***Official*** Australia in South Africa

[silentstriker]

If Aussies do go on to win, as it looks like, I think it'll be a two way tie, with India real close at #3. Australia and SA have beaten each other, and both have beaten India. India has beaten Australia and drew with SA. So SA and Aussies come out ahead of India.

India will have a chance to even the score next year (or for SA to pull away) when SA visit India again, followed by India's visit to SA.

Cricket Australia's proposal for the revised FTP is absolutely awesome, and hopefully ECB and BCCI can work out the issues with television rights. That seems to be the only bone of contention, with CA wanting a more equal sharing of rights while ECB and BCCI (the two with the biggest TV contracts, don't). But hopefully they work that out, because each test nation playing a minimum of 24 Tests over two years followed by a semifinal and a final to determine the winner sounds utterly awesome. I really hope to see it. We can get rid of this flawed ranking business, and actually have a winner. Plus, every Test and Test series will have the added interest of qualifying for the semi-finals, or getting a higher seed for home advantage and such. It's just what Test cricket needs IMO. You're not changing the game at all, and you're adding an added incentive for each team. The perfect solution.

 

[Noble One]

If Aussies do go on to win, as it looks like, I think it'll be a two way tie, with India real close at #3. Australia and SA have beaten each other, and both have beaten India. India has beaten Australia and drew with SA. So SA and Aussies come out ahead of India.

India will have a chance to even the score next year (or for SA to pull away) when SA visit India again, followed by India's visit to SA.

Cricket Australia's proposal for the revised FTP is absolutely awesome, and hopefully ECB and BCCI can work out the issues with television rights. That seems to be the only bone of contention, with CA wanting a more equal sharing of rights while ECB and BCCI (the two with the biggest TV contracts, don't). But hopefully they work that out, because each test nation playing a minimum of 24 Tests over two years followed by a semifinal and a final to determine the winner sounds utterly awesome. I really hope to see it. We can get rid of this flawed ranking business, and actually have a winner. Plus, every Test and Test series will have the added interest of qualifying for the semi-finals, or getting a higher seed for home advantage and such. It's just what Test cricket needs IMO. You're not changing the game at all, and you're adding an added incentive for each team. The perfect solution.

I agree, the proposed FTP sounds an absulutely brilliant concept. Will bring a new level of excitement and hype to each test match, without destroying the underlying fundamentals of what makes test cricket so great.

Imagine the prospect of Australia playing India at Eden Gardens, or the MCG infront of a packed stadium vying for the true number one position in world cricket.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Yeah agreed, remember that Donald run out during the 1999 World Cup and multiply it by a test series and this is the mess you have got.. There is nothing worse than false hope, and South Africa have proved themselves to be completely abject since Melbourne.. Normal service resumed, still at least we aren't as bad as England yet. I didn't mind those times when we were put away by great players, but this really grates, we're bowling like kids to a 20 year old kid..

I think that undersells how awkward it might be to bowl to Hughes...he's scored runs at every level now so there's obviously something about him. Bowling to guys that are unorthodox can sometimes be extremely frustrating and it seems to have gotten to the SA bowlers who it appears assumed they could bounce him out or simply bowl aggressively and blast him away. I think they have to realise he doesn't play the short ball the way he does out of fear and just concentrate on bowling good lines. Mind you, they haven't bowled consistent lines to many of the batsmen.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Yeah not saying he's a bad player at all, but it just makes things all the worse when someone younger than me is putting us away

You'll get over it mate...if you don't, by the time you get to my age you'll struggle to leave the house

 

[Son Of Coco]

If Aussies do go on to win, as it looks like, I think it'll be a two way tie, with India real close at #3. Australia and SA have beaten each other, and both have beaten India. India has beaten Australia and drew with SA. So SA and Aussies come out ahead of India.

India will have a chance to even the score next year (or for SA to pull away) when SA visit India again, followed by India's visit to SA.

Cricket Australia's proposal for the revised FTP is absolutely awesome, and hopefully ECB and BCCI can work out the issues with television rights. That seems to be the only bone of contention, with CA wanting a more equal sharing of rights while ECB and BCCI (the two with the biggest TV contracts, don't). But hopefully they work that out, because each test nation playing a minimum of 24 Tests over two years followed by a semifinal and a final to determine the winner sounds utterly awesome. I really hope to see it. We can get rid of this flawed ranking business, and actually have a winner. Plus, every Test and Test series will have the added interest of qualifying for the semi-finals, or getting a higher seed for home advantage and such. It's just what Test cricket needs IMO. You're not changing the game at all, and you're adding an added incentive for each team. The perfect solution.

If Australia win this 3-0 then I wouldn't have SA and Aus tied at the top, but I'd like to see Australia and India go at it again home and away. I don't think SA dominated Australia in Australia like they have been dominated at home in these two tests. This is a better Australian team than was offered up in the home series, although I still think we'll struggle when we need to play a spinner.

If we do win this match convincingly (and I'll be horrified if we don't) then I'd have us slighty ahead of SA still barring a complete capitulation against them in the 3rd test. They've been outplayed from pillar to post...not the effort of a joint number 1 team in the world. Personally I think India are much more likely to challenge Australia home and away. The last test series in Australia was extremely close,. and they won away.

 

[silentstriker]

That's funny because I'd like India to play Australia again too. I think India have a shot at winning away - or at the very least definitely drawing. Lee in that series was better than Johnson is now IMO, and I think India could do a better job all around if Zaheer was fit for the whole series. And I'd back India to win at home again.

