Unofficial Buildup to the 2010/11 Ashes

[Num]

This isn't the 80s, if a captain is a serial over-rate offender he doesn't get to say "that's just how we roll".

They got to say that in the 80s?

 

[War]

This isn't the 80s, if a captain is a serial over-rate offender he doesn't get to say "that's just how we roll". He gets fined and suspended.

Has i always say. The worries you guys on this site have about the AUS attack regularly violating the over-rate thus become "serial over-rate offenders" is basically just extreme & unwarranted pessimism & paranoia i'm afraid.

Since the ICC started getting tough on over-rate issues in the 1990s. I dont recall past 4-man pace attack having such a problem from:

- Windies from 1990-1999

- S Africa 1992-1996

- ENG joke 4-man pace attacks in the 90s

- ENG famous 4-man attack of Gough/Caddick/Cork/White circa 2000

Plus test matches here of there where 4-man/all pace attack where played such as:

4th Test: South Africa v England at Johannesburg, Jan 14-17, 2010 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com


1st Test: England v Pakistan at Lord's, May 17-20, 2001 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

Plus of course you have AUS wins in SA 09, & the final two Ashes test 09 where over-rates issues weren't a problem.

The only example in recent times i can recall an all-pace attack having over-rate problems was that Perth 08 with AUS & IND. Usually teams it is conclusively proven that teams can manage overs well with an all-pace attack in modern times. So you guys have to come up with a stronger argument than that for your "over-rate" worries over an all-pace attack playing. Or rather just accept thats the attack, AUS have to play.

 

[sifter132]

Well the argument from me is not 'can Australia get away with bad over rates without consequence' but more will Ricky Ponting want to sail close to the edge of the overrate law? India 2008 is the prime example, where Ponting decided to honour the spirit of the rules by trying to quicken his overrate. I think he'd bowl 10 overs of spin a day REGARDLESS of whether he's going to get fined or not, just to make an attempt of quickening the game. So to me 4 quicks just means more bowling for Marcus North, and I'm not terribly excited by it.

I'd be intereted to hear someone ask Ponting about the issue speficially, but I'm afraid our cricket journalists are too busy whining about the selectors and pushing out their own opinions. No one REPORTS anything anymore...

 

[War]

Well the argument from me is not 'can Australia get away with bad over rates without consequence' but more will Ricky Ponting want to sail close to the edge of the overrate law? India 2008 is the prime example, where Ponting decided to honour the spirit of the rules by trying to quicken his overrate. I think he'd bowl 10 overs of spin a day REGARDLESS of whether he's going to get fined or not, just to make an attempt of quickening the game. So to me 4 quicks just means more bowling for Marcus North, and I'm not terribly excited by it.

I'd be intereted to hear someone ask Ponting about the issue speficially, but I'm afraid our cricket journalists are too busy whining about the selectors and pushing out their own opinions. No one REPORTS anything anymore...

But in Nagpur 2008, AUS had Krejza bowling from one end most of that day. That wasn't a 4-man/all pace attack. That test was just the entire team being sluggish between overs.

In my preferred AUS top 6 of Watson, Hughes, Ponting, Clarke, Katich, Ferguson. No North would be there anyway. So that would leave Clarke & Katman to to be called upon if needed to run through some inocuous overs of spin to aid in speeding things up. Of course given te injury records of those two when it comes to bowling, Ponting may not call upon them to bowl.

But this where IMO we have to have confidence in AUS pace attack - instead pessimism towards it. As i always say once Bollinger/Hilfenhaus/Johnson/Harris or Siddle bowl to potential, AUS will bowl out teams quickly enough more often than not IMO. I cant see any of the top 8 teams outside of SA or IND regualry suriving againts that attack (probably only even SA, since i have my doubts over the ageing IND batsmen these days outside of Tendy & Laxman). Thus the over-rate problem & need to get part-time spinners into game to help speed things come will not be a issue very often.

 

[angryangy]

Cumulative sanctions for slow over rates only came into effect in 2009. While serious punishment for a seriously slow over rate did exist, no captain ran the risk of being suspended simply for a string of minor offences. Now they do.

