Now, as you who know me well already know, I'm a Catholic. And those of you who know me better will also know that it's a personal thing, and I'm not really interested in participating in mass-scale conversion of people to the flock.
But today I'm going to take up the flag for my people, and also people of all religions.
A story in The Spencer Street Soviet (otherwise known as The Melbourne Red, or The Age) today, which it has picked up from it's sibling newspaper in Britain, The Guardian, informs one that double decker buses in London now carrying advertising for atheism. They read "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life". You can find the article here.
Now, while I agree with the sentiment of the latter part of the message, I'm not happy with the advertisement. In fact, I'm not happy with atheism in general. Recently, it's been charting an interesting course.
Due to people like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, atheism has received plenty of publicity. Both agree that religion is the basis of most of the world's problems, and because God plainly doesn't exist, this is a problem that can be easily solved by the eradication of religion.
I call this "fundamentalist atheism". Just as other fundamentalists in other religions want to eradicate all the other religions (and atheists for that matter), these people want only atheism to survive.
There is only one problem with my analogy - atheism isn't a religion. It's the absence of one.
When the Church of England publicises Christ or God, it is publicising something. Atheists are publicising the absence of something. It's like selling an empty coke bottle.
I know plenty of atheists. Hell (not a swear word when talking about atheists as they don't believe it exists), I'm even marrying one. But they don't promote atheism. In fact, they talk little about God of their own accord. They may talk about the evil in the world that organised religion is responsible for, and that is fair comment. But they're not actively recruiting people to be Godless.
Paul Keating is quoted as saying (and this is about the only time I'll quote PJK in an argument I'm making), "If God doesn't exist, why isn't everyone just chasing women and antiques?", these being the two most desirable things in his mind, apparently.
Organised religions, or "faith traditions" as some people call them (urghh), have been responsible for, how does one put it, some bad shit. But they're also responsible for some incredible goodness as well. Personally, I think that is how God works on Earth, through people doing good works and being charitable. Jesus didn't call on us to be good to the poor because he wanted to change the world order or bring about social equity: He called us to do good works because it brought us closer to God. But that is another story for another day and another audience.
A few weeks ago a story ran in the local papers that the Humanist Society was about to receive permission from the Department of Education to run a "religious" education course at state primary schools that advocated the absence of God.
Now, I'm a secularist, and I don't believe religious education should be taught at schools operated by the government. But they certainly shouldn't be permitting what amounts to a "non-religious" education course to be run at a state school. It should be up to parents to provide guidance with regards to religious beliefs and greater meaning. It should also be noted that relying on parents to do parenting isn't exactly the most successful strategy at the moment.
Simply put, I don't think atheism should be put on the same level as religious belief. Actually, I think on the census the box you tick should just be " No Religion". If you don't believe in a religion, then you have no religion. Atheism is not a religion. It's the promotion of nothing. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
3rd Test and 20/20 ODI squads
Some quick thoughts....
- Graeme Smith is one tough hombre, as Dennis Commetti would say. Great effort to go out and bat, and nearly save the match. Much deserved Man of the Series.
- Siddle and Johnson are keepers, but this attack (with Stuart Clark and Ben Hilfenhaus) will look more like Australia's attack 1989-1991 than 1999-2001. Jury out on Bollinger, but plenty of time yet.
- My current fourteen man squad for South Africa tests - Ponting (c), Clarke (vc), Hughes, Katich, M Hussey, Symonds, McDonald, D Hussey, Haddin, Siddle, Johnson, Clark, Hilfenhaus, McGain. Bollinger, Hauritz & Krejza unlucky, but we need a wrist spinner for South Africa and England.
- Good move to rest Mitchell Johnson for a couple of weeks. Also good move to select Hauritz for 20/20 and one dayers, but can't see how he plays with that squad.
- Michael Clarke to open batting in first two one dayers, ahead of Brad Haddin or James Hopes.
- 20/20 matches to be split, Aussies to win one day series 3-2, mainly due to absence of Graeme Smith.
- Graeme Smith is one tough hombre, as Dennis Commetti would say. Great effort to go out and bat, and nearly save the match. Much deserved Man of the Series.
- Siddle and Johnson are keepers, but this attack (with Stuart Clark and Ben Hilfenhaus) will look more like Australia's attack 1989-1991 than 1999-2001. Jury out on Bollinger, but plenty of time yet.
