Futures Tours Program; fine for some

The current Future Tours Program from the ICC ends in May 2012 and it makes for interesting analysis. Overall the amount of tests played by the major test playing nations is fairly even over the next 28 months. There are, however, glaring inconsistencies within this program.

England (26 tests; 10 away and 16 at home), Australia (25 tests; 12 away and 13 at home), India (29 tests; 17 away and 12 at home) and South Africa (24 tests; 13 away and 11 at home) should and do play similar levels of test cricket til May 2012. West Indies and New Zealand, surprisingly in this author’s view, play 29 and 24 tests respectively (WI play 11 away/18 at home, NZ play 12 away/12 at home). The biggest surprise is Sri Lanka who play only 12 tests in the next 28 months; 9 away and 3 at home. The ICC may have listened to criticism of India and Sri Lanka playing each other too frequently as they do not compete in this period (they have played a series very recently, however). Nor does Sri Lanka play Australia; instead they have the unenviable task of travelling to Pakistan (likely neutral), England and South Africa. Very tough tours indeed. Perhaps they’ll have better luck against West Indies at home.

Granted the program needs to be looked at in the context of the whole schedule; ie prior to January 2010. Considering Bangladesh and Zimbabwe both play more tests in the next 28 months (19 and 16 respectively) it beggars belief that the Sri Lanka cricket board could tolerate such an exclusion. Even Pakistan, where terrorism mars all home series, play 26 tests in the same period. Of course how many are actually on Pakistan soil (scheduled to be 13) remains to be seen. We may have seen the last of Murali, Sangakkara and Jaywardene when Australia played Sri Lanka last.

The program contains several postponements and there will be more to come. One thing will not change, however, and that is Bangladesh’s improvement. While Zimbabwe is out of favour (no fault of the test team!) world cricket needs nations to stand up and Bangladesh are doing just that. Hopefully scares like that which they gave to India recently can be turned into test wins.

For Down the Wicket fans; Australia travels to New Zealand, Pakistan (in England), Bangladesh, South Africa and West Indies while hosting England, Zimbabwe, New Zealand and India.

As always the schedule is not concrete (are Zimbabwe playing at all currently?) but hopefully some balance is brought; at least for cricket fans in Sri Lanka.

What can I say...

Standings for Australian Summer Tests 2009/2010 - Down the wicket

Rank
Team
Coach
CurrentRound
AveragePer Round
FantasyPoints
1
Weed Wackin Windies
Simon Beaumont
1,165
1,388
6,941
2
youbetchurass
Lucas Bain
895
1,338
6,691
3
Punani Flagellum
Luke Bain
1,309
1,325
6,624
4
scruntage
stoph verismo
1,062
1,320
6,598
5
The Groaner n Grunts
simon beaumont
1,014
1,298
6,489
6
shaboinkage
christo van risto
994
1,269
6,346
7
Delicious Inc
Phil Sampson
1,713
1,177
5,884
1720

In Between Red Wines

I saw little of the first day from Hobart, as I will likely see little of the remaining days but in between my wife's sips and spits at the various wineries around Victorian's Rutherglen, all the glimpses I got on the large screens prominent inside each of the cellar doors were of Ricky Ponting. By that stage of the afternoon, he was pushing those purposeful singles and slicing those cover dives and yes, even smashing those pulls and hooks.

Highlight packages and radio commentary suggested his day hadn't always been as such.

The man immortalised in a sub-editors nightmare which declared "Ponting To Keep Pulling" had done just that and again, should have been wondering on Ian Chappell's advice, early doors, in the southern most of Australia's cricket playing cities. He wasn't because Pakistan can't always play like they did on the first day in Sydney - in fact, they rarely do. When the magic happens, they can be world beaters but that's the trouble with magic, sharp eyes will always undo sleight of hand.

So pull and hook Ponting did but it was awful for an hour, with shots played and missed and a sconer all in the mix. Older he is, perhaps even jaded as his thirties wane but never forget, he is Ponting. The ICC says he's the best of the last ten years and frankly, looking at the time period, disagreement could at best be churlish and at its worst, stupid. I saw enough around tea to recognise the younger man in him and it was good. I have been his critic over other things, but never his batting. Today he passed three figures for the 39th time and I both salute him and shake my head at the figure. I had watched Greg Chappell make 24 and thought that remarkable and that master run accumulator, Allan Border make 27 mostly heroic hundreds.

Ponting is better than any of them. In fact, having watched them both, I can place only Tendulkar beyond him - two grand masters by all means and me left to make a hard decision.


At the other end, offering no false shots, no scramble, Michael Clarke was poised and frankly beautiful. I saw one pull shot from him and it was just a sweet swing of the bat to a ball that was only to pleased to speed to the boundary. No butchery like we might see from his Skipper just twenty odd metres away. Clarke really is classy. He may be the new Walters or the new Chappell but who cares - he's Clarke.

