SA Footy

Can someone please tell me when the fourth test starts? I lost my TV guide, Facebook, work colleagues and radio frequencies.

Booney wrote:If your bat movement goes from mid-wicket to gully you aren't going to have much success other than providing the slips with catching practice.

What happened to playing the "v" early in an innings?

The most disappointing shot was Clarkes. 5/29 and an out of form skipper chases a full wide one and "nick"....it was a stinker of a shot and the sign of a man not comfortable at the crease at all. His half pull a few balls before further evidence he simply isn't picking it up out of the hand.

Burns, Head, Abott and Coulter-Nile need a look in before too long.

I like your ins...... Clarke, for me the ball was there to hit, in good form he smashes that to the boundary, but he is no where near good form. I reckon his eye's are gone.

The batters were not playing the ball late enough. All of them were reaching for the ball in front of their pads. Good players, play it late.... in those conditions it meant by playing late you will probably play (late) and miss a bit.... but it's better than the catching practice our blokes gave last night.

Given the circumstances, Clarke's dismissal was possibly the worst from a specialist batsman in the history of test cricket.

It was a shot of desperation.

RB wrote:Given the circumstances, Clarke's dismissal was possibly the worst from a specialist batsman in the history of test cricket.

Should have his resignation letter already penned.
How fast can we get the guys there from India? Id be sending a few of the mugs home after this test

Corona Man wrote:^ makes for some very sad reading. I hope the selectors are aware of all these stats, and while it is unrealistic to make wholesale changes now, clearly we need to get the broom out. Have to agree with Bumble, if Siddle doesn't get a game on that pitch, he is never going to get a game. Personally I don't think we can play Johnson & Starc in the same team, they are too similar, so no variety there. Our batters were found out in the conditions. I am a firm believer that you best batter, bats at 4..... S. Marsh is NOT our best batter. Other than last night Rogers has been the rock, now he is almost on the eve of his last test match, so where to from here at the top of the order??

I think the biggest worry is not the lack of variety between Starc and Johnson but more the fact that they leak runs so you can't have them bowling together.

Hazelwood has been disappointing this series too, none of them can keep the pressure on, and I think most of us underestimated the value of harris and even Siddle for doing that for us.

I'm not sure anyone underestimated Harris.
As soon as he was unavailable for the series, I think most of us knew the attack was going to be sorely tested.

We can afford one bowler out of the two Mitchs, not two. I wonder how much better Hazlewood would be if the bowling up the other end was tighter. It's hard work for him at the moment - the pressure's off the Poms, they don't have to sit on him as the valve is released by Mitch and Mitch.

Dogwatcher wrote:I'm not sure anyone underestimated Harris.
As soon as he was unavailable for the series, I think most of us knew the attack was going to be sorely tested.

We can afford one bowler out of the two Mitchs, not two. I wonder how much better Hazlewood would be if the bowling up the other end was tighter. It's hard work for him at the moment - the pressure's off the Poms, they don't have to sit on him as the valve is released by Mitch and Mitch.

Hazelwood was the man of the series in WI right?

There was talk as to who would be left out of Harris came in. I guess I just meant that we miss him more than we think

bennymacca wrote:

Corona Man wrote:^ makes for some very sad reading. I hope the selectors are aware of all these stats, and while it is unrealistic to make wholesale changes now, clearly we need to get the broom out. Have to agree with Bumble, if Siddle doesn't get a game on that pitch, he is never going to get a game. Personally I don't think we can play Johnson & Starc in the same team, they are too similar, so no variety there. Our batters were found out in the conditions. I am a firm believer that you best batter, bats at 4..... S. Marsh is NOT our best batter. Other than last night Rogers has been the rock, now he is almost on the eve of his last test match, so where to from here at the top of the order??

I think the biggest worry is not the lack of variety between Starc and Johnson but more the fact that they leak runs so you can't have them bowling together.

Hazelwood has been disappointing this series too, none of them can keep the pressure on, and I think most of us underestimated the value of harris and even Siddle for doing that for us.

