5th Test Border Gavaskar Trophy January 3-7 1000hrs @ the SCG

[caveman72]

Indeed which was understandable, though he probably shouldn’t have made a moderately homophobic slur to begin with.

What would your reply have been in the heat of the moment. Probably not knowing his wifes circumstances. My guess is something similar

 

[sr36]

It really wasn’t that bad I didn’t think.

Equally I don’t think that batsmen don’t have the skill or technique to handle it.

I think Rishabh Pant - a player not noted for his stickability or robust defensive technique (even though it’s solid enough) showed in the first innings that you could get by and so did Webster.

As soon as players get on those pitches though they weigh up the odds though and tend to balance out the ‘ball with my name on it’ probability against the ‘how many can I make beforehand’ philosophy and the wickets start to tumble and you end up with a 3 day test.

That wasn’t an 8 session pitch.

Newlands last January; that was a substandard pitch. It was fascinating to watch, don’t get me wrong, but it was substandard.

This was ok.

Me too. I thought Australia batted poorly in the first innings. Uzzy played back and turned a half volley into a wicket taking delivery. Konstas was a high risk shot. Marnus had a brain fade and just steered it to slip. Head managed to outside edge an inswinger - it wasn't the pitch. Smith and Webster were looking very comfortable until Smith knicked one he shouldn't have.

 

[sr36]

What Sarwan said was quick wit and one of the best come backs ever. The fact McGrath's wife had cancer is irrelevant. Moral of the story is if you can't take it don't dish it out.

I'm not critical of Sarwan at all - just suggesting that McGrath losing it was more understandable considering the emotional events in his private life.

 

[PhatBoy]

What would your reply have been in the heat of the moment. Probably not knowing his wifes circumstances. My guess is something similar

I would have said exactly what Sarwan said if I was quick enough to think of it, or a joke about how many times Shane Warne had copped Brian Lara’s appendage on the field.

He got well and truly owned but obviously given the personal circumstances of his wife at the time I could understand his reaction in some capacity too

 

[Gough]

I would have said exactly what Sarwan said if I was quick enough to think of it, or a joke about how many times Shane Warne had copped Brian Lara’s appendage on the field.

He got well and truly owned but obviously given the personal circumstances of his wife at the time I could understand his reaction in some capacity too

I was never quick witted to be a good sledger, I'd think of a great response when I was taking off my shoes and lighting a *** at the end of the day.

 

[Soggy2112]

It really wasn’t that bad I didn’t think.

Equally I don’t think that batsmen don’t have the skill or technique to handle it.

I think Rishabh Pant - a player not noted for his stickability or robust defensive technique (even though it’s solid enough) showed in the first innings that you could get by and so did Webster.

As soon as players get on those pitches though they weigh up the odds though and tend to balance out the ‘ball with my name on it’ probability against the ‘how many can I make beforehand’ philosophy and the wickets start to tumble and you end up with a 3 day test.

That wasn’t an 8 session pitch.

Newlands last January; that was a substandard pitch. It was fascinating to watch, don’t get me wrong, but it was substandard.

This was ok.

It was borderline, the fact that one team has arguably the greatest fast bowler of all time and the other has the best bowling attack in the world probably exaggerated it. Perhaps if you put NZ v England or something similar it becomes a 300 v 250 test.

That being said though, there were several balls with alarming levels of bounce. There is always going to be a certain level of danger in cricket but if that pitch wasn’t on the edge of being too dangerous it was certainly close.

 

[cats_09]

 

[Soggy2112]

On another note TGC poddy has become Captain Serious all of a sudden. Don't want to upset the Indians it seems.

Did you listen to it? Higgos went on a rant of about 4 minutes straight about how the Indians behaviour has been poor and the ICC is gutless for not doing anything about it.

They also repeatedly take the piss out of their fans for not tuning in when the Indians have had a bad day.

 

[Gethelred]

Methinks Sydney was very, very lucky not to go for another day there. Up down bounce and two paced on day two and arguably worse on day 3 means potentially dangerous on day 4, let alone on day 5.

