Agree, I'm a big fan of Pant.
A handy 50 run partnership between Labushagne and Head. Labushagne is a good leaver, I wish my mother in law would take note.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Cricket
- Thread starter mb64
- Start date
A handy 50 run partnership between Labushagne and Head. Labushagne is a good leaver, I wish my mother in law would take note.
A tough series to make your debut in, India are a quality bowling side.
I like his temperament, be good if he could come in at 4/250, instead of 4 for not many.
A great 1st over from Starc, he's got it on a string.
Just got home from the MCG. Smith, Labushagne, Head and Wade threw their wickets away. India were lucky to get Aust out so cheaply, they set good fields but after Ashwin's first spell both him and Jadeja should have bowled a lot more. Green looks... well green, technique looks OK but he struggles to get runs.
The test cricket win-win-win scenario for this punter. Bit gloomy here at the G, but having backed India at $7.80 prematch, I just had some on Australia at $2.56 and the draw at $23 to lock in a guaranteed profit no matter what. That's how you do it!
Now this test is exactly what you love about test cricket - every ball is important. Batsman showing courage, fast bowlers being hostile, spinners using guile, chirp and feeling between batsman and fieldsman. Gripping stuff. This is the arena where real reputations are made.
Wade consolidating his reputation as a street fighter. Big innings required from Smith. Next session massive.
How good is test cricket?!
Wade consolidating his reputation as a street fighter. Big innings required from Smith. Next session massive.
How good is test cricket?!
Real talk, this batting unit has been brittle for 3-4 years. Costs us time and again. Poor concentration, shot selection, sure, but Wade Head and Burns just aren’t good enough.
Burns will be extinguished.
Head’s shot was terrible. Terrible. Not convinced by him at all.
Wade up the top? In fact, Wade at all in our Test six? Yeah nah. He’s compact and diligent but is he Test level? Really? I don’t see it. Not if we wanna stay at the top of the tree through the Ashes into 2022.
Depth is *smile* to be honest. Should we continue with mediocre plodders who’ll struggle to average 40 at test level?
Might be time to give Harris (a guy who can actually hold an end despite his limitations) and Warner the opening slots in the 3rd test. Reverse the laughable Hail Mary they tried with the opening pair for the first two.
Yeah I know, Harris is a bit *smile*. But we just need someone to survive the new ball at the moment. 40 off 90 odd is fine if Warner gets going.
I would also blood Pucovski (when he’s ready) at five when the ball is softer.
Harris
Warner
Labs
Smith
Pucovski
Green
A solid top four with youth finding experience before the Ashes. This is the long term setup but I concede JL doesn’t coach this way.
Burns will be extinguished.
Head’s shot was terrible. Terrible. Not convinced by him at all.
Wade up the top? In fact, Wade at all in our Test six? Yeah nah. He’s compact and diligent but is he Test level? Really? I don’t see it. Not if we wanna stay at the top of the tree through the Ashes into 2022.
Depth is *smile* to be honest. Should we continue with mediocre plodders who’ll struggle to average 40 at test level?
Might be time to give Harris (a guy who can actually hold an end despite his limitations) and Warner the opening slots in the 3rd test. Reverse the laughable Hail Mary they tried with the opening pair for the first two.
Yeah I know, Harris is a bit *smile*. But we just need someone to survive the new ball at the moment. 40 off 90 odd is fine if Warner gets going.
I would also blood Pucovski (when he’s ready) at five when the ball is softer.
Harris
Warner
Labs
Smith
Pucovski
Green
A solid top four with youth finding experience before the Ashes. This is the long term setup but I concede JL doesn’t coach this way.
Last edited:
No doubt our batting has been propped up by Smith, Warner and Labuschagne recently, and to an extent by the excellence of the bowlers which has meant they haven't had to make too many on occasion.
But let's talk DRS. In general, I am a fan but it needs to be used better, by both the players and the (TV) umpires.
Burns. WTF? He must have known that he hit that. What's his excuse? Desperation?
Wade. He must have known that he DIDN'T hit it, and by his body language it was obvious he reckoned he was out, but his thought process was "if I am gone here we are history". Probably didn't matter in the end.
The Paine decision. What is their procedures? Surely if hot spot and snicko say such opposite things, you go with the on-field umpire? Or is one of the technology elements enough for "conclusive proof" to overturn? Anyone with any knowledge of cricket could see that was not out. The TV umpires are, after all, also on-field umpires and they know the game. I reckon the TV umpires should be given some degree of free reign o use their cricketing instincts and not be so blindly restricted to a specific process.
They should just remove on field umpires entirely.
Test cricket is such a slow game the upstairs umpires could simply review every ball and get the right decision (close to) 100% of the time.
No referrals, no challenges, just correct decisions.
Also, if they do stick with the referral system (they will), if the ball tracking says the ball is hitting the stumps - at all - it should be out. No umpires call nonsense.
I know there's a margin of error for software, but I don't care. A computer's margin of error must be less than some dude standing 20 metres away.
Test cricket is such a slow game the upstairs umpires could simply review every ball and get the right decision (close to) 100% of the time.
No referrals, no challenges, just correct decisions.
Also, if they do stick with the referral system (they will), if the ball tracking says the ball is hitting the stumps - at all - it should be out. No umpires call nonsense.
I know there's a margin of error for software, but I don't care. A computer's margin of error must be less than some dude standing 20 metres away.
Agree. If the margin of error is up to half a ball, they shouldn’t be using it. Just go with the technology - if it’s hitting, it’s out.
