***Official*** NatWest Series/Challenge

[greg]

Arguing about the respective merits of the pitches is missing an obvious point. The toss at Lords WAS decisive, for the simple reason that England deserve to be ranked with Bangladesh and Zimbabwe in games where they are batting first. Under Vaughan (and including 'joke' games in the Champions Trophy) they have won 6 and lost 13 in these circumstances. Batting second on the other hand they are comfortably up there with Australia, having won 16 and lost 3.

It is, incidentally, the one area IMO, which remains a slight concern for England in the test arena. Whereas they have performed above what might have been expected when they have had the supposedly difficult task of batting second (and last) in several tests under Vaughan they still seem to struggle to some extent when the underlying characteristics of the match have yet to be formed, and therefore the players seem to find it difficult to focus on what they are trying to achieve - most obviously apparent in the first innings of test matches. Substandard bowling performances can often go unnoticed because their batting has usually been able to recover the situation, but poor batting performances can rarely be recovered. Exhibits A, B and C would be two test matches vs South Africa (Lords 2003 and Durban 2004/5) and the third test vs Sri Lanka in 2004.

 

[luckyeddie]

Have the days of a team winning the toss and electing to bat gone forever, the only possible exception being games played as day-nighters in much-maligned Durban?

 

[Scaly piscine]

Mate, do you watch the games at all? At Headingley, the pitch was a minefield when Australia batted, and fairly sedate when England batted.

Rubbish, it wasn't sedate at all. Did you watch the games at all? Did you watch the ball Trescothick edged when he was on eighty-odd? Just because Gillepsie is busy bowling half-pace half-trackers getting smacked around whilst other bowlers go through the motions towards the end doesn't mean the pitch has become sedate.

 

[greg]

There has always been a heavy bias in favour of batting second in England. A mixture of early morning conditions, the ball not going soft, small grounds making scores difficult to defend etc. etc I guess. Unlike in many other countries, especially the sub-continent, chasing 8-10 an over in the last 10 is usually at least a 50:50 proposition. (with wickets in hand)

 

[sledger]

doesnt mean it, doesnt take away from the fact that it was,

 

[aussie]

Rubbish, it wasn't sedate at all. Did you watch the games at all? Did you watch the ball Trescothick edged when he was on eighty-odd? Just because Gillepsie is busy bowling half-pace half-trackers getting smacked around whilst other bowlers go through the motions towards the end doesn't mean the pitch has become sedate.

even so scaly, the pitch did become easier to bat on towards the end of Australia's innings and for the entire England innings.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Rubbish, it wasn't sedate at all. Did you watch the games at all? Did you watch the ball Trescothick edged when he was on eighty-odd? Just because Gillepsie is busy bowling half-pace half-trackers getting smacked around whilst other bowlers go through the motions towards the end doesn't mean the pitch has become sedate.

It might not have been as sedate as Adelaide on a 38 degree day in late January, but it was a far cry from what was seen earlier in the day. And you will notice that I mentioned Gillespie bowled poorly, but that doesn't alter the fact that after the first few overs the pitch did very little for any bowler, while earlier in the day even Paul Collingwood was moving it a mile.

 

[vic_orthdox]

He really doesn't appear to be doing himself any favours as far as making himself 'tall' is concerned. It doesn't look as though the bouncer would be much of an effective weapon, on account of the fact that he would have to 'telegraph' it, either by changing his action or hitting his own toes.

Then again, if he can swing it and get seam movement, we're talking 'Glenn Plus' so it would be unfair for him to be able to peg a batsman onto his back foot too, especially if the yorker is as good as suggested.

We'd then be talking 'greatest fast bowler of all time by a mile'

I think you'll find that - as a general rule - often the smallest men (and in this case, Tait has a very low point of release) often have just as hard to deal with bouncers as the bigger fast bowlers. Its just that the bigger men get more bounce out of their stock ball.

Now, I don't know much about Malcolm Marshall, but I'm pretty sure you can lump him in with the "small but good bouncer" group, yeh? Perfect example?

 

[luckyeddie]

I think you'll find that - as a general rule - often the smallest men (and in this case, Tait has a very low point of release) often have just as hard to deal with bouncers as the bigger fast bowlers. Its just that the bigger men get more bounce out of their stock ball.

