***Official*** Pakistan in Australia 2016/17

[vic_orthdox]

Whatever time of the Test it is, whether it's well targeted or not, it's always fun cricket watching a team try and bump out players.

 

[Blocky]

Whatever time of the Test it is, whether it's well targeted or not, it's always fun cricket watching a team try and bump out players.

Wagner brought it back, remains the best consistent performer with it too, for some reason his 135KPH bouncer seems to hustle the batsmen more than almost anyone since Mitchell Johnson's 150KPH editions.

 

[Spark]

Shouldn't be that hard tbh. Will do it now.

Here we go:

3/144
3/106
3/78
3/72
2*/206 (effectively 3 as Clarke retired hurt)
2/98
2/115
2/204
1/0
1/78
1/110
1/8
2/287
2/67
1/21
2/75

I'd call this a pretty normal spread of when a batsman comes in having batted at 5, 4 and then 3. This is very shorn of context, as it misses a few examples I spotted where a stack of wickets fell after Smith came in, and the 1/8 was at 2nd innings Perth last year, but there's only 4 innings here that could even be vaguely called "downhill skiing": 3 where he came in with 200+ on the board and that 2nd innings at Perth last season. Certainly not as many times as where he's come into a very dangerous situation and bailed us out.

 

[Blocky]

Here we go:

3/144
3/106
3/78
3/72
2*/206 (effectively 3 as Clarke retired hurt)
2/98
2/115
2/204
1/0
1/78
1/110
1/8
2/287
2/67
1/21
2/75

I'd call this a pretty normal spread of when a batsman comes in having batted at 5, 4 and then 3. This is very shorn of context, as it misses a few examples I spotted where a stack of wickets fell after Smith came in, and the 1/8 was at 2nd innings Perth last year, but there's only 4 innings here that could even be vaguely called "downhill skiing": 3 where he came in with 200+ on the board and that 2nd innings at Perth last season.

I'd consider any of those 2/100+ or 1/78 as being "set" innings.

If you compare him to what Root or Williamson has to deal with, you'll start to get more of a picture. If you also take into account innings where he scored a century where no one else managed to score one, you'll get more of a picture too.

 

[Dan]

Apart from the small spike on RTS, the slightest tickle on hot spot and the fact Warner was at deep square while the decision was being made?

Admittedly the TV I'm watching on barely does standard definition, let alone HD, but i saw nothing on hot spot. And from side on, the RTS spike showed up after the ball was well clear of the bat/glove.

 

[Spark]

Admittedly the TV I'm watching on barely does standard definition, let alone HD, but i saw nothing on hot spot. And from side on, the RTS spike showed up after the ball was well clear of the bat/glove.

It wasn't really a "spot" on hot spot. I saw it but wasn't sure what it was at first, it was so vague.

Matching up with snicko was definitely conclusive though IMO.

 

[Blocky]

Admittedly the TV I'm watching on barely does standard definition, let alone HD, but i saw nothing on hot spot. And from side on, the RTS spike showed up after the ball was well clear of the bat/glove.

It's an interesting precedence, because that type of dismissal has remained with the on-field call throughout the DRS until probably this season where there seems to be more of a mandate to use instinct/judgement as much as what the technology tells you to understand whether or not it's been edged. The Williamson dismissal comes to mind as one where DRS gave him out and everyone lost their **** because they felt he hadn't hit it, that was an over-turn too.

As long as it's consistent, and as long as they're looking to make the right onfield decision, I don't mind it. I think benefit of the doubt has to be eradicated from the game, especially the modern game where most of the benefits now sit with the batsmen (better bats, covered wickets, balls that don't do as much, etc etc)

 

[Dan]

Yeah all I saw was endless, unchanging dark grey. Again, may be the ****** tv

 

[Spark]

I'd consider any of those 2/100+ or 1/78 as being "set" innings.

If you compare him to what Root or Williamson has to deal with, you'll start to get more of a picture. If you also take into account innings where he scored a century where no one else managed to score one, you'll get more of a picture too.

The cricket world is not divided into "extremely difficult" and "downhill skiing", even not withstanding the fact that Smith definitely wins over Root in this case.

Seriously, Smith will win almost any comparison you can think of which is based around scoring hundreds specifically. It's what he does considerably better than his contemporaries, who have other strengths.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah all I saw was endless, unchanging dark grey. Again, may be the ****** tv

That was the Melbourne weather.

