England v NZ & Aust 2015

[Quick Hands]

Clarke gone for 4. Aust 4/104 just after lunch.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Train smash happening in Cardiff. Another one bites the dust.

Embarrassing capitulation.

 

[Quick Hands]

Voges caught behind for 1. Aust 5/106 - this could get ugly.

 

[Bairdy]

Now is your time to shine Twatto! If we ever needed him to make the runs when it mattered, it's now.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Yeah but he won't because he flatters to deceive.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

6/122. The good news is that it will not be a late night/early morning watching the cricket.

 

[Bairdy]

This would almost be deja vu, excepting the fact that we don't have Agar (or any of our tailenders for that matter) capable of bailing out the top order ala 2013.

 

[Quick Hands]

Haddin caught off the spinner - 6/122

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Watson out LBW? Quelle surprise.

7 down.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Watto obviously has to go but don't think it would have made too much difference.

The real concern is Haddin. Bugger all runs for years and the drop of Root was the turning point of the match.

He used to be able to make up for that sort of keeping with the vital lower order runs. If that's gone......

 

[No4918]

Good thing Aus only need to draw the series. Hard to see England not winning another unless Aus can really pick things up. It all went wrong from the dropped catch and questions about the attack and batting have been raised. It's hard to know how much to read into it, perhaps it is just very hard to win in England. Better teams haven't succeeded in the last 14 years.

 

[Quick Hands]

All out 242. A well made 77 to Mitchell Johnston - he's been the all-rounder in the team for some time, and everyone but the selectors have worked that out.

I fear that we've lost this series at the selection table. Where we've had a choice we've picked the player in his mid-30s instead of the player in his mid-20s. And to cap it off be bring in a 35 year old to make his debut this year. Didn't matter so much against the West Indies, but now...........

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Voges case was pretty irresistable so I don't blame them for that. The continued selection of Watson is the far more egregious error and I think we're seeing the end of Haddin's time in the team. He'll survive the next test but we need more out of him than we're getting. The rest of the team I think is fairly spot on, though I'd still rather see Smith back at five and someone different at three. Problem is, first drop has been a problem for a while and we've not had anyone command the spot.

 

[Lindommer]

I was thinking of Watson's complete and utter selfishness constantly referring his LBW dismissals and where I could find a record of them when news.com.au kindly came to the rescue: "Of his 29 LBW dismissals, he has tried unsuccessfully to have 14 overturned. Fittingly the dismissal that might well prove to be his last in Test cricket, was one of them."

14 TIMES THIS USELESS PRICK'S POINTLESSLY CHEWED UP BATTING REFERRALS! How unforgiveably and selfishly indulgent.

 

[RugbyReg]

All out 242. A well made 77 to Mitchell Johnston - he's been the all-rounder in the team for some time, and everyone but the selectors have worked that out.

.....

Well he'd be an all rounder if he could just get some wickets.

This isn't the series to blood a bunch of rookies. That's next year v NZ and WIN.

 

[Pfitzy]

Sorry but fuck Watson - he no longer deserves the confidence of the coaching staff, his team mates, or the cricketing public.

Young Marsh is our man. Bowls faster, hits harder.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Yep, Mitch has done enough on this tour with the bat to suggest that he should overtake Watson. It still leaves open the question of why we don't just pick a specialist batsman at 6, like we have for the overwhelming majority of the 138 years we've played test cricket.

 

[Quick Hands]

Well he'd be an all rounder if he could just get some wickets.

This isn't the series to blood a bunch of rookies. That's next year v NZ and WIN.

It's probably not the series to retain people beyond their use by date either.

No-one is talking about a bunch of rookies. What I'm talking about is a couple of fairly obvious choices - Watson over M Marsh is/was absurd as is bringing a 35 year old into an already aging team. Is Australian cricket saying that there is not one middle order batsmen under 30 in Australia who is capable of playing test cricket?

 

[Quick Hands]

Voges case was pretty irresistable so I don't blame them for that. The continued selection of Watson is the far more egregious error and I think we're seeing the end of Haddin's time in the team. He'll survive the next test but we need more out of him than we're getting. The rest of the team I think is fairly spot on, though I'd still rather see Smith back at five and someone different at three. Problem is, first drop has been a problem for a while and we've not had anyone command the spot.

Voges would have been an ok selection in a young side where we needed to fill a hole short term and his experience could have been useful, but no way in a team where most of the players are already in their mid to late 30s..

 

[Strewthcobber]

Yep, Mitch has done enough on this tour with the bat to suggest that he should overtake Watson. It still leaves open the question of why we don't just pick a specialist batsman at 6, like we have for the overwhelming majority of the 138 years we've played test cricket.

The obvious answer is that none of Warner, Rogers, Smith, Clarke, Vogues or The Other can bowl enough overs of sufficient quality. For the 138 years we have had enough bowling in the top 6 to get away with it.

And actually,http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...by=runs;team=2;template=results;type=allround looking at the stats, if you bat at 6 for Australia, you have had to bowl plenty over the years