Now, I don't know much about Malcolm Marshall, but I'm pretty sure you can lump him in with the "small but good bouncer" group, yeh? Perfect example?

Marshall had one of the greatest bouncers I ever saw - as has already pointed out, it was 'skiddy' as well as quick. Charlie Griffith had the most lethal, but that was, er, a doosra (politically correct term for a chuck).

That'll get a reaction.

 

[age_master]

how is Tait even being compared to Marshall?

 

[vic_orthdox]

I'm not comparing him to Marshall. I'm just using Marshall as a point of reference to say that just because someone isn't releasing the ball from as high, doesn't mean that their bouncer is any less lethal.

 

[Top_Cat]

how is Tait even being compared to Marshall?

Well, yeah that's right. Tait, although releasing from a low point in his delivery stride, is 6'3" whereas Marshall was 5'10". Bit of a difference. They are entirely different types of bowler, yes.

I posted this in another thread about how Tait can be somewhat inconsistent but it's worth reposting;

"I personally watched him, in the same match he took a ten-fer, bowl two of the widest deliveries I've ever seen. I know people joke about bowlers not being able to bowl on the 'cut portion' but seriously, these two didn't even land anywhere near them. For those who know Adelaide Oval, both deliveries he was bowling from the River Torrens End and they flew from his hand to the boundary right underneath the sightscreen. Now THAT's wide.................

That's the view from the Torrens End. Now imagine a bowler running into bowl, letting go of the ball and the ball then rolling into the fence under the scoreboard and you'll get an idea of how wide those balls were!"

The match in which he did that was in the season just gone too. I think after he bowled those two balls, he then ripped through the opposition's batting line-up. That's Tait. His 8/43 in the ING Cup had something like 12 wides in it. That's Tait.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

That's the view from the Torrens End. Now imagine a bowler running into bowl, letting go of the ball and the ball then rolling into the fence under the scoreboard and you'll get an idea of how wide those balls were!

The fine leg should be sacked!

 

[Top_Cat]

If I remember correctly, he was too fine!!! hahahaha

 

[vic_orthdox]

His 8/43 in the ING Cup had something like 12 wides in it. That's Tait

It was also the most amazing One Day spell I've ever seen. Stumps were cartwheeling a very very long way back, blokes were jumping out of the way so they wouldn't be hit.

 

[Top_Cat]

It was also the most amazing One Day spell I've ever seen. Stumps were cartwheeling a very very long way back, blokes were jumping out of the way so they wouldn't be hit.

Yep, exactly. What a spell. I did better than him on a match once; 5/14 of which 11 runs were wides. It was a weird day.

I got the number of wides wrong, by the way; he bowled 9 wides and 4 no-balls.

Here's the match in question;

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2003-04/AUS_LOCAL/ING/SCORECARDS/SOA_TAS_ING_09JAN2004.html

 

[age_master]

Yep, exactly. What a spell. I did better than him on a match once; 5/14 of which 11 runs were wides. It was a weird day.

I got the number of wides wrong, by the way; he bowled 9 wides and 4 no-balls.

Here's the match in question;

http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2003-04/AUS_LOCAL/ING/SCORECARDS/SOA_TAS_ING_09JAN2004.html

gotta love the way Lehmann got the other 2 wickets there

 

[greg]

Stumps were cartwheeling a very very long way back, blokes were jumping out of the way so they wouldn't be hit.

I know it's sort of taken as gospel that Australian state cricket is the best domestic competition, but i don't think stories like this exactly enhance its reputation.

 

[Top_Cat]

I know it's sort of taken as gospel that Australian state cricket is the best domestic competition, but i don't think stories like this exactly enhance its reputation.

Why? I've heard exactly the same sort of stuff from English county cricket when guys like Sylvester Clarke, Devon Melcolm, etc. were bowling. This doesn't impact on my belief that English county cricket is and has been strong for many years.

Seriously, Tait is FAST when he really winds up. And dangerous because sometimes it's impossible to know which way the ball is going.

 

[marc71178]

The problem with someone as wayward as that is that he will bowl loose deliveries, and I would suggest that top drawer batsmen could really make him suffer.