- My current fourteen man squad for South Africa tests - Ponting (c), Clarke (vc), Hughes, Katich, M Hussey, Symonds, McDonald, D Hussey, Haddin, Siddle, Johnson, Clark, Hilfenhaus, McGain. Bollinger, Hauritz & Krejza unlucky, but we need a wrist spinner for South Africa and England.
- Good move to rest Mitchell Johnson for a couple of weeks. Also good move to select Hauritz for 20/20 and one dayers, but can't see how he plays with that squad.
- Michael Clarke to open batting in first two one dayers, ahead of Brad Haddin or James Hopes.
- 20/20 matches to be split, Aussies to win one day series 3-2, mainly due to absence of Graeme Smith.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Silence is not golden
The end of 2008 couldn't come quickly enough for the Australian Cricket Team. From a familiar position on Day 2 of the WACA Test Match (and the MCG Test Match for that matter), the Aussies couldn't seal the deal, failing mostly with the ball, but also with the bat, particularly in the 2nd innings in Melbourne, where even Ricky Ponting's 99 was disappointing, given he got out to such an obvious set-up.
What was more disappointing about Ponting's dismissal, even more disappointing than how it happened, was his reaction. He wandered off the pitch a beaten man. It was the same reaction that came from a brave Brett Lee when he heard Billy Doctrove call no-ball after he bowled Neil McKenzie late on the fourth evening. They just seemed defeated.
Watching the DVD of the first 16-match winning streak enjoyed by the Australian Test Team from October 1999 until March 2001, I noticed Ponting's reaction when he was out for 197 in Perth versus Pakistan, playing a similar shot. He was ropable with himself, screaming "no" loudly as he walked angrily off the ground. That was the reaction of a man not defeated, and not satisfied. Ponting reaction was more like a surrender in Melbourne, despite the fact he had made 98 fewer runs. He had given it his best shot, and almost looked comfortable with the fact that it wasn't good enough.
Another astonishing thing I read during the Boxing Day Test Match was an article by Robert Craddock in the Hun. He reported than when Graeme Smith, the South African captain, walked off after batting in Perth, he couldn't believe how quiet it was. Very little chatter, and certainly no talk directed at unsettling the batsman.
It is not a long bow to draw to say that this all goes back to match in Sydney 12 months ago. That match caused a national outcry, but not at the man who had made a racial slur, or his team, but ours, for playing the game while taking no prisoners.
Andrew Symonds had nicked a ball to the keeper and not walked. What terrible form to rely on the umpire to do his job! Imagine an AFL footballer throwing a lunging foot at a ball, getting close, the ball bouncing through the goals, and then the footballer telling the umpire he didn't get a foot to it? No, one expects better behaviour from a cricketer, although there is more money involved and also the little question of national pride.
There was no great ourpouring of approval when Symonds got a howler of a decision in Adelaide and walked off the field without comment or visable dissent. Of course, everything that is wrong with Symonds' cricket career can also be traced back to the New Year's Test Match of 2008.
The massive media reaction last year has resulted in the Aussies having their verbal tail between their legs. I can't imagine a Steve Waugh team reacting the same way; he would have called a spade a spade, said something about being paid to win games of cricket, and carried on as if the fuss had never happened.
Since Michael Clarke bowled Australia to victory late on the Sunday afternoon, Australia has won only four test matches, all against the West Indies or New Zealand, and lost five, all against India or South Africa. Like it or not, the Aussies are at best third in the world at the moment.
Sure, there have been some personnel problems. We can't find a quality spinner. Fast bowlers keep getting hurt and changing, but during the first 16 game winning streak, Australia played McGrath, Fleming, Muller, Kasprowicz, Lee, Bichel & Gillespie. Two sides of quicks, with a 12th Man thrown in. During the 2nd 16 game winning streak, Australia played quicks McGrath, Lee, Kasprowicz, Clark, Gillespie & Mitchell Johnson. You need a good squad of players.
Shane Warne said before the Sydney match that the Aussies bowlers need to recapture some aggression on the field. That could well start with the verbal aggression, although it is hard to see newbies Bollinger or Siddle, or the seemingly patholigically friendly (and incredibly lucky) Andrew McDonald doing that. Johnson has been growing into that role, and he looms as one of the three most vital members of that team, along with captain and vice-captain.
In the final analysis, the players are paid to play and win. When they won the Sydney match 12 months ago, it was almost like they had caused some sort of international incident. Firstly, it was that awful little Indian who caused the "incident". However, it was Australian heads that were being called for. If Ponting should be sacked, it should be for poor captaining, not waiting for the umpire's decision, pressing home every advantage he can, and verballing his opponents. The Australians need to forget about the events of Sydney 2008, and once again make a cricket field full of Australians an uncomfortable place to be.
What was more disappointing about Ponting's dismissal, even more disappointing than how it happened, was his reaction. He wandered off the pitch a beaten man. It was the same reaction that came from a brave Brett Lee when he heard Billy Doctrove call no-ball after he bowled Neil McKenzie late on the fourth evening. They just seemed defeated.
Watching the DVD of the first 16-match winning streak enjoyed by the Australian Test Team from October 1999 until March 2001, I noticed Ponting's reaction when he was out for 197 in Perth versus Pakistan, playing a similar shot. He was ropable with himself, screaming "no" loudly as he walked angrily off the ground. That was the reaction of a man not defeated, and not satisfied. Ponting reaction was more like a surrender in Melbourne, despite the fact he had made 98 fewer runs. He had given it his best shot, and almost looked comfortable with the fact that it wasn't good enough.
Another astonishing thing I read during the Boxing Day Test Match was an article by Robert Craddock in the Hun. He reported than when Graeme Smith, the South African captain, walked off after batting in Perth, he couldn't believe how quiet it was. Very little chatter, and certainly no talk directed at unsettling the batsman.
It is not a long bow to draw to say that this all goes back to match in Sydney 12 months ago. That match caused a national outcry, but not at the man who had made a racial slur, or his team, but ours, for playing the game while taking no prisoners.
Andrew Symonds had nicked a ball to the keeper and not walked. What terrible form to rely on the umpire to do his job! Imagine an AFL footballer throwing a lunging foot at a ball, getting close, the ball bouncing through the goals, and then the footballer telling the umpire he didn't get a foot to it? No, one expects better behaviour from a cricketer, although there is more money involved and also the little question of national pride.
There was no great ourpouring of approval when Symonds got a howler of a decision in Adelaide and walked off the field without comment or visable dissent. Of course, everything that is wrong with Symonds' cricket career can also be traced back to the New Year's Test Match of 2008.
The massive media reaction last year has resulted in the Aussies having their verbal tail between their legs. I can't imagine a Steve Waugh team reacting the same way; he would have called a spade a spade, said something about being paid to win games of cricket, and carried on as if the fuss had never happened.
Since Michael Clarke bowled Australia to victory late on the Sunday afternoon, Australia has won only four test matches, all against the West Indies or New Zealand, and lost five, all against India or South Africa. Like it or not, the Aussies are at best third in the world at the moment.
Sure, there have been some personnel problems. We can't find a quality spinner. Fast bowlers keep getting hurt and changing, but during the first 16 game winning streak, Australia played McGrath, Fleming, Muller, Kasprowicz, Lee, Bichel & Gillespie. Two sides of quicks, with a 12th Man thrown in. During the 2nd 16 game winning streak, Australia played quicks McGrath, Lee, Kasprowicz, Clark, Gillespie & Mitchell Johnson. You need a good squad of players.
Shane Warne said before the Sydney match that the Aussies bowlers need to recapture some aggression on the field. That could well start with the verbal aggression, although it is hard to see newbies Bollinger or Siddle, or the seemingly patholigically friendly (and incredibly lucky) Andrew McDonald doing that. Johnson has been growing into that role, and he looms as one of the three most vital members of that team, along with captain and vice-captain.
In the final analysis, the players are paid to play and win. When they won the Sydney match 12 months ago, it was almost like they had caused some sort of international incident. Firstly, it was that awful little Indian who caused the "incident". However, it was Australian heads that were being called for. If Ponting should be sacked, it should be for poor captaining, not waiting for the umpire's decision, pressing home every advantage he can, and verballing his opponents. The Australians need to forget about the events of Sydney 2008, and once again make a cricket field full of Australians an uncomfortable place to be.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Time for Panic Stations
Maybe I underestimated the toughness of the South Africans. In England this year they made significant inroads. They fought gamely for a draw at Lords after following on 346 runs in arrears. At Trent Bridge, they chased down 281, which is a testing total. And apart from Neil McKenzie, the Proteas' batting order looks decidedly classy.
