ATAR Notes: Forum
General Discussion => Sport => General Discussion Boards => Cricket => Topic started by: Joseph41 on December 15, 2018, 02:56:24 pm
-
First test was actually pretty good, all things considered.
Second test is pretty interesting. Australia just bowled out for 326 in the first dig. Can't say I have heaps of confidence in our middle order, which is a bit of a concern moving forward.
Who's watching/listening/following atm?
-
The first innings really killed AUS, but you can't expect much when aus has one of their worst top 6's ever. The only Test level batsmen they have is probably Khawaja. Hopefully there is a few changes for the next test.
-
Definitely in need for a few changes. Take out Finch plz.
-
We really don’t need Mitchell Marsh..... Pat Cummins is our MVP and all rounder :)
Harsh words .... but he really is dead weight !
Poor bowling from Starc and Hazlewood, poor line and lengths.
-
disappointed with india's performance :(
-
Mitch Marsh and Finch really have to go. Hopefully they’ll put in Burns and Maxwell/Stoinis for the SCG test. Cummins really put our batsmen to shame our there, but he has had a phenomenal test.
-
If Cummins hits 100 tmr it’ll be glorious
-
disappointed with india's performance :(
same :-\
their first innings went well, second was quite frankly horrible
-
Frankly, I'm so devastated at the batting performance of Australia in recent times. How many openers and baggy greens have we gone through?
-
Frankly, I'm so devastated at the batting performance of Australia in recent times. How many openers and baggy greens have we gone through?
Even with errors in their technique, with a little more patience and shot choice the batters could perform better. How many times do we see batters ticking over the strike with singles? Too many higher risk shots at an early stage...
Probably in part due to the fault of the rise of T20.
-
It's crazy looking at some of the first class averages of some of the Australian Batsmen (in the current team and up for selection) at a first class level most are ~35. (Tim Paine averaging less than 30)
Ideally you would want at least 50+ averages given a general rule of thumb is a test average 5-10 less than your FC average (exceptions when players get into the Test team very young). High 50's to 60+ would be a transcendent player. I don't even know if anyone would fit this criteria but if that is the case we shouldn't expect much in terms of results.
-
At the same time we would be batting even worse if it weren't for the above average batting performances of the 'tail' compared to other cricketing nations!
-
It's crazy looking at some of the first class averages of some of the Australian Batsmen (in the current team and up for selection) at a first class level most are ~35. (Tim Paine averaging less than 30)
Ideally you would want at least 50+ averages given a general rule of thumb is a test average 5-10 less than your FC average (exceptions when players get into the Test team very young). High 50's to 60+ would be a transcendent player. I don't even know if anyone would fit this criteria but if that is the case we shouldn't expect much in terms of results.
Those numbers are a bit ambitious. There are only a handful of players in history to have had a FC average >60. Mid-50s is basically god like status, anything over 60 is just superhuman (which I guess is technically the same as god like but it's late :p)
-
Those numbers are a bit ambitious. There are only a handful of players in history to have had a FC average >60. Mid-50s is basically god like status, anything over 60 is just superhuman (which I guess is technically the same as god like but it's late :p)
Hence, why I said they would be a transcendent batsmen. E.g. Ponting would probably be the only Australian in the past 15 years.
Also directly looking at first class averages is a bit misleading since most people wouldve played a lot of test cricket to bring those numbers down. (Test matches count as FC too). So before they entered test matches they would have higher averages.
-
Feels to me like Australia's success has often been due to a few batsmen. It wasn't that many years ago when it felt like it was Clarke and Hussey at 5 and 6 bailing out a changing cast of top and middle-order batsmen. And in recent years it has more often been Smith and Warner bailing them out (seriously, IIRC Smith made 1,000 Test runs at a 70+ average 4 years in a row...). And looking back at the 2017 Ashes draw in Melbourne, it was those two along with M Marsh who did the majority of the final innings batting. Obviously we haven't had them this year, haven't been able to replace them, and I haven't seen anything suggesting they won't be rushed back into the team the instant their bans expire. A stronger team would be able to make them prove their fitness to be selected.
I've found quite a few of the selections odd: Finch has done lots for Australia with the white ball, but over the years he's struggled even to make Victoria's red ball team. He was better in the last couple of years, but not set-the-world-on-fire better. Plus he was mostly playing in the middle order for Victoria - why pick him as an opener?
Coming back from the UAE as incumbent, Mitch Marsh was dropped for the first couple of Tests. After being dropped he played one first class match and one T20, didn't do much in either, and then got picked again in part as a bowler. Last year in the Ashes he held his own as a batsman, and it would be great if he could continue to do that. But I'm not sure there was anything in his performance to justify the recall.
And, with Labuschagne added to the Sydney squad, I'm afraid the same will happen again. His leg-spin was certainly useful in UAE, but he was presumably dropped for not doing enough with the bat, and he hasn't done enough with either bat or ball since to justify selection.
And then going a bit further back, some of those who didn't make it through selection. Glenn Maxwell coming back relatively successful from India/Bangladesh, then dropped for the Ashes, rushed to South Africa, but not even making the squad for a UAE tour. Joe Burns rushed over as replacement opener in South Africa, then overlooked (just from a process point of view, both Burns and Renshaw are actual first-class openers, and for that alone deserve more consideration than Finch for an opening slot).
Anyway, I don't guarantee to be a good armchair selector, and there may be more context here that the selectors are aware of and I'm not. And like always, when it comes to the actual Test I hope the selections I'm skeptical of perform and prove me wrong - like Shaun Marsh did in the Ashes 2017/18. But Australia is meant to just win at home, y'know? ;)
-
Not a good toss to lose, that.
-
If we can peg a few back early and get past Kohli before Lunch, I'd say we become favourites in this game. Spin hasn't been as dangerous at the SCG in recent times, so nor should batting last.
-
I don’t trust Aus to bat with an old pitch and ball.
It’s literally another batting collapse waiting to happen.
....
India going to score 300 easily atm ... >:(
-
How bad is Handscomb's technique. I would still have him in the team given how bad the other options are but I could't see him excelling in the long term overseas if he doesn't make any changes - especially in England, NZ and SA.
-
How bad is Handscomb's technique. I would still have him in the team given how bad the other options are but I could't see him excelling in the long term overseas if he doesn't make any changes - especially in England, NZ and SA.
Many people have said the same about Smith's technique, and yet he is arguably the best batsman in the world. Don't forget how successful Handscomb's technique was at the start of his career and at state level. This guy can be good, if he can just learn how to build on starts.
-
Many people have said the same about Smith's technique, and yet he is arguably the best batsman in the world. Don't forget how successful Handscomb's technique was at the start of his career and at state level. This guy can be good, if he can just learn how to build on starts.
tbh I don't remember smith's technique, but I don't think someone who is suspended for cheating can be the best .....
Handscomb averages 38 at a first class level which isn't great and he is already nearly 28. (Smith was 28 when he was suspended so not a fair comparison).
Also It's not even that Handscomb isn't scoring runs (which I know he is very capable of) but the ways in which he is getting out - most of these ways would be avoided if he had the basics right,
-
Highly entertaining read!
https://www.msn.com/en-au/sport/cricket/comment-everyone-gets-a-gold-star-our-boys-are-learning-lots-by-playing-men/ar-BBRPjBH?ocid=spartanntp
-
Highly entertaining read!
https://www.msn.com/en-au/sport/cricket/comment-everyone-gets-a-gold-star-our-boys-are-learning-lots-by-playing-men/ar-BBRPjBH?ocid=spartanntp
That article is quite amusing but it highlights the depressing state of Australian cricket. This is shaping up to be a record-breaking series in more ways than one, yet despite how terrible the Australian team is, there isn’t much fresh talent knocking down the door for selection. Looking at how well Pujara has done this series, we definitely need some batsmen to stop focusing on BBL and start trying to develop themselves through Sheffield Shield. Honestly the only young players I’m hopeful about now are Harris, Head and Cummins.
-
That article is quite amusing but it highlights the depressing state of Australian cricket. This is shaping up to be a record-breaking series in more ways than one, yet despite how terrible the Australian team is, there isn’t much fresh talent knocking down the door for selection. Looking at how well Pujara has done this series, we definitely need some batsmen to stop focusing on BBL and start trying to develop themselves through Sheffield Shield. Honestly the only young players I’m hopeful about now are Harris, Head and Cummins.
not allowed to/can't bat for more than 2 hours in a Test match because of BBL :'(
-
I was reading Bill Bryson's Down Under today, and came across this (my emphasis):
It is not true that the English invented cricket as a way of making all other human endeavours look interesting and lively; that was merely an unintended side effect.
...
The upshot was that Australia was giving England a good thumping, but then Australia pretty generally does. In fact, Australia pretty generally beats most people at most things.
How have the mighty fallen...
But well played to India as well. Even without the rain they pretty much had control of the series by the middle of day 2 of this Test.
tbh I don't remember smith's technique, but I don't think someone who is suspended for cheating can be the best .....
Purely as a technical judgement, Smith was unquestionably the No 1 Test batsman in the world, performing in a wide variety of conditions and bailing Australia out of more bad situations than they had a right to expect. I cited it earlier, but he made 1,000 Test runs at a 70 average four calendar years in a row... Kohli was equally clearly the No 1 ODI batsman, and has been the best Test batsman over the last year.
On current team form, I expect Smith and probably Warner to be fast-tracked back into ODI and Test teams the instant the bans expire. And Smith probably has a fair chance to return to No 1 at some point.
Talking about team form, what changes would people make for the Sri Lanka Tests? I would hope Australia has a better chance to win (playing a lower-ranked team at home...), but at a minimum I'd like to see Burns or Renshaw coming in to open with Harris and Khawaja at his "normal" place at 3.