Ashes 2011

JustinDee

d'Oracle wrote: »

Warney mentioned this the other day.

As he put it, "Horses for Courses".
Beer will know the WACA wicket.
Seeing as Aussie aren't have so much with the slow bowlers these days, maybe their thinking is he will most likely get something out of the wicket.

A plan which I expect will fall flat on it face.
But what can you do when your only Test class bowler is in the worst form of his career?

One downside to Warnie's prediction is that Beer is actually not that long in WA. He is originally a VIC. He also has very little first-class cricket behind him.
Would be nice if he took some important scalps however. As I said before, and as every player taking part knows already, all it takes is a couple of catches to stick or an lb decision to go their way and its a different game.

TrueDub

JustinDee wrote: »

He is originally a VIC.

Bill Lawry will be happy. 12th Man, anyone?

JustinDee

TrueDub wrote: »

Bill Lawry will be happy. 12th Man, anyone?

You just reminded of one of the things I miss in Aussie: The Channel9 commentary team (Mark Nicholas hadn't joined them when I lived there so I was spared his mike-calling).
They love and know their cricket regardless of who is doing well.

The Sky Sports team are beginning to get a little carried away. Not all of them mind. Mainly Gower, Atherton and Botham (whose company is Pietersen's management agency).

d'Oracle

"Athers" is bloody rubbish. Boring stuffy bloody sod.
Beefy is grumpy galoot.

Gower is ok.
Bumble & Holding are great.

So says me.

TrueDub

JustinDee wrote: »

You just reminded of one of the things I miss in Aussie: The Channel9 commentary team (Mark Nicholas hadn't joined them when I lived there so I was spared his mike-calling).
They love and know their cricket regardless of who is doing well.

I'm not a fan of Nicholas, his self-satisfied approach on Channel 4 used to rub me the wrong way regularly.

JustinDee wrote: »

The Sky Sports team are beginning to get a little carried away. Not all of them mind. Mainly Gower, Atherton and Botham (whose company is Pietersen's management agency).

I think they also know & love their cricket, regardless of who is doing well. They tend to err on the side of supporting their team, but then so do the 9 team. Sky are primarily broadcasting for an England-supporting audience, so it's understandable that they concentrate on the English side of things.

I find Atherton to be very like Boycott, once you get past the monotone accent and tendency to be negative, his views are always interesting & informative. His print stuff in particular is excellent.

For really, really good commentators (and imo this applies to any sport), you need to go to radio. They're in general much much better - Test Match Special in particular.

Mind you, don't try the trick of turning down the TV volume and turning up the radio. They take advantage of the lack of pictures on the radio to delay things to their pace - which can be very frustrating!

d'Oracle

TrueDub wrote: »

I find Atherton to be very like Boycott, once you get past the monotone accent and tendency to be negative, his views are always interesting & informative. His print stuff in particular is excellent.

You don't find him condescending towards associates/lesser test nations?
Or obsessed with "proper cricket"? (meaning front foot shots and stock deliveries)

booth70

Australia have finally realised they need 5 frontline bowlers to win games for them....gone are the days of Warne and McGrath + 2 others

Can't see Beer playing in Perth though....it will be the 4 pacers plus the leggie

The pressure on the top 3 to score some runs will be huge given they are a specialist batsman short.....Hopefully Watson can convert a fifty that he normally makes into something big

booth70

d'Oracle wrote: »

"Athers" is bloody rubbish. Boring stuffy bloody sod.
Beefy is grumpy galoot.

Gower is ok.
Bumble & Holding are great.

So says me.

For me the best three are:)

Nasser Hussain
Mark Taylor
Michael Holding

The worst three are:mad:

Mark Nicholas
Ian Chappell
Tony Greig

JustinDee

TrueDub wrote: »

I think they also know & love their cricket, regardless of who is doing well. They tend to err on the side of supporting their team, but then so do the 9 team

This is my point. The Channel 9 team get nowhere near as carried away as Gower, Atherton and Botham do. The only tilted commentator during an Ashes series on Channel 9 is Tony Greig and that is towards England (usually was just borne out of frustration of poor play by them).
ITV4 shows a one-hour highlights programme from Channel 9 late at night after each day's play. The difference between the two commentary teams is huge.
I don't listen to punditry in any sport really but would like commentary to be a little more to the centre on Sky Sports.

