Aussie Cricket
-
@dogmeat said in Aussie Cricket:
@MN5 Just to revert to the commentators for a moment
Nicholas captained Hampshire for a decade or more during their most successful era and also was captain of England A. As @Catogrande said he was very much thought of as in the Brearley mould although a better batsman. He played during the Lamb, Gower, Gatting time. If he's played in a different decade or for a different country (e.g. NZ) he would almost certainly picked up some full caps.
He is / was also highly regarded as a commentator in the early days. I'm sure he won commentator of the year in the UK. I did find him much more palatable in his earlier career. His UK persona seemed more toned down but you know what. Her makes his living from being the host. If his employers want him to be a cheerleader then good luck to him for doing so. He's got a great gig why would he rock the boat.
As for your self-avowed ignorance about other commentators as @booboo said - it really does say it all. While Benaud was an absolute legend having perfected the art of saying very little there are some on that list who are at the very least his equal. Plus as I said above it seems the various Aussie (and others) want partisan ex-players rather than balanced nuance
I was living in England back in 1999 when Channel 4 took over the cricket coverage from BBC.
Their coverage was excellent, innovative for the time, with Mark Nicholas having retired the previous year from playing county cricket as the suave, late 30s, famous captain, frontman. He was great in that role.
After leaving UK didn't come across him again until Ch9 picked him up, where he makes me cringe. He doesn't suit the Warney v Chappelii macho circle jerk over who can suggest the most aggressive change the fielding captain just must do.
I like commentators like early Nicholas. In NZ i like Cumming who was similar, a 10 year domestic captain, but without the supposed captaincy fame that Nicholas had by the late 90s. I like that Cumming actually keeps a grasp of domestic cricket still and knows something about newcomers. cough, not-looking at you Mark Richardson. Styris and Doull have good internationalist knowledge of visitors due to their T20 commentating stints, (and Styris's until recent still T20 playing travels).
I like all the NZ TV commentators actually apart from Richardson. Maybe Smithy is starting to go off the plantation as well with his Hawkes Bay/CD bias.
On radio, with the decline of ball-by-ball commentary of Plunket Shield. I find the stints by the other younger ball-by-ball guys not called Waddle to be quite difficult listening. Garth Galloway is a natural when he does a Christchurch test, but he is a just a part timer.
-
Aussie cricket is actually a bit fucked at the moment.
Pretty lame bowling and fielding performance from a backs to the wall Aussie team in a face saving game.
Something (lots of things) ain't right in that camp.
It's all a bit weird to be honest, but this mob is playing unaustralian cricket
-
@Yeahtheboys said in Aussie Cricket:
@Siam hey bro it could be because they got caught cheating and lost their 2 best players!!
Australia's quick bowling since the moment the sandpaper scandal blew up is basically what would have happened if Lance Armstrong were made to ride the TdF clean.
-
@Yeahtheboys said in Aussie Cricket:
@Siam hey bro it could be because they got caught cheating and lost their 2 best players!!
Easy to point the finger from across the ditch but we'd be pretty fucked if KW and Rossco got banned too.
-
@MN5 Yeah, for sure. But 9 months later would we see dropped catches, knee high full tosses, soft batting dismissals and a deer in the headlights look from the players in the winning and losing moments in a game that could be won? Bowling full with a short bowling field set?The basics of cricket.
Nah, the loss of Smith and Warners runs is one thing, the attitude and mental fortitude of the others suggests this boil hasn't been properly lanced.
For a redeeming series final, that was pretty insipid for a team whose main characteristics have been never give up and fight till the end.
-
@Rapido said in Aussie Cricket:
@dogmeat said in Aussie Cricket:
@MN5 Just to revert to the commentators for a moment
Nicholas captained Hampshire for a decade or more during their most successful era and also was captain of England A. As @Catogrande said he was very much thought of as in the Brearley mould although a better batsman. He played during the Lamb, Gower, Gatting time. If he's played in a different decade or for a different country (e.g. NZ) he would almost certainly picked up some full caps.
He is / was also highly regarded as a commentator in the early days. I'm sure he won commentator of the year in the UK. I did find him much more palatable in his earlier career. His UK persona seemed more toned down but you know what. Her makes his living from being the host. If his employers want him to be a cheerleader then good luck to him for doing so. He's got a great gig why would he rock the boat.
As for your self-avowed ignorance about other commentators as @booboo said - it really does say it all. While Benaud was an absolute legend having perfected the art of saying very little there are some on that list who are at the very least his equal. Plus as I said above it seems the various Aussie (and others) want partisan ex-players rather than balanced nuance
I was living in England back in 1999 when Channel 4 took over the cricket coverage from BBC.