Australia too strong and Ponting looking at his Test highest tomorrow.

More wineries and skinny dipping for me.

What to do with a dead rubber

And so the Aus summer moves to sunny Hobart for the finale in what has been an incredible summer of test cricket. With so many pundits declaring the West Indies a far from formidable force (one even declaring after Brisbane they should be stripped of test status) and the unpredictability of Pakistan a 'known' quantity, this summer has produced cricket few would have expected possible. What is even more amazing is the fact that Aus have won 4 from 5 tests. How often the results do not truly indicate the state of play! A miracle turn-around (and negative tactics plus capitulation) plus a batting effort to save a test have prevented a very different scoreline for Aus. Ian Chappell made an apt observation about Aus cricket pointing out that despite world best players exiting its side, it still knows how to win when it gets a sniff. Pakistan may need to learn this with a young group with a great deal of talent; to do this they must play more test cricket. West Indies are beginning to rebuild from almost scratch. Chanderpaul will retire very soon but they have found players who can score freely and hold an end. In the bowling stocks it's important to remember they didn't have one of their strike bowlers for the whole series and lost the other after the first test.

So, what was my point? Ah yes; the dead rubber. I must admit that usually I advocate for such matches to give 'fringe' players a run and get some match practice into those who have had a lean summer. In the case of the bowlers I think all have done a job and could well deserve a rest. This is, of course, not possible and probably stupid. Johnson has bowled so many overs that I think there's a case for giving him a break. He plays all forms of the game! Bollinger is proving his worth and Siddle may need to still prove his. I get the feeling that Siddle will forever be scrutinised more than most; likely because he will have the Darren Gough syndrome whereby he doesn't get the poles next to his name to reflect his effort. On the batting front only Watson can say he has performed consistently, with Katich coming back from an injury and therefore likely to regain his place. Of course if you leave out Watson you also lose valuable overs. So, little change to the batting lineup then. The middle order has been awful at times. Hussey can hold his head up after playing a major role in giving Aus a chance to win in Sydney. North, Ponting and Clarke could do with some time in the middle.

Summation; give Johnson and Watson a break. Put in Shaun Marsh or Phil Hughes and, well, who takes Johnson's spot? While the Aus bowling lineup is quickly finding its feet as a unit I'm not so sure there are the bowlers circling the Shield comp. Geeves and Mackay have looked promising, Laughlin and Nannes perhaps? The key is how these guys step up to test cricket. I guess there's only one way to find out. Another player who has done the yards is Hauritz. Although he seems to hurt himself every time he plays he's backed it up again and again. Personally I sense that CA is keen for him to be an almost permanent fixture of the Aus 11 and will seek for him to get as many overs in the middle as possible. With the latest injury being a left finger, leave him in and bowl the proverbial out of him in Hobart.

Looking ahead Aus heads to New Zealand for two tests and of course some limited over stuff. Then we wait til next summer for the Ashes. In between of course there are various ODI and 20/20 tournaments. While Aus will remain a frequently playing test nation, it appears it cannot avoid being a victim of limited over fascination. After the second test in NZ there is only the first test against England to look forward to. For the players who make up the Aus limited over squads and test squad there is no chance of playing county cricket. They can only hope to get a run for their state before the Ashes starts. This infuriates me. Batting the middle overs of an ODI or playing 20/20 full stop does not prepare you in any real way for test cricket. Nor does bowling 4 overs with power plays. It's a vicious circle for mine as players like Ferguson, Hughes et al can play all year round but find it hard to get and cement a spot in the Aus side, while national reps can struggle for the baggy green but have few opportunities to fine-tune in longer versions of the game. I wish CA still treated 20/20 like the gimmick it is and just use guys like Warner who will never play test cricket.

We'd all be great administrators, wouldn't we!

Any other country...

Over the last 24 hours since Australia "won" the Sydney test I have entertained many conversations about how unbelievable it was and so on. Eventually the conversation has lead to match fixing. I know with any implosion the subject rears it's ugly head but when the side concerned is Pakistan, and the game was lost by grassed sitters and poor field settings it becomes a little more ugly.
I love test cricket and this game was an awesome advertisement for the validity of it but something in the back of my mind sits uneasily and I throw it over to the gentlemen on this site to give me some councelling.
Am I being silly or is there a distinct possibility that the Pakistani's might have thrown this one?
I look forward to your replies.

A Few Good Men

There's an old saying, often quoted by those who like to take short cuts to gain success - "the ends justify the means" - and I'm afraid this remarkable win in Sydney will turn around journalists and cricket followers, who will bay from the rooftops of the SCG that Ponting is King.