JustinDee

d'Oracle wrote: »

You don't find him condescending towards associates/lesser test nations?
Or obsessed with "proper cricket"? (meaning front foot shots and stock deliveries)

His attitude to the Irish team in 2007 after beating Pakistan in the CWC was very poor. In his articles he would italicise Ireland as "Ireland". All the while his own national side being populated by South Africans and an Irishman last year seemed to escape this belittlement of his. Then at the end of the Ashes in 2009, this was all suddenly okay.
His diatribe on cheating in cricket had me in stitches, given he was someone caught live on camera souping up a ball for the bowler in a test.

d'Oracle

JustinDee wrote: »

His attitude to the Irish team in 2007 after beating Pakistan in the CWC was very poor. In his articles he would italicise Ireland as "Ireland". All the while his own national side being populated by South Africans and an Irishman last year seemed to escape this belittlement of his. Then at the end of the Ashes in 2009, this was all suddenly okay.
His diatribe on cheating in cricket had me in stitches, given he was someone caught live on camera souping up a ball for the bowler in a test.

Insistence of naming every foreign players place of origin when its us playing.

The "proper cricket shots" nonsense around the time of KP's KRAZY reverse sweeps pissed me off too. He isn't even that old.
I really, really dislike him.
I'd tell him to his face.

The few "third man" bits I have seen him do this series were just plain boring.

crackit

I'd be able to buy into this 'horses for courses' theory with Beer if it wasn't for the fact he's only played 5 first class games. It's a blind grope in the dark hoping to hit paydirt. And the reluctance to admit they were wrong with Hauritz is almost childish at this stage. Haurtiz has taken 10 first class wickets in the last week. Beer has taken just 6 more in his entire career. It's just another Doherty scenario all over again.

If taking wickets against the England touring side was the key then why hasn't Steve O'Keefe been given a crack? He is the 'A' team spinner and performed well in the warmup (got 4 I think) More bulls*it from the Aussie selectors.

I feel really sorry for Hauritz. I think he pretty much knows his international career is over now. After being dropped (wrongly) to respond with 7 wickets at the venue of the next test then follow it up with a maiden first class ton and another 3 wickets bowling in your 2nd innings is pretty much all anyone could do. I'd be surprised is he makes the ODI team now and even if he does he'll be given the chop a.s.a.p

At least Smith coming in is something. It's progressive but my one concern is that even when he's taking wickets at domestic level he's going for plenty of runs. I don't know if he'll be given the leeway to get hit for 5 and over until he nabs those couple of wickets.

JustinDee

What are the odds on England ignoring Tremlett and going for Bresnan to replace Broad?
Bresnan is an ordinary cricketer who can bat a bit too but somehow gets wickets no matter how crap he's bowling, much like Ashley Giles did.
Every team I've ever played with has a player like this. A jambo.

booth70

JustinDee wrote: »

What are the odds on England ignoring Tremlett and going for Bresnan to replace Broad?
Bresnan is an ordinary cricketer who can bat a bit too but somehow gets wickets no matter how crap he's bowling, much like Ashley Giles did.
Every team I've ever played with has a player like this. A jambo.

Tremlett will get the nod ahead of Bresnan or Shahzad...only bcos its the WACA

Corsendonk

booth70 wrote: »

For me the best three are:)

Nasser Hussain
Mark Taylor
Michael Holding

The worst three are:mad:

Mark Nicholas
Ian Chappell
Tony Greig

Can I throw in Nick Knight into the worst too? Always seems to look smug back in the studio and one of those former players who seems to think he was a better player than he actual was. Michael Vaughan is quite good on the TMS commentary team.

wicorthered

JustinDee wrote: »

What are the odds on England ignoring Tremlett and going for Bresnan to replace Broad?
Bresnan is an ordinary cricketer who can bat a bit too but somehow gets wickets no matter how crap he's bowling, much like Ashley Giles did.
Every team I've ever played with has a player like this. A jambo.

