***Official*** 3rd Test at the WACA

[LegionOfBrad]

That scorecard is actually even worse than I remembered. What an awful, awful Test that was.

Absolutely awful. Up there with England India at TB where Jimmy nearly got a century and Chef took a wicket doing impressions.

Curators mess up sometimes.

 

[Dan]

Malan

 

[Starfighter]

I actually wonder if it'll get faster. If the pace in the pitch is because of the grass, you'd expect it to ease off as the pitch dries out.

So it might become an easy batting draw pitch which only a lollapse will get a result on? If it's cloudier it might swing a little, but only when the s***aburra's new.

That scorecard is actually even worse than I remembered. What an awful, awful Test that was.

That one was completely dead from the get-go though. That match was indescribably bad watching. The scorecard genuinely undersells how bad it was. A real 800 track.

 

[Spark]

So it might become an easy batting draw pitch which only a lollapse will get a result on?



That one was completely dead from the get-go though. That match was indescribably bad watching. The scorecard genuinely undersells how bad it was. A real 800 track.

Genuinely disgusting when a high quality attack bowls quite well and concedes 600+. Those are the pitches that should cop fines, not fun ones like Pune.

 

[Spark]

Absolutely awful. Up there with England India at TB where Jimmy nearly got a century and Chef took a wicket doing impressions.

Curators mess up sometimes.

That at least was funny. That Perth Test had no almost no redeeming qualities whatsoever and ended the career of a modern great.

 

[Prince EWS]

The Shield wickets in Perth this season have been very similar to this on Day 1, and by Day 4 each match they've all just been silly roads. Obviously no fifth day in Shield games but I would not be expecting the wicket to get more difficult. There's a bit of (very consistent) bounce and basically nothing else.

 

[adub]

Usually only when it's really, really hot, and even then not always.

Sometimes it just flattens out and 4th innings batting here is the easiest batting you will ever see. Like I thought the pitch played well today but the true test is Days 3 and 4, because sometimes it flattens out completely and you get, well, this.

Yeah, after the first two sessions I was thinking this looks a good pitch. But once the ball got soft it really is one you should turn a 20 into a big ton. It looks suspiciously like one of those Perth wickets that just gets easier to bat on. Like 1st Test, South Africa tour of Australia at Perth, Dec 17-21 2008 | Match Summary | ESPNCricinfo

Don't want to get ahead of ourselves, but it was the early pace and bounce that was giving the Aussie quicks something in the first 3 hours. After that early life dried out it was hard yakka for the bowlers. If it is one of those wickets where it just flattens out with nothing off the deck and a billiard table outfield then we might even be appalled by the sight of Mitchell Marsh scoring runs. Maybe Anderson can get something out of the doctor, but it's hard to see any of the other English bowlers really making life tough if it is going to become as roady as it's looking.

 

[Starfighter]

That at least was funny. That Perth Test had no almost no redeeming qualities whatsoever and ended the career of a modern great.

It had that spell where Starc hit 160 and Williamson did some weird things against Haze and got out. But even then it seemed easy enough for the batsmen. About 20 mildly diverting minutes amongst 29 hours of ****.

Genuinely disgusting when a high quality attack bowls quite well and concedes 600+. Those are the pitches that should cop fines, not fun ones like Pune.

Even if it's annoying when your team is on the receiving end pitches like Pune always produce something that might be worth watching.

 

[Spark]

It had that spell where Starc hit 160 and Williamson did some weird things against Haze and got out. But even then it seemed easy enough for the batsmen. About 20 mildly diverting minutes amongst 29 hours of ****.


Even if it's annoying when your team is on the receiving end pitches like Pune always produce something that might be worth watching.

Speak for yourself, I think pitches like Pune are universally hilarious. I wasn't as much a fan of Bangalore because that was more of a lottery with the inconsistent bounce, but even that was leagues better than the tripe served up at Perth too often over the last 10-15 years.

 

[morgieb]

Speak for yourself, I think pitches like Pune are universally hilarious. I wasn't as much a fan of Bangalore because that was more of a lottery with the inconsistent bounce, but even that was leagues better than the tripe served up at Perth too often over the last 10-15 years.

