The Ashes 2010/11

[littlebabyjesus]

This series has been a microcosm of Hussey's career. Started off as a world-beater and ended with a series of failures.

I actually think Aus should get rid of Hussey and Ponting now. They should also have the courage to get rid of Johnson for good. It's time for them to move on.

 

[Teaboy]

Is it worth mentioning that, even if a solid statistical analysis proves that sending out a nightwatchman tends to reduce the overall score of the side, there will be occasions on which it is the correct decision? I think when 2 or 3 wickets have gone quickly sending out a nightwatchman can be a useful way of defusing the anxiety in the rest of the batting order.

Would this not be offset by the amount of times a night watchman has got out the same evening and the scared batsman has had to come out and bat anyway, except this time the bowler is on a hat trick or something.

I seem to remember this sort of thing used to happen a lot under Atherton.

 

[mattie]

But if he's not a batsman, then what is he?

Oh, hold on.........

My understanding was that the shackle-draggers recognised he was Not Marcus North.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Would this not be offset by the amount of times a night watchman has got out the same evening and the scared batsman has had to come out and bat anyway, except this time the bowler is on a hat trick or something.

I seem to remember this sort of thing used to happen a lot under Atherton.

TBF, the middle order under Atherton – Ramprakash, Hick, Crawley, et al – was barely worth even trying to protect.

 

[Teaboy]

My understanding was that the shackle-draggers recognised he was Not Marcus North.

I think there are quite a few aussies who were not marcus north, in fact from time to time marcus north appeared to be someone else. There was one north who scored centuries against top quality bowling and the other one who couldnt get into double figures for love nor money. Maybe theres two of them just like there are two Mitchells.

 

[mattie]

I think there are quite a few aussies who were not marcus north, in fact from time to time marcus north appeared to be someone else. There was one north who scored centuries against top quality bowling and the other one who couldnt get into double figures for love nor money. Maybe theres two of them just like there are two Mitchells.

Weren't they even considering one of these Marcus Norths for the captaincy? Shame the other one turned up.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

A tough question:

Which was more disappointing, Australia's batting performance or their bowling performance?

 

[kabbes]

Define "disappointing"

 

[littlebabyjesus]

From the point of view of an Aus supporter, I should have added.

 

[mattie]

In this context, 'hilarious'.

 

[Santino]

On the one hand, there is nothing like the exquisite agony of a batting collapse. But a poor bowling performance wears you down over a couple of days.

Would you rather have a kidney removed without anaesthetic or be repeatedly punched and kicked every morning for a month?

 

[Teaboy]

A tough question:

Which was more disappointing, Australia's batting performance or their bowling performance?

That is tough because there bowling has been woeful and they've spent hours and hours in the field, but I think England batted very well.

However the batting has been dismal, and by the end of the series Tremlett and Bresnan are running through them, decent bowlers but not exactly Steyn and Morkal. So I'd say the batting, and the lowest of the low has to be Clark and Ponting, they've both been trully awful.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

'They made Tim Bresnan look unplayable' might be the clincher.

Then again, the assortment of spinners on display over the series surely equals that achievement. I wonder what the series figures for Aus spinners were.

 

[g force]

Batting - with the claibre/ track record you'd never expect them to give away such cheap wickets at home. On the bowling Johnson's the only real threat and he's always been erratic at best.

 

[Santino]

They bowled England out relatively cheaply three times. And let them get 500+ four times.

The batting was ok at Brisbane, average at Perth, and abysmal everywhere else. (Taken on overall score.)

 

[Teaboy]

Then again, the assortment of spinners on display over the series surely equals that achievement. I wonder what the series figures for Aus spinners were.

Oh yeah good point, none of the spinners they tried (Doherty, Beer or Smith) are even fit to play the same game as Shane Warne.

Watching Paul Harris today totally fail to do anything of use on a 5th day pitch that was turning sideways and offered variable bounce (the same pitch Harbhajan had taken 7 wickets on the day before)has reinforced my belief that you cannot be a world beating side without a world beating spinner.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Ah, better than I thought.

aus spinners' series figures:

5 for 679

 

[Teaboy]

So an average of 136? Hmmm, frugal.