I think this selection will show if England have the mentality to be the number 1 test side. The best sides have and will always be aggressive, going for the troat when the opposition is in trouble. The best sides pick match winners not Steady Eddies.

Bresnan will be the safe pick he might not take many test wickets against top batting but he won't get carted around the park and he'll also add depth to the batting.

Tremlett won't add much to the batting line up and if he gets his length wrong could leak runs. It is a risk picking him. However he is far more likely to run through the Aussie top order. He will be a constant wicket threat!!

Picking Tremlett is the aggressive move, he'll be picked for the damage he can do to Australia. Bresnan will be picked to try and limit any damage to England. Australia are down on their knees England should finish them off!!!!

JustinDee

I hope they do pick Bresnan and so will the Aussie batsmen.

djimi

Tremlett did okay in the warm up matches did he not? I have to say if it was me Id pick Tremlett over Bresnan.

Bresnan has a few things going in his favour tho. He is well capable with the bat, and considering he would be replacing Broad this is going to be a consideration, as selecting a genuine no 10/11 to replace a guy who can score you near a ton on his day makes the batting lineup look a lot weaker. And Bresnan has been in the test side recently and done well as opposed to Tremlett who has not played a test in over 3 years.

I agree with the above; Bresnan is the safe option and the one they would be expected to go with. However if the selectors have real balls they will pick Tremlett, who might be the riskier option, but if he gets it right he could potentially be a match winner. I think Bresnan is closer to Broad in terms of batting ability, but Tremlett is a lot closer to Broad as a bowler, and its the latter that they are really replacing. I would love to see England back their top order to get the runs and select Tremlett, even if it makes the tail that bit longer.

JustinDee

djimi wrote: »

Tremlett did okay in the warm up matches did he not? I have to say if it was me Id pick Tremlett over Bresnan

That is why I hope they pick Bresnan.

Even with the England batsmen in the form they're in, their selectors won't trust them enough and will go with the safe option of an ordinary seamer who can bat a bit.

Beasty

Batting is not really relevant, given the form the batsmen are in. Tremlett has never really impressed me at international level - if he was up to it he would have played a lot more at test level already (he's 30 next year)

I'll say again, I would not be surprised to see Shahzad called up

Beefy78

JustinDee wrote: »

This is my point. The Channel 9 team get nowhere near as carried away as Gower, Atherton and Botham do. The only tilted commentator during an Ashes series on Channel 9 is Tony Greig and that is towards England (usually was just borne out of frustration of poor play by them).
ITV4 shows a one-hour highlights programme from Channel 9 late at night after each day's play. The difference between the two commentary teams is huge.
I don't listen to punditry in any sport really but would like commentary to be a little more to the centre on Sky Sports.

The Sky commentary team generally talk up the better side in any series. In The Ashes, that is currently England.

d'Oracle

Beefy78 wrote: »

The Sky commentary team generally talk up the better side in any series. In The Ashes, that is currently England.

This is actually a very valid point.

JustinDee

Beefy78 wrote: »

The Sky commentary team generally talk up the better side in any series. In The Ashes, that is currently England.

No, they don't.
If England are doing well, they'll behave as they are now ie. a bit too giddy to be considerd anyway balanced.
If England are losing, they'll spend most of the time discussing the team, problems, performances etc even on coverage of other test or one-day series.

TrueDub

JustinDee wrote: »

No, they don't.
If England are doing well, they'll behave as they are now ie. a bit too giddy to be considerd anyway balanced.
If England are losing, they'll spend most of the time discussing the team, problems, performances etc even on coverage of other test or one-day series.

That's the market they're catering for, the vast majority of their viewers are England cricket fans.

I don't think they're as bad as you think, to be honest. I also don't think other commentary teams are much better. Each team will have it's interests and agenda, often set by the stronger personalities or the requirements of their employers.

JustinDee

TrueDub wrote: »

That's the market they're catering for, the vast majority of their viewers are England cricket fans.