 

[Blocky]

The cricket world is not divided into "extremely difficult" and "downhill skiing", even not withstanding the fact that Smith definitely wins over Root in this case.

Seriously, Smith will win almost any comparison you can think of which is based around scoring hundreds specifically. It's what he does considerably better than his contemporaries, who have other strengths.

His contemporaries don't go missing entirely during home series where they're beaten by a side that wasn't favoured to beat them during the start of the series (i.e RSA) or when conditions don't suit (i.e Sri Lanka)

 

[Johnners]

So basically what you're saying is "let me just rag on Smith because I don't like him alright"?

 

[Spark]

His contemporaries don't go missing entirely during home series where they're beaten by a side that wasn't favoured to beat them during the start of the series (i.e RSA) or when conditions don't suit (i.e Sri Lanka)

Two failures is not "entirely missing". You're under this weird misconception that he batted badly at Hobart, when he was the only batsman to do anything.

And he was our best batsman in SL.

But anyway, he could make 40 hundreds in his career and average 45+ in all conditions and you'd still find a way to make bizarre arguments against him, so I'm going to do something more productive with my time.

 

[Shady Slim]

surely you can't be taken seriously if you say warner's not a flat track bully but smith downhill skis lol

 

[Blocky]

Actually, the narrative is more about the flat highway road pitches that Australia produce repeatedly and how the current Australian bowling attack will struggle as much as the visitors to take wickets, because they don't have the Warnes and McGrath's who could do it in all conditions.

 

[Blocky]

Two failures is not "entirely missing". You're under this weird misconception that he batted badly at Hobart, when he was the only batsman to do anything.

And he was our best batsman in SL.

44* isn't a top innings, especially when he made absolutely no attempt to shield the tail.

 

[Shady Slim]

Actually, the narrative is more about the flat highway road pitches that Australia produce repeatedly and how the current Australian bowling attack will struggle as much as the visitors to take wickets, because they don't have the Warnes and McGrath's who could do it in all conditions.

tbf australia of late has been the best roads batting and bowling team in the world, and up until the sa series objectively were

 

[Blocky]

tbf australia of late has been the best roads batting and bowling team in the world, and up until the sa series objectively were

tbf, you had India and the West Indies, they're not going to be threats there... you then had New Zealand who were competitive considering the two main bowlers went absolutely missing because the ball offered them nothing, but ultimately still easy for Australia to beat.

I'm expecting England to win this years Ashes in Australia based on their bowling attacks, even with England recently being run over in the sub continent and Anderson being on his last legs.

You're also putting so many overs into Mitchell Starc that I think he's going to have severe injury issues sooner rather than later.

 

[SteveNZ]

Admittedly the TV I'm watching on barely does standard definition, let alone HD, but i saw nothing on hot spot. And from side on, the RTS spike showed up after the ball was well clear of the bat/glove.

Was a smart arse comment on my behalf actually, I saw nothing on hot spot either. I did think RTS was in time with the glove though.

Anyone think the third umpire looked down onto the ground, saw Davey walking off and decided to use the little info he had to give it out? Wish that'd happened at Adelaide last year....

 

[Shady Slim]

tbf, you had India and the West Indies, they're not going to be threats there... you then had New Zealand who were competitive considering the two main bowlers went absolutely missing because the ball offered them nothing, but ultimately still easy for Australia to beat.

I'm expecting England to win this years Ashes in Australia based on their bowling attacks, even with England recently being run over in the sub continent and Anderson being on his last legs.

You're also putting so many overs into Mitchell Starc that I think he's going to have severe injury issues sooner rather than later.

look at the two tests we won in england tbh, no coincidence they were both the roady roads we bowled well on, even moreso than the pitches that assisted the bowling

we're successful in south africa because they're often either roads or fast and bouncy near roads

james anderson of late is the anti australian, very good at using conditions to his advantage but no so helpful when it doesn't do anything, england's assets with the ball in the upcoming ashes are broad and stokes

regarding starc that's true but only because we've been bowling absolute dross (josh hazlewood and to a lesser degree bird exempted) so we have had to bowl long, ideally he'll get a break in india when smith hopefully realises spin can be used to take wickets and isn't just a holding option; though i have reservations considering lyon's style is suited to aus pitches (roads!!) moreso than an indian pitch, johan botha for the india tour to do the jadeja job isn't the worst idea imo