If you're suggesting that ridiculously pointless 5 man pace attack fielded by South Africa should be repeated, then I can only assume it is the punch-line of a very long winded joke.

 

[War]

Cumulative sanctions for slow over rates only came into effect in 2009. While serious punishment for a seriously slow over rate did exist, no captain ran the risk of being suspended simply for a string of minor offences. Now they do.

Yes and since 2009 no example of teams playing 4-man or all-pace attacks has that risk coming to past. All the teams that have used it i.e AUS 4 times & S African 1 time, have gotten through their overs & a fairly decent pace, with captains or anybody not even worrying about their teams being at a risk at any point for suspension or seriously slow over-rates. So again the argument or worries you guys have over this matter has no recent evidence (even by your post 2009 criteria) - just a bit too much pessimism & paranoia i'm afraid.


In the upcoming series with SA vs IND, where i expect SA to dish out a all-pace attack @ some point in the series. I shall report to you again how they will not run into to any over-rate problems.

If you're suggesting that ridiculously pointless 5 man pace attack fielded by South Africa should be repeated, then I can only assume it is the punch-line of a very long winded joke.

Haha yes, and playing useless spinners (who have been chosen in the Ashes 17-man) like Hauritz, Doherty, Smith who have:

- failed show he can bowl out teams/be a wicket-taking threat on the 5th day tracks/turners againts good teams. (Hauritz)

- a FC bowler who averages 48 in FC cricket (Doherty) & has shown nothing that he can make a difference @ test level in the conditions Hauritz has failed to deliver in. (Doherty)

- A guy whose bowling is by no means the finished article for tests (probably wont ever be), who is crazily being fast tracked by the selectors as a leg-spinner in Smith.

Now if you seriously are going to tell me oh fine sir, that playing anyone of the spinners based on these facts in the Ashes makes more sense than backing a proven seamer (in which many exist around AUS). Who although as i've articulated before, wont always aid in AUS winning test on last day pitches, but will be far more of wicket taking threat than any of the current spinners in AUS in the said conditions. Then the long winded joke is one you.

Fact is NO spinner should play for AUS again unless he proves over the course of a season in sheild cricket, that he take a bag of wickets @ a solid average - this is usually how players get picked. If he then failes to look test quality when picked for test based on FC form, as was seen with Cullen, McGain & Smith - thats a different story however. Why should AUS be uselessly trying to fast track spinner who have not done that in FC cricket consistently, only to have them exposed as test level againts good teams?. Is this proven logic on how you pick players based on solid/strong FC form before tests too robust for you my friend, or do you see this as well as another "punch-line of a very long winded joke"?.


NOTE: As i've said before, I remain in the camp that believes Krejza is the spinner AUS are looking for in a 5-man attack.

 

[sifter132]

Yes and since 2009 no example of teams playing 4-man or all-pace attacks has that risk coming to past. All the teams that have used it i.e AUS 4 times & S African 1 time, have gotten through their overs & a fairly decent pace, with captains or anybody not even worrying about their teams being at a risk at any point for suspension or seriously slow over-rates. So again the argument or worries you guys have over this matter has no recent evidence (even by your post 2009 criteria) - just a bit too much pessimism & paranoia i'm afraid.

But it's not me who's paranoid! Even if I'm fine with the risk of fine or suspension, it matters not. It's Ponting's on field actions that matter and whether HE is worried about suspensions, fines or whatever. And I can tell you that if Ricky's bowled 60 overs of pace and he's 5 overs behind the rate, I can guarantee you he'll be looking for a guy with a shorter run up - and not because he thinks there'll be a magical break through either.

And here's proof: In my spare hour this morning, I've finished my scorecard analysis of Australians in the field since 2006/07. I wanted to prove that Ponting will always look for a spinner/slower option - whether or not there is a specialist spinner in the side or not. And thus I'm looking prove that even if Australia played 4 specialist quicks, Ponting would always be looking for someone slower to bowl. That makes the idea of 4 quicks less exciting for me, because I know they won't be utilised to their maximum. That negate any advantage that 4 quicks might bring IMHO.


