*Official* Second Test at the Adelaide Oval

[Goughy]

Agree with Dav here. Boot on the throat time; quick runs are the order of the day. We get 400+ lead and the chances of a ticklish little chase are reduced.

If the forecast is that dire tho there's a case to pull the plug overnight.

99 times out of 100 I agree with both of you on this. You should virtually always score runs when the going is good rather than risk having to bat a 2nd time. Its good, sensible cricket. Its just that time is looking like an issue here.

We just dont know what the next 2 days will bring so we have to have a plan that can cope with the greatest number of variables. For me, declaring over night does that.

 

[Prince EWS]

99 times out of 100 I agree with both of you on this. You should virtually always score runs when the going is good rather than risk having to bat a 2nd time. Its good, sensible cricket. Its just that time is looking like an issue here.

We just dont know what the next 2 days will bring so we have to have a plan that can cope with the greatest number of variables. For me, declaring over night does that.

Yeah, I agree. I'm probably the staunchest "don't declare your first innings until you nullify the need to bat second" man on CricketWeb usually, but with the weather forecast being so uncertain and with the lead being so absolutely ridiculous, I'd declare overnight. I don't think it'd be a terrible decision for Strauss to do the opposite, but it's what I'd do.

 

[Prince EWS]

How has he suddenly leap frogged Khawaja? Don't tell me he's going to come inndue to his 'useful' offies!

Haha yeah that would be pretty dire. I can understand, to some extent, North being preferred to other candidates because of his bowling - because it's actually pretty damn useful, especially by Australian spin standards. Dave Hussey is not anything remotely close to a Test bowling option though. Think Yusuf Pathan with less accuracy.

That said, I do think Dave Hussey's a better bat than Khawaja at the moment, even if only marginally. If he were to come in I'd hope it'd be based on that and the failure of Khawaja to score any runs since the pressure to do so was really applied to them and not based on his pies.

 

[Jono]

I would be very surprised if he averages below 30. I think, in this game, he has looked every bit like he did in his only other Test against decent opposition - South Africa in Sydney at the start of last year.

Harsh on India tbh

 

[BoyBrumby]

Haha yeah that would be pretty dire. I can understand, to some extent, North being preferred to other candidates because of his bowling - because it's actually pretty damn useful, especially by Australian spin standards. Dave Hussey is not anything remotely close to a Test bowling option though. Think Yusuf Pathan with less accuracy.

That said, I do think Dave Hussey's a better bat than Khawaja at the moment, even if only marginally. If he were to come in I'd hope it'd be based on that and the failure of Khawaja to score any runs since the pressure to do so was really applied to them and not based on his pies.

Dussey's darts don't lose much in comparison to the specialist incumbent's efforts thus far, IMHO. At least they're hard(ish) to get away.

North looks decidedly decent as part-timers go, but his retention as a batsman is as baffling as it's (to a pom) hilarious.

 

[Jono]

Yeah, I agree. I'm probably the staunchest "don't declare your first innings until you nullify the need to bat second" man on CricketWeb usually

Teja:
YouTube - Family Guy - Stewie "Say WHAAAT?" (HD)

 

[superkingdave]

Be wary of taking anything about Bollinger from this game. Don't think he looks anywhere near 100%, still think he can contribute later in the series

 

[Prince EWS]

I feel more sorry for McGain and even Hauritz.

Never saw the McGain affair and yes Hauritz has been shabbily treated. That is selectors for you though, stick with their favourites through thin and thinner and dump other players for the odd bad game.

Well the funny thing about Hauritz is that he was picked in almost identical circumstances to Doherty. He'd been tried and failed as a First Class bowler and dropped for a couple of years (average over 50) while retaining his spot in state's one day team and then had just made an improved return to First Class cricket over an extremely small sample size, thrusting him into Australian contention based on that and some decent displays at ODI level. In both cases the incumbent had started well but then had somewhat of a nightmare showing prompting them to be replaced.

I think that made the selectors a little delusional about our spin stocks. Instead of recognising that picking a bowler who averaged 50 domestically over a long sample size and watching him average on the right side of 35 at Test level was something should be celebrated as a minor miracle, they ironically used Hauritz's moderate Test success against him, figuring players with similar records could do a similar job and opted for someone who fit the team better (left armer v Pietersen, high on confidence, in good form, etc).

I think those who matter in Australian cricket just refuse to believe that all our spinners are rubbish by First Class, let alone Test standard, and would rather make a neverending list of excuses for them all. I actually buy into the pitches argument a little bit for some of them (Krejza and pre-yips Cullen, anyway) but even still, saying "Australian pitches really don't suit finger spinners, so this bowler's 50 average is in no way representative of how he'll bowl at Test level.. on Australian pitches" just doesn't make any sense. Hence, we're going to keep cycling through spinner after spinner after spinner as the selectors hope and pray that one of them will average 30 odd and bowl well on fifth day wickets.

I've been a long-time detractor of Hauritz and it's always infuriated me that such a terrible cricketer could be in Australia's Test team, and yes I do think his Test figures flatter him a little, but when all your options are absolutely awful and one of them performs significantly above that, dropping him for another spinner is probably not a good idea. If he'd been dropped for O'Keefe (good performances over a very small sample size + batting), a batsman, a fast bowler or even someone like McDonald it'd make sense to me, but in Doherty they've got someone who's only just as good a bowler (at absolute best) with less experience and worse batting.

 

[Prince EWS]

Dussey's darts don't lose much in comparison to the specialist incumbent's efforts thus far, IMHO. At least they're hard(ish) to get away.

North looks decidedly decent as part-timers go, but his retention as a batsman is as baffling as it's (to a pom) hilarious.

To be fair to Doherty (something I loathe to do given I think I can safely say he's the worst player I've ever seen play a Test for Australia) he actually is a bit better than he's shown. He's an improved bowler in recent times but he seems to have dropped back to his old, lower action under pressure. Certainly a level above Dave Hussey. That said, I'd rather see North bat 8 as a frontline bowler than see Doherty go out there again.

 

[BoyBrumby]

To be fair to Doherty (something I loathe to do given I think I can safely say he's the worst player I've ever seen play a Test for Australia) he actually is a bit better than he's shown. He's an improved bowler in recent times but he seems to have dropped back to his old, lower action under pressure. Certainly a level above Dave Hussey. That said, I'd rather see North bat 8 as a frontline bowler than see Doherty go out there again.

I actually thought Doherty looked ok in the third ODI v SL & think I said as much in that thread, but he looks someway short of the requisite standard from the evidence of the first two tests.

If he's picked again one would seriously question the sanity of the selectors; thought a second test was a brave call in fact.

 

[Ruckus]

Worst thing about Doherty is his fielding. Dropped catches, missed run-outs, misfielded multiple times...pretty terrible stuff.

 

[Furball]

Agree with Dav here. Boot on the throat time; quick runs are the order of the day. We get 400+ lead and the chances of a ticklish little chase are reduced.

If the forecast is that dire tho there's a case to pull the plug overnight.

Sendin Australia in is a much more aggressive statement of intent IMO. Can see where you're coming from, but with questionable weather around, I'd get them in.

Reckon this would be a moot point had the 3rd session not been lost. Had we carried on, we'd be on about 650, which I think everyone would agree is more than enough.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Gets worse for Oz. Katich has buggered his Achilles according to The Guardian.

 

[social]

Gets worse for Oz. Katich has buggered his Achilles according to The Guardian.

When you consider that Australian sport has access to some of the top medical practitioners in the world, the injury management of our cricket team is an absolute farce

 

[Burgey]

To be fair to Doherty (something I loathe to do given I think I can safely say he's the worst player I've ever seen play a Test for Australia) he actually is a bit better than he's shown. He's an improved bowler in recent times but he seems to have dropped back to his old, lower action under pressure. Certainly a level above Dave Hussey. That said, I'd rather see North bat 8 as a frontline bowler than see Doherty go out there again.

Chris Matthews
Tony Dodemaide
Wayne Phillips
Ken Macleay
Simon Davis
Paul Wilson
Rick Darling
Beau Casson

are all worse than Doherty.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Sendin Australia in is a much more aggressive statement of intent IMO. Can see where you're coming from, but with questionable weather around, I'd get them in.

Reckon this would be a moot point had the 3rd session not been lost. Had we carried on, we'd be on about 650, which I think everyone would agree is more than enough.

Definitely agree about the lost session, but (and this comes with the rider that I'm v much a "glass half empty" sort of chap) we're currently only just over 50 runs better off than Oz were on first innings at Brisbane. I could envisage Oz racking up 500 and putting us in for a dart at our top order for a session and a half.

Declaring on 551 just too much of a fate-tempter IMHO.

 

[Jono]

That's not glass half-empty though. That's empty. In fact, that's knocking the glass off the table and breaking.

A 300 lead is enough to not lose the game.

 

[GIMH]

Haha, see his point about 551 tbf. In 2006 we declared on 551 in two games and didn't win either.

On the other hand, on both instances Pietersen had got out for 158 and we were six down.

I say declare and get the game won tomorrow. Mainly because I can't really watch any of Tuesday's play.

 

[MW1304]

Not sure if its been mentioned already, but England and Australia both move up one in the Test rankings at the expense of Sri Lanka. Seems like this series is a battle for a Champions League spot rather than a mid-table bore fest. Closing in on SA aswell.

 

[Woodster]

The timing of our declaration will certainly need to re-assessed now following that downpour that curtailed the day's play. I think Strauss wil bat on in the morning on the proviso we get to start on time, and it may be just for psychological purposes. An overnight declaration will mean the Aussies can solely focus on batting, can prepare to bat without the need to concentrate on fielding or bowling.

Even if Strauss and Flower opt to bat for an hour, it just disrupts the Aussie plans, mentally makes them wonder how long they are going to be kept out in the field, and just reminds them we are totally in control, and just rushes their preparation that little bit. Of couse how much an effect these things have is open to debate, but I do think this may be the way England go.

In terms of the lead, it should be plenty, and I think whatever we decide to do it's important to ensure we keep this Test moving forward. If we bat, do so positively and with obvious purpose.

Swann will surely be licking his lips, it may not be quite as hazardous as KP tried to point out in his interview after the game, but there will be assistance for him out of those footholes. The good things is they're not all turning, which then makes it harder to play not knowing if they're going to grip or not.

It seems though the weather may be England's greatest problem in winning this Test as averse to the resistance of the home side. Oh to see the sunshine out in the morning.