But that would underplay the complete failure of the Australian outfit in this match. While managing to compose two totals of 300+, there were still a legion of missed opportunities. Andrew Symonds and Michael Clarke found ingenious ways to dismiss themselves rather than fall to quality bowling. Michael Hussey looked as bad as he has in any test match during his career, but that will pass.
For mine, only Simon Katich, Brad Haddin and Mitchell Johnson get passing grades from me. I'll excuse Jason Krejza as well - he was asked to make his home debut on the most unfriendly of pitches for a spinner. Unfortunately for Krejza, Melbourne comes before Sydney, and the MCG has been playing like Antigua this season domestically.
Matthew Hayden looked good before getting out in the first knock, and then got a howler in the second innings. Ricky Ponting is doing all the things he does when he it out of form. He needs to learn to leave the ball more early in his innings.
Fortunately for these two their favourite ground for batting awaits. For Australia's sake, here's hoping there is another couple of MCG hundreds for these two.
Symonds continues to frustrate, and Clarke can only seem to make 100s when Australia least needs them. Clarke has never made a hundred when Australia has scored less than 400, although he deserved one in Brisbane which would have bucked the trend.
Peter Siddle didn't look up to it, and I'd be hard pressed to keep him in for the Boxing Day Test. While I'd love to see a Victorian run around on the MCG later this week, I'd rather see Australia win. While I'm not ready to concede he won't make it, I look at Siddle and see a lot of other short lived Australian quick bowlers of the last 20 years.
Here's how Siddle looks compared to some others of similar ilk:
Peter Siddle 2 tests, 5 wickets @ 60.80
Jo Angel 4 tests, 10 wickets @ 46.30
Simon Cook 2 tests, 7 wickets @ 20.28
Scott Muller 2 tests, 7 wickets @ 36.85
Matthew Nicholson 1 test, 4 wickets @ 28.75
Paul Wilson 1 test, 0 wickets
On those numbers, Siddle can count himself lucky. Brett Lee is another who deserves some mention. He looked complete benign in that 2nd innings, and while Lee has taken 300 test wickets, he has received more chances than most.
Overall, the Australian 2nd innings bowling effort could be compared to a soccer team that loses 1-0, with one shot on goal. It wasn't a day of missed chances for Australia yesterday; it was a day of no chances being created.
Unfortunately, the selectors are continuing to misplace their focus. The time is now for Ben Hilfenhaus, so he can play five tests before going to England. Doug Bollinger may be bowling well, but we have a left armer who is in some form, and the Australian attack needs some variety right now. That would be my only change for Boxing Day: Hilfenhaus in for Siddle.
However, if Australia were to lose the Boxing Day test match, then look out. If that happens, only a 100 saves Hayden or Symonds, and at least 6 wickets is needed to save Lee. With youngsters waiting in the wings (Hughes, Watson, Bollinger) a lost series may provide an opportunity for renewal and inspiration before the Ashes.
But that would underplay the complete failure of the Australian outfit in this match. While managing to compose two totals of 300+, there were still a legion of missed opportunities. Andrew Symonds and Michael Clarke found ingenious ways to dismiss themselves rather than fall to quality bowling. Michael Hussey looked as bad as he has in any test match during his career, but that will pass.
For mine, only Simon Katich, Brad Haddin and Mitchell Johnson get passing grades from me. I'll excuse Jason Krejza as well - he was asked to make his home debut on the most unfriendly of pitches for a spinner. Unfortunately for Krejza, Melbourne comes before Sydney, and the MCG has been playing like Antigua this season domestically.
Matthew Hayden looked good before getting out in the first knock, and then got a howler in the second innings. Ricky Ponting is doing all the things he does when he it out of form. He needs to learn to leave the ball more early in his innings.
Fortunately for these two their favourite ground for batting awaits. For Australia's sake, here's hoping there is another couple of MCG hundreds for these two.
Symonds continues to frustrate, and Clarke can only seem to make 100s when Australia least needs them. Clarke has never made a hundred when Australia has scored less than 400, although he deserved one in Brisbane which would have bucked the trend.
Peter Siddle didn't look up to it, and I'd be hard pressed to keep him in for the Boxing Day Test. While I'd love to see a Victorian run around on the MCG later this week, I'd rather see Australia win. While I'm not ready to concede he won't make it, I look at Siddle and see a lot of other short lived Australian quick bowlers of the last 20 years.
Here's how Siddle looks compared to some others of similar ilk:
Peter Siddle 2 tests, 5 wickets @ 60.80
Jo Angel 4 tests, 10 wickets @ 46.30
Simon Cook 2 tests, 7 wickets @ 20.28
Scott Muller 2 tests, 7 wickets @ 36.85
Matthew Nicholson 1 test, 4 wickets @ 28.75
Paul Wilson 1 test, 0 wickets
On those numbers, Siddle can count himself lucky. Brett Lee is another who deserves some mention. He looked complete benign in that 2nd innings, and while Lee has taken 300 test wickets, he has received more chances than most.
Overall, the Australian 2nd innings bowling effort could be compared to a soccer team that loses 1-0, with one shot on goal. It wasn't a day of missed chances for Australia yesterday; it was a day of no chances being created.
Unfortunately, the selectors are continuing to misplace their focus. The time is now for Ben Hilfenhaus, so he can play five tests before going to England. Doug Bollinger may be bowling well, but we have a left armer who is in some form, and the Australian attack needs some variety right now. That would be my only change for Boxing Day: Hilfenhaus in for Siddle.
However, if Australia were to lose the Boxing Day test match, then look out. If that happens, only a 100 saves Hayden or Symonds, and at least 6 wickets is needed to save Lee. With youngsters waiting in the wings (Hughes, Watson, Bollinger) a lost series may provide an opportunity for renewal and inspiration before the Ashes.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Deja vu happening all over again
Two years ago, when Shane Warne coaxed the impossible from a previously dull test match in Adelaide to effectively grab The Ashes back from the mother country, I quoted Yogi Berra's famous quote about decades of New York Yankee success against the Boston Red Sox. He said "Don't worry; we;ve been beating these guys for eighty years".
When I heard about what happened last night I was disappointed I hadn't seen it live (I was Christmas shopping with Rose), but I wasn't surprised. When it comes to test match cricket against South Africa, someone always seems to pop their head up.
Whether it is Mark Waugh's heroics in Port Elizabeth or 12 months later in Adelaide, or Ian Healy's towering six, or Stuart MacGill bowling out the Proteas in Sydney, or Stuart Clark's incredible debut series, someone from the Australian side always seems to deliver the goods.
With Australia 3/15 on the first morning, you could forgive the South Africans for having visions on bowling the Aussies out for less than 200. But after sending Ponting and Hussey back to the pavillion for no score, Simon Katich, along with the next three batsmen in, combined to score 248 runs between them.
And then that most pesky of Australian traits reared its head: the tailed wagged. Perhaps the most underplayed aspect of Australia's decade long dominance in the longer form of the game is the ability of batsmen 8-11 in the order to produce runs. This has frustrated many oppositions, and South Africa were no exception. Lee, Krejza, Johnson and Siddle scored exactly 100 between them, with no one scoring less than 18. It turned a modest, if defendable, total into a healthy one.
Yet none of the South Africans could kick on in reply. Smith 48, Amla 47, Kallis and de Villiers 63 each. The rest of the batting order looks like binary code, with lots of 0s and 1s.
But the story was that it was Mitchell Johnson who was destined to be the player to step up on this occasion. Johnson's record before yesterday was modest: 61 wickets at a shade under 30. With Lee averaging about the same, and newcomers Siddle and Krejza in support, Johnson produced an incredible spell of 5-2 in 21 balls, removing de Villiers, Kallis, debutant Duminy, Morkel and Harris. South Africa now find themselves 132 runs behind with 2 wickets in hand. Expect Australia to achieve a 100 run 1st Innings lead.
From here it will be up to Australia to bat well and set the South Africans 350-400 to chase in about five sessions. It will be interesting to see if the Australians can succeed in almost the same position in which they failed three years ago against the Proteas in the corresponding Perth test match, but it would be a brave soul indeed to suggest they couldn't.
When I heard about what happened last night I was disappointed I hadn't seen it live (I was Christmas shopping with Rose), but I wasn't surprised. When it comes to test match cricket against South Africa, someone always seems to pop their head up.
