The Cricket Thread
Aug 7th 2015, 6:25 am
#691
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 14,040
Aug 7th 2015, 7:40 am
#692
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Nov 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 7,949
Re: The Cricket Thread
OK let me explain how this works. "Hit the top of off" is an expression rather than an action. It's where the bowler aims to get the ball in the corridor, not only just outside off, but at a good height as it passes the batsman - keeps the batsmen in two minds whether to go forward or back, play the shot or pull out, protect the wicket or let it go. Too full and its half volley sweet spot time, too short, step back and pow. Aim there an let the pitch, seam and movement do the rest. If the aim was to actually hit the stumps you'd aim at the bottom of middle. The beauty of bowling with this method in England is there is so much more a ball can do off the wicket, especially early on in a test, as opposed to Australia where there is not as much seam or swing deviation where the pitches are more like a road than a slippery carpet. Of course there are exceptions to this rule. See big green monsters in 2010/11 Ashes and the Lords pitch in this Ashes. The duke ball in England also has a more pronounced seam than the Kookaburra.
Australia's bowlers are not taking advantage of these conditions, and are really struggling to change the way they bowl to adapt to the conditions. England on the other hand are just doing what they know how to do so well in their own conditions. "Hit the top of Off". Pace is not the key here like it generally is in Australia. In fact pace can sometimes reduce ball movement because there isn't enough airtime. I had great hopes for Josh Hazlewood because he's got that slower airtime action, coming from height, and has generally been really accurate before this series. When he has hit the spot he's causing a lot of trouble, but he's just so inconsistent. The line and length are all over the place, giving England batsmen ample opportunity to make decisions. When they have hit the spot on the rare occasions, its bingo. See Cook wicket. .
Australia's bowlers are not taking advantage of these conditions, and are really struggling to change the way they bowl to adapt to the conditions. England on the other hand are just doing what they know how to do so well in their own conditions. "Hit the top of Off". Pace is not the key here like it generally is in Australia. In fact pace can sometimes reduce ball movement because there isn't enough airtime. I had great hopes for Josh Hazlewood because he's got that slower airtime action, coming from height, and has generally been really accurate before this series. When he has hit the spot he's causing a lot of trouble, but he's just so inconsistent. The line and length are all over the place, giving England batsmen ample opportunity to make decisions. When they have hit the spot on the rare occasions, its bingo. See Cook wicket. .
England won the toss and during the first session it was very overcast and the ball moved around a lot. It was the job of the top order to survive these conditions; the sun came out after lunch and the pitch flattened as the day went on. The Australian bowlers simply didn't get the same conditions as Broad had in the morning.
The simple fact is that batsmen and bowlers are a product of their environment. The Australian batsmen are playing early and hard at the ball; the English batsmen, particularly Root, are playing late and soft at the ball. Broad took great advantage of the former and bowled superbly. When England batsmen play on hard, bouncy wickets they try and play soft and late (hence the 5-0) and usually can't adapt. The shoe is on the other foot here; the Aussie batsmen (Lords apart), can't adapt.
You are again a bit too bowler centric. No matter what the bowler does there is a batsman down the other end with a piece of wood in his hand to defend the stumps and not put the ball in the fielders hands without bouncing.
Getting back to the bowlers, Hazlewood has disappointing and has been most of the series. Point out whatever stats you want but he was expected to bowl long spells, pin the batsmen down and get wickets while Starc and Johnson bowled short, fiery spells. Hazlewood was poor yesterday and Johnson had to bowl longer spells because of that. Team selection was patently wrong and Mitch Marsh was needed yesterday. By all means drop Voges to bring in Shaun Marsh (or Shane Watson) but to swap one Marsh for the other was crass.
Well done England though, tremendous recovery after Lords and deserved Ashes winners this time.
Last edited by OzTennis; Aug 7th 2015 at 8:47 am.
Aug 7th 2015, 9:00 am
#693
I'm Old Gregg!