Are you including North in those figures?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yes, but one wicket per match. That's more than I would have guessed, tbh, but I'd forgotten Doherty's 2 for 41 in the first innings at Brisbane.

That it all started so well for them, too...

Such a shame.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

So an average of 136? Hmmm, frugal.

Are you including North in those figures?

Yes. All spinners. Only fair, I think, given that North was probably the pick of the bunch.

England's spinners so far:

15 for 601

 

[Streathamite]

Batting, simply because England's batsmen played supremely well, whereas our bowlers were simply pretty good. Four run-outs in a test series is simply farcical

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Oh yeah good point, none of the spinners they tried (Doherty, Beer or Smith) are even fit to play the same game as Shane Warne.

Watching Paul Harris today totally fail to do anything of use on a 5th day pitch that was turning sideways and offered variable bounce (the same pitch Harbhajan had taken 7 wickets on the day before)has reinforced my belief that you cannot be a world beating side without a world beating spinner.

You can. West Indies were for years. But you're right that the ordinariness of Harris is SA's weak spot.

 

[embree]

Changing the subject back to the ashes, what the fuck is wrong with Watson? I've just seen that run out on the highlights and its just bizarre. It's Hughes' call and you clearly hear him say 'no', but Watson head down just carries on trotting to the other end and then looks surprised when Hughes is stood next to him.

Is Watson deaf or just completly stupid? Do the shackles make it difficult for an aussie to turn around once they start running?

Not only that but the failure to run the first one hard meant the second was never on. There were two runs there if they'd gone hard at it. The look on Prior's face as the ball came in and Watson sauntered out of his crease was priceless. He couldn't believe the gift he was about to be handed

 

[Teaboy]

You can. West Indies were for years. But you're right that the ordinariness of Harris is SA's weak spot.

Times have moved on. The batsman have better protection and the pitches are covered and a lot flatter. Also Hawkeye means spinners get a lot more lbw's these days.

On the SA point, I think they have quite a few weak spots which the class of a few have been covering up for. In particular Kallis is so important to them that when he retires they are going to be in trouble. It showed today not having a 4th seamer completly unbalanced their attack, worlds best all rounder for me.

 

[embree]

Proving Steve Smith is not a batsman.

Seen all the proof I need of that

 

[embree]

They bowled England out relatively cheaply three times. And let them get 500+ four times.

The batting was ok at Brisbane, average at Perth, and abysmal everywhere else. (Taken on overall score.)

No, the bating was dismal at Brisbane with the exception of Hussey and Haddin

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Times have moved on. The batsman have better protection and the pitches are covered and a lot flatter. Also Hawkeye means spinners get a lot more lbw's these days.

You are right about Hawkeye. Phil Tufnell makes the point quite often that he'd have got a lot more test wickets with it. Hit on the front foot with a decent stride in used to equal guaranteed not out, but no more.

But pitches were covered in the 80s too, and Dale Steyn shows what a top fast bowler can still do. I don't think the overall quality of fast bowling today is as high as that WI team. Of current players, I would suggest that only Steyn would get anywhere near to a place in the great WI teams of the past.

This is a great shame, I think, as top quicks and top spinners are what make test cricket special. It also makes Mohammad Amir's fall from grace so more painful. World cricket needs exciting young fast bowling talent like that.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

No, the bating was dismal at Brisbane with the exception of Hussey and Haddin

But with Hussey and Haddin included, it was ok. 600 runs for 11 wickets is good.

 

[Teaboy]

Sure there is a real lack of quality out and out fast bowlers at the moment, but given the quality of pitch being served up in the likes of the windies and Sri Lanka its no wonder. Would you bother on those sorts of pitches?

Its perhaps no surprise that the country which is consistantly producing the fastest pitches has the two fastest bowlers.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Pakistan has pudding pitches too. But even on puddings, a 90 mph in-(reverse)swinging yorker is mighty effective. The likes of Waqar and Wasim grew up on slow pitches. Great bowlers can take wickets in all conditions.

That said, you are right that such pitches don't help. I hate slow, flat pitches. 600-4 versus 550-5, match drawn, is the kind of thing that drives people away from test matches, and rightly so. It is tedious in the extreme.