I agree with you on Starc/Johnson, yes they both leak runs, for the same reason.... they are trying to produce wicket taking balls every delivery...so in that sense they don't have variety. The loss of Ryan Harris has now become oh so apparent. Siddle is unlikely to run through any team, but he will keep the runs in check, and he always gives you 100%. I'm predicting a CA review into the series when they get back home....much like last time we played over there.... for me time to move a few blokes on, and time to bring a few blokes up. I would like to see Smith bat at 4, and build the team around him in a sense. Warner stays, but needs a new opening partner, and we need a rock solid #3.... it's too late for Max Klinger, but that type of player.. Smith 4, Clarke 5, Head or Burns 6, Neville 7, Johnson 8, Coulter-Nile 9, Hazelwood/Siddle 10, Lyon 11....I'm sure there are a few other candidates out there, but it's time for Watson, Haddin & Rogers (though I want him to stay) to go... M.Marsh needs to either hold his spot as a batter or a bowler & the other string is a bonus. S. Marsh perhaps 3 season of 1,000+ domestic runs (like a few others had to produce) before he gets a look in.

bennymacca wrote:

Corona Man wrote:^ makes for some very sad reading. I hope the selectors are aware of all these stats, and while it is unrealistic to make wholesale changes now, clearly we need to get the broom out. Have to agree with Bumble, if Siddle doesn't get a game on that pitch, he is never going to get a game. Personally I don't think we can play Johnson & Starc in the same team, they are too similar, so no variety there. Our batters were found out in the conditions. I am a firm believer that you best batter, bats at 4..... S. Marsh is NOT our best batter. Other than last night Rogers has been the rock, now he is almost on the eve of his last test match, so where to from here at the top of the order??

I think the biggest worry is not the lack of variety between Starc and Johnson but more the fact that they leak runs so you can't have them bowling together.

Hazelwood has been disappointing this series too, none of them can keep the pressure on, and I think most of us underestimated the value of harris and even Siddle for doing that for us.

Agree Hazelwood has been disappointing, but perhaps we are expecting too much too soon. McGrath took a while to find his feet too.
Watson also was often effective at drying up an end for a few overs, leading to something, eg Adelaide 2013.

Corona Man wrote:

bennymacca wrote:

Corona Man wrote:^ makes for some very sad reading. I hope the selectors are aware of all these stats, and while it is unrealistic to make wholesale changes now, clearly we need to get the broom out. Have to agree with Bumble, if Siddle doesn't get a game on that pitch, he is never going to get a game. Personally I don't think we can play Johnson & Starc in the same team, they are too similar, so no variety there. Our batters were found out in the conditions. I am a firm believer that you best batter, bats at 4..... S. Marsh is NOT our best batter. Other than last night Rogers has been the rock, now he is almost on the eve of his last test match, so where to from here at the top of the order??

I think the biggest worry is not the lack of variety between Starc and Johnson but more the fact that they leak runs so you can't have them bowling together.

Hazelwood has been disappointing this series too, none of them can keep the pressure on, and I think most of us underestimated the value of harris and even Siddle for doing that for us.

I agree with you on Starc/Johnson, yes they both leak runs, for the same reason.... they are trying to produce wicket taking balls every delivery...so in that sense they don't have variety. The loss of Ryan Harris has now become oh so apparent. Siddle is unlikely to run through any team, but he will keep the runs in check, and he always gives you 100%. I'm predicting a CA review into the series when they get back home....much like last time we played over there.... for me time to move a few blokes on, and time to bring a few blokes up. I would like to see Smith bat at 4, and build the team around him in a sense. Warner stays, but needs a new opening partner, and we need a rock solid #3.... it's too late for Max Klinger, but that type of player.. Smith 4, Clarke 5, Head or Burns 6, Neville 7, Johnson 8, Coulter-Nile 9, Hazelwood/Siddle 10, Lyon 11....I'm sure there are a few other candidates out there, but it's time for Watson, Haddin & Rogers (though I want him to stay) to go... M.Marsh needs to either hold his spot as a batter or a bowler & the other string is a bonus. S. Marsh perhaps 3 season of 1,000+ domestic runs (like a few others had to produce) before he gets a look in.

By that theory on S. Marsh, his career's over. Three more seasons, he'll be 35. Scary to think how little he's done with his talent.

Dogwatcher wrote:

Corona Man wrote:

bennymacca wrote:

Corona Man wrote:^ makes for some very sad reading. I hope the selectors are aware of all these stats, and while it is unrealistic to make wholesale changes now, clearly we need to get the broom out. Have to agree with Bumble, if Siddle doesn't get a game on that pitch, he is never going to get a game. Personally I don't think we can play Johnson & Starc in the same team, they are too similar, so no variety there. Our batters were found out in the conditions. I am a firm believer that you best batter, bats at 4..... S. Marsh is NOT our best batter. Other than last night Rogers has been the rock, now he is almost on the eve of his last test match, so where to from here at the top of the order??

