Dec 26-30: 4th Test - Australia v England at Melbourne

[Themer]

4 pacer really proving themselves here.

 

[Slowcoach]

So, you can say I am putting the boot in, but...

If you want something to rise from the ashes...you have to kill it and burn it to ashes first.

 

[Lee1981]

What a lovely sight an empty mcg is on a boxing day, thats what a can of woop ass will do.

 

[Slowcoach]

So the answer is...

Sack the entire team, world wide genocide, and clone Hauritz.

 

[TumTum]

As was the case in Perth. If the conditions (pitch & overhead) stay the same like this throughout this test. I'd back AUS quicks to cause ENG bats equal or more damage again.

The thing is the conditions rarely support the quicks. As I have debated this with you so many times, you are going to lose much more games than win with that strategy.

 

[Iridium]

Looking at this performance you really wonder how Australia won in Perth. Seems almost like it was a fluke. Also another sub-100 score to add to that 80-odd score they had against Pakistan.

So the answer is...

Sack the entire team, world wide genocide, and clone Hauritz.

Yea I'd go for that. Maybe not the world wide genocide part though.

 

[War]

Doesn't look like War's battery of medium pacers is doing so well.

Yea if AUS had picked two spinners in Hauritz & Doherty England would have been bowled out already. Stupid selectors & me...

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Yea if AUS had picked two spinners in Hauritz & Doherty England would have been bowled out already. Stupid selectors & me...

How did you jump to the conclusion that what he was saying was to pick two spinners?

They're simply pointing out the flaw in what you thought was the 'obvious' solution - if the conditions don't favour the quicks, you're screwed.

You need a spinner for balance. Common cricketing sense. Aus might regret not having one.

 

[War]

The thing is the conditions rarely support the quicks. As I have debated this with you so many times, you are going to lose much more games than win with that strategy.

Its pretty obvious & the commentators where saying it as well. That the overhead conditions that England got whe they where bowling basically disappeared & the sun came out, as soon as AUS started to bowl. Thus the MCG pitch is playing like it normally does every boxing day - which is a flat.

If AUS lose this test, it wont be because of the use of 4 quicks. It will be because of the fact that they got bowled out for 98. Its generally impossible for any bowling attack to ressurect you whether it has 4 quicks or not in any conditions, if you bat that poorly initially.

 

[Slowcoach]

Picking 5 quicks and no spinner on every pitch flys in the face of 130 years of cricket history and wisdom built through observation.

It may work if you have 5 Malcolm Marshalls, but who ever did?

Go back through the scorecards from the past two years and see how many times Hauritz outbowled the weak link/links of our "pace attack".

"If we pick 8 quicks, one of them will outbowl Hauritz, it's the law of averages, let's drop Hauritz."

 

[War]

How did you jump to the conclusion that what he was saying was to pick two spinners?

They're simply pointing out the flaw in what you thought was the 'obvious' solution - if the conditions don't favour the quicks, you're screwed.

You need a spinner for balance. Common cricketing sense. Aus might regret not having one.

Firstly i was being sarcastic to poster slowcoach, just as his comment to me was.

AUS already have a spinner in Steve Smith in the team. So in case some of you forgot & didnt realise, in his domestic cricket so far in his career he has been a Sakib-Hasan/Vettori type all-rounder. Which is the role AUS selectors envision him replicating hopefully long term in tests, whether he can do it though is another question of course.

So calls for another spinner to be picked in the XI, is bit perplexing to me.

This debate is going nowhere again with some posters & i dont have the energy to keep arguing one point over & over, some people just are stuck in their ideology unfortunately. Just to quote another poster on this site who has seen the light:http://www.planetcricket.org/forums/2011891-post619.html

Some people don't realise Smith played as a specialist spinner verses Pakistan.It doesn't matter anyway cause 4 quicks is our strength plus having a developing spinner in Smith ( who has taken big halls in domestic cricket )should be seen as a bonus.Most of our success in matches against the top4 teams has come without playing a specialist spinner , so why play one?If 4 pacers wont win us games then 3 good ones and ann average spinner wont fear better.I agree with war, lets give 4 quicks plus Smith a long run in the team.

I dssagree fundamentally with anyone who thinks otherwise. So we can all accept we have hit the ideological brick wall in this debate & now middle ground can be found.

----------

Now Australians got bowled out under 100 against seam attack... they are being out on low totals in this series... then why it is generally said India Can't Play on fast tracks.... even Aussies are struggling on their home grounds......

Because historically thats how the two countries have feared in such conditions.

Of course the difference is now is that the current AUS top 6 is nowhere near as good as past AUS top 6 who usually would do wayyyy better than this in seaming conditons.

 

[Slowcoach]

Let's pick a 12 yr old who bowls wrist spin, because in 20 years he might be good.

Winning now doesn't matter, because POSSIBLY winning in the future is far more important.

Also, sticking with someone for the sake of it because we are tired of all the chopping and changing after the Doherty fiasco is pure stupidity.

Stuff those who deserve chances and earn chances, we will just randomly pick someone and stick with them through thick and thin.

Ever thought of picking your strongest and best balanced team, instead of randomly flailing around and trying every hair brained idea in the book?

Australian cricket is in panic mode, they have no idea what to do.

We lost a couple of games, and suddenly Watson is the best option as next captain?
Just look at the guy, and ask yourself what the hell you're thinking.

Panic mode, we are not used to losing, so we don't know how to deal with it, so we start flailing around and flinging baggy greens in all directions.

The fact we ended up with a Steve Waugh doesn't justify flailing around and then sticking with a bunch of crap cricketers for the sake of it.

 

[midgetwars]

Clearly, Australia are back to their unlucky selves AGAIN. Just when Australia finished batting the sun comes out.. C"MON!

 

[War]

Let's pick a 12 yr old who bowls wrist spin, because in 20 years he might be good.

Winning now doesn't matter, because POSSIBLY winning in the future is far more important.

Ease the sarcasm now. Regardless if you dont think Smith is 100% the finished article (i still share some of those reservations, since i personally wanted D Hussey picked instead of him before the Perth tests). Fact is he has put in those performance in the strongest domestic competition in the world, so the AUS selectors are in within their rights to back him to translate that domestic performance onto the test level.

 

[Adarsh]

So this Aussie line up can't play on flat subcontinent pitches, can't play in England and can't play on home pitches either. Nice one.