Me too. I thought Australia batted poorly in the first innings. Uzzy played back and turned a half volley into a wicket taking delivery. Konstas was a high risk shot. Marnus had a brain fade and just steered it to slip. Head managed to outside edge an inswinger - it wasn't the pitch. Smith and Webster were looking very comfortable until Smith knicked one he shouldn't have.

Movement in the air comes courtesy of moisture rising off the wicket. It's why the ball moves more above a green surface than above one without moisture, or in humid air. To say that movement isn't due in part to the wicket isn't quite correct.

Then, there's the other issue. Khawaja went out to a ball that was absolutely short enough to pull caught behind because the ball came off slower than it should have. Any number of balls leaped off a length over the course of the day, and when they did they went quickly. I'm not one for abandoning a game of cricket (I've always found it the utmost of ironies that the worse the batter is the more likely they are to play on a shit-tip of a turf wicket but the better the batter is the more likely the pitches are to be good for batting; plonk them on some of the old, torn up dustbowls in and around Melbourne and let's see how those excellent talents go against test match attacks on the wickets at park level!) but they're a bit lucky the game didn't go a little longer.

It's not the slow ones that are the problem, although they do cause bats to question their judgement. It's the ones that leap at you from fuller than a good length. Smith faced a ball on day 3 that should've perhaps gotten to bail height, but leaped at him; he took his hand off the handle of his bat and was very lucky not to go out or get hit on the hand as the thing hit the handle of his bat in front of his clavicle. That's borderline dangerous at 130+ clicks.

Imagine Andre Nortje bowling on that deck, in the form he was in in 2018. He'd be hitting blokes every second ball, and there'd be busted fingers everywhere. And that deck was only going to get worse.

 

[Richard Pryor]

What Sarwan said was quick wit and one of the best come backs ever. The fact McGrath's wife had cancer is irrelevant. Moral of the story is if you can't take it don't dish it out.

Just struck me that Sarwan literally pulled a george costanza lol

 

[Gough]

McGrath was one of the most petulant cricketers I've ever watched, great bowler, shit bloke it would seem.

 

[Richard Pryor]

McGrath was one of the most petulant cricketers I've ever watched, great bowler, shit bloke it would seem.

The African hunting happy snaps certainly lowered my estimation of him as a bloke

 

[sr36]

Methinks Sydney was very, very lucky not to go for another day there. Up down bounce and two paced on day two and arguably worse on day 3 means potentially dangerous on day 4, let alone on day 5.

Movement in the air comes courtesy of moisture rising off the wicket. It's why the ball moves more above a green surface than above one without moisture, or in humid air. To say that movement isn't due in part to the wicket isn't quite correct.

Then, there's the other issue. Khawaja went out to a ball that was absolutely short enough to pull caught behind because the ball came off slower than it should have. Any number of balls leaped off a length over the course of the day, and when they did they went quickly. I'm not one for abandoning a game of cricket (I've always found it the utmost of ironies that the worse the batter is the more likely they are to play on a shit-tip of a turf wicket but the better the batter is the more likely the pitches are to be good for batting; plonk them on some of the old, torn up dustbowls in and around Melbourne and let's see how those excellent talents go against test match attacks on the wickets at park level!) but they're a bit lucky the game didn't go a little longer.

It's not the slow ones that are the problem, although they do cause bats to question their judgement. It's the ones that leap at you from fuller than a good length. Smith faced a ball on day 3 that should've perhaps gotten to bail height, but leaped at him; he took his hand off the handle of his bat and was very lucky not to go out or get hit on the hand as the thing hit the handle of his bat in front of his clavicle. That's borderline dangerous at 130+ clicks.

Imagine Andre Nortje bowling on that deck, in the form he was in in 2018. He'd be hitting blokes every second ball, and there'd be busted fingers everywhere. And that deck was only going to get worse.

The bounce wasn't too bad. Melbourne was just as up and down. There was too much seam movement though making it too hard to bat on. Boland was moving it like a spinner with an old ball.

I think they got the rating right. It wasn't a good pitch but it was satisfactory.

 

[Jim Prideaux]

I was never quick witted to be a good sledger, I'd think of a great response when I was taking off my shoes and lighting a *** at the end of the day.

“The Jerk factory called, and they’re out of you!”