Joined: Mar 2009
Location: A Former Bogan Colony in QLD
Posts: 8,460
Re: The Cricket Thread
The bottom line is, since 2011, SA have been head and shoulders above the rest of the pack, the rest are just jostling for second place.
Last edited by Broad Shoulders; Aug 7th 2015 at 9:02 am.
Aug 7th 2015, 9:02 am
#694
I'm Old Gregg!
Joined: Mar 2009
Location: A Former Bogan Colony in QLD
Posts: 8,460
Re: The Cricket Thread
same here. I watched none of the recent WC. It's like they are completely different sports to me. Completely and utterly uninterested in it
Aug 7th 2015, 9:20 am
#695
I'm Old Gregg!
Joined: Mar 2009
Location: A Former Bogan Colony in QLD
Posts: 8,460
Re: The Cricket Thread
Lord's clearly was a false dawn for the Aussies. I pointed it out at the end of the first Aussie innings how only two of their batsmen scored above their averages, which of course in the context of the match meant nothing, but in the context of Aus' batting ineptitude said plenty. Sure Rogers and Smith made mammoth scores, but you should remember they were both dropped by Eng when they were in single figures. Some would say, so what Eng should have taken their chances, but at the end of the day, even their best batsmen were giving us chances, we just weren't good enough to take them that day.
This Aus batting lineup has been leading up to this for years. There have been pinacles of failures of Aus in that time (47ao v SA), however off memory that was then followed up with a win in SA to draw the series. I'm a firm believer that you should make changes to a winning team if certain parts are not functioning. Aus have had big failings in their batting lineup throughout this time with the odd batsmen standing up and delivering.
I know this won't happen, but Warner needs to drop to 4 or below. When Aus need to set a first innings total he is rarely anywhere to be seen. Warner scores his big scores either once he knows his team have a first innings lead or when he knows his bowlers have got the opposition out cheaply. Too often he is the start of the slide and when you have a team full of players who are failing you need someone at the top who is willing to just wear off the shine of the new ball then go to work. I'd be keeping Rogers in there for as long as possible as he is the type of opener Aus needs right now. Smith has not shown anything to me that he deserves the recent best batsman mantle he has held. Clarke just needs to focus on his batting and nothing else. It is the middle order where I would make the changes. Get rid of Voges for someone younger who has future. I still think Aus should have stuck with Kawajha all those years ago, after all they stuck with Smith and that worked for them. M Marsh needs to be given more time as he can potentially be a massive cog for them in the future. I like what I have seen of Nevill.
The biggest thing they can do though is get another grafter at opener to replace Warner.
This Aus batting lineup has been leading up to this for years. There have been pinacles of failures of Aus in that time (47ao v SA), however off memory that was then followed up with a win in SA to draw the series. I'm a firm believer that you should make changes to a winning team if certain parts are not functioning. Aus have had big failings in their batting lineup throughout this time with the odd batsmen standing up and delivering.
I know this won't happen, but Warner needs to drop to 4 or below. When Aus need to set a first innings total he is rarely anywhere to be seen. Warner scores his big scores either once he knows his team have a first innings lead or when he knows his bowlers have got the opposition out cheaply. Too often he is the start of the slide and when you have a team full of players who are failing you need someone at the top who is willing to just wear off the shine of the new ball then go to work. I'd be keeping Rogers in there for as long as possible as he is the type of opener Aus needs right now. Smith has not shown anything to me that he deserves the recent best batsman mantle he has held. Clarke just needs to focus on his batting and nothing else. It is the middle order where I would make the changes. Get rid of Voges for someone younger who has future. I still think Aus should have stuck with Kawajha all those years ago, after all they stuck with Smith and that worked for them. M Marsh needs to be given more time as he can potentially be a massive cog for them in the future. I like what I have seen of Nevill.
The biggest thing they can do though is get another grafter at opener to replace Warner.
