|
|
Post by hhsussex on Aug 6, 2015 12:45:24 GMT
A short-term loss, but a massive long term gain for the marketing men. The argument that has been put forward here and in other media that Ashes could be staged more frequently will have had a terrific boost from this series, although the cricket hasn't been much to write home about. I don't quite agree with borderman that the pitches are not worthy of a Test match, but I do think that in going all out to emphasise the "national" quality of pitches (seamers in England, bouncy and hard in Australia, slow turners in India) we are serving up a dish that suits "patriotic" fans but is indigestible to the palates of batsmen who no longer have any lengthy exposure to anything other than their native pitches. When overseas players spent whole seasons in England they learnt a different kind of cricket and their play improved, as did those of English players touring, playing more first class games and finding out the flaws in their techniques with time to remedy them before the Tests themselves. Good bowling, very good from Broad and shell-shocked batting from a demoralised and generally clueless Australian team.
First morning of an Ashes Test match, surely the bowlers ruddy well should be required to run in hard rather than just putting it there and watching it swing? Not sure that is true of everything that was bowled this morning: Clarke and Voges were too quick trying to drive, and that is bad technique, however the ball may swingde pitches in Test cricket a farce. Pakistan prepare turning wickets in the UAE that make them almost impossible to beat, Australia do the same down under and now England have joined in the fix. Then we agree, because that is my point about the "national" quality of pitches.Arguably you can't blame them for that. But Holding has a couple of answers worth considering. Take responsibility for pitch preparation away from the home boards and hand it to the ICC. Or abolish the toss and give the visiting captain the choice. Would England have ordered that pitch if they knew instead of a 50-50 chance on the toss of a coin it was 100 per cent certain Australia would ask them to bad first on it? Personally, I like the chance element of the toss, so I'd favour the first solution: take pitch oversight away from the home board and hand it to an independent ICC pitches authority. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2015 16:21:25 GMT
you can get the entire Austraian innings into a single tweet:
04W24W0W04100000W40000110W020000401000W000000000101000011W0011200010040040000W1W30000000000000400000000000001004W
|
|
|
|
Post by leedsgull on Aug 6, 2015 17:58:15 GMT
England have shown that this is a perfectly reasonable test match wicket. Australia are just batting in the spineless way that used to be copyrighted by England.
|
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on Aug 6, 2015 19:44:19 GMT
Borderman's at it again, got another fifth day ticket have you? But you made the mistake of saying the pitch wasn't worthy of Test cricket before England made 260 odd for four on it. You're about as quick a learner as an Aussie batsman mate. Will you ever accept that English tracks have always looked this way? Other Aussie sides of the past would have dealt with it but this particular side is in disarray. I do agree with you about the home advantage thing though but while they're all at it we should be too - they always have and we always have as far as I'm aware. Maybe teams should prepare for it much better.
An amazing day's play, truly eye catching. These sort of days may do better for finances than some think.
|
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on Aug 6, 2015 19:47:23 GMT
If Anderson was playing (or if Finn had opened rather than Wood), Australia would be all out by now. Decent bowling by Broad. But pitches on which world class batsmen are made to look like novices have no place in five day Test cricket. "World class batsmen" Honestly, you're killing me now. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2015 20:37:32 GMT
I'm sure you must be right fraudster and Michael Holding is talking out of his backside and Naseer Hussain was making it up when he said 8 mm of grass had been left on the pitch.
And Willis who has just said the Aussie bowlers are to blame for 260-4 "for not exploiting a very juicy pitch"; he must be wrong if you say so.
You seem to know a bit about cricket, but you're like someone in a karaoke contest who knows the words and sings the notes but has still never quite learnt the song.
And of course, you don't address the main point about taking supervision of pitch preparation away from home boards - whether it's Pakistan, England or Australia - and putting it under an independent ICC pitch authority.
|
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on Aug 6, 2015 21:12:38 GMT
I'm sure you must be right fraudster and Michael Holding is talking out of his backside and Naseer Hussain was making it up when he said 8 mm of grass had been left on the pitch. And Willis who has just said the Aussie bowlers are to blame for 260-4 "for not exploiting a very juicy pitch"; he must be wrong if you say so. You seem to know a bit about cricket, but you're like someone in a karaoke contest who knows the words and sings the notes but has still never quite learnt the song. And of course, you don't address the main point about taking supervision of pitch preparation away from home boards - whether it's Pakistan, England or Australia - and putting it under an independent ICC pitch authority. That's your main point. My main point is your nonacceptance of two cracking pitches. Sweeeeeeeeeeeeet Carolinnnnnnnnnnnnnne, do-do-do, good times always over there. I feel declined, do-do-do x |
|
|
|
Post by pompeymeowth on Aug 6, 2015 22:41:13 GMT
I find it hard to believe that anyone could find fault with such a day as we have witnessed. I was lucky enough to be at Cardiff on day 4, but I think I was even luckier to have had a day off today.