I think the biggest worry is not the lack of variety between Starc and Johnson but more the fact that they leak runs so you can't have them bowling together.

Hazelwood has been disappointing this series too, none of them can keep the pressure on, and I think most of us underestimated the value of harris and even Siddle for doing that for us.

I agree with you on Starc/Johnson, yes they both leak runs, for the same reason.... they are trying to produce wicket taking balls every delivery...so in that sense they don't have variety. The loss of Ryan Harris has now become oh so apparent. Siddle is unlikely to run through any team, but he will keep the runs in check, and he always gives you 100%. I'm predicting a CA review into the series when they get back home....much like last time we played over there.... for me time to move a few blokes on, and time to bring a few blokes up. I would like to see Smith bat at 4, and build the team around him in a sense. Warner stays, but needs a new opening partner, and we need a rock solid #3.... it's too late for Max Klinger, but that type of player.. Smith 4, Clarke 5, Head or Burns 6, Neville 7, Johnson 8, Coulter-Nile 9, Hazelwood/Siddle 10, Lyon 11....I'm sure there are a few other candidates out there, but it's time for Watson, Haddin & Rogers (though I want him to stay) to go... M.Marsh needs to either hold his spot as a batter or a bowler & the other string is a bonus. S. Marsh perhaps 3 season of 1,000+ domestic runs (like a few others had to produce) before he gets a look in.

By that theory on S. Marsh, his career's over. Three more seasons, he'll be 35. Scary to think how little he's done with his talent.

So be it!

Dogwatcher wrote:By that theory on S. Marsh, his career's over. Three more seasons, he'll be 35. Scary to think how little he's done with his talent.

Talent, really?

I disagree.

Tests 14 Avg 35.79
ODI 46 @ 39.81
1st Class 108 matches @39.18

Not really smacking them around, is he?

Isn't an average like that, at Test and first class level, doing "little with his talent"?

Booney wrote:

Dogwatcher wrote:By that theory on S. Marsh, his career's over. Three more seasons, he'll be 35. Scary to think how little he's done with his talent.

Talent, really?

I disagree.

Tests 14 Avg 35.79
ODI 46 @ 39.81
1st Class 108 matches @39.18

Not really smacking them around, is he?

Sounds like my workplace.

Dogwatcher wrote:Isn't an average like that, at Test and first class level, doing "little with his talent"?

I think he's done about right, "with his talent".....I don't think he's much chop at all. Lots of nick, not much chop.

So you think he should be a 45+ Avg but is under achieving? I think he's lucky to be where he is.

Yep. He's played a lot of Shield cricket, and done very little with the bat worthy of test selection. Can consider himself very lucky to have played as many tests as he has IMO. I've never seen anything in him to suggest that he is more talented that his stats would suggest. Average stroke player with an ordinary defensive game.

Booney wrote:

Dogwatcher wrote:Isn't an average like that, at Test and first class level, doing "little with his talent"?

I think he's done about right, "with his talent".....I don't think he's much chop at all. Lots of nick, not much chop.

So you think he should be a 45+ Avg but is under achieving? I think he's lucky to be where he is.

Couldn't agree more... when I heard he had come into the side to bat at 4 (the premier batting position) having been unable to nail a spot down in the team, I kinda thought we were in trouble.

I think he has a LOFT problem!

Nick Marsh fun fact:

Marsh's 7 ducks in 26 test innings at a rate of a duck every 3.71 innings puts him in elite company. E.g. Glenn McGrath made a duck every 3.94 innings. Not too many Australians have done better than that.

Booney wrote:

Dogwatcher wrote:Isn't an average like that, at Test and first class level, doing "little with his talent"?

I think he's done about right, "with his talent".....I don't think he's much chop at all. Lots of nick, not much chop.

So you think he should be a 45+ Avg but is under achieving? I think he's lucky to be where he is.

Hey, I'm only going by the talent that experts like Steve Waugh have been telling us he had from a young age.
He hasn't lived up to that, no doubt. His test hundreds were against Sri Lanka, there, and South Africa and were big ones, so he, obviously, had a bit more talent than what the rest of his career has shown. For one reason, or another, he hasn't been able to live up to it.

By the way, he should never play again.