Even in Pune it was possible to score runs if you really dug in. I don't see how you can expect decent figures at all on a pitch like Perth.

 

[Starfighter]

Speak for yourself, I think pitches like Pune are universally hilarious. I wasn't as much a fan of Bangalore because that was more of a lottery with the inconsistent bounce, but even that was leagues better than the tripe served up at Perth too often over the last 10-15 years.

Woah, wait up, I'm Australian and was very much supporting Australia. It was analogous. I thought Bangalore was actually the worse pitch by the end of the match. O'Keefe cleaned up with a whole bunch of typical non-turners which was ****ing hilarious and made Warne absolutely taste it (not that he noticed).

 

[Furball]

What was the controversy sorrounding Stoneman's dismissal? BT comms made mention when I had the cricket on this morning getting ready for work and Cricinfo have mentioned it when I checked the score card but the replay I saw just looked like he'd gloved a well directed short ball.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Can't understand people wrapping up tons on roads. They're easy and inconsequential.

Doubt even the inclusion of Mitch Marsh can prevent a draw here. The WACA curators should've dished up better than this for the final game, fmd.

It's a well-known fact that when we doctor our wickets over here, we do it to allow the opposition to rack up a total. It's incredibly generous.

 

[Second Spitter]

What was the controversy sorrounding Stoneman's dismissal? BT comms made mention when I had the cricket on this morning getting ready for work and Cricinfo have mentioned it when I checked the score card but the replay I saw just looked like he'd gloved a well directed short ball.

Lack of evidence to overturn the on-field decision. I heard on the radio that the 3rd ump may have access to a larger frame than shown on TV.

 

[adub]

Even if it's annoying when your team is on the receiving end pitches like Pune always produce something that might be worth watching.

That's the really annoying thing though isn't it. The first three hours were ****ing engrossing cricket. Runs flowing, quicks bowling snorters. There are really far too few pitches where genuine quick bowling really is rewarded (as opposed to seamy green wickets where medium pacers grab a bagful or dustbowls). It was great the way the English bats were just hanging in there, but still pumping anything in the slot to the fence or edging fours over the slips etc. 4 days of that would be some of the best test cricket you could ever watch. But Perth doesn't seem to be that place anymore (was it ever really?).

 

[Starfighter]

What was the controversy sorrounding Stoneman's dismissal? BT comms made mention when I had the cricket on this morning getting ready for work and Cricinfo have mentioned it when I checked the score card but the replay I saw just looked like he'd gloved a well directed short ball.

It was given not out and overturned quite hastily, then they re-checked it after Stoneman had nearly walked off.

I wouldn't have overturned it, there was nothing at all on hot-spot, the snicko snick was well after the supposed contact and the 'supposedly clinching' replay was, in my opinion, pretty much inconclusive and was from an angle which would be very favourable for a spurious appearance of contact.

 

[morgieb]

What was the controversy sorrounding Stoneman's dismissal? BT comms made mention when I had the cricket on this morning getting ready for work and Cricinfo have mentioned it when I checked the score card but the replay I saw just looked like he'd gloved a well directed short ball.

Was originally given not out. Australia referred it but it seemed kinda inconclusive (there was no mark on the glove with the bat on it, and it also appeared to hit the lower glove which wasn't on the bat). Yet it was still overturned.

FTR it was probably out, but the process was kinda iffy (the replay which saw it hit the glove wasn't shown originally) and people felt there was enough doubt to not overturn the original decision.

 

[Spark]

I think it was more that they overturned it really quickly, without consulting any of the offside camera angles at all, which is bizarre because surely that's where you'll actually see the ball?

 

[Spark]

To be clear, all this doom and gloom pitch talk is hypothetical. For the most part the pitch today played really well; it's very rare that you'll get a pitch in Australia that looks anything but flat when you have a 60-over old Kookaburra.

 

[Starfighter]

I think it was more that they overturned it really quickly, without consulting any of the offside camera angles at all, which is bizarre because surely that's where you'll actually see the ball?

I wonder why they couldn't get a snicko replay from the off side? You'd think that would have been the best, yet the only non-hotspot angle used was that one from third man.