Anyway, I've excluded Symonds and Hussey from the pace overs, but included McDonald, even though he often bowled with the keeper up. So here's the first list - the most overs of pace bowled by Australia in a single day of Test cricket in the last 4 years. All other days or part days in the last 4 years have had 65 overs of pace or less:
1. 79 overs, Day 2 v South Africa, Cape Town 2009
McGain was getting slapped and bowled only 9 overs that day. The other 79 were pace. They were 2 overs short of the 90.

2. 75 overs, Day 2 v Pakistan, Sydney 2010
Hauritz bowled 16 overs in an extended day due to rain the day before. There were only 3 quicks playing, but Watson bowled 17 overs on the day because he was getting good reverse. 98 overs were meant to be bowled: 91 got bowled.

3. 72 overs, Day 1 v England, The Oval 2009
Australia went in with 4 quicks and lost the toss. North bowled 14 overs of spin and Australia bowled 85.3 overs for the day. 4.3 short of what they should have.

4. 70 overs, Day 1 v India, Mohali 2008
Australia lost the toss, and played Cameron White as the 'main' spinner. White bowled 8 overs and Michael Clarke bowled 7 to make 15 overs of spin. Australia were 5 overs short for the day.

5. 70 overs, Day 1 v India, Delhi 2008
3rd Test of the India tour, again White was the primary spin option and again Australia lost the toss. 89 overs in total were bowled, still 1 over short. Spin consisted of: Katich 6 overs, Clarke 9 overs, White 4 overs.

6. 68 overs, Day 1 v India, Perth 2008
4 quicks for the Aussies, including Lee and Tait. Symonds and Clarke bowled the other 16 overs of the day, leaving Australia 6 short of the 90 required.

7. 67 overs, Day 3 v South Africa, Sydney 2009
This is the most overs of pace I can find Australia bowling in a day and still getting their overs in. They bowled 82 overs to finish of SA, and then faced 6 overs themselves with the 2 over changeover getting the tally to 90. Hauritz bowled 15 of the 82 overs. McDonald bowled another 16 and the other 51 was Siddle, Bollinger and Johnson. You'll remember McDonald bowling tight stump to stump lines with Haddin at the stumps.


Where are the first 2 Tests of the SA tour 2009 I hear you scream? Well in none of those 3 innings did Australia spend a whole day in the field. Durban they got close with 80 overs of fielding on day 4. On that day North and Katich bowled 18 overs of spin. Australia did well to win the toss in those 2 Tests which meant that they didn't have to face a full day in the field by batting first.

Of interest, in the first Test at Jo'burg, Australia bowled the highest ratio of pace/spin in the last 4 years. Only 7 overs of spin in each innings, compared to 75 overs of pace in the 1st and 113 overs of pace in the 2nd. Australia didn't have a full day in the field, but by adding up the minutes of the South African batsmen you can see what kind of overrates were kept in that game:
SA 1st innings 355 minutes, lasted 81.1 overs (round up to 82): 13.86 overs per hour
SA 2nd innings 512 minutes, lasted 119.2 overs (round up to 120): 14.06 overs per hour
Those overrates are good enough to just bowl 90 overs in 6.5 hours. But Australia conceded very few boundaries in either of those innings, bowled a lot of maidens, and had McDonald in the team who bowls of a shorter run, often with the keeper up. To summarise, the ball wasn't going very far and can get back to the bowler quicker. So essentially, everything has to go right to get that overrate.


This is why I maintain that if Australia can knock over a team quickly on a green pitch eg. v Eng at Headingly 2009, or v Pak at Headingly 2010, or v NZ at Brisbane 2008, then great 4 fast bowlers will knock their socks off. But any more than 65 overs of pace in a day and Ricky will be looking for overrate relief and to rest his quick men. That's just the way it is, unless you want to improve your own field routines and quicken the overrates, or try bowlers who get through their overs quickly like McDonald. That doesn't mean my dream XI isn't 4 fast bowlers, it's just that I recognise my dream XI won't work until the Aussies pick up their act in the field.