Borderman there's a reason behind the term Home advantage. I understand where you are coming from, but groundsmen have been producing wickets to order, for the home team skipper since before we were all born.
|
|
|
|
Post by howardh on Aug 7, 2015 4:39:42 GMT
Borderman,
Just no.
|
|
|
|
Post by leedsgull on Aug 7, 2015 5:25:11 GMT
As a general rule of thumb, I find that if Willis says something then the opposite is probably true.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Aug 7, 2015 7:42:39 GMT
Excluding catastrophe this match has already been won by England, so what are, or should be, the motivations for the players in whatever remains of the game?
Currently we have 4 players, plus Anderson, who are of indisputable Test class - Cook, Root, Broad and Finn. All the others have done good things sometimes, or not quite well enough.
Firstly, another batsman to play a convincing innings to set alongside Root and the new-style limited competence of Cook. Bairstow gave no impression of permanence and gave further proof of the disparity between county cricket and the Test game: he doesn't move his feet and therefore his stand-and-deliver stance means that he is reliant on his eye and the strength of his wrists. Anything that doesn't pitch where he estimates it, or that behaves deviantly is likely to induce a false stroke. Steyn and Morkel will work him over this winter, always assuming that there is much left after the Pakistani spinners have had their share in the Gulf.
Stokes has the opportunity now to show that he could go up to 5 or 4 when the occasion offers itself. His stroke-making is good enough, his aggression is unchallenged, now he can accumulate and build a reputation. The same chance is there for Buttler, whose batting has gone backwards since the one-day matches finished. Moeen won't change, and providing the rest of the side is in balance his flickering 70s are always fun to watch and worth double their value since they are scored down at the end of the innings when the fielding side is itching to get batting again.
In the second innings Australia will probably feel that there is no point in digging in, but will go for their shots with the pitch drier and harder after a couple of sunny days. Wood will have to work out if his best game is banging it in short of a length to induce the false shoot, the miscued pull and hook, or to continue to bowl that full length with his slingy action that induces a little doubt as to bounce, as well as movement off the seam. Maybe there will be a chance for Ali to carry on learning in the middle, but probably the game won't get that far.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2015 8:13:10 GMT
Borderman there's a reason behind the term Home advantage. I understand where you are coming from, but groundsmen have been producing wickets to order, for the home team skipper since before we were all born. "It's always been unfair" is the worst possible argument, though. We always had home umpires until the ICC set-up an independent elite panel, thankfully ensuring that we get no more Gatting- v Shakoor Rana type incidents. We never had a third umpire reviewing decisions until recently and as a result most of the umpiring howlers of yesteryear have now been eradicated. There are plenty of examples of things that had been happening "since before we were born" that have since been changed to make the game fairer - and better. Neutral supervision of pitch preparation will be the next such move and England have brought the day closer by the pitches thety are preparing. The first rule should be that there is a maximum amount of grass that is left on a Test wicket and that it has to be considerably less than the 8 mm that England ordered for this game. When the ICC get around to amending the laws this autumn or in 2016, I'd guess the maximum is likely to be 6 mm. There will be another ten wickets today, I predict - England should get a 300 plus lead, and we will take 3 or 4 Australian wickets tonight and the game will end tomorrow afternoon. That would be back-to-back Tests ending in two and a half days. Anyone who thinks that is good for Test cricket or good for the state of the English game is bonkers. As s&f said yesterday, there will be a backlash against this, and when it comes it will be ferocious. People like fraudster seem to think the Lord's wicket was terrible but the Trent Brige and Edgbaston wickets were great for no other reason than England lost at Lord's and got Australia on the back-foot on the other two pitches. Such myopic 'patriotism' does the game of cricket no favours whatsoever. Test cricket is dying all over the world and playing to empty stadia everywhere except England and in Australia (and even then only down under when its the Ashes). We need to care and tend for this game vey carefully if we are not to destroy it totally. And two and a half day Tests created by 'home advantage' wickets are hastening the day of judgement. |
|
|
|
Post by howardh on Aug 7, 2015 9:18:42 GMT
Borderman, isn't it time for your holiday?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2015 9:30:20 GMT
Am on hol for the whole of august, Howard. First with the grandchildren and then a second hol without them to recover. And these two and a half day one sided home advantage tests are marring enjoyment of my vacation!
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Aug 7, 2015 9:57:31 GMT
Am on hol for the whole of august, Howard. First with the grandchildren and then a second hol without them to recover. And these two and a half day one sided home advantage tests are marring enjoyment of my vacation! How one-sided do you think these matches would have been if England had lost the toss and Australia had decided to bowl? I don't disgree with your contention that groundsmen should not be directed to prepare particular types of wicket to suit "home" rather than "opposition", but do you think England would have played as badly on the first morning against the Australian attack here and at Edgbaston? Looking at Hazlewood at Cardiff, and to some degree at Lord's I got the feeling that he was an English type of bowler, but he hasn't been able to find length consistently since then, and for all his pace Johnson has gradually reverted to his slews to the left, slews to the right persona. |
|
