1st Test, Aus vs India, Adelaide oval 17th-21st December

[morgieb]

70 overs a day is ****ing grim watching. They have to be anal about it to enforce it but it's worth it.

Except that never happens.

 

[trundler]

If its 70 overs of high quality frontline bowlers, then whats the issue. Instead we get 5 overs from Labu to speed things up which is exactly how we improve the viewing experience right?

If the frontline bowlers git gud they wouldn't have to get Labu on

 

[Kirkut]

theyre an awfully long way from that mate. More likely to be a/o 180-200 if it hoops tonight

great session of cricket that. Batsmen fought hard against class bowlers creating chances.

Yes, you need some 3 Graham Gooches to even come close to 350 here.

 

[OverratedSanity]

250 would be a success from here imo, especially if it moves around a lot under lights.

 

[stephen]

Except that never happens.

Not since the 1980s Windies at least.

 

[cnerd123]

tbf Aus are only 5 overs behind the required over-rate. They can catch that up

 

[trundler]

Except that never happens.

It does't because there are rules in place to prevent it from happening. Used to happen with WI in the 80s. WI bowled 20 overs in the first session in the 2nd test vs NZ. If there were no sanctions for slow overrates, they'd have bowled 60 at that rate.

 

[Gnske]

duffer can you please offer an assessment of the stature of Sunil Gavaskar for the benefit of this community?

 

[SteveNZ]

Why do people care about over-rate so much as though its the biggest problem with test cricket? Its such a nothingburger

I don't understand why people wouldn't care. You're absolutely fine with a certain amount less overs because fielders and bowlers want to **** about a bit between balls and overs, when they're well capable of moving things forward and therefore ultimately producing more pieces of cricket (ie the sport we're all watching) in a day?

Are over rates going to be the death of Test cricket? No. Are they annoying? To me, oath they are. The Windies were rubbish in the last two Tests v us, barely manage 10 overs an hour. It's not good enough.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Yeah I imagine it was hazy because of all the pollution Sunny

 

[Teja.]

Third session bound to be exciting however it goes.

 

[Gnske]

I don't understand why people wouldn't care. You're absolutely fine with a certain amount less overs because fielders and bowlers want to **** about a bit between balls and overs, when they're well capable of moving things forward and therefore ultimately producing more pieces of cricket (ie the sport we're all watching) in a day?

Are over rates going to be the death of Test cricket? No. Are they annoying? To me, oath they are. The Windies were rubbish in the last two Tests v us, barely manage 10 overs an hour. It's not good enough.

They even walk off slow. Watching Bravo walk off after one of his dismissals in that last test was like watching an old guy in a walker try to make it across the road in front of an SUV going at 90.

 

[stephen]

I hope Kohli comes out and punches Labuschagne in the gut so that we can move on from the over rates being the most controversial thing in this thread, other than your face.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I don't understand why people wouldn't care. You're absolutely fine with a certain amount less overs because fielders and bowlers want to **** about a bit between balls and overs, when they're well capable of moving things forward and therefore ultimately producing more pieces of cricket (ie the sport we're all watching) in a day?

Are over rates going to be the death of Test cricket? No. Are they annoying? To me, oath they are. The Windies were rubbish in the last two Tests v us, barely manage 10 overs an hour. It's not good enough.

Its only annoying and harmful when its truly egregious like the game youre talking about. But in the broadcast , commentators constantly comment on the over-rate even when a team is a mere handful of overs behind the required rate. The amount of attention it gets irrationally annoys me. Being too anal about overrates is how we get more rubbish part timers imo. Its not going to improve the quality of a day's cricket the way its being handled

 

[trundler]

It's a necessary evil and I'm fine with it if stops WI's efforts from becoming the norm

 

[trundler]

Is that Chappell stand for Greg or Ian? Very beta to not pick one.

 

[Burgey]

I don't understand why people wouldn't care. You're absolutely fine with a certain amount less overs because fielders and bowlers want to **** about a bit between balls and overs, when they're well capable of moving things forward and therefore ultimately producing more pieces of cricket (ie the sport we're all watching) in a day?

Are over rates going to be the death of Test cricket? No. Are they annoying? To me, oath they are. The Windies were rubbish in the last two Tests v us, barely manage 10 overs an hour. It's not good enough.

it’s got less to do with fielders and bowlers ****ing around than it does batsmen changing gloves, bitching about a 40 metre wide sightscreen etc.

The fact that generally speaking more runs arescored is also a factor. I’d rather see 8/300 (82-85 overs) than 3/180 (112) any day, which is what cricket in the 50s and 60s was.

I’ve lost count of the number of times I hear tv or radio commentators complaining about lost overs at the end of a day over the sound of a capacity crowd going nuts because there’s been 300 runs/ 10+ wickets taken in a day. It’s cringe.

 

[Gnske]

Is that Chappell stand for Greg or Ian? Very beta to not pick one.

Trevor, for setting back NZ cricket by 100 years with a single ball.

 

[SteveNZ]

Its only annoying and harmful when its truly egregious like the game youre talking about. But in the broadcast , commentators constantly comment on the over-rate even when a team is a mere handful of overs behind the required rate. The amount of attention it gets irrationally annoys me. Being too anal about overrates is how we get more rubbish part timers imo. Its not going to improve the quality of a day's cricket the way its being handled

Oh no doubt, I'm not saying today's is horrendous or anything like that. It's not great to be fair, 55 two sessions in with 13 overs of spin...but it's certainly nowhere near West Indies' 20 in the first session of one of the Tests this month (I forget which one). I'd argue that Australia need to be a bit sharper than 55 overs when Lyon bowls nigh on half the overs from one end...it's probably worth mentioning in commentary but not harping on about it. And I do think teams (and captains probably in the most part) should have a commitment to trying to be as close to 30 overs a session as they can be, to be as urgent as they can be for the sake of the viewing public without altering what they'd normally do in terms of their bowlers and tactics.

 

[trundler]

Trevor, for setting back NZ cricket by 100 years with a single ball.

NZ cricket was stuck in 1870 until 1979 anyway. How cruel.