***Official*** South Africa In Australia

[longtom]

Considering most of the bowling line-up plus Haddin is new, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that they aren't bonded like what we used to be. The likes of Warne, McGrath, Gilchrist, Taylor, S Waugh, et al were men bonded together by the fires of success and failure. Even if they didn't get along there was a connection. It'll take time.

Personally, I think I am, as an Aussie fan, a bit more relaxed than most. I think people thought this Aussie team would instantly click, and I think that was stupid to assume. Yes, they are highly talented - in fact, I'd say they are still potentially the best team in the world, there is a pool of talent in Australia that is capable of making it in the Test arena. Yes, they're still strong. But patience is needed and not changes for the sake of changes and decisions based on rolls of the dice. Test cricket is a game for those who wait, and it's not any different here.

Wessels appears to agree with you:

http://news.theage.com.au/sport/australia-must-face-the-beast-wessels-20081231-77uo.html

 

[Craig]

South Africa werent playing silly shots? Thats news to me. Perhaps you need to rewatch the Kallis dismissal from the first inning. Losing wickets to Johnson and Hauritz is almost inevitably down to poor or unnecessary strokes. Australia without Clark currently have one of the worst bowling attacks going around in the world, and theres no getting away from that IMO.



Johnson doesnt 'bowl it all over the place' nor did I claim that he did. He just doesnt bowl on the stumps theres a difference. He has been fairly economical for most of his career and instead of picking defensive bowlers Australia would be better off picking someone who can actually take wickets. I dont rate Tait, but its painfully obvious that he and Bracken are far more likely to win Australia test matches than Johnson and Hauritz. And a glance at the record of the latest player in the selection merry go round suggests that McDonald is going to be another joke selection over someone like Dave Hussey.

Can't you say that against any bowler though?

 

[longtom]

Lee out of South Africa tour

I know - some of the Aussies were calling for his blood and are probably happy - I, for once, reckon he is a very good bowler and an excellent sportsman.
Great combination - doesn't appear to come to often and I will miss him here in February.

More here:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2008/12/31/1230681570815.html

longtom

 

[BoyBrumby]

Considering most of the bowling line-up plus Haddin is new, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that they aren't bonded like what we used to be. The likes of Warne, McGrath, Gilchrist, Taylor, S Waugh, et al were men bonded together by the fires of success and failure. Even if they didn't get along there was a connection. It'll take time.

Personally, I think I am, as an Aussie fan, a bit more relaxed than most. I think people thought this Aussie team would instantly click, and I think that was stupid to assume. Yes, they are highly talented - in fact, I'd say they are still potentially the best team in the world, there is a pool of talent in Australia that is capable of making it in the Test arena. Yes, they're still strong. But patience is needed and not changes for the sake of changes and decisions based on rolls of the dice. Test cricket is a game for those who wait, and it's not any different here.

Think that's fair enough. Objectively your batting is still arguably the best in the world, even if at least two of the top six are in the worst form of their test careers. The absence of such notable get-out-of-jail-free cards like Gilchrist, Warne & McGrath obviously exaggerates the current failings of the top order and means passengers are less easily carried than they were a couple of years ago.

It'd actually be interesting to see if the average total of runs scored by the first 5 Australian wickets has actually declined since Gilly retired or if it just seems like that because the bowling isn't what it was. CBA to do the leg work tho.

 

[pup11]

Interesting passage in Neil Manthorp's diary on the Supersport website:

"Sunday, December 28

...
Warne's question about Katich's bowling is put to vice-captain Michael Clarke after play: "I am not consulted about bowling changes and have no say in the matter," he says.

"But you are vice-captain," continues his questioner.

"Yes, but you'll have to ask the captain about the bowling changes."

Bloody hell. Discord in the ranks? In Australia? As several Proteas have mentioned, this is the quietest and least bonded Aussie team ever to face South Africa.
..."

I know, no team likes to loose...but that from the vice captain?...

Any of the Aussie care to comment?

I posted earlier that I heard Clarke on the radio and he was asked the same question and he said that he went up to Katich and asked him if he could bowl and he said Katich told him that he hadn't practiced in the nets recently or something like that. Now, those seem like two pretty different answers to the exact same question...

I think you really can't blame Clarke for what he said, as he is not the one running the show there, bowling changes are something that are completely upto the captain to make a call upon, and if Ponting doesn't want to discuss bowling changes with Clarke, then obviously Clarke can't force him into doing that.

Anyways this is what Clarke actually said about Katich not bowling:
"I actually asked Simon at some stage late in the day if he was okay to bowl," Clarke said. "He said he hadn't been bowling in the nets because his shoulder was a little bit sore. But in saying that I think if he had have been asked to bowl I think he would have done that."

 

[pup11]

Lee out of South Africa tour

I know - some of the Aussies were calling for his blood and are probably happy - I, for once, reckon he is a very good bowler and an excellent sportsman.
Great combination - doesn't appear to come to often and I will miss him here in February.

More here:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2008/12/31/1230681570815.html

longtom

Really gutted with this, was hoping he would be back for the South African tour and bowl as well as we know he is capable of, but i guess this lay off would help him make a strong comeback, so fingers crossed for Binger.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I think you really can't blame Clarke for what he said, as he is not the one running the show there, bowling changes are something that are completely upto the captain to make a call upon, and if Ponting doesn't want to discuss bowling changes with Clarke, then obviously Clarke can't force him into doing that.

Anyways this is what Clarke actually said about Katich not bowling:
"I actually asked Simon at some stage late in the day if he was okay to bowl," Clarke said. "He said he hadn't been bowling in the nets because his shoulder was a little bit sore. But in saying that I think if he had have been asked to bowl I think he would have done that."

I think the point is that it looks like passing the buck, which should be contrary to the whole ethos of a team. Success has many fathers but failure is an orphan, as the old proverb goes.

 

[pup11]

I think the point is that it looks like passing the buck, which should be contrary to the whole ethos of a team. Success has many fathers but failure is an orphan, as the old proverb goes.

Yup it might sound like that, but it doesn't help when you ask wrong people the right questions, this a question they should have asked Ponting to answer, Clarke obviously made it clear that he has zero involvement in issues like bowling changes so he is in no position to answer the question.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Yup it might sound like that, but it doesn't help when you ask wrong people the right questions, this a question they should have asked Ponting to answer, Clarke obviously made it clear that he has zero involvement in issues like bowling changes so he is in no position to answer the question.

One might well wonder why the bloomin' flip he's the vice-captain then. Ultimately it's the skipper's choice, but if the vice captain demurs from a decision you'd think the captain explaining his thinking to his immediate deputy wouldn't be too much of a stretch.

 

[Ikki]

Yeh, Brumby has a point there. Is it me or has the team communication/environment gone to ****s since Buchanan left?

 

[longtom]

Yeh, Brumby has a point there. Is it me or has the team communication/environment gone to ****s since Buchanan left?

You see - that was obviously what I was hinting at. Easy to have an excellent climate when you are on top of the world...not so easy once you are not...

Aussies only going to pull themselfes out of this together - a real test of character to which they are not used...

longtom

 

[pup11]

One might well wonder why the bloomin' flip he's the vice-captain then. Ultimately it's the skipper's choice, but if the vice captain demurs from a decision you'd think the captain explaining his thinking to his immediate deputy wouldn't be too much of a stretch.

And that obviously isn't happening, Ponting has always made his fare share of illogical decisions as the captain of the Australian team, when the team was winning not much hue and cry was being made about it, but with the team faring the way they are atm, every decision of Ponting would come under scrutiny and if he keeps making such tactical blunders neither he or his team-mates would have much to say in his defence.

 

[BoyBrumby]

And that obviously isn't happening, Ponting has always made his fare share of illogical decisions as the captain of the Australian team, when the team was winning not much hue and cry was being made about it, but with the team faring the way they are atm, every decision of Ponting would come under scrutiny and if he keeps making such tactical blunders neither he or his team-mates would have much to say in his defence.

Well, that goes back to my point about passing the buck, doesn't it? Clarke obviously disagrees and distances himself from his captain in front of the media. Doesn't scream "team unity", does it?

 

[pup11]

Well, that goes back to my point about passing the buck, doesn't it? Clarke obviously disagrees and distances himself from his captain in front of the media. Doesn't scream "team unity", does it?

Well it surely doesn't, but shouldn't the Aussie media have already got used to see such ****ty captaincy from Ponting by now, or is that all of a sudden that when the team starts losing and they realise, "oh... this Ricky Ponting bats well but sucks when it comes down to captaincy", i understand the bit about team unity but i really don't know how possibly Clarke could have answered that question in a different way, because had he defended Ponting' decision not to bowl Katich, then he would have been the one receiving all the flak, and had he criticised Ponting' decision openly then people would have said their is in-fighting taking place within the Australian team, in a way if you look at his quote from his interview regarding why Katich didn't bowl, in a way he has saved Ponting' arse saying that Katich had told him that he hasn't been bowling in the nets due to a sore shoulder, so people feel that could possibily be the reason why Ponting didn't bowl Katich.

 

[susudear]

Clarke

Sad, but true. He is too buddy-mode to become a strict captain I fear. And with this passing the buck, I have doubts about his ability to assume responsibility.

 

[stephen]

The problem with picking on Ponting's captaincy is severalfold:

a) There is no ready replacement that obviously jumps out of the page. Pup is underdeveloped, Katich should be left alone to make runs, Hussey isn't captain material, Hayden is right at the end of his career, none of the bowlers are experienced enough and Haddin really is still learning the ropes. Of those the best bet would be Katich, but that may upset both his and Ponting's batting.

b) History says that when Australia picks a skipper they stay picked. Given the uncertainty around the team at the moment sticking with Ponting is their best choice. Dropping him as captain may even end his career prematurely.

c) Ponting is nowhere near as dire as people make out. He is a very good "people's" captain, in that he is a lightning rod for criticism and attracts great respect from his players by sticking by them. He really handles his players well, and I think the selectors feel that it makes up for his lack of tactical nuance.

 

[MendisNuffSaid]

Funny Channel 9 didn't even bother to mention the biggest loss in recent cricket history in it's news update..

Australians will now go into the blame game/ignore it mode that we all love to do here..

No-one will give SA any credit we'll just blame the selectors.. I'm surprised Ricky didn't blame the pitch again..

We need a 3-0 loss so some of these idiots can pull their heads in and try and regain some interntaional respect & dignity.

Apparently, the "uniqueness" of the MCG pitch was maintained

 

[silentstriker]

What the ****? My comment was a reply to EWS, had nothing to do with that.

I assumed you was replying to the post right above yours. Gotta quote.

 

[Migara]

The problem with picking on Ponting's captaincy is severalfold:

a) There is no ready replacement that obviously jumps out of the page. Pup is underdeveloped, Katich should be left alone to make runs, Hussey isn't captain material, Hayden is right at the end of his career, none of the bowlers are experienced enough and Haddin really is still learning the ropes. Of those the best bet would be Katich, but that may upset both his and Ponting's batting.

b) History says that when Australia picks a skipper they stay picked. Given the uncertainty around the team at the moment sticking with Ponting is their best choice. Dropping him as captain may even end his career prematurely.

c) Ponting is nowhere near as dire as people make out. He is a very good "people's" captain, in that he is a lightning rod for criticism and attracts great respect from his players by sticking by them. He really handles his players well, and I think the selectors feel that it makes up for his lack of tactical nuance.

Good points. Ponting is not the best that Aussies longing for. But are they any better than him?

 

[tooextracool]

You said this "bowl tight and hope that batsmen will play stupid shots. Well this isnt NZ or the WI and thats not going to happen", so I was pointing out that it obviously did happen.

It happened, but I already attributed that to the fact that the SA players were unfamiliar with Johnson's style of bowling. In any case it lasted for all of one innings, and if SA bat the way they normally do, it wont happen very many times hereafter.

I think you've noted earlier that you don't understand the difference the angle a left-handed bowler can make.Watching Tait in previous tests nothing's painfully obvious at all, except that he'll likely to either hit middle stump or the square leg umpire. Johnson bowled someone the other day, so unless there were 12 stumps in the ground, he must come close on occasions Johnson's not brilliant, but he's not the problem with the bowling outfit.

Tait is for all means and purposes not very good, and I've always argued that and will continue to argue that for as long as he maintains the bowling action that he currently has. However, at least he attempts to get batsmen out rather than frustrate the batsmen by bowling outside the off stump.
As far as Johnson bowling someone is concerned, he bowled Morne Morkel, which is quite an accomplishment by his standards. However the fact remains that the number of bowled and lbws that he has got against top order right handers is negligible and any 2 right handers at the crease should never really feel threatened when he is bowling out there.

You're basically talking up two guys as proven wicket-takers in tests when they're anything but that. I'd be all for giving Bracken another go...but not Tait right now. I think Siddle would be a much better option, at least he's capable of getting it in and around the stumps and creating enough movement to cause problems...and at speed.

Siddle was the most (and only) impressive Australian bowler in the last game so I wouldnt consider dropping him. However, I think Bracken is a better bowler than Hauritz or Johnson with all 3 being different shades of mediocre. As far as Tait is concerned, I merely advocated someone similar to him, an attacking option instead of the defensive options. Its a bit like how Fidel Edwards' selection in the WI side when there were Collymores, Drakes, Collins etc floating around, not because he was a better bowler than them but because of the style of bowling that he offered.