In doing so, they disregard a few essential truths. 1. Ponting should have bowled; 2. 127 was not enough; Australia, as a group, batted badly; 3. Fear and lack of self-belief lost this Test as much as courage and self-belief won it.

The Australia skipper said many things in victory yesterday afternoon which were consistent with the arrogance that we like to call confidence. Asking the press gallery to raise their hands if they had thought Australia would lose, for instance. When the hands went up he said "It comes down to results and we've got a great result here. So I look like a genius where I didn't a couple of days ago." Nothing like humility in victory ... nothing like it! He also claimed that his theory on batting first was he would back his side to score more in the first innings than the opposition did in their second. Do the maths Ricky, you didn't.

Underlining Ponting's remarkable first day choice was a pathetic bating performance by so many of the Australians in the four hours their first innings lasted. Pakistan earned their wickets but Hughes, Ponting, North and Haddin handed their wickets away in the first innings. Of the batsmen, Hussey stood up and then Hauritz and Johnson prevented a complete debacle.

I could rabbit on about Ponting all day as he gives you more than enough ammunition but the bottom line was his decision to bat was a bad one and victory doesn't change that bald fact. Australia didn't win because of anything Ponting did, it won because a small handful of players could find something extra, something beyond that which we expect.

Pakistan batted with great application to lead by more than enough on Day Two and the cascade of wickets late in the day was about quick runs at a time when they perceived themselves safe. It was one of cricket's delicious injustices that Peter Siddle could return 1-61 on a day of guts and great line. The ball must have glanced at the edge twenty five or thirty times as it hurried past to Haddin. He was clearly Australia's best bowler. Had Kamran Akmal been paying attention, he would have seen Haddin catch safely, despite having a sloppy day. Watson held a Dyson like beauty from Faisal Iqbal.

If we are to further our honesty, Australia climbed back into this match on Days 3 & 4 thanks to the continued great form of Shane Watson, who this correspondent has never rated but must now admit has become a fine player. This was his unluckiest near hundred, because it was made under such pressure and in the end, only a viper jumping from the pitch to bite his glove could remove him. The other man of note on Day three was the beleaguered Phil Hughes who played an innings of skill and uncharacteristic graft in his two and a half hour 37. The century opening stand removed half the deficit and restored belief. Ponting, Clarke, North and Haddin all went cheaply again and when the early tail was between Australia's legs, Day 4 dawned a gloomy one.

Then came the extraordinary but not uncommon modern tactics from Pakistan's skipper Mohammad Yousuf. For one hundred and fifty minutes of the lengthened first session, he had keeper and two slips and everyone else signing autographs on the boundary for the first four balls of each over, whenever Hussey faced, gave away a single and attacked Siddle for one or two deliveries. We might attack this tactic and we should but it's a standard for modern Test captains. We watched Ponting do the same against South Africa at this very ground last year. We saw it from both sides in England during the Ashes. It's a tactic born from one day rules which prevent it. Therefore, we shouldn't be barking insults and derogatory dismissal at Pakistan for using the tactic. Yousuf's stupidity was to continue to apply it well after it's useby date had made it rotten. It was a tactic born of a lack of self-confidence. Pakistan were frightened Australia might climb out of the hole and in being so, they passed them a ladder.

Hussey was Hussey for those two hours. Whilst "told-you-so's" were common after play, the one's with the biggest right were the Australia selectors who stuck with Mr Cricket when most had preferred to use short-sightedness as the yardstick. He milked Pakistan's lazy cow until her teats were dry and scored one of cricket's greatest centuries. At the other end, it was that bloke Siddle who batted with more front than Mae West and whether or not the numbers stacked up, this was his best Test innings. A better bat than Johnny Watkins but not as good as Bob Massie, he called on both of their SCG ghosts to maintain his composure at the centre wicket and do what he does best - get the job done. There's something about Victorians isn't there?

Faced with a moderate total to defend, Australia was all guts before glory as they kept at the Pakistani's, hoping to sow more discontented seeds among the falling confidence. There were two overs in it, in the end. With Pakistan steaming along at five an over, Johnson found the outside edge of Faisal Iqbal and then two balls later, induced Salmon Butt to glance to ball down the leg side where Brad Haddin took a superb one hander, way off in the distance to his right. The wobbly boot was on but with tea not long after, Pakistan should have settled under Yousuf's experience at the crease. They didn't. Yousuf blazed a lofted drive straight back at Hauritz, who lost bits and pieces from his left hand but somehow held the catch. Two balls later, Mishbar Ul-haq cut a ball straight to Hussey at backward point and the game was Australia's to win.

Ponting gets credits from me for his attacking captaincy on this last day. Attacking is what he does well and he should do it more often.