I don't think they're as bad as you think, to be honest. I also don't think other commentary teams are much better. Each team will have it's interests and agenda, often set by the stronger personalities or the requirements of their employers.

So on one hand they're doing it because thats who they're selling to and on the other, they're not really doing it?
Okay

No worries. Not arguing. Just my opinion. They're definitely the worst of them at the moment. I just turn the sound off an listen to iPod instead if they kick off again and just don't watch anything hosted by Charles 'Wholly Unqualified' Colville.

Dozen Wicked Words

They are the de facto national broadcaster for English Cricket, I expect their focus therefore to be English Cricket first and foremost.

Happy with that, happy with the commentary team generally and happy with the current score in the series.

TrueDub

JustinDee wrote: »

So on one hand they're doing it because thats who they're selling to and on the other, they're not really doing it?
Okay

No worries. Not arguing. Just my opinion. They're definitely the worst of them at the moment. I just turn the sound off an listen to iPod instead if they kick off again and just don't watch anything hosted by Charles 'Wholly Unqualified' Colville.

I'm not saying they're not doing it, I'm saying they're not doing it as much as you think they are.

There's a lot of commentators I don't listen to, in lots of sports, but there are also several I find fascinating - even if I don't always agree with their findings or allegiances.

Beefy78

Commentators in a lot of sports (especially football) really, really annoy me. But cricket commentary is especially good and whilst I miss the days of Benaut & Boycott on the BBC, I think the Sky team are very good. Of course they talk a lot about the England team - most are English, most captained the side and most of the people watching are English and want to hear this stuff. They're hardly biased in favour of England though and the likes of Hussain & Atherton have lambasted players and management in previous years when there were things to lambast.

JustinDee

Beefy78 wrote: »

the likes of Hussain & Atherton have lambasted players and management in previous years when there were things to lambast.

. . . yes, when they've lost a series or important game.
If you went according to the panel, Australia didn't win the 2006/7 Ashes. England lost it.
I've all the time in the world for Nassr Hussein however. He's astute and honest in his view.
Atherton isn't.

Beefy78

As an Essex boy, Nasser Hussain is a hero of mine.

crackit

JustinDee wrote: »

. . . yes, when they've lost a series or important game.
If you went according to the panel, Australia didn't win the 2006/7 Ashes. England lost it.
I've all the time in the world for Nassr Hussein however. He's astute and honest in his view.
Atherton isn't.

The Ashes 2006/7 was written out of history until the regained them last year. I know they aren't going to focus too heavily on a series where they got battered but it was stricken from the records at one stage.

They are lopsided but that is to be expected. I generally don't mind it, though, I think Bob Willis is by far the most annoying panelist/commentator they have.

Stick me down as a Nas fan too. I think he's brilliant.

Nation 98

JustinDee wrote: »

. . . yes, when they've lost a series or important game.
If you went according to the panel, Australia didn't win the 2006/7 Ashes. England lost it.
.

No, they acted as though it never happened which is far worse.

dfx-

TrueDub wrote: »

That's the market they're catering for, the vast majority of their viewers are England cricket fans.

I don't think they're as bad as you think, to be honest. I also don't think other commentary teams are much better. Each team will have it's interests and agenda, often set by the stronger personalities or the requirements of their employers.

After suffering Channel9 for last year's Australian Summer, the South African tour the year before and even the warm-up England game, the Sky commentary is far superior, refreshing and honest for me. Biased obviously too, but honest bias.

Hussein would probably be my least favourite, but he's better than the best of channel9.

Beefy78

Nation 98 wrote: »

No, they acted as though it never happened which is far worse.

No they don't. Every test so far has made numerous mentions of what happened in the corresponding fixture four years ago.

England are the holders because they won the last Ashes series. Of course that is the one which gets spoken about the most as it's the most recent and featured the highest number of players still playing in this series.

TrueDub

Beefy78 wrote: »

No they don't. Every test so far has made numerous mentions of what happened in the corresponding fixture four years ago.

