Just watched a sky masterclass with Wasim Akram from a while back.
He said the whole team had a responsibility in the field to keep the ball in the condition that would benefit the bowlers.Not to the lengths the Ozzies took, but keeping one side rough and the other shiny. Can't believe only three of them knew what was going on.
they've made themselves look even more daft by daring to suggest that Lehmann knew nothing about any of it.
They have but I think we should give CA some credit for 12 months bans of their best two batsmen as they didn't need to do anything - especially when one looks at the previous bans imposed:
Atherton - fined £2,000
Tendulkar - one match ban overturned on appeal and the Indian cricket board refused to accept former England captain Denness as match referee for the third Test and it proceeded but was declared unofficial
Inzamam ul-Haq - banned for four matches
Afridi - banned for two T20 matches
Du Plessis - fined 100% of his match fee and given three penalty points
I would not be surprised if the players don't appeal and the bans aren't, ultimately, cut in half.
Has more to do with team-mates being apoplectic about being shown up. Lehmann may not survive, and none of the three will play test cricket again.
they've made themselves look even more daft by daring to suggest that Lehmann knew nothing about any of it.
They have but I think we should give CA some credit for 12 months bans of their best two batsmen as they didn't need to do anything - especially when one looks at the previous bans imposed:
Atherton - fined £2,000
Tendulkar - one match ban overturned on appeal and the Indian cricket board refused to accept former England captain Denness as match referee for the third Test and it proceeded but was declared unofficial
Inzamam ul-Haq - banned for four matches
Afridi - banned for two T20 matches
Du Plessis - fined 100% of his match fee and given three penalty points
I would not be surprised if the players don't appeal and the bans aren't, ultimately, cut in half.
Has more to do with team-mates being apoplectic about being shown up. Lehmann may not survive, and none of the three will play test cricket again.
I think smith will, Bancroft will need to improve spectacularly to be considered again. Warner? Did someone say Mervyn Westfield?
they've made themselves look even more daft by daring to suggest that Lehmann knew nothing about any of it.
They have but I think we should give CA some credit for 12 months bans of their best two batsmen as they didn't need to do anything - especially when one looks at the previous bans imposed:
Atherton - fined £2,000
Tendulkar - one match ban overturned on appeal and the Indian cricket board refused to accept former England captain Denness as match referee for the third Test and it proceeded but was declared unofficial
Inzamam ul-Haq - banned for four matches
Afridi - banned for two T20 matches
Du Plessis - fined 100% of his match fee and given three penalty points
I would not be surprised if the players don't appeal and the bans aren't, ultimately, cut in half.
I hope they do appeal.
Because it will be a very expensive and futile waste of time and money.
Is the Ashes the next series that Smith could theoretically be picked for? If so, and if he is, I imagine he will be in for a very interesting welcome.
Is the Ashes the next series that Smith could theoretically be picked for? If so, and if he is, I imagine he will be in for a very interesting welcome.
Think so. The 12 month ban lasts up until their series against Pakistan in the UAE in March 2019. Presumably they will play in the following IPL in March and the Australian national team's next fixture is the Ashes in the summer of 2019.
Suspect Smith will be straight back in the side but not so sure about Warner.
So it appears that Vince is going to bat at 7 and assuming Stokes can't bowl we will only have four front line bowlers including debutante Leach?
You'd think it's Vince 3, Root 4, Malan 5, Stokes 6, Bairstow 7, Overton 8. I don't think they would have dropped the fourth seamer if Stokes could not bowl.
So it appears that Vince is going to bat at 7 and assuming Stokes can't bowl we will only have four front line bowlers including debutante Leach?
You'd think it's Vince 3, Root 4, Malan 5, Stokes 6, Bairstow 7, Overton 8. I don't think they would have dropped the fourth seamer if Stokes could not bowl.
I'd agree with this. Altgough would have Woakes over Overton any day.
So it appears that Vince is going to bat at 7 and assuming Stokes can't bowl we will only have four front line bowlers including debutante Leach?
You'd think it's Vince 3, Root 4, Malan 5, Stokes 6, Bairstow 7, Overton 8. I don't think they would have dropped the fourth seamer if Stokes could not bowl.
Not from what I've read - think they want to give Root a run at 3 and promote Bairstow which is right in both cases. Equally, Vince will be under less pressure at 7.
Watching a review/preview of the match on Sky the other night they were saying that the pitch doesn't take spin & you'd be crazy to play a spinner there. No need to play Leach - bowlers being Wood, Overton, Broad & Anderson. Also they were saying Foakes should come in & play Bairstow higher up as a batsman only.
Watching a review/preview of the match on Sky the other night they were saying that the pitch doesn't take spin & you'd be crazy to play a spinner there. No need to play Leach - bowlers being Wood, Overton, Broad & Anderson. Also they were saying Foakes should come in & play Bairstow higher up as a batsman only.