Hussey picked up MOM but any of Watson, Hauritz or that man Siddle might have. Throw in Johnson who had some telling moments. Churchill said it well ... never have so many owed so much to so few. Ponting, for the main was not among them and I will maintain, whether asked or not, his decision at the toss was the wrong one. He was saved vilification in the end by a few of his men who love that Baggy Green so much, that they were prepared to expose the bowling balls between their legs and work a miracle.

AWESOME.....and a retraction

Just got home from a hard days slog with the cricket in my earphones, fidelity boosted by the earmuffs... What can I say? nothing surely that any of the commentary has already said, it was awesome: Siddle's Gumption (for you stoph) and Hussey's professionalism were a highlight as well as Pontings confidence in his bowlers namely Hauritz who had gone for a few runs prior to tea.

Now the retraction... I blasted the first day pitch the other day and although I stand by the comments, the way that the game played out made for awesome listening.
Hang on...
Does that make it ok?
Was the pitch fair/true?
Is it like when Tails asked Punter about his decision about the toss after the game: "was it the right decision"? and the answer came back "it is now"
Am I glossing over what should be a polish for the Aussie cricket team?

I would have liked to have listened to the Hobart test with the series result in the balance but am stoked with the way we have won so...

....so am going to go and have another 17,000 beers while the house sleeps.

Go cricket, you rock.

Lessons For The Cricket Punks

Among many other things, today was a day of lessons. Certainly, it was a day in which Australia played well but not well enough and of the lessons taught, one key lesson must be learned if Australia are to escape what appears inevitable defeat. It's an old fashioned value that three year old have little of but mothers emplore them to apply.

Patience. As they say, it's not rocket science but for two sessions, Australia was shown how to bat on this lively Sydney wicket. For under such circumstances, one has to play the real Test cricket of our forefathers and its therefore even more astounding that a young group of players raised on the money grabbing fifty over game and the filthy indecency of Twenty20, could show Australia's corn fed, high intensity, high calibre, academy bred elite how its meant to be when the pitch is willing and the conditions against the men who stand in pairs.

But they did and the did for two long sessions - long enough to gain control. By tea, Pakistan's position at 2-190 was several suburbs, let alone streets ahead of Australia's over and time eqivalent all out for 127 yesterday. In fact, so disciplined did they scrap with the Aussies, that it took until two hours into the day for a brain explosion to be apparent, when Farhat danced Watson, missed in an ugly swing and then wandered back at his own pace and was almost stumped by a throw from Haddin.

There after, it was back to the grind.

How Australia would have valued losing 0-71 yesterday in their first session. The second was more expansive, both openers leaving with the addition of 106 runs. Australia won the last session by taking seven wickets but the last four hardly counted as Pakistan's batsmen had been given the instruction to crash or crash through. So whilst they lost wickets, they also piled on the advantage in adding 141 after tea, swinging like a middle class couple in the sixties.

The day started badly for Australia with North playing dropsey at first slip to Farhat. The opener continued to play and miss but so did all in the top six with the exception of Yousuf, who just looked the classy batsman he is. Salman Butt top scored and if Pakistan win this, I hope someone is smart enough to figure his name in the MOM calculations. His 22 runs in the first session made Tavare look like a swashbuckler but like real estate, position or occupation was everything. His application of the backcut is such a rarity in the modern game that watching him execute it was a real treat.

When they missed, it was mostly to the luckless Peter Siddle who finished low on the wicket count and must surely wait for another day when the cricket gods will watch him bowl badly but give him a bagful. Siddle finished the day with more misses than an aging Sheik but kept on coming and apart from one wayward over just before tea, he was clearly Australia's best. The worst was Hauritz, who bowled darts at up to 95km/h, on a poor line and a poor length and at a time when Ponting and I were in strange agreement about the need for him to bowl.

He let us both down.

Bollinger was honest and quick and intimidatory. I still don't get the Johnson rush and thought he was disappointing. For mine, Bolly and Mitch should be buying Siddle the drinks tonight. Yousuf was distressed when he ran the ball off the face of the bat to Haddin. Yousuf was in complete control with his 46 off only 56 balls. I threw my head back too. Umar was in a terrible hurry and did little wrong in his rapid 49 and was out lbw on referral. He managed to turn Hauritz into Australia's latest four wheel drive - going 4x4 with the first four balls he faced! Australia fielded well.

Apart from Haddin's five catches, Watson held two beauties - one invoking the ghost of John Dyson but looking into the sun and another skier that would have been coming down between solar flares. He just keeps doing good things. Elementary, I suppose.

It dawned on me near the end - Ponting and Hughes only need a thousand runs to have a 1000 runs in a calendar year. Things to look forward to but not for my eyes. Sated, for now, my thoughts are turning to 12 months hence and England and I wonder ... will I get a ticket?