Aug 7th 2015, 9:54 am
#696
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 14,040
Re: The Cricket Thread
Lord's clearly was a false dawn for the Aussies. I pointed it out at the end of the first Aussie innings how only two of their batsmen scored above their averages, which of course in the context of the match meant nothing, but in the context of Aus' batting ineptitude said plenty. Sure Rogers and Smith made mammoth scores, but you should remember they were both dropped by Eng when they were in single figures. Some would say, so what Eng should have taken their chances, but at the end of the day, even their best batsmen were giving us chances, we just weren't good enough to take them that day.
This Aus batting lineup has been leading up to this for years. There have been pinacles of failures of Aus in that time (47ao v SA), however off memory that was then followed up with a win in SA to draw the series. I'm a firm believer that you should make changes to a winning team if certain parts are not functioning. Aus have had big failings in their batting lineup throughout this time with the odd batsmen standing up and delivering.
I know this won't happen, but Warner needs to drop to 4 or below. When Aus need to set a first innings total he is rarely anywhere to be seen. Warner scores his big scores either once he knows his team have a first innings lead or when he knows his bowlers have got the opposition out cheaply. Too often he is the start of the slide and when you have a team full of players who are failing you need someone at the top who is willing to just wear off the shine of the new ball then go to work. I'd be keeping Rogers in there for as long as possible as he is the type of opener Aus needs right now. Smith has not shown anything to me that he deserves the recent best batsman mantle he has held. Clarke just needs to focus on his batting and nothing else. It is the middle order where I would make the changes. Get rid of Voges for someone younger who has future. I still think Aus should have stuck with Kawajha all those years ago, after all they stuck with Smith and that worked for them. M Marsh needs to be given more time as he can potentially be a massive cog for them in the future. I like what I have seen of Nevill.
The biggest thing they can do though is get another grafter at opener to replace Warner.
This Aus batting lineup has been leading up to this for years. There have been pinacles of failures of Aus in that time (47ao v SA), however off memory that was then followed up with a win in SA to draw the series. I'm a firm believer that you should make changes to a winning team if certain parts are not functioning. Aus have had big failings in their batting lineup throughout this time with the odd batsmen standing up and delivering.
I know this won't happen, but Warner needs to drop to 4 or below. When Aus need to set a first innings total he is rarely anywhere to be seen. Warner scores his big scores either once he knows his team have a first innings lead or when he knows his bowlers have got the opposition out cheaply. Too often he is the start of the slide and when you have a team full of players who are failing you need someone at the top who is willing to just wear off the shine of the new ball then go to work. I'd be keeping Rogers in there for as long as possible as he is the type of opener Aus needs right now. Smith has not shown anything to me that he deserves the recent best batsman mantle he has held. Clarke just needs to focus on his batting and nothing else. It is the middle order where I would make the changes. Get rid of Voges for someone younger who has future. I still think Aus should have stuck with Kawajha all those years ago, after all they stuck with Smith and that worked for them. M Marsh needs to be given more time as he can potentially be a massive cog for them in the future. I like what I have seen of Nevill.
The biggest thing they can do though is get another grafter at opener to replace Warner.
You really should be giving your bowlers more credit here. Its a simple game, bowl well and let your bowlers take down the opposition batsmen.
Its the reason why Australia were number 1 in past history and recent history and its the reason why SA are number 1. For England to ever be No. 1 they need to learn to bowl in SA and Oz.
Aug 7th 2015, 9:55 am
#697
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 14,040
Re: The Cricket Thread
Brilliant analysis which none of us mere mortals could work out for ourselves.
England won the toss and during the first session it was very overcast and the ball moved around a lot. It was the job of the top order to survive these conditions; the sun came out after lunch and the pitch flattened as the day went on. The Australian bowlers simply didn't get the same conditions as Broad had in the morning.
The simple fact is that batsmen and bowlers are a product of their environment. The Australian batsmen are playing early and hard at the ball; the English batsmen, particularly Root, are playing late and soft at the ball. Broad took great advantage of the former and bowled superbly. When England batsmen play on hard, bouncy wickets they try and play soft and late (hence the 5-0) and usually can't adapt. The shoe is on the other foot here; the Aussie batsmen (Lords apart), can't adapt.