Whether it is Mark Waugh's heroics in Port Elizabeth or 12 months later in Adelaide, or Ian Healy's towering six, or Stuart MacGill bowling out the Proteas in Sydney, or Stuart Clark's incredible debut series, someone from the Australian side always seems to deliver the goods.
With Australia 3/15 on the first morning, you could forgive the South Africans for having visions on bowling the Aussies out for less than 200. But after sending Ponting and Hussey back to the pavillion for no score, Simon Katich, along with the next three batsmen in, combined to score 248 runs between them.
And then that most pesky of Australian traits reared its head: the tailed wagged. Perhaps the most underplayed aspect of Australia's decade long dominance in the longer form of the game is the ability of batsmen 8-11 in the order to produce runs. This has frustrated many oppositions, and South Africa were no exception. Lee, Krejza, Johnson and Siddle scored exactly 100 between them, with no one scoring less than 18. It turned a modest, if defendable, total into a healthy one.
Yet none of the South Africans could kick on in reply. Smith 48, Amla 47, Kallis and de Villiers 63 each. The rest of the batting order looks like binary code, with lots of 0s and 1s.
But the story was that it was Mitchell Johnson who was destined to be the player to step up on this occasion. Johnson's record before yesterday was modest: 61 wickets at a shade under 30. With Lee averaging about the same, and newcomers Siddle and Krejza in support, Johnson produced an incredible spell of 5-2 in 21 balls, removing de Villiers, Kallis, debutant Duminy, Morkel and Harris. South Africa now find themselves 132 runs behind with 2 wickets in hand. Expect Australia to achieve a 100 run 1st Innings lead.
From here it will be up to Australia to bat well and set the South Africans 350-400 to chase in about five sessions. It will be interesting to see if the Australians can succeed in almost the same position in which they failed three years ago against the Proteas in the corresponding Perth test match, but it would be a brave soul indeed to suggest they couldn't.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Australia v South Africa - Series Preview
The Proteas are talented, and well placed to challenge the Aussies, it will be a corker of a series, blah, blah, blah. We've heard it all before from a media desperate for a contest, and to create one where one doesn't really exist.
The South Africans have always been talented. They've usually been in form before gracing our shores. But except for the exploitation of a team with a problem with chasing small targets by a wily veteran, South Africa hasn't won a test match in Australia since returning to world cricket.
In 1997 they came full of confidence, against an Australian side that had retained the Frank Worrell Trophy and the Ashes, but with more difficulty than was expected. It was an engrossing series, with Jacques Kallis and Brian McMillan fighting for a draw in Melbourne, Shane Warne at his brilliant best taking his 300th test wicket on his way to winning the Sydney test match, and the enthralling final day in Adelaide, when an Australian side weakened by injury managed a draw, thanks to Mark Taylor carrying his bat in the 1st Innings, and Mark Waugh making an unbeaten, inspirational 100 in the 2nd.
In the last two series the Aussies have won 5 of 6 test matches, with only a most docile Perth wicket preventing a whitewash.
The South African teams that have played these matches have been good, talented, cricket teams. But as Karl Stefanovic put it on the Today show last week, they have "heart-ledge" issues. Their problems are mental, not physical.
Australia no longer has the guile of Taylor, the sheer will of Steve Waugh, or the incredible talent of the 2005/06 team to ensure victory. Ricky Ponting will have to captain well (and make a few runs on the way), the Australian pace attack will have to adapt without the players of the series the last time Australia visited South Africa, Stuart Clark, and Jason Krejza will have to get some results against a team Warnie loved to torment.
And I think it will happen. The South Africans will discover another fatal flaw, another way to lose. The Australians will find a way to have the better of de Villiers and Amla, and will get to Steyn and Morkel. They always have, and this is not the South African team of the late 1960s coming over. They're good, but they're not great.
It does promise to be interesting, if over a little too quickly. The entire series will be over in 22 days.
The South Africans have always been talented. They've usually been in form before gracing our shores. But except for the exploitation of a team with a problem with chasing small targets by a wily veteran, South Africa hasn't won a test match in Australia since returning to world cricket.
In 1997 they came full of confidence, against an Australian side that had retained the Frank Worrell Trophy and the Ashes, but with more difficulty than was expected. It was an engrossing series, with Jacques Kallis and Brian McMillan fighting for a draw in Melbourne, Shane Warne at his brilliant best taking his 300th test wicket on his way to winning the Sydney test match, and the enthralling final day in Adelaide, when an Australian side weakened by injury managed a draw, thanks to Mark Taylor carrying his bat in the 1st Innings, and Mark Waugh making an unbeaten, inspirational 100 in the 2nd.