So really War, you've got a beef with the captain, not so much the selectors. They are basically only picking a side that Ricky wants and you can tell that by the bowler usage. Because even when they've picked 4 quicks, Ricky has still used a fair amount of spin - only in those 3 matches I've outlined has a spinner not been required. Ponting's shown no special urgency in his overrates so he can try to fit more overs of pace in. He obviously likes having a slower option.

The other prudent thing to note from my research: the 2 overrate 'incidents' Australia have had both came JUST AFTER one of those listed innings - obviously with Ponting a little worried about fine/suspension. The poor overrate in the first innings at Perth 2008, led to plenty of Symonds and Clarke in the 2nd. The poor overrates in the 2nd and 3rd Tests in India led to the 25 overs of slow bowling overkill in the 4th Test on that 4th day.

 

[Num]

Great post sifter132. Nice research as well.

 

[Owzat]

I think it is possible to bowl with four quick bowlers and no spin, it's just the captains take so long fiddling with fields etc and basically don't show that little bit of urgency that is required. If you work out how long it takes from start of delivery to reaching the batsman, even with any fielding/fetching included, it is not that long. What takes the time is walking back to the mark, the field getting ready, the batsman getting ready (although he should be ready by the time the bowler is back to his mark) etc.

Oh and ffs ditch the drinks break. ANY fielder could get a drink from the boundary or off the umpire, batsmen are necessarily out for the full session and again could get a drink off the umpire and the umpires could hold a few bottles for themselves/batsmen. Play doesn't need to be interrupted, in some conditions it shouldn't be a fixture in the session

And another factor that probably isn't factored in but maybe should be is the review system (when used) I think the boundary calls should be dumped, if you're not sure just give four. Makes me laugh technology makes sure boundaries are called 100% accurately, yet more critical match changing decisions get called with less accuracy - especially when a side has run out of reviews which in my opinion defeats the object (of eliminating umpiring errors)

 

[cricketmad09]

I don't think the 17 man squad thus far is a terrible thing like the media is suggest. Theres still the Australia A game as well as every team playing a shield match. This gives the selectors more time to see who is really in form before they decide to cut the squad.

 

[War]

But it's not me who's paranoid! Even if I'm fine with the risk of fine or suspension, it matters not. It's Ponting's on field actions that matter and whether HE is worried about suspensions, fines or whatever. And I can tell you that if Ricky's bowled 60 overs of pace and he's 5 overs behind the rate, I can guarantee you he'll be looking for a guy with a shorter run up - and not because he thinks there'll be a magical break through either.

And here's proof: In my spare hour this morning, I've finished my scorecard analysis of Australians in the field since 2006/07. I wanted to prove that Ponting will always look for a spinner/slower option - whether or not there is a specialist spinner in the side or not. And thus I'm looking prove that even if Australia played 4 specialist quicks, Ponting would always be looking for someone slower to bowl. That makes the idea of 4 quicks less exciting for me, because I know they won't be utilised to their maximum. That negate any advantage that 4 quicks might bring IMHO.


Anyway, I've excluded Symonds and Hussey from the pace overs, but included McDonald, even though he often bowled with the keeper up. So here's the first list - the most overs of pace bowled by Australia in a single day of Test cricket in the last 4 years. All other days or part days in the last 4 years have had 65 overs of pace or less:
1. 79 overs, Day 2 v South Africa, Cape Town 2009
McGain was getting slapped and bowled only 9 overs that day. The other 79 were pace. They were 2 overs short of the 90.

2. 75 overs, Day 2 v Pakistan, Sydney 2010
Hauritz bowled 16 overs in an extended day due to rain the day before. There were only 3 quicks playing, but Watson bowled 17 overs on the day because he was getting good reverse. 98 overs were meant to be bowled: 91 got bowled.

