MasterBlaster76
ICC Chairman
Incidentally - you're a West Indies/New Zealand fan. Why do you have an Aussie legend as your avatar?
1st Test: England v Australia at Nottingham Jul 10-14, 2013
- Thread starter aussie1st
- Start date
Incidentally - you're a West Indies/New Zealand fan. Why do you have an Aussie legend as your avatar?
ferg512
International Coach
Incidentally - you're a West Indies/New Zealand fan. Why do you have an Aussie legend as your avatar?
Haha fair enough, Brett Lee has always been my favourite cricketer though, and I am guilty of cheering for the aussies this series (must be the only kiwi out there) but only because they are the underdogs.
MasterBlaster76
ICC Chairman
Strange...a Kiwi supporting the Aussies; wouldn't that be a bit like me throwing my support behind Scotland? Never mind - if you want to support the underdogs, there's nothing wrong with that.
IceAgeComing
Retired Administrator
- Joined
- May 26, 2013
- Location
- Brussels, Belgium
- Profile Flag
- Scotland
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - PS3
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
40% of Australia's runs in this test match came from 10th wicket partnerships. Dunno whether that's good or bad for either side...
MasterBlaster76
ICC Chairman
Finn definitely deserves to keep his place. He started off in the first innings with the new ball bowling really well. The problem was they then got him to bowl short at Agar and he got clattered, which is more a poor decision by the Captain, than Finn bowling badly. Then come the 2nd innings, he didn't bowl until something like the 25th over and bowler about 10 overs in the first 100.
You can't expect him to not be allowed to bowl, yet still somehow come on and bowl brilliantly at the end, it's just not going to happen. He needs to bowl to find a rhythm, like he had going at the start of the first innings, then we'll see the best of him.
You can't expect him to not be allowed to bowl, yet still somehow come on and bowl brilliantly at the end, it's just not going to happen. He needs to bowl to find a rhythm, like he had going at the start of the first innings, then we'll see the best of him.
IceAgeComing
Retired Administrator
- Joined
- May 26, 2013
- Location
- Brussels, Belgium
- Profile Flag
- Scotland
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - PS3
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
They'll keep Finn in for Lords; since that's his home ground and there will be a pitch that will better suit him. If he bowls like he did in the second innings; and Cook doesn't have confidence in him; I'd imagine that they'll drop him and go for someone else - I'd go for Tremlett if he's fit; but that's just me!
ferg512
International Coach
Strange...a Kiwi supporting the Aussies; wouldn't that be a bit like me throwing my support behind Scotland? Never mind - if you want to support the underdogs, there's nothing wrong with that.
Yep, I'm not really the typical kiwi though. Never really had anything against them, but then again I wasn't alive during the underarm
MasterBlaster76
ICC Chairman
Tremlett; yep I'd forgotten all about him.
Last edited:
aditya123
National Board President
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2003
- Location
- Mumbai
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Xbox 360
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Xbox One
More like you were`nt born during the underarm incident. ;-) . You made it sound as if this is your afterlife.Yep, I'm not really the typical kiwi though. Never really had anything against them, but then again I wasn't alive during the underarm
Can't really see how anyone could say that it was inconclusive, was about as clear cut as you could get. Hotspot, snicko and sound all confirmed the edge. Knew it was out straight away on TV, stump microphone picked it up loudly
Thoughts for the second test. I think Finn is going to have to be dropped. He's a great bowler but chosen an awful time to be bang out of form. Bringing in Bres also shores up the batting although I think Finn at his best is far better than Bresnan at his best.
Bairstow at 6 is a concern. I wondered if England might have considered just swapping Compton and Root in the order. If Bairstow has a technical flaw and is playing across the line you can be sure that Australia will exploit it.
Can Australia bring anyone in for Cowan?
Bairstow at 6 is a concern. I wondered if England might have considered just swapping Compton and Root in the order. If Bairstow has a technical flaw and is playing across the line you can be sure that Australia will exploit it.
Can Australia bring anyone in for Cowan?
War
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Online Cricket Games Owned
1st test thoughts
Australia
When i saw Agar, Cowan & Smith named in the 1st test XI i literally screamed with disgust.
Why the selectors or some fans still see in Cowan to keep picking him is mind-boggling to me. The man is like Marcus North - but even worse. A very limited player who after given a chance after certain youngers (Hughes, Marsh) didn't step up - who hasn't made a impact in international cricket.
Surely Cowan has to be sent to the scrap heap now.
Khawaja has to play now - he is the future. If he fails so be it - AUS batting has enough holes anyway.
The selectors clearly have much faith in Smith so called improve batting ability. But i remained unconvinced & i'm sure when England's bowler look @ AUS middle-order they feel they can get rid of him early more often than not.
As i've argued since the Australian summer George Bailey should be in the test team middle-order & the team would look much more solid with Bailey in the middle @ # 5 behind Clarke.
Not having Bailey (a natural middle order player) also puts AUS in the problem most people noted before the Ashes, of having to turn top order batsmen into middle-order batsmen. Do AUS really want to be batting Hughes @ # 5 & 6 for the remainder of this Ashes?
I know Warner deserves some punishment for his crazy acts - but they selectors IMO have to seriously rethink sending him on that A-tour to S Africa. He really needs to be playing @ Lords's.
One thing the selectors can be credited for is the selection Agar. Obviously Nathan Lyon has been progressing slowly but surely & his 7-wicket haul in India shows this. But clearly the talented of Agar they noted from him since they took him to India earlier this year seems to be genuine. This is what good selectors get paid to do also, finding via unconventional means.
Also for those who claimed before this test that Watson can combine opening and bowling duties competently once more failed to cater for his injury problems which saw him influence with the ball reduced significantly.
Michael Clarke can't depend on Watson to bowl seriously long spells the same Graeme Smith can with Kallis for S Africa. So essentially in this test AUS pretty much had a 4-man attack with Watson as much a "part time" option. Which is not the role of an "all-rounder". This is why playing Faulkner becomes a serious option to play in this series IF Aus thinks they want 5 seriously bowling options.
But as things stand i believe Pattinson/Starc/Siddle/Agar or maybe a all pace of attack which might include Harris can take 20 English wickets, so the 5-man currently is not needed.
I don't believe Cowan & Smith should play for the rest of the series. Let the young talented trio of Hughes, Khawaja, Warner either sink or swim in this series. They are the best AUS have.
England
In 6 previous tests vs N Zealand this year Eng's batting has looked unusually shaky and it continued with the 1st innings collapse. I don't think they batting has any real problems, i just think mentally England have relaxed vs these good NZ & AUS attacks.
AUS ran them close, but given the paucity of talent in the AUS ranks (especially in the batting) i don't think AUS really have another level to go frankly. ENG though can take it to another level & i believe as the series progresses they will show their superiority over AUS.
No changes should be made for Lord's i would think also. If its some feel Finn should be dropped - i'd prefer picking Tremlett or Rankin who would be more penetrative options than Bresnan or Onions.
Australia
When i saw Agar, Cowan & Smith named in the 1st test XI i literally screamed with disgust.
Why the selectors or some fans still see in Cowan to keep picking him is mind-boggling to me. The man is like Marcus North - but even worse. A very limited player who after given a chance after certain youngers (Hughes, Marsh) didn't step up - who hasn't made a impact in international cricket.
Surely Cowan has to be sent to the scrap heap now.
Khawaja has to play now - he is the future. If he fails so be it - AUS batting has enough holes anyway.
The selectors clearly have much faith in Smith so called improve batting ability. But i remained unconvinced & i'm sure when England's bowler look @ AUS middle-order they feel they can get rid of him early more often than not.
As i've argued since the Australian summer George Bailey should be in the test team middle-order & the team would look much more solid with Bailey in the middle @ # 5 behind Clarke.
Not having Bailey (a natural middle order player) also puts AUS in the problem most people noted before the Ashes, of having to turn top order batsmen into middle-order batsmen. Do AUS really want to be batting Hughes @ # 5 & 6 for the remainder of this Ashes?
I know Warner deserves some punishment for his crazy acts - but they selectors IMO have to seriously rethink sending him on that A-tour to S Africa. He really needs to be playing @ Lords's.
One thing the selectors can be credited for is the selection Agar. Obviously Nathan Lyon has been progressing slowly but surely & his 7-wicket haul in India shows this. But clearly the talented of Agar they noted from him since they took him to India earlier this year seems to be genuine. This is what good selectors get paid to do also, finding via unconventional means.
Also for those who claimed before this test that Watson can combine opening and bowling duties competently once more failed to cater for his injury problems which saw him influence with the ball reduced significantly.
Michael Clarke can't depend on Watson to bowl seriously long spells the same Graeme Smith can with Kallis for S Africa. So essentially in this test AUS pretty much had a 4-man attack with Watson as much a "part time" option. Which is not the role of an "all-rounder". This is why playing Faulkner becomes a serious option to play in this series IF Aus thinks they want 5 seriously bowling options.
But as things stand i believe Pattinson/Starc/Siddle/Agar or maybe a all pace of attack which might include Harris can take 20 English wickets, so the 5-man currently is not needed.
I don't believe Cowan & Smith should play for the rest of the series. Let the young talented trio of Hughes, Khawaja, Warner either sink or swim in this series. They are the best AUS have.
England
In 6 previous tests vs N Zealand this year Eng's batting has looked unusually shaky and it continued with the 1st innings collapse. I don't think they batting has any real problems, i just think mentally England have relaxed vs these good NZ & AUS attacks.
AUS ran them close, but given the paucity of talent in the AUS ranks (especially in the batting) i don't think AUS really have another level to go frankly. ENG though can take it to another level & i believe as the series progresses they will show their superiority over AUS.
No changes should be made for Lord's i would think also. If its some feel Finn should be dropped - i'd prefer picking Tremlett or Rankin who would be more penetrative options than Bresnan or Onions.
Ahmad94
Staff Member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2011
- Location
- West Midlands, UK
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
I am pretty sure Khawaja will come in for Cowan. Otherwise, Australia may aswell play 10 men.
Similar threads