 

[Soggy2112]

Then, there's the other issue. Khawaja went out to a ball that was absolutely short enough to pull caught behind because the ball came off slower than it should have. Any number of balls leaped off a length over the course of the day, and when they did they went quickly. I'm not one for abandoning a game of cricket (I've always found it the utmost of ironies that the worse the batter is the more likely they are to play on a shit-tip of a turf wicket but the better the batter is the more likely the pitches are to be good for batting; plonk them on some of the old, torn up dustbowls in and around Melbourne and let's see how those excellent talents go against test match attacks on the wickets at park level!) but they're a bit lucky the game didn't go a little longer.

If someone was bowling 130+ on those decks I’m sure games would get abandoned pretty quick smart.

 

[sr36]

utmost of ironies that the worse the batter is the more likely they are to play on a shit-tip of a turf wicket but the better the batter is the more likely the pitches are to be good for batting; plonk them on some of the old, torn up dustbowls in and around Melbourne and let's see how those excellent talents go against test match attacks.

Outfields too. I remember watching Mark Waugh flicking fours racing away through midwicket with shots that wouldn't have got through the infield on our surface. You couldn't bat like Mark Waugh, even if you were Mark Waugh. Admittedly against our bowlers he would have just bludgeoned 4s.

 

[PhatBoy]

Regarding the Sydney pitch.

Referencing the possibility of it becoming ‘dangerous’ on days four and five if it went that long.

Yes yes I know it’s straight from the ‘back in my day’ playbook but can we just reflect on the fact that despite the Hughes tragedy, batsmen are better protected than they have ever been, and even a ‘dangerous’ pitch on day four or five in Sydney if it began to be less predictable would still be not as dangerous as pitches of yore, when protection was less and bowling less restricted.

It would be nice at some point if there was SOME emphasis put back onto batsmen being able to manage a strategy on those challenging surfaces even if it IS to just go berserk

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Regarding the Sydney pitch.

Referencing the possibility of it becoming ‘dangerous’ on days four and five if it went that long.

Yes yes I know it’s straight from the ‘back in my day’ playbook but can we just reflect on the fact that despite the Hughes tragedy, batsmen are better protected than they have ever been, and even a ‘dangerous’ pitch on day four or five in Sydney if it began to be less predictable would still be not as dangerous as pitches of yore, when protection was less and bowling less restricted.

It would be nice at some point if there was SOME emphasis put back onto batsmen being able to manage a strategy on those challenging surfaces even if it IS to just go berserk

Every time a pitch isn't a road batsmen whinge like no tomorrow these days. Honestly how do bowlers feel when it's as flat as the Hume Highway?

was it that hard when Webster made 50 plus and 40 not out showing application? How about Pant who got 40 in both innings? Sure people will say he batted ultra agressive- he does that a lot anyway! Even Usman who complained got 40 odd and looked the best he's looked all summer in the second innings! Lets not pretend the pitch was some cracked WACA pitch where Curtley Ambrose was making the ball roll on day 5, you could get runs if you showed application, problem is worldwide there's a lack of application. These are two of the worst batting sides at the moment too, we all said it before the series- both sides batting sucks, both sides have elite quicks, it was always the side who got more out of a poor batting lineup that was winning.

 

[sr36]

Every time a pitch isn't a road batsmen whinge like no tomorrow these days. Honestly how do bowlers feel when it's as flat as the Hume Highway?

was it that hard when Webster made 50 plus and 40 not out showing application? How about Pant who got 40 in both innings? Sure people will say he batted ultra agressive- he does that a lot anyway! Even Usman who complained got 40 odd and looked the best he's looked all summer in the second innings! Lets not pretend the pitch was some cracked WACA pitch where Curtley Ambrose was making the ball roll on day 5, you could get runs if you showed application, problem is worldwide there's a lack of application. These are two of the worst batting sides at the moment too, we all said it before the series- both sides batting sucks, both sides have elite quicks, it was always the side who got more out of a poor batting lineup that was winning.

I love spicy pitches, but I think current batsmen are getting unfairly criticised. They'd kill it on 1980s pitches against 1980s attacks, with 80s benefit of the doubt. The standard of cricket is outstanding at the moment.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I love spicy pitches, but I think current batsmen are getting unfairly criticised. They'd kill it on 1980s pitches against 1980s attacks, with 80s benefit of the doubt. The standard of cricket is outstanding at the moment.

Look at all the dismissals how many of them actually get their foot to the ball? You know like Batting 101? How many of them have an ability to leave on length? It's terrible techniques. Then watch someone like Kane Williamson who does exactly that. The era of t20 and ODI has made batsmen lazy and have to feel the bat on the ball all the time rather than knuckling down and getting through a tough period. At least half if not more of the dismissals were flat out poor batting this series, and worse in Sydney.

 

[troybe]

 

[sr36]

Look at all the dismissals how many of them actually get their foot to the ball? You know like Batting 101? How many of them have an ability to leave on length? It's terrible techniques. Then watch someone like Kane Williamson who does exactly that. The era of t20 and ODI has made batsmen lazy and have to feel the bat on the ball all the time rather than knuckling down and getting through a tough period. At least half if not more of the dismissals were flat out poor batting this series, and worse in Sydney.

Here's Curtley on a fast bouncy pitch - faster and bouncier than current pitches, but more consistent height and not as much seam as in this series. By today's standards, most pitches were roads and the bowling dropped off significantly after the new ball.

 

[PhatBoy]

Every time a pitch isn't a road batsmen whinge like no tomorrow these days. Honestly how do bowlers feel when it's as flat as the Hume Highway?

was it that hard when Webster made 50 plus and 40 not out showing application? How about Pant who got 40 in both innings? Sure people will say he batted ultra agressive- he does that a lot anyway! Even Usman who complained got 40 odd and looked the best he's looked all summer in the second innings! Lets not pretend the pitch was some cracked WACA pitch where Curtley Ambrose was making the ball roll on day 5, you could get runs if you showed application, problem is worldwide there's a lack of application. These are two of the worst batting sides at the moment too, we all said it before the series- both sides batting sucks, both sides have elite quicks, it was always the side who got more out of a poor batting lineup that was winning.

It’s a case of batsmen not having willingness to search beyond 1-2 tactics.

Everyone laughed at Matthew Wade’s tactic a few years ago against Neil Wagner but hey: Wagner didn’t get him. Wade thought beyond trying to either hit out, fend the ball, or duck and weave where he might get hit in the head. He got bashed up sure but he survived. He actually thought his way through something.

It’s so often a case nowadays of ‘if my normal approach doesn’t work in these conditions, I just have to start trying to flog everything.’

On the rare occasions someone deviates from that - Labuschagne in Perth for example - they get lambasted: ‘you just dug a hole for yourself that you were never getting out of.’

If the batsman doesn’t have the skillset I can certainly understand the ‘bash everything’ approach but if he has any level of judgement and flexibility he shouldn’t be beaten down by the idea of a ‘dangerous’ pitch just because the odd one bounces a bit more

 

[LukeParkerno1]

It’s a case of batsmen not having willingness to search beyond 1-2 tactics.

Everyone laughed at Matthew Wade’s tactic a few years ago against Neil Wagner but hey: Wagner didn’t get him. Wade thought beyond trying to either hit out, fend the ball, or duck and weave where he might get hit in the head. He got bashed up sure but he survived. He actually thought his way through something.

It’s so often a case nowadays of ‘if my normal approach doesn’t work in these conditions, I just have to start trying to flog everything.’

On the rare occasions someone deviates from that - Labuschagne in Perth for example - they get lambasted: ‘you just dug a hole for yourself that you were never getting out of.’

If the batsman doesn’t have the skillset I can certainly understand the ‘bash everything’ approach but if he has any level of judgement and flexibility he shouldn’t be beaten down by the idea of a ‘dangerous’ pitch just because the odd one bounces a bit more

Yeah I agree, it's why Khawja's comments were dumb, honestly it was the best he's looked all summer in the second innings. Everyone will say Melbourne but in Sydney we saw the Khawaja of old you know why...and wait for it here, he played good solid cricket shots and waited for the bad ball. Half of Khawaja's dismissals this series were prodding at balls a foot away from the stumps

 

[HirdsTheWord]

View attachment 2200201

dont like that usman got the pick

does not deserve it.