3. 72 overs, Day 1 v England, The Oval 2009
Australia went in with 4 quicks and lost the toss. North bowled 14 overs of spin and Australia bowled 85.3 overs for the day. 4.3 short of what they should have.

4. 70 overs, Day 1 v India, Mohali 2008
Australia lost the toss, and played Cameron White as the 'main' spinner. White bowled 8 overs and Michael Clarke bowled 7 to make 15 overs of spin. Australia were 5 overs short for the day.

5. 70 overs, Day 1 v India, Delhi 2008
3rd Test of the India tour, again White was the primary spin option and again Australia lost the toss. 89 overs in total were bowled, still 1 over short. Spin consisted of: Katich 6 overs, Clarke 9 overs, White 4 overs.

6. 68 overs, Day 1 v India, Perth 2008
4 quicks for the Aussies, including Lee and Tait. Symonds and Clarke bowled the other 16 overs of the day, leaving Australia 6 short of the 90 required.

7. 67 overs, Day 3 v South Africa, Sydney 2009
This is the most overs of pace I can find Australia bowling in a day and still getting their overs in. They bowled 82 overs to finish of SA, and then faced 6 overs themselves with the 2 over changeover getting the tally to 90. Hauritz bowled 15 of the 82 overs. McDonald bowled another 16 and the other 51 was Siddle, Bollinger and Johnson. You'll remember McDonald bowling tight stump to stump lines with Haddin at the stumps.


Where are the first 2 Tests of the SA tour 2009 I hear you scream? Well in none of those 3 innings did Australia spend a whole day in the field. Durban they got close with 80 overs of fielding on day 4. On that day North and Katich bowled 18 overs of spin. Australia did well to win the toss in those 2 Tests which meant that they didn't have to face a full day in the field by batting first.

Of interest, in the first Test at Jo'burg, Australia bowled the highest ratio of pace/spin in the last 4 years. Only 7 overs of spin in each innings, compared to 75 overs of pace in the 1st and 113 overs of pace in the 2nd. Australia didn't have a full day in the field, but by adding up the minutes of the South African batsmen you can see what kind of overrates were kept in that game:
SA 1st innings 355 minutes, lasted 81.1 overs (round up to 82): 13.86 overs per hour
SA 2nd innings 512 minutes, lasted 119.2 overs (round up to 120): 14.06 overs per hour
Those overrates are good enough to just bowl 90 overs in 6.5 hours. But Australia conceded very few boundaries in either of those innings, bowled a lot of maidens, and had McDonald in the team who bowls of a shorter run, often with the keeper up. To summarise, the ball wasn't going very far and can get back to the bowler quicker. So essentially, everything has to go right to get that overrate.


This is why I maintain that if Australia can knock over a team quickly on a green pitch eg. v Eng at Headingly 2009, or v Pak at Headingly 2010, or v NZ at Brisbane 2008, then great 4 fast bowlers will knock their socks off. But any more than 65 overs of pace in a day and Ricky will be looking for overrate relief and to rest his quick men. That's just the way it is, unless you want to improve your own field routines and quicken the overrates, or try bowlers who get through their overs quickly like McDonald. That doesn't mean my dream XI isn't 4 fast bowlers, it's just that I recognise my dream XI won't work until the Aussies pick up their act in the field.


So really War, you've got a beef with the captain, not so much the selectors. They are basically only picking a side that Ricky wants and you can tell that by the bowler usage. Because even when they've picked 4 quicks, Ricky has still used a fair amount of spin - only in those 3 matches I've outlined has a spinner not been required. Ponting's shown no special urgency in his overrates so he can try to fit more overs of pace in. He obviously likes having a slower option.

Well my beef (i rather use the word querry) is with Ponting & the selectors. Since i presume as captain, Ponting at least would always have some same in the playing XI selection.

Even by what you have resaerched in those matches. If Ponting in a match scenario if AUS play 4-quicks decides he wants to bowl a few overs of spin here or there from time to time to either:

- aid in speeding things up
- a hunch to get a wicket

That wont matter to me really. Plus i dont see how that will negate the advantage of playing 4 quicks. He still will be using them to its maximum, its just at times at times he or any captain i would think just may want to try a few overs of part-time spin to speed things up for a short period.

I can certainly see AUS 4-prong of Hilfy/Bollinger/Johnson/Harris or Siddle once they bowl to potential. Doing to most international batting teams what they did in SA 09 (1st two test), Brisbane 08, Headlingley 09 & 10, Lords 10 - not just on bowler friendly decks like those. But in even on flat decks, since they all have the ability to take wickets on flat decks as they all showed in various degrees in India recently.

They will also be hard to hit just like in SA 09 as you highlighted. Since i cant see too muc international batting teams smashing them to the boundary alot, thus they will get through the overs quickly.

The other prudent thing to note from my research: the 2 overrate 'incidents' Australia have had both came JUST AFTER one of those listed innings - obviously with Ponting a little worried about fine/suspension. The poor overrate in the first innings at Perth 2008, led to plenty of Symonds and Clarke in the 2nd. The poor overrates in the 2nd and 3rd Tests in India led to the 25 overs of slow bowling overkill in the 4th Test on that 4th day.

But except for Perth none of those tests had all pace attacks. Spinners where present. That was just lackadasical stuff between overs (along with the fact that IND batsmen kept hitting alot of boundaries) from the entire team.


So basically if the argument has now has evolved to not that:

(A) We are picking a spinner not to do the main job of test spinner. Which is to take wickets on wearing 5th day track.

But

(B) We are picking a spinner due to nervousness over the over-rate issue that playing 4 quicks will cause. Thus even if the spinner is useless & cant get the main job of a test spinner done. At least it will camn the uneasyness of the over-rate issue.

If it really is option B for fans, the selectors & Ponting. The plot has been truly lost.

 

[Num]

I can certainly see AUS 4-prong of Hilfy/Bollinger/Johnson/Harris or Siddle once they bowl to potential.

Most international bowling attacks would look pretty good if they all bowled to potential. Unfortunately, it doesn't happen all the time and given Johnson's inconsistency and Harris being unproven at Test level, I don't think a 4-man pace attack would be as successful as your making it out to be for Australia.

 

[Left_Hander]

I've been reading Ponting's Captain Diary from the last home Ashes series, today and yesterday and I've got to say, it's really pumping me up for the Ashes. I'm even more exctied now than I have ever been.

 

[Blues]

Unfortunately your enthusiasm isn't being shared by enough people. I am absolutely pumped for the Ashes but far to many people seem to have this negative attitude towards the Australian team and therefore not getting behind the team as has been the case in the past.

There was huge support for the team during the last home Ashes series and a real mentality of 'lets get these Ashes back' among the fans and media, that doesn't seem to be the case this time

 

[War]

Most international bowling attacks would look pretty good if they all bowled to potential. Unfortunately, it doesn't happen all the time and given Johnson's inconsistency and Harris being unproven at Test level, I don't think a 4-man pace attack would be as successful as your making it out to be for Australia.

Disagree & this is where this argument may hit a roadblock until a 4-man pace actually plays together again soon & prove pessimism againts it wrong IMO.

Harris is only unproven when it comes to actual matches played againts top teams & ability to last in tests given his recent knee injury problems (although Harris himself has said, he doesn't believe it will affect his ability to play test this Ashes & beyond). But he has all the skills to be good fast-bowler quite clearly IMO.

While for all the talk of Johnson's inconsistencies as a bowler. Since he became test quality vs SA 08/09. Its been only in two series in ENG, where injuries & off-field issues caused him to bowl badly in tests. Otherwise Johnson has been very sold, he is still a sub-30 average bowler. Which sort of flies in the face of all talk that he is inconsistent i would say.

So basically i cannot see how anyone cannot be confident about the ability of Bollinger/Hilfenhaus/Johnson/Harris or Siddle (Siddle rotating if Harris is not fit for a particular test) to be consistent force in test. How many international batting teams outside of South Africa can you really see surviving consistently againts that attack once it is bowling well??