What I'd really like is for SA to play India and in SA again. I think India are a much better team than they were when they last toured SA, but so are SA. And if India prepare true Indian pitches and not Ahemdabad type, I think India can win there too.

Obviously a lot of ifs and buts there. Based on existing results, I'd have to put India at #3 though.

 

[Son Of Coco]

That's funny because I'd like India to play Australia again too. I think India have a shot at winning away - or at the very least definitely drawing..

Yeah I think they would have a decent chance too. Even though they lost against Australia in Australia there wasn't much in it at all after the first test. I think they look stronger than SA when they're at full strength. SA may have won in Australia but they weren't dominant at any stage. I don't know what the story is behind the way they're playing now, but from what I've seen I'd back India if they played SA at the moment.

 

[Redbacks]

I smelt a rat when listening to the comments coming from Micky Arthur about wanting to go on and dominate world cricket now. You win the battle everyday of every test match on that path, winning at home is all they should have been talking about.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I smelt a rat when listening to the comments coming from Micky Arthur about wanting to go on and dominate world cricket now. You win the battle everyday of every test match on that path, winning at home is all they should have been talking about.

Yeah, they really should have been concentrating on getting to number 1 first. I don't think anyone's going to 'dominate' for a while as the Australian team that did had so much quality in every area.

 

[Noble One]

So, at what point will Ricky Ponting declare the innings?

10-15 overs before lunch would be my point. Allow Hughes to run rampant, see if he can get close to a double.

The pitch appears to be giving some assistance to the spin bowlers now. Duminy made the ball bite on a couple of occasions. Harris even turned the odd delivery. Expecting Marcus North to bowl a decent quantity of overs during the 4th innings, unless SA collapse early.

 

[Demon43]

i think ponting should declare3 overnight and still give south africa a chance at winning thus hoping to make them play aggressive and giving australia more chance to take wickets and 506 is gunna be hard to make on any 4th and 5th day wicket and with smith out its one less wicket so give the bowlers time to do something

 

[Ausage]

i think ponting should declare3 overnight and still give south africa a chance at winning thus hoping to make them play aggressive and giving australia more chance to take wickets and 506 is gunna be hard to make on any 4th and 5th day wicket and with smith out its one less wicket so give the bowlers time to do something

If they were going go down that path Ponting should have given SA 7-10 overs before stumps yesterday essentially forcing SA to "get in" an extra time. As that didn't happen I'd rather see them grind SA down a bit further, then send them in for a few overs before lunch.

I doubt SA would consider themselves a chance at chasing 500+, so I can't see coaxing them into an aggressive approach a possibility. 5 and a half sessions should be plenty of time to get 9 wickets.

 

[Demon43]

If they were going go down that path Ponting should have given SA 7-10 overs before stumps yesterday essentially forcing SA to "get in" an extra time. As that didn't happen I'd rather see them grind SA down a bit further, then send them in for a few overs before lunch.

I doubt SA would consider themselves a chance at chasing 500+, so I can't see coaxing them into an aggressive approach a possibility. 5 and a half sessions should be plenty of time to get 9 wickets.

If we roll south africa before day 5 then it will send a positive message to england and then the worst result for australia will be a draw

 

[Burgey]

40 minutes before lunch, FTW.

he varying nature of the pitch and the atmospherics might affect the decision though. If they bat on and see it moving around all over the shop, he might be tempted to declare earlier and get at them while the ball's doing a bit.

 

[Top_Cat]

If we roll south africa before day 5 then it will send a positive message to england and then the worst result for australia will be a draw

If South Africa themselves have demonstrated anything, it's that you don't think too far ahead. Win this series, then worry about England. They'll take more notice of a series win by Aus (even if this Test is a draw) than how much Aus win by I reckon.

EDIT: Myself, Ponting's a pretty defensive skipper so I reckon he'll be wanting a 550+ lead, then declare. He'll probably want the Aussies to take their time getting there too (say, an hour of play) just to let the Saffies feel the grind of being in the field for a while. I'd say South Africa's morale would be pretty low right now and reckon they're a chance of not batting tomorrow, let alone pushing the game into a 5th.

 

[Demon43]

The english have no chance of winning coz last time i checked you need to take 20 wickets and not have to rely on one batsmen

 

[Top_Cat]

The english have no chance of winning coz last time i checked you need to take 20 wickets and not have to rely on one batsmen

Personally, they have bigger problems than merely their bowling.

 

[Burgey]

The english have no chance of winning coz last time i checked you need to take 20 wickets and not have to rely on one batsmen

That's what people were saying about Australia 5 weeks ago......

 

[aussie]

That's what people were saying about Australia 5 weeks ago......

Yea, but that was more down to the injury woes to Clark & Lee's dry form. Their was always alot of strong hope in Johnson, Siddle, Hilfenhaus & even Noffke once they get together Australia would have a strong bowling attack capable of 20 wickets.

With England. For 2008 the talk was "when Flintoff will be back" since everyone else has huge question marsk over them & they have just gotten worse.

 

[AlanJLegend]

Does anyone know off the top of their head who the last Australian to score 200 was? I can't remember anyone doing it since Gillespie.


Also, who do you reckon the next will be?

I think I'm gonna have to jump on the bandwagon and say Hughes