Agree with Foakes in and Bairstow to play as a batsman. Won't happen though.
So it appears that Vince is going to bat at 7 and assuming Stokes can't bowl we will only have four front line bowlers including debutante Leach?
You'd think it's Vince 3, Root 4, Malan 5, Stokes 6, Bairstow 7, Overton 8. I don't think they would have dropped the fourth seamer if Stokes could not bowl.
Not from what I've read - think they want to give Root a run at 3 and promote Bairstow which is right in both cases. Equally, Vince will be under less pressure at 7.
Cant think youd be pick Vince to play and bat him number 7 ?
I'm actually feeling a little sorry for Smith. Think he allowed Warner to influence him and believe that a 6 month ban would be more than enough recompense provided it does turn out to be a worldwide ban (there is a chance he could play county cricket for example). Equally, Bancroft's should be 6 months too because he lied in the press conference too. As for Warner I would just lock him up in a cell with KP and throw away the key!
So it appears that Vince is going to bat at 7 and assuming Stokes can't bowl we will only have four front line bowlers including debutante Leach?
You'd think it's Vince 3, Root 4, Malan 5, Stokes 6, Bairstow 7, Overton 8. I don't think they would have dropped the fourth seamer if Stokes could not bowl.
According to the BBC - "All-rounder Ben Stokes is unlikely to bowl in the match because of a back injury, and did not bowl at nets on Thursday."
Which is the point I made previously about dropping both Woakes and Ali - you have to either replace them with two bowlers in which case you weaken the batting (if that's possible at the moment) or one batsman and one bowler in which case we go into the Test with just four front line bowlers.
So it appears that Vince is going to bat at 7 and assuming Stokes can't bowl we will only have four front line bowlers including debutante Leach?
You'd think it's Vince 3, Root 4, Malan 5, Stokes 6, Bairstow 7, Overton 8. I don't think they would have dropped the fourth seamer if Stokes could not bowl.
Not from what I've read - think they want to give Root a run at 3 and promote Bairstow which is right in both cases. Equally, Vince will be under less pressure at 7.
Cant think youd be pick Vince to play and bat him number 7 ?
I'm not saying that is what I would do - I too would go down the Foakes route but Bairsotw doesn't want to give up the gloves. The other issue with Bairstow batting at 7 is that we know he is capable of getting a big score at this level but having him there with potentially Overton, Broad, Leach and Anderson to come (as opposed to batting at 6 with Ali and Woakes behind him) means he will probably have little or no chance of doing so.
So it appears that Vince is going to bat at 7 and assuming Stokes can't bowl we will only have four front line bowlers including debutante Leach?
You'd think it's Vince 3, Root 4, Malan 5, Stokes 6, Bairstow 7, Overton 8. I don't think they would have dropped the fourth seamer if Stokes could not bowl.
According to the BBC - "All-rounder Ben Stokes is unlikely to bowl in the match because of a back injury, and did not bowl at nets on Thursday."
Which is the point I made previously about dropping both Woakes and Ali - you have to either replace them with two bowlers in which case you weaken the batting (if that's possible at the moment) or one batsman and one bowler in which case we go into the Test with just four front line bowlers.
They may think that on a non-spin friendly pitch, that Root is accurate enough to hold up and end and allow rotation of the 4 seamers?
I'm actually feeling a little sorry for Smith. Think he allowed Warner to influence him and believe that a 6 month ban would be more than enough recompense provided it does turn out to be a worldwide ban (there is a chance he could play county cricket for example). Equally, Bancroft's should be 6 months too because he lied in the press conference too. As for Warner I would just lock him up in a cell with KP and throw away the key!
Don't feel sorry for Smith. He is supposed to be the captain but has shown what a weak character he is, undeserving of the honour.
I agree with you on Warner. He is a bully and they always prey on the weak, in this case a spineless captain and a struggling junior bowler desperate to keep his place in the team.
Comments
Can you imagine the likes of Root and Cook roughing the ball up this way without asking the pace bowlers first?
http://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/43567067
He said the whole team had a responsibility in the field to keep the ball in the condition that would benefit the bowlers.Not to the lengths the Ozzies took, but keeping one side rough and the other shiny. Can't believe only three of them knew what was going on.
Because it will be a very expensive and futile waste of time and money.
Suspect Smith will be straight back in the side but not so sure about Warner.
Which is the point I made previously about dropping both Woakes and Ali - you have to either replace them with two bowlers in which case you weaken the batting (if that's possible at the moment) or one batsman and one bowler in which case we go into the Test with just four front line bowlers.
Don't feel sorry for Smith. He is supposed to be the captain but has shown what a weak character he is, undeserving of the honour.
I agree with you on Warner. He is a bully and they always prey on the weak, in this case a spineless captain and a struggling junior bowler desperate to keep his place in the team.
http://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/43580069