Ashes Cricket in England 2013

[JohnK]

Test teams also gain a lot from some stability. Perhaps we're finnaly seeing the knock-on effects of T20 filtering into the test arena? Its bound to happen sometime. Test players should avoid T20, but of course the bling is too lucrative.

The quicker they get rid of T20 the better in my opinion. It has nothing to do with cricket and the same name should not be used either.

If you are a T20 cricketer then you are not/should not be a test cricketer.

 

[SeatBackForward]

The quicker they get rid of T20 the better in my opinion. It has nothing to do with cricket and the same name should not be used either.

If you are a T20 cricketer then you are not/should not be a test cricketer.

I agree, I find T20 to be closer to Baseball, I once wrote a smart-alec piece about how to improve T20 cricket, I'll try to find it.

However the reality is, as a cricketer, if you want to make money, T20 is where its at. And the Cricketing associations will play along because they also receive good money from T20 and its players. Test cricket will end up being dependent on T20 income, and i doubt it will be sustainable for a player to play test cricket only - certainly not in the early and mid stages of their careers.

 

[JohnK]

Where is coughmins? Tell me he broke down because he played a lot of test cricket?

The T20 thing is just like hit and giggle stuff that means nothing.

 

[SeatBackForward]

Found it.

---

Why I don't like the new Twenty20 format of cricket.

1) I don't get to see enough batting. The shortened form of the game can sometimes mean we miss out on seeing the teams full batting abilities, my solution is that we allow upto four batsmen at a time to be on the field. Of course this would make space on the pitch a premium, but I have a solution - two more sets of stumps, offset to the pitch in a perpendicular direction, the bowler no longer runs up but stands on the spot and can only aim for the primary one, but run-outs should be made possible at any or all of them. There will need to be some form of collision avoidance because of the increased number of batsmen and stumps, so I propose that the batsmen when running, must run between the stumps in an anti-clockwise direction.

2) I'm disappointed in the number of runs being scored, there have been some shockingly low scoring games in T20, I blame the defensive batting attitudes for this. The batting and running should be made more aggressive, why not adopt their policy that a run *must* be taken on the third non-scoring ball. In fact I believe this system of non-strikes should be tallied and shouted out aloud by the umpire. "non-strike 1"..followed by "NON-STRIKE 2", even the crowd can get behind this, shouting out "non-striiiikkkee!". And if there’s a non-strike 3, the batsmen must run to the next set of stumps. In an anti-clockwise direction, of course.

3) Both of the above two aside, the Twenty20 format still favors the batsmen a lot, the fielding team needs a bit of a hand. A big soft rubbery hand in fact. Why should just the wicket keeper be allowed gloves? What Twenty20 needs to win my respect is for each fielder to be sporting at least one wicket keeping glove, the other hand can be used for precise throwing at any one of the four sets of stumps. The bats that the batters use provide an unfair advantage - a rounded edge on both sides of the bat will create additional variability and excitement.

4) The scoring system is archaic, Its stuck in an era where scoreboards were turned using pulleys and gears. A modern system would make use of blogs, news tickers and live data much like the stockmarket - instantly updated indicators. What I would suggest is each of the 10 batting pairs is listed against the opposition pair, thereby providing an innings by innings, batting pair by batting pair comparison, along with indices, ratings and statistical comparisons of their scores, all adding up to a grand total score.

5) This last one is rather obvious - these days, in between checking my smartphone, posting to my blogs and buying junk off the internet, how can I be expected to devote a whole 40 overs to a game of cricket? The Twenty20 format of the game, is simply too long. T10 is the future.

 

[Warks]

^^ What becomes of the stumps?


T20 gets blamed for the decline in the Australian team but the simple truth is that it's played everywhere and you don't see the Indians (home of the IPL) throwing their wickets away trying to belt the cover off every ball.

It's as though they went out of their way to repeat everything bad from the First Test when they promised these were the areas they'd work on.
Better use of DRS - fail.
Batsmen to put heads down and build innings - fail.
Someone to score a century - didn't get close this time.
Watson not to get out LBW - double fail. (okay that wasn't a promise but it should have been)

There's talk of bringing back old hands like Katich who is playing county cricket and carving them up. Adam Voges is there too. However playing old hands (like Rogers) is only a stop-gap measure as in a year or two they'd retire anyway.

The reality is this has been coming for a while but the cracks were papered over by having Mike Hussey and previously Ponting, being there to score runs with Clarke. The rest were only ever good for ducks, 30s and a 50 plus score every tenth innings.

Hard to see why you'd keep Watson. I was a big fan - thought he could be another Matt Hayden but his head is not in it. Hughes - what more can you say? Is Smith Test quality? Khawaja has a lot of fans but hasn't delivered. Mind you he hasn't been given the chances these other batsmen have.

Haddin seems to drop too many but I don't know who is next best to take his place as keeper. Wade wasn't much of an inspiration last season.

The only area we're ahead of the Pom sides we flogged in the 90s is that we aren't conceding scores of 600 plus in consecutive games. Our bowlers have been reasonably good although missed chances have cost us dearly. If the bowling falls to bits then we'll start seeing those scores.

It's going to be a very long winter, then summer. I'm booked to go to day 3 at the SCG. I wonder if I can call in sick.

