2013/14 Ashes non Official thread !!
- Thread starter aussiecricketer
- Start date
It's really sad that i sat down at the start of the innings imagining exactly this would happen 
Truth is we just suck at batting and half of these guys don't deserve their spots in the team. They don't have the passion and they don't have the patience and the will to fight and build an innings. Something twenty/20 has a lot to answer for.... Give a local first grade batsmen as many chances as half these guys have had and he would probably score a ton in less innings...
Truth is we just suck at batting and half of these guys don't deserve their spots in the team. They don't have the passion and they don't have the patience and the will to fight and build an innings. Something twenty/20 has a lot to answer for.... Give a local first grade batsmen as many chances as half these guys have had and he would probably score a ton in less innings...I reckon that society in general and "modern thinking" breeds performances like the ones we have seen from the team lately.
Remember when Glenn Maxwell was promoted to open the innings against the West Indies at the WACA when we knocked them over for less than 100 in an ODI this recent summer? The types of shots he played were absolutely ridiculous, mostly slogs......and the commentators nearly fell over each other in their excitement at it all. That, sadly, is what attracts the big money these days in cricket.
Remember when Glenn Maxwell was promoted to open the innings against the West Indies at the WACA when we knocked them over for less than 100 in an ODI this recent summer? The types of shots he played were absolutely ridiculous, mostly slogs......and the commentators nearly fell over each other in their excitement at it all. That, sadly, is what attracts the big money these days in cricket.
The Rogers dismissal would have been an interesting review - shame the peanut Watson wasted one on his self-indulgent ego - as I'm pretty sure the impact was in line with the stumps, and being a full bunger means the umpires have to assume the ball's going straight on, yes? Is the LBW rule for full tosses black and white with regards to where it hits a batsman? With the tracking it showed the ball drifting to miss the stumps, though it had struck him in line. So would have remained out if reviewed??
Aussie cricket is in a shambles, the batting especially, and Hadds/Pup leaving a catch - after Watto/Pup did the same last game shows some work needs to be done (how a bowler keeps bowling no-balls at Test level is beyond me...thanks Sidds for gifting the Poms a free innings!) The slips are too close together and Watson let another chance go begging as he was standing too deep.
This article on Cricinfo sums it up perfectly on Watson:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2013/content/story/653135.html
They've changed the coach; now for a broom through the players (and assistant coaches...)
Aussie cricket is in a shambles, the batting especially, and Hadds/Pup leaving a catch - after Watto/Pup did the same last game shows some work needs to be done (how a bowler keeps bowling no-balls at Test level is beyond me...thanks Sidds for gifting the Poms a free innings!) The slips are too close together and Watson let another chance go begging as he was standing too deep.
This article on Cricinfo sums it up perfectly on Watson:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2013/content/story/653135.html
They've changed the coach; now for a broom through the players (and assistant coaches...)
The DRS is flawed (as Kyle has continued to articulate in this forum) and it is being used purely as a self-serving tactic - it is time to take it out of the hands of the batting team and have EVERY "out" decision reviewed by the third umpire.
90% of the time decisions are straightforward anyway (eg bowled, slips catches) and the only issue will be with the no-ball call so it is not as though a lot of time will be lost. It would also give the onfield umpire the confidence to actually give a positive decision, knowing that an error can be corrected and that he wouldn't suffer the indignity of clear-cut decisions being questioned purely on a tactical basis.
I would increase the number of bowling referrals to 3 as the "hitting the outside of the top corner of the leg bail" hawkeye tracking doesn't seem a fair or adequete reason to lose one review.
90% of the time decisions are straightforward anyway (eg bowled, slips catches) and the only issue will be with the no-ball call so it is not as though a lot of time will be lost. It would also give the onfield umpire the confidence to actually give a positive decision, knowing that an error can be corrected and that he wouldn't suffer the indignity of clear-cut decisions being questioned purely on a tactical basis.
I would increase the number of bowling referrals to 3 as the "hitting the outside of the top corner of the leg bail" hawkeye tracking doesn't seem a fair or adequete reason to lose one review.