In the last two series the Aussies have won 5 of 6 test matches, with only a most docile Perth wicket preventing a whitewash.
The South African teams that have played these matches have been good, talented, cricket teams. But as Karl Stefanovic put it on the Today show last week, they have "heart-ledge" issues. Their problems are mental, not physical.
Australia no longer has the guile of Taylor, the sheer will of Steve Waugh, or the incredible talent of the 2005/06 team to ensure victory. Ricky Ponting will have to captain well (and make a few runs on the way), the Australian pace attack will have to adapt without the players of the series the last time Australia visited South Africa, Stuart Clark, and Jason Krejza will have to get some results against a team Warnie loved to torment.
And I think it will happen. The South Africans will discover another fatal flaw, another way to lose. The Australians will find a way to have the better of de Villiers and Amla, and will get to Steyn and Morkel. They always have, and this is not the South African team of the late 1960s coming over. They're good, but they're not great.
It does promise to be interesting, if over a little too quickly. The entire series will be over in 22 days.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
The Summer of Australian Cricket's discontent
OK, so we beat the Kiwis. And we took wickets, keeping New Zealand under 200 runs in either innings. But no one is really satisfied, and the buzz surrounding Andrew Symonds and his off-field troubles only contributes to feelings of unease about where the Australian Test Team is currently at.
Yesterday there was more bad news. Jason Krejza rolled his ankle during a fielding drill and is in doubt for tomorrow's 2nd Test in Adelaide, where Australia always plays a spinner. Australian selectors have called up Nathan Hauritz as cover if Krejza cannot play. Hauritz is currently behind Beau Casson as New South Wales' preferred spinner, and Casson has taken one first class wicket this summer. Not much there to fill one full of confidence.
If Krejza doesn't play, it may be some time before he gets another opportunity. Considering the precedent set in Brisbane, Australia are very unlikely to play a spinner in Perth in the 1st Test versus South Africa. No one can say with any certainty what the pitch will look like in Melbourne, with new drop in pitches being laid in October. But over the years, Melbourne has not been synonymous with spinning success, bar local lad Shane Keith Warne.
By Sydney, Australia might be looking to ensure success against a South African outfit susceptible to leg spin by calling up Bryce McGain, if fit. Surely McGain would be in selector's plans for the upcoming tours of South Africa and England, the two teams Warne enjoyed the most success against. They would love to get McGain a taste of Test action before shipping him overseas on tour.
Australia's batting hasn't looked great since going to India. I believe the selectors want Matthew Hayden to get to England, or at least survive until Phil Jaques is fit. However, with Brad Hodge, David Hussey, Shaun Marsh and Chris Rogers all in good form and pressing for selection, the pressure is squarely on one of Australia's greatest opening batsmen to make some runs.
Hayden's opening partner is safe. Simon Katich may be Australia's most valuable batsman at the moment, because he protects his wicket better and more dearly than anyone else in the side. Also safe are the next captain in Michael Clarke, who deserved a 100 in Brisbane that would have been rated close to Mark Waugh's 116 in Port Elizabeth for importance, and Michael Hussey, who is always making runs.
The real problem, other than Hayden, is that Australia's most out of form batsman is the captain, Ricky Ponting. Since making 123 in the 1st Innings v India in Bangalore, he has made 17, 5, 2, 87, 24, 8, 4 & 17. And in the 2nd Innings v New Zealand in Brisbane, it was not Ishant Sharma getting Ponting out but Ponting himself.
Andrew Symonds will continue to bring more than his batting to the team, but he'll want to stop making 20s pretty soon. In one way his 26 & 20 was more disappointing than if he had made 8 & 5: he got a start both times, and played a pretty silly shot to get out both times.
Lee, Johnson and Clark will be fine, and all looked really good in Brisbane. I would still like to see Ben Hilfenhaus get a few Tests before taking him to England, but he appears to be behind Peter Siddle in the pecking order at the moment.
Finally, Brad Haddin is enjoying a lack of pressure from underneath. Unless Luke Ronchi can keep making runs, I can't see Haddin being displaced for a time yet. But this feels a lