England v NZ & Aust 2015

[Hugh Jarse]

The rigmarole surrounding Clarke needing to prove his fitness gave an inkling that there was trouble at mill. Clarke didn't take the hint, and in his typical determined manner, he applied himself to the task at hand and passed the rather stringent criteria that CA imposed for him to be reselected.

Both parties seemed to back themselves into a corner leaving little room for manoeuvre without public and rather embarrassing backdowns.

Now we have lost the Ashes and with the benefit of hindsight, was there any way we could have actually won the series? Do we genuinely have bowlers and batsmen who can thrive in English conditions?

 

[No4918]

“The players are as tight as any team I’ve been a part of.
“Travelling in different cars. What a load of s--t.
“Wives and girlfriends being on tour is a distraction for us. What a load of s--t. That’s absolute garbage.“I’ll give back 10 of my Test hundreds if it wasn’t for my beautiful wife.”
http://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket...australias-squad/story-e6frf3gl-1227476914242

From bad to worse. Was easy to dismiss all the conjecture of a rift in the team back when Clarke was injured in the Indian series but it seems now that there is a lot of truth to the rumours.

Couple that article with Lehmann's surprising comments about Howard and it doesn't paint a nice picture, surprising in that he felt they needed to be said publicly. To his credit Lehmann does try to take a lot of the blame off the players.

Easy to look for problems after a terrible tour though. Who know's how many tours past there has been similar issues and it was just never an issue because we still managed to not play like grade cricketers.

 

[Quick Hands]

Lehmann is a character of the highest quality. IMO Australian cricket needs to retain him as coach. Very refreshing to see someone reflect on their decisions and acknowledge some errors.

It's another reason why I think that Lehmann and Cheika are the two best coaches going around in any sport. They tell it like it is, back their judgement and take responsibility if things go wrong.

 

[light]

Tall poppy syndrome strikes again..

I really don't understand some of the hate that has been aimed at Clarke over the last day or two by the media. Can't we just accept that he played a series too long and leave it at that, I don't see the need for the character bashing and former players chipping in about how he wasn't so good at such and such.

IMO, his record speaks for itself.

 

[Quick Hands]

The rigmarole surrounding Clarke needing to prove his fitness gave an inkling that there was trouble at mill. Clarke didn't take the hint, and in his typical determined manner, he applied himself to the task at hand and passed the rather stringent criteria that CA imposed for him to be reselected.

Both parties seemed to back themselves into a corner leaving little room for manoeuvre without public and rather embarrassing backdowns.

Now we have lost the Ashes and with the benefit of hindsight, was there any way we could have actually won the series? Do we genuinely have bowlers and batsmen who can thrive in English conditions?

We may well have lost the series with a younger team, but the nucleus of that younger team would have been back at a later time with experience under their belts. We're now in the ludicrous situation where we have a dead rubber in a losing series and there is NOT ONE young batsman we can pick to play in that game, because we didn't pick any in the squad. Darren Lehmann seems to have acknowledge what I have been saying since the start of the thread - the squad selected was too old and there wasn't the appropriate balance between youth and experience.

Chris Rogers can obviously score in England - he was the top runscorer in county cricket in 2013 and third in 2012.

There are other guys playing first class cricket in Australia who have figured in the top 20 run scorers in recent years - Phil Jaques, Michael Klinger for example.

Joe Burns played a few matches for Middlesex this year and managed to score a couple of half centuries.

 

[light]

Glenn Maxwell also scored 140 for Yorkshire the other day.

He's not test ready but I like that he's over there getting county cricket experience. We need to start sending guys over there earlier in their careers so by the time they are wearing the baggy green they have miles under their belts against the duke.

 

[Quick Hands]

^^^It's no coincidence that Chris Rogers has played a lot of cricket in England. His technique is much more sound than the guys who spend most of their time in Australian conditions.

In 2013 he scored 1500 runs at over 50 in England.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

We've still had plenty of blokes play over in England -- that hasn't stopped. Burns (for instance) played CC this season before going on the A tour and that may be the issue, representative selections mean no cricket in English conditions at the moment.

 

[Strewthcobber]

^^^It's no coincidence that Chris Rogers has played a lot of cricket in England. His technique is much more sound than the guys who spend most of their time in Australian conditions.

In 2013 he scored 1500 runs at over 50 in England.

I'm not trying to drag Rogers down in anyway, because he's been our best bat for two series now.

He has failed plenty of times in that period though, just as much, if not more than our other openers in England over the last 10 years - the difference is he has gone big a couple of times and got a big not out there too, which really helps his average.

• Rogers (8 innnings < 25 in 17 innings - 58%) 2 x 100
• Warner (7 from 14 - 50%) 0 x 100
• Katich (8 from 19 - 42%) 1 x 100
• Watson (6 from 17 - 35%) 1 x 100
• Cook (15 from 26 - 58%) 0 x 100 - for comparison

Now that 25 limit is pretty arbitrary and you could probably choose another number to make him look better, but I do think it's an interesting look at how our openers have gone. If you get through the opening session - you have to go big, because you are not going to make it through particularly often.

 

[the plastic paddy]

I'm not trying to drag Rogers down in anyway, because he's been our best bat for two series now.

He has failed plenty of times in that period though, just as much, if not more than our other openers in England over the last 10 years - the difference is he has gone big a couple of times and got a big not out there too, which really helps his average.

• Rogers (8 innnings < 25 in 17 innings - 58%) 2 x 100
• Warner (7 from 14 - 47%) 0 x 100
• Katich (8 from 19 - 42%) 1 x 100
• Watson (6 from 17 - 35%) 1 x 100
• Cook (15 from 26 - 58%) 0 x 100 - for comparison

Now that 25 limit is pretty arbitrary and you could probably choose another number to make him look better, but I do think it's an interesting look at how our openers have gone. If you get through the opening session - you have to go big, because you are not going to make it through particularly often.

Great post. 25 is a very pertinent figure for an opener, particularly one stamped out of a traditional mold like a Cook or Rogers. For a non traditional opener like Warner, who is often 30 not out after 6 overs, it is less significant. Is there an argument that Warner might be better off in the middle order in English conditions?

 

[Strewthcobber]

Great post. 25 is a very pertinent figure for an opener, particularly one stamped out of a traditional mold like a Cook or Rogers. For a non traditional opener like Warner, who is often 30 not out after 6 overs, it is less significant. Is there an argument that Warner might be better off in the middle order in English conditions?

Had a bit of a think about it and here's the list of our openers facing 90 balls in their innings - the equivalent of making it to lunch. It's probably what you want from your openers. It paints Rogers in a much better light

• Rogers 7 from 17
• Warner 2 from 14
• Watson 4 from 17
• Katich 4 from 13
• Cook 5 from 26

 

[Quick Hands]

I'm not trying to drag Rogers down in anyway, because he's been our best bat for two series now.

He has failed plenty of times in that period though, just as much, if not more than our other openers in England over the last 10 years - the difference is he has gone big a couple of times and got a big not out there too, which really helps his average.

• Rogers (8 innnings < 25 in 17 innings - 58%) 2 x 100
• Warner (7 from 14 - 50%) 0 x 100
• Katich (8 from 19 - 42%) 1 x 100
• Watson (6 from 17 - 35%) 1 x 100
• Cook (15 from 26 - 58%) 0 x 100 - for comparison

Now that 25 limit is pretty arbitrary and you could probably choose another number to make him look better, but I do think it's an interesting look at how our openers have gone. If you get through the opening session - you have to go big, because you are not going to make it through particularly often.

I don't disagree with any of that. It probably shows how difficult it can be opening on the first day in Engish conditions. They are all going to have their failures, but as you say, if you can get through the first 2 hours things become much easier.

The difficulty for us in this series was that Rogers and Smith were the only batsmen in form. Warner, Clarke, Watson out of form & S Marsh and Voges never in form in the first place. So as soon as Rogers and/or Smith failed, the innngs collapsed like a deck of cards.

If you were the Poms you'd have the dynamic lifter and the hoses out on the oval pitch as we speak.

 

[light]

S Marsh never in form?

That is the strangest thing I've read in a while. He was in exceptional form in the tour games (hit at least two centuries that I can recall). Unfortunately that form wasn't enough to hide his inability to perform in test cricket.

 

[Quick Hands]

^^^But we're talking about test cricket though. That's one of the essential problems that some people continue to equate first class form with test form as if they are interchangeable.

S Marsh has never ever been in form as a test batsman - ever.

 

[I like to watch]

Tall poppy syndrome strikes again..

I really don't understand some of the hate that has been aimed at Clarke over the last day or two by the media. Can't we just accept that he played a series too long and leave it at that, I don't see the need for the character bashing and former players chipping in about how he wasn't so good at such and such.

IMO, his record speaks for itself.

Up to a point.
He has been extremely well paid over a long period,critiqueing his performance/legacy is not beyond the pale.
lets put it in perspective,he is leaving at the end of a disastrous tour.
Questions are always asked when things are going this badly.

 

[light]

He isn't immune from criticism but my post was mainly in regard to the personal attacks that have been levelled at him since he announced his retirement.

His form and runs over the last 12 months are fair play but the character bashing is what annoys me, particularly as he still has another test to play and captain.

 

[Teh Other Dave]

What really pisses me off about this tour is the lack of cricketing smarts. We not only went the same way as in 2005 and 2009 in failing to show patience in the face of swing, we also allowed bowlers like Ali to purchase wickets. Our batting once again gave our bowlers nothing to work with, and they were forever chasing the game, and not even SK Warne could do that in 2005.



Shit, there's still another test to play.

 

[Quick Hands]

He isn't immune from criticism but my post was mainly in regard to the personal attacks that have been levelled at him since he announced his retirement.

His form and runs over the last 12 months are fair play but the character bashing is what annoys me, particularly as he still has another test to play and captain.

For whatever reason some sections of the press and possibly even some ex-players have had it in for Clarke for a while. I'm not really sure why - presumably he doesn't fit their idea of the blokey Australian cricketer/cricket captain? Anyway I agree that it's poor form to kick the guy when he's down and has announced his retirement.

As Pompey observed 2000 years ago "people worship the rising sun not the setting sun"

 

[Aussie D]

Could it be lingering animosity for the whole Katich / Hussey situations in the past?

 

[the plastic paddy]

I might be proven to be wrong, but after Smith's dismissal in the second innings of the fourth test I would wonder very strongly whether he has the mental toughness for captaincy.