Their coverage was excellent, innovative for the time, with Mark Nicholas having retired the previous year from playing county cricket as the suave, late 30s, famous captain, frontman. He was great in that role.
After leaving UK didn't come across him again until Ch9 picked him up, where he makes me cringe. He doesn't suit the Warney v Chappelii macho circle jerk over who can suggest the most aggressive change the fielding captain just must do.
I like commentators like early Nicholas. In NZ i like Cumming who was similar, a 10 year domestic captain, but without the supposed captaincy fame that Nicholas had by the late 90s. I like that Cumming actually keeps a grasp of domestic cricket still and knows something about newcomers. cough, not-looking at you Mark Richardson. Styris and Doull have good internationalist knowledge of visitors due to their T20 commentating stints, (and Styris's until recent still T20 playing travels).
I like all the NZ TV commentators actually apart from Richardson. Maybe Smithy is starting to go off the plantation as well with his Hawkes Bay/CD bias.
On radio, with the decline of ball-by-ball commentary of Plunket Shield. I find the stints by the other younger ball-by-ball guys not called Waddle to be quite difficult listening. Garth Galloway is a natural when he does a Christchurch test, but he is a just a part timer.
I miss Peter Sharp... I agree that the newer commentators have some distance to travel yet. Someone I would like to see/hear more of is Jonathan Agnew.
-
@Siam said in Aussie Cricket:
@MN5 Yeah, for sure. But 9 months later would we see dropped catches, knee high full tosses, soft batting dismissals and a deer in the headlights look from the players in the winning and losing moments in a game that could be won? Bowling full with a short bowling field set?The basics of cricket.
Nah, the loss of Smith and Warners runs is one thing, the attitude and mental fortitude of the others suggests this boil hasn't been properly lanced.
For a redeeming series final, that was pretty insipid for a team whose main characteristics have been never give up and fight till the end.
Didn't we see all of that stuff in the win against Sri Lanka when Perera was going nuts!!!
Australia lost 2-1 in a series of 3 close games against a very good Indian one day team. They were missing their two best batsmen and their three best bowlers. I don't know why anything different would be expected.
-
@hydro11 because 1 Perrera innings of about an hour does nothing to explain the Australian ODI team team stinking up the joint since Feb 2017
They lost 4-1 at home last summer and took a game off SA and India making that 4-2, so they managed 1 win per series on home conditions for 2 summers (3wins from 11at home). They got hammered everywhere overseas AND on some days they had their best bowlers and batsmen.
For a country with all that cricket IP and advanced cricketing institutions, the winning history ; the last 2 years performances are more than just Davey having a brain explosion with sandpaper.
But sure, there's nothing unexpected in Australian cricket performances on home soil that can't be explained by noting 2 innings by a Sri Lankan in a losing game in another country
Australian cricket has never seen any value in a "close" loss
-
@Siam said in Aussie Cricket:
@hydro11 because 1 Perrera innings of about an hour does nothing to explain the Australian ODI team team stinking up the joint since Feb 2017
They lost 4-1 at home last summer and took a game off SA and India making that 4-2, so they managed 1 win per series on home conditions for 2 summers (3wins from 11at home). They got hammered everywhere overseas AND on some days they had their best bowlers and batsmen.
For a country with all that cricket IP and advanced cricketing institutions, the winning history ; the last 2 years performances are more than just Davey having a brain explosion with sandpaper.
But sure, there's nothing unexpected in Australian cricket performances on home soil that can't be explained by noting 2 innings by a Sri Lankan in a losing game in another country
Australian cricket has never seen any value in a "close" loss
There are a couple of factors why Australia tends to do poorly in one day cricket at the moment.
One - they are very reliant on a few players. Their best test bowling fast bowlers are Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins. Their best ODI quicks are Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins. We play 2-3 test series and we know for every series we can bring in a fit Wagner. The Aussies play five home tests and then their quicks are tired. Like last summer when they destroyed England in the Ashes and then, as you say, lost a relatively meaningless series 4-1. The troika were great in the Ashes but shit in the ODIs.Meanwhile Anderson and Broad could just go home.
To put this into perspective, post 2015 World Cup Starc has played 34 ODI's, Hazlewood 31 and Cummins 30. Boult has played 46 and Southee 43 in that time. In that time New Zealand have played 68 ODIs, 27 against South Africa, India and England. Australia have played 66 ODIs in that time but 40 against those three teams. Of those 40 games against those 3 top teams, Cummins has played 17 times, Starc 14 and Hazlewood 11. Of New Zealand's 27 games against the top 3, Boult has played 20 and Southee 23.