You are again a bit too bowler centric. No matter what the bowler does there is a batsman down the other end with a piece of wood in his hand to defend the stumps and not put the ball in the fielders hands without bouncing.
Getting back to the bowlers, Hazlewood has disappointing and has been most of the series. Point out whatever stats you want but he was expected to bowl long spells, pin the batsmen down and get wickets while Starc and Johnson bowled short, fiery spells. Hazlewood was poor yesterday and Johnson had to bowl longer spells because of that. Team selection was patently wrong and Mitch Marsh was needed yesterday. By all means drop Voges to bring in Shaun Marsh (or Shane Watson) but to swap one Marsh for the other was crass.
Well done England though, tremendous recovery after Lords and deserved Ashes winners this time.
England won the toss and during the first session it was very overcast and the ball moved around a lot. It was the job of the top order to survive these conditions; the sun came out after lunch and the pitch flattened as the day went on. The Australian bowlers simply didn't get the same conditions as Broad had in the morning.
The simple fact is that batsmen and bowlers are a product of their environment. The Australian batsmen are playing early and hard at the ball; the English batsmen, particularly Root, are playing late and soft at the ball. Broad took great advantage of the former and bowled superbly. When England batsmen play on hard, bouncy wickets they try and play soft and late (hence the 5-0) and usually can't adapt. The shoe is on the other foot here; the Aussie batsmen (Lords apart), can't adapt.
You are again a bit too bowler centric. No matter what the bowler does there is a batsman down the other end with a piece of wood in his hand to defend the stumps and not put the ball in the fielders hands without bouncing.
Getting back to the bowlers, Hazlewood has disappointing and has been most of the series. Point out whatever stats you want but he was expected to bowl long spells, pin the batsmen down and get wickets while Starc and Johnson bowled short, fiery spells. Hazlewood was poor yesterday and Johnson had to bowl longer spells because of that. Team selection was patently wrong and Mitch Marsh was needed yesterday. By all means drop Voges to bring in Shaun Marsh (or Shane Watson) but to swap one Marsh for the other was crass.
Well done England though, tremendous recovery after Lords and deserved Ashes winners this time.
Aug 7th 2015, 10:10 am
#699
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,230
Re: The Cricket Thread
I really like t20 I have to say but it's a completely different beast from test cricket. It's hard to be great at both
I think it's notable that the best players in this series (root, broad, Rodgers) don't go prancing around the world playing ipl and big bash and what have you
I think it's notable that the best players in this series (root, broad, Rodgers) don't go prancing around the world playing ipl and big bash and what have you
Aug 7th 2015, 10:40 am
#701
Proudly Deplorable
Thread Starter
Joined: May 2003
Location: Alloha snack bar
Posts: 24,246
Re: The Cricket Thread
Rankings, especially in test cricket are a crock of proverbial these days. The very fact that Aus managed to be number 1 in the world only 9 months after getting spanked in England 3-0 and 4-0 in India shows how much attention can be paid to them. The other thing is, bar Aus & Eng, the rest of the teams play nowhere near enough tests.
The bottom line is, since 2011, SA have been head and shoulders above the rest of the pack, the rest are just jostling for second place.
The bottom line is, since 2011, SA have been head and shoulders above the rest of the pack, the rest are just jostling for second place.
I wish SA would play more test cricket and that looks like it may be starting to happen. A 4 tester away to India starting next month was recently announced and then a 4 test series at home to England straight afterwards (the fact that we are playing 4 test series at all is a major step in the right direction)
Aug 7th 2015, 10:56 am
#705
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Nov 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 7,949
Re: The Cricket Thread
I presume you mean Jos Buttler? You've been going on about Hazlewood (well Hazelwood as you call him) all series but I said before a ball was bowled that Starc would be the main threat. QED.
Last edited by OzTennis; Aug 7th 2015 at 10:59 am.