*Official* Second Test at the Adelaide Oval

[social]

If North fails again, you can just picture what will happen:

Hilditch: "It was a day 5 pitch which was deteriorating rapidly so North's form in those difficult conditions is not much of a concern to us. We know North is a very experienced cricketer, and we're sure he will bounce back and contribute in the rest of the series."

Add something along the lines of "and the WACA, which is his home ground, is a totally different pitch so performances at Adelaide cant be used as a guide to how a player will perform there blah blah blah"

 

[NUFAN]

Or it will mean instead of losing one wicket, we'll lose two really quickly because North's terrible batsman and is going to fail anyway (please!).

I was thinking a demotion in the batting order would be the perfect way for North to end his Test Career.

I reckon North would be a better ODI option for Australia. Less scrutiny if he makes a few low scores.

 

[andyc]

I was thinking a demotion in the batting order would be the perfect way for North to end his Test Career.

I reckon North would be a better ODI option for Australia. Less scrutiny if he makes a few low scores.

Not sure why any Australian team in any format should be willing to accept someone who makes so many low scores, tbh. Dump the guy ASAP and be done with it.

 

[pup11]

Mate, all you had to do was land the ball in a certain spot and the ball would turn and jump at pace

The fact that Hussey was able to cover that and play the ball along the ground is testimony to his skill not luck

The fact that KP, a bowler with a test average of well over 100, and Colly (who actually had Hussey in more trouble) were able to produce similar deliveries does not exactly speak volumes for Swann's performance against Hussey and Clarke

Agree with this, Swann looked good early in the innings when he was virtually allowed to bowl wherever he wanted by the Aussie top 3, but once Clarke and Hussey came together they forced his hand a bit and from thereon he just wasn't able to bowl with any consistentcy. Had Swann really bowled well, Australia would have been 6 or 7 down by now, but having said that he still has tomorrow to rectify things, and he would be up against two left handers on a turning pitch, so things really couldn't be any more favourable for him.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

I win a lot of money if he does.

Cribb - Australia's Michael Vaughan.

 

[pup11]

Not sure why any Australian team in any format should be willing to accept someone who makes so many low scores, tbh. Dump the guy ASAP and be done with it.

Not of fan of North or anything, but he surely would have been dropped had anyone really put their hand up.

 

[ripper868]

Reckon it's North's Audtion for the openers role tomorrow morning...similar situation really, knowing your batting first up the next morning, Hard new rock due, He does well i reckon he should be elevated to #1 and stuff it, captain as well.

Post may be in jest.

Drop the **** already. Haduseey to see off the deficit and set about leaving us with a lead of about 100 or so, leaving not enough time for the english to chase when the rain sets in.

EDIT: or England need to chase about 100 and Doherty picks ups 8, with two comical run outs (of KP and Swann)

 

[Furball]

The fact that KP, a bowler with a test average of well over 100, and Colly (who actually had Hussey in more trouble) were able to produce similar deliveries does not exactly speak volumes for Swann's performance against Hussey and Clarke

KP's always been a pretty big turner of the ball to be fair. If he can land the ball regularly in the rough, I'd expect him to cause massive problems.

 

[Ruckus]

Not of fan of North or anything, but he surely would have been dropped had anyone really put their hand up.

haha c'mon I'm pretty sure David Hussey has been putting his hand up for an absurd amount of time. If selectors don't pick someone just because they don't happen to make a FC century right in the 'selection window', that is just stupid imo. The policy of selecting players on extremely recent form is highly overated. Rather they should be picking players to begin with who show signs of long term potential (i.e. a good FC average over a substantial amount of matches).

 

[social]

haha c'mon I'm pretty sure David Hussey has been putting his hand up for an absurd amount of time. If selectors don't pick someone just because they don't happen to make a FC century right in the 'selection window', that is just stupid imo. The policy of selecting players on extremely recent form is highly overated. Rather they should be picking players to begin with who show signs of long term potential (i.e. a good FC average over a substantial amount of matches).

e.g. Hughes or Dussey

 

[andyc]

Not of fan of North or anything, but he surely would have been dropped had anyone really put their hand up.

What DeusEx has said, basically. Just because Khawaja or Hughes or Dussey haven't scored a ton in the most recent game doesn't mean that their vastly superior FC records, plus youth in the case of Khawaja or Hughes, count for nothing. One of those three out of form would still be an improvement on North out of form.

 

[Prince EWS]

While I don't agree with North's persistent selection, I do actually think the selectors are having some problems with the talent pool that have contributed to it. We can all point out how awesome Dave Hussey, Chris Rogers, Phil Jaques etc have been over long First Class careers or how impressive the likes of Hughes, Smith and Khawaja have been early in their careers, but there's nothing in between. I get the distinct impression that the selectors are very keen to pick a few batsmen in the mid to late 20s age range, and the players of that sub-generation just never really came through. All the serious candidates are over 32 or under 25 - ages that aren't really perfect for making a Test debut at.

We had a whole generation of batsmen who never really kicked on at First Class level as they were hoped to - Ferguson, Marsh, Cosgrove, Bailey, Pomersbach, Voges, Cosgrove, Cowan etc etc. For one reason or another, these guys haven't really had the success that the the batsmen either side of them seem to have. That's why we're left with North - comfortably the batsman with the best First Class career in that age range when he was selected, and the team balance at the time (three quicks and McDonald with no Watson and no specialist spinner) made him even more attractive.

This is one of many reasons I've never liked trying to get too funky with players' ages - I just like to pick the best team all the time and if that means debuting someone two weeks before they retire then so be it. The Australian selectors are definitely trying to be a bit funky with this progression business though and I think they want North as the experienced head of that age range when Katich, Ponting and Hussey go. Without him, Australia essentially have to build a batting lineup comprised almost completely of players outside their prime - 32+ or under 25. Again, not trying to justify it as I don't support his selection - just trying to possibly explain the "logic" behind it.

 

[andyc]

Yeah, good post that, especially the point about the lack of decent 'middle' aged batsmen. I suppose that, just as we've seen with the national team, the state teams are all kind of suffering from having good FC batsmen (Law, Love, Maher, Hodge, Lehmann, etc.) all retiring around the same time.

I just battle so hard to understand the reluctance to pick youngsters that have shown that they can compete strongly at domestic level instead of an experienced middle of the road kind of player.

 

[Furball]

While I don't agree with North's persistent selection, I do actually think the selectors are having some problems with the talent pool that have contributed to it. We can all point out how awesome Dave Hussey, Chris Rogers, Phil Jaques etc have been over long First Class careers or how impressive the likes of Hughes, Smith and Khawaja have been early in their careers, but there's nothing in between. I get the distinct impression that the selectors are very keen to pick someone to pick some batsmen in the mid to late 20s age range, and the players of that sub-generation just never really came through. All the serious candidates are over 32 or under 25 - ages that aren't really perfect for making a Test debut at.

We had a whole generation of batsmen who never really kicked on at First Class level as they were hoped to - Ferguson, Marsh, Cosgrove, Bailey, Pomersbach, Voges, Cosgrove, Cowan etc etc. For one reason or another, these guys haven't really had the success that the the batsmen either side of them seem to have. That's why we're left with North - comfortably the batsman with the best First Class career in that age range when he was selected, and the team balance at the time (three quicks and McDonald with no Watson and no specialist spinner) made him even more attractive.

This is one of many reasons I've never liked trying to get too funky with players' ages - I just like to pick the best team all the time and if that means debuting someone two weeks before they retire then so be it. The Australian selectors are definitely trying to be a bit funky with this progression business though and I think they want North as the experienced head of that age range when Katich, Ponting and Hussey go. Without him, Australia essentially have to build a batting lineup comprised almost completely of players outside their prime - 32+ or under 25. Again, not trying to justify it as I don't support his selection - just trying to possibly explain the "logic" behind it.

I made that very point a couple of days ago.

 

[zaremba]

Mike Hussey has become an enormous pain in the arse as far as England are concerned. We heard all about his loss of form leading into this series but we've never really seen anything of that from him. When he's not been leaving straight ones (Edgbaston 09) he's looked one of the toughest opponents I can remember us facing, and his record against us is monstrously good.

Please get out early Mike.

 

[ripper868]

Hi Zaremba

With regards to your get out early request i refer to the below

GAGFC

Sincerely

Mike Hussey

 

[Woodster]

A good day of Test cricket, but may all be in vain should the weather forecasters get their predictions spot on.

After the decision was taken to bat on this morning, rightly or wrongly time will tell, England were as positive as they had to be in order to keep the game moving forward. Bell played sumptuously, KP belligerent early and Prior selfless in his quest for quick runs when ideally a nice careful not out may have been his preferred method for confidence purposes. A partnership of 55 in no time against a demoralised attack would have been what Strauss was hoping for.

Australia's reply in chasing down the deficit was positive. Shane Watson again looking good, but he is player I don't worry about too much about from an English perspective. His consistency as an opener is commendable, but I get the feeling he's equally as vulnerable on 50 as he is on 5. When Hussey gets set, it's a worry, when Ponting is in and set, it's a worry, but with Watson I think he lacks what it takes to really cash in and score big.

Katich battled bravely, barely able to move between the wickets, but his strokeplay wasn't less pleasing on the eye as a result. Clarke looked much better, took one or two risks but it was a dramatic improvement from the first innings. No surprise it was him and Hussey that put their main partnership together, being two of Australia's best players of spin. Though I agree with Spark, thought they both rode their luck, but tbf to flourish on this track which is becoming increasingly difficult to play the spinners on, you need that, and perhaps they both deserved it.

The wicket of Clarke at the end, in theory was massive.Was astonished he stayed there and waited for the referral to be carried out. He got more of the bat on that than he did on anything in the first innings!

As for England's bowlers, thought Swann bowled well again today, with little loose stuff. Probably troubled Hussey a touch less due to the lack of footholes he was bowling into against the left-hander, but still got enough to cause a few moments of alarm. Finn bowled the best spell I've seen him bowl on this tour just prior to the tea break. He charged in, bowled with good pace and got some reverse swing, but it was his consistent areas that were most impressive.

I really hope the weather doesn't spoil what promises to be quite an exciting finish to this Test.

 

[Bun]

I cannot understand why Clarke is being targeted. After all it could have been a ****ing no ball as well. It happened like twice in the recent Ind-NZ series.

 

[Furball]

I'd give Pietersen a short spell in the morning, I reckon he'll be dangerous if he can land a few in the rough because he's tall and is actually a decent turner of the ball.

As he's a part timer he might leak a few with bad balls, but at the moment, the potential benefit outweighs the downside.

 

[simmy]

Has there ever been a case of the home team's groundstaff elongating their pitch preparation and "mopping up time" to help the home team?

Morning forecast looks good but afternoon more variable and then the evening horrific.

We better win, would be so unjust.