The point of all that is Australia look worse than they are if you just look at results. Their problem in a bowling sense is because their quicks are always tired from tests. They don't have a Bracken or a Faulkner or any other ODI specialist. Australia also play more tests and more games against the top teams. Even though they play the top teams more, their best bowlers are often absent from those games. Of course there are other factors like Zampa under-performing.
Obviously much of this is Australia's fault. They don't have the depth and CA schedules too much ODI cricket and proceeds to pick poor squads which are always going to get butchered.Having said that, in the World Cup Australia will have their top bowlers. Australia are at $6 (3rd favourites), we are $9 (5th favourites). There are good reasons for that.
The batting is another story and another long post. In short, the BBL is now way too long and takes up too much oxygen. There are other factors too, of course. Australia's batting has been weak and held up by a few players since 2010.
-
@hydro11 said in Aussie Cricket:
@Siam said in Aussie Cricket:
@hydro11 because 1 Perrera innings of about an hour does nothing to explain the Australian ODI team team stinking up the joint since Feb 2017
They lost 4-1 at home last summer and took a game off SA and India making that 4-2, so they managed 1 win per series on home conditions for 2 summers (3wins from 11at home). They got hammered everywhere overseas AND on some days they had their best bowlers and batsmen.
For a country with all that cricket IP and advanced cricketing institutions, the winning history ; the last 2 years performances are more than just Davey having a brain explosion with sandpaper.
But sure, there's nothing unexpected in Australian cricket performances on home soil that can't be explained by noting 2 innings by a Sri Lankan in a losing game in another country
Australian cricket has never seen any value in a "close" loss
There are a couple of factors why Australia tends to do poorly in one day cricket at the moment.
One - they are very reliant on a few players. Their best test bowling fast bowlers are Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins. Their best ODI quicks are Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins. We play 2-3 test series and we know for every series we can bring in a fit Wagner. The Aussies play five home tests and then their quicks are tired. Like last summer when they destroyed England in the Ashes and then, as you say, lost a relatively meaningless series 4-1. The troika were great in the Ashes but shit in the ODIs.Meanwhile Anderson and Broad could just go home.
To put this into perspective, post 2015 World Cup Starc has played 34 ODI's, Hazlewood 31 and Cummins 30. Boult has played 46 and Southee 43 in that time. In that time New Zealand have played 68 ODIs, 27 against South Africa, India and England. Australia have played 66 ODIs in that time but 40 against those three teams. Of those 40 games against those 3 top teams, Cummins has played 17 times, Starc 14 and Hazlewood 11. Of New Zealand's 27 games against the top 3, Boult has played 20 and Southee 23.
The point of all that is Australia look worse than they are if you just look at results. Their problem in a bowling sense is because their quicks are always tired from tests. They don't have a Bracken or a Faulkner or any other ODI specialist. Australia also play more tests and more games against the top teams. Even though they play the top teams more, their best bowlers are often absent from those games. Of course there are other factors like Zampa under-performing.
Obviously much of this is Australia's fault. They don't have the depth and CA schedules too much ODI cricket and proceeds to pick poor squads which are always going to get butchered.Having said that, in the World Cup Australia will have their top bowlers. Australia are at $6 (3rd favourites), we are $9 (5th favourites). There are good reasons for that.
The batting is another story and another long post. In short, the BBL is now way too long and takes up too much oxygen. There are other factors too, of course. Australia's batting has been weak and held up by a few players since 2010.
It wasn't that long ago though that it seemed Australia could field three different world class teams and still win everything. There does seem to have been a marked drop off in their standards, particularly fielding as well as the obvious batting, India have just looked so much more hungry in the field in the test and one dayersand aren't giving their wickets away
-
@Nevorian said in Aussie Cricket:
@hydro11 said in Aussie Cricket:
@Siam said in Aussie Cricket:
@hydro11 because 1 Perrera innings of about an hour does nothing to explain the Australian ODI team team stinking up the joint since Feb 2017
They lost 4-1 at home last summer and took a game off SA and India making that 4-2, so they managed 1 win per series on home conditions for 2 summers (3wins from 11at home). They got hammered everywhere overseas AND on some days they had their best bowlers and batsmen.
For a country with all that cricket IP and advanced cricketing institutions, the winning history ; the last 2 years performances are more than just Davey having a brain explosion with sandpaper.
But sure, there's nothing unexpected in Australian cricket performances on home soil that can't be explained by noting 2 innings by a Sri Lankan in a losing game in another country
Australian cricket has never seen any value in a "close" loss
There are a couple of factors why Australia tends to do poorly in one day cricket at the moment.
One - they are very reliant on a few players. Their best test bowling fast bowlers are Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins. Their best ODI quicks are Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins. We play 2-3 test series and we know for every series we can bring in a fit Wagner. The Aussies play five home tests and then their quicks are tired. Like last summer when they destroyed England in the Ashes and then, as you say, lost a relatively meaningless series 4-1. The troika were great in the Ashes but shit in the ODIs.Meanwhile Anderson and Broad could just go home.
To put this into perspective, post 2015 World Cup Starc has played 34 ODI's, Hazlewood 31 and Cummins 30. Boult has played 46 and Southee 43 in that time. In that time New Zealand have played 68 ODIs, 27 against South Africa, India and England. Australia have played 66 ODIs in that time but 40 against those three teams. Of those 40 games against those 3 top teams, Cummins has played 17 times, Starc 14 and Hazlewood 11. Of New Zealand's 27 games against the top 3, Boult has played 20 and Southee 23.
The point of all that is Australia look worse than they are if you just look at results. Their problem in a bowling sense is because their quicks are always tired from tests. They don't have a Bracken or a Faulkner or any other ODI specialist. Australia also play more tests and more games against the top teams. Even though they play the top teams more, their best bowlers are often absent from those games. Of course there are other factors like Zampa under-performing.
Obviously much of this is Australia's fault. They don't have the depth and CA schedules too much ODI cricket and proceeds to pick poor squads which are always going to get butchered.Having said that, in the World Cup Australia will have their top bowlers. Australia are at $6 (3rd favourites), we are $9 (5th favourites). There are good reasons for that.
The batting is another story and another long post. In short, the BBL is now way too long and takes up too much oxygen. There are other factors too, of course. Australia's batting has been weak and held up by a few players since 2010.
It wasn't that long ago though that it seemed Australia could field three different world class teams and still win everything. There does seem to have been a marked drop off in their standards, particularly fielding as well as the obvious batting, India have just looked so much more hungry in the field in the test and one dayersand aren't giving their wickets away
If I go through the Australian World Cup winning teams, most of their players were good in all formats.
1999: Only Moody and Bevan weren't up to test cricket.
2003: Bevan and Hogg with Bichel and Symonds being marginal.
2007: Bracken, Hogg and Tait.Australia at their best had a similar team in all formats. They played a lot less cricket back then. I don't think you can be an Australian international in all three formats and play IPL. Some of them are trying to do this though.
The big difference is the batting depth just isn't there for the Aussies right now. There aren't guys in the shield averaging 50 consistently for seasons who can't get a look in. I don't know where they have all gone. I suggest the lure of T20 leagues hasn't helped them out.
The other point I will make is look at the U-19 World Cups:
- 2010 - Australia 1st, NZ 7th
- 2012 - Australia 2nd, NZ 4th
- 2014 - Aus 4th, NZ 10th
- 2016 Aus Did Not Compete, NZ 12th
- 2018 Aus 2nd, NZ 8th
So it seems the Aussies are still producing a lot more talent than us at the youth level. It just hasn't shown through in international cricket yet (if indeed it will).
-
I wonder if the BBL is having an adverse affect on the Aussie ODI team. Over the last few seasons they seem to have picked quite a few blokes predominantly on the back of BBL form, typically for short stints. This has to have an affect on the stability of the side.
-
@hydro11 said in Aussie Cricket:
@Siam said in Aussie Cricket:
@hydro11 The point of all that is Australia look worse than they are if you just look at results.
Jesus Christ
Do you want to raise some counter points?
Only one: Cricket Australia's problems run a bit deeper than not having Starc, Hazlewood and Cummins available for every fucking game!
Your argument suggests if they play those three all the woes (like losing 8 of the last 11 home ODIs!) go away.
I'm reminded a bit of Tana led player responsibilities that Ted talked about. A shift in culture away from the steep old hierarchy to a more inclusive (sorry couldn't think of a better word) set up that typifies the culture today.
Cricket Aus looks too similar to Aus rugby in that the pathways to the top and the performances are tinkered with by chopping and changing personnel and pr spin. The amount of vocally disgruntled players and administrators are struggling to cope with comflicting "win at all costs " and " win the public back".
CA is starting to resemble the ARU in the execution of their vision, got more money but.
Again, these problems run far deeper than Australia has only 5 class players and when they don't play it's NOT unexpected that they lose 80 odd percent at home, which is the extent of your enlightenment.
But by all means mention Boult and Southee again in an analysis of 2 years poor fundamental cricket by the Canary yellows 😀