 

[samh004]

Warner isn't a bad player, but he strikes me as old world in attitude. After all, he did start a fight in a bar right? He'd probably help get Australia on track, but I'm not sure at what cost. It's hard to say where they should go from here.

However, on the DRS system, it for the most part works very well. Where it doesn't work for Australia is wasting reviews early on when you're out. Or wasting them on the field. For the most part England doesn't waste reviews when fielding, and in the same breath, Australia does when batting. You only get two, better use of the system needs to happen.

As an aside, does anyone know why Hotspot is part of DRS, but Snicko isn't?

 

[Flashback]

It's going to be a very long winter, then summer. I'm booked to go to day 3 at the SCG. I wonder if I can call in sick.

You're not the one who needs to live here amongst the poms :mrgreen:

 

[QF WP]

I was that disappointed this morning I couldn't post. The only positive is the bowlers who toiled well. Batsmen were MIA.

Warks, I go to the first 3 days of the Gabba Test every year - just think of how I'll feel if we can't beat them on our own wickets

 

[whatmeworry]

Surprise surprise the ratings for the Ashes have crashed in the second test. lol
Cricket's Collapse Gives Nine Ratings A Reality Check

 

[QF WP]

Have to agree with the story. I am a diehard but tuen off and went to bed ~11pm (or earlie) most nights - as can be seen from my posting on this thread. I'd never watch the Nine cricket, I was one of the Fox Sports viewers. Give me their panel of former players every day...

 

[samh004]

Have to agree with the story. I am a diehard but tuen off and went to bed ~11pm (or earlie) most nights - as can be seen from my posting on this thread. I'd never watch the Nine cricket, I was one of the Fox Sports viewers. Give me their panel of former players every day...

The commentary was exactly the same on GEM as it was on Fox Sports, but as I didn't have the HD package with Foxtel, I chose GEM as it was HD and Fox Sports wasn't. Only difference being that occasionally ads would come up while commentators were still talking and the ads themselves were a bit repetitive (as an aside, Nine looks short of advertisers).

 

[QF WP]

A slight blow to the team [more to Pattinson himself] (and now understandable why he wasn't very successful in the Tests):

Pattinson ruled out of Ashes - Yahoo!7 Sport

 

[Warks]

I've been going to at least one day of the SCG Test since the mid 90s when I moved back to Sydney. Before that I can trace my ancestry right back to my first Test match out there as a kiddie in 1974-75 when Lillian Thomson were giving the Poms hell! Went every couple of years until I left Sydney in the late 80s. I even managed to get to the Test at The Oval in 1989. I've seen some highs and some lows (lowest was probably the last Ashes tour!) but this is the first time I'm really not looking forward to it. I don't mind getting beaten in a good contest but now I know how the Poms felt in the 90s!

The loss of Pattinson weakens the batting more than the bowling!

Wonder if Bird or Starc will get the nod. Bird looked good at the SCG last January.

 

[drron]

I can remember being on the Hill at the SCG and having a few words with Freddie Trueman when he was fielding right in front of me.

 

[drron]

Now this is an interesting graph showing you can use statistics to prove anything-

Basically saying the Aussies win more ashes test matches if the AUD is at or below 50p.
Suggested that was because the English beer is cheaper if it is above that.

 

[JohnK]

A few weeks ago Pattinson would have been the first choice bowler and now he is leading the batting averages.

I wonder if they keep chopping and changing whether they will get the test team right?

 

[Rallo]

A few weeks ago Pattinson would have been the first choice bowler and now he is leading the batting averages.

I wonder if they keep chopping and changing whether they will get the test team right?

This was typical of the English teams when they ordinary chopping and changing and bringing back old players.
We have confused messages from the selectors saying Katich too old then bringing in Haddin and Rogers , and now they are saying Wade to come in as a batsmen ,select players on what their speciality is and stick with it.

 

[Warks]

Having a good keeper-batsman seems to be the key. Marsh in the 70s to the early 80s. Healy from the late 80s. Gilchrist straight after Healy. Since then... Haddin, Paine, Wade, Manou (1 Test). During the 80s there was a series of keepers as well. Seems to coincide with our poorer periods. Haddin may be able to slog now and again but he seems to drop a lot of catches or miss stumpings. Wade doesn't appear much better. Healy was not as good a batsman although he did make runs when needed - luckily he didn't often need to. He was a very good keeper though. Gilchrist made up for any deficiency in his keeping (there wasn't much bad about it) with his amazing batting - one of the best batsmen I've ever seen.

So where to now? Paine is supposed to be the best keeper but he's injured a lot.

 

[Rallo]

Tim Ludeman may be a smoky but he doesn't play for NSW , don't see the point in playing Haddin he is not the future and an ordinary keeper.
If we continue to get belted then move the older players on and starting bringing in new talent Chad Sayers was top wicket taker in the shield last year and took eight wickets in a tour game .
Yes call me bias I support the Redbacks so I am used to to lean pickings,

 

[samh004]

I reckon it goes like this. Next test they'll probably recall a few oldies and see what they can pull together. If it doesn't work out though, the direction should be picking a mostly new team based on what each player can bring to the side. They'll probably end up losing the rest of the games, but by Australian summer they'll have played together a bit and might be ready to shine...

Somehow I don't see them taking that drastic action though.