reckon), yawn, bring on the Saffers!
So Instead I am going to name my best Aussie team of all time, lets get stuck in.
1. B. Ponsford: He picks himself really, Bill O'Rielly reckoned he had more chance of getting Bradman out than him. He once had four consecutive scores of 437, 202, 38 and 336.
2. D. Boon: Tough, Stoic, Tasmanian with an ability to down drinks on planes that is unsurpassed.
3. Neil Harvey: Averaged just under 50 during 80 tests (ave:83 against South Africa).
4. D. Jones: Mercurial, magical batsman cut down by the stiffs in the ACB for having a personality, would have attained Demi-God status had he been allowed to play his whole career.
5. Doug Walters: The Quintessential Aussie cricketer, ocker, cheeky, loved a drink and a smoke, could bat a bit too (ave 48).
6. Keith Miller: The best all rounder Australia has produced, averaged 36 with the bat and 22 with the ball. Was a pilot with the RAAF during ww2.
7. Ian Healy: With a batting line up like the one above you don't need a batting keeper, just the best keeper. Having said that he scored 4 test centuries and 22 50's.
8. S.K.Warne (Capt.): Enough has been said about his bowling. He should have captained his country but wasn't from NSW.
9. G.McGrath: Picks himself in any team, there has never been a better Line & Length bowler in history in my opinion.
10. D.K : Didn't even need to add his surname, that's why he is in the side.
11. Thommo: Fastest bowler ever. Once stated on live TV before a test against old Blighty: "I enjoy hitting a batsman more than getting him out. I like to see blood on the pitch".
12. D.Bradman: As a teetotaller would be in no danger of drinking the refreshments of his team mates.

Well I have shown you mine how about you show me yours?

Ponsford.

Thursday, 27 November 2008

Hauricane pick a fizzer

WATCH OUT!

Cricket Australia have feet flailing... in every direction!

Jason Krejza's injury has caused a typical CA knee jerk reaction with the call up of Nathan Hauritz.

What? You say. Hauritz! Didn't he get a run a few years ago in Mumbai on a turning pitch and get out bowled by part timer M.Clarke, you say?

Yep!, And at the moment he has 6 wickets for 40.67 in the Sheffield shield.
So why has he been called up? Only because he has International experience.

CA is clearly running with their stop-gap policy for fear of condemnation if an inexperienced player fails to perform- even though Hauritz must be considered inexperienced with only one test and eight ODI's. But Australia are playing New Zealand and are one test up, why not blood a new player?
If there isn't another spinner available in the First class competition, why not dig out a 19 year old from grade cricket? Give him a run. He may be carted (most likely in Adelaide), but he may step up and prove to be another champ that just needed the pressure put on to extract his best, what do we have to lose?

Instead, CA just fall back on someone that had a chance - sure Hauritz is on 27 and only got one go at test level, but where is the foresight in picking someone that now at best can only give seven or eight years service?

If we are are "rebuilding" our national side, why a retrograde call-up?

Wednesday, 26 November 2008

CA believes what Symonds says

And there it is...Roy cleared! Who would have thought it?

Now that Symonds has been cleared by the CA investigation, he has all of two days to put this incident behind him and get his frame of mind right for the Adelaide test. Given that the publican was so prompt in coming to Symonds defence, why did it take CA this long to put the matter to rest?

It was a nice touch that Symonds apologised to his team mates for the distraction leading up to this test; I presume that the media and the public will now be clamouring to say sorry to the Australian number 6... NOT! I doubt that Roy's detractors will be slow to insist on his dropping from the side if he fails to perform up to their expectations; regardless of the fact he has been most distracted by all of this, through no fault of his own.

CA's James Sutherland had a great opportunity to (finally) show they were supporting Symonds in the announcement when he stated, "CA is totally satisfied that Andrew did not provoke that incident and when approached by the patron in question handled himself appropriately." and "his response when subsequently provoked, was restrained and mature." But Sutherland couldn't resist turning to a more patronising tone by adding that he was disappointed that Symonds put himself in a compromising position... sorry Dad!

And then, "Whilst it's clear that no harm has been done on this occasion, I thought it important to talk to Andrew and take advice from his professional counsellors, to understand why he could be quite open about having a problem with alcohol and then find himself in the spotlight by visiting a pub literally a few days later," added Sutherland condescendingly.

After the lack of support from CA towards Symonds last summer, the jury is out on whether they truly value this world class cricketer.

stoph verismo
downthewicket