England are the holders because they won the last Ashes series. Of course that is the one which gets spoken about the most as it's the most recent and featured the highest number of players still playing in this series.

I think the issue is that during the last series in England, they spent more time discussing the wonders of 2005 than reflecting on the 5-0 drubbing in Aus in 2006/7.

I'm not going to condemn or defend any commentary team, as there's a lot of outside influences on them and it's not an easy job - you can keep some people happy all the time, etc.

Mind you, nobody's as bad as Stuart Barnes <smacks self on head for going off-topic>

Dozen Wicked Words

TrueDub wrote: »

I think the issue is that during the last series in England, they spent more time discussing the wonders of 2005 than reflecting on the 5-0 drubbing in Aus in 2006/7.

I'm not going to condemn or defend any commentary team, as there's a lot of outside influences on them and it's not an easy job - you can keep some people happy all the time, etc.

Mind you, nobody's as bad as Stuart Barnes <smacks self on head for going off-topic>

AFAIK they cancelled the 06/07 series and just had the next series in England. Actually, as far as all the England players in 06/07 goes they forgot it was on too.

JustinDee

Beefy78 wrote: »

No they don't. Every test so far has made numerous mentions of what happened in the corresponding fixture four years ago

England lost it rather than Australia won it.
And no matter what bloody cricket you might have happened to be watching that year or the beginning of the next season, all that was talked about was England, England, England.
Not good coverage and nowhere near anywhere Channel 9 or even Fox Sports Australia have gone.

Just crap, thats all.
Then again, its only TV. What matters is what happens on the oval.

d'Oracle

I like Nas too.
He is a grumpy bugger and he focuses way too much on negatives, but he is always honest.

I also Like Beefy, but only on away series when he is not moaning about the lack of test matches OOp North.

Corsendonk

booth70 wrote: »

Tremlett will get the nod ahead of Bresnan or Shahzad...only bcos its the WACA

BBC Sport quoting inside knowledge that its Tremlett.

Gordon Gecko

Heard on Sky News that Nathan Hauritz literally started selling his Test gear outside his apartment the other day!

riffmongous

Good start to the comeback for Tremlett, gets Hughes in his first over, 2nd over of the day. Have to say I've been a fan of him ever since I saw him in Clontarf a few years back

crackit

Ponting gone for nothing for the 4th time out of 5 this series.

He won't last when he loses the captaincy which now seems inevitable. A sad end to a fine career.

Superb catch by Collingwood by the way. That shouldn't mask how ****e the shot was though. Fencing a yard away from his body and outside off when the ball was miles too short to hit the stumps. It was just nerves. You can't afford that in his position

As the old expression used to go 'Lead. Follow. Or get the FcUK out of the way'

Ponting isn't leading. He won't be given the chance to follow. Therefore he's going to have to get the fcuk out of the way

kryogen

it makes me very sad to see Ponting play this way, Clarke too. But i have a special affinity for Punter and I hate to see him like this

crackit

Me too Kryogen. It really is a sad demise.

I know everyone seems to say Clarke will be a fine captain once he finds his form etc..

Who is to say he will find his form. And who is to say he will be capable of balancing being a new captain with having to bat himself back into form?

Testing times all round for Australia.

If Waston and Hussey go I expect England to bat by tea time

crackit

ffs it's a 2 man team. for the third test in a row Australia live or die on what #5 and #7 can do.

JustinDee

Yep, poor show by the batting lineup. Pressure looks to be getting the better of them.
Hopefully the fifty will have Johnson's back up, especially having been caught out by sooky Anderson.
Aussie at least have two genuine quicks (Johnson and Harris). England fielding has been exemplary and thats what Aussie, who have fielded poorly this series, have to match at the very least.

JustinDee

At least the tailenders have finally got a run going. Siddle-Hilfenhaus so far is 34 of 20-odd balls.

JustinDee

Well that post was the kiss of death if ever there was!
268 total.
Poor and need early door wickets in final overs of day.

Inquitus

If you are an England fan you must be wondering when you are going to wake up!

mike65

Why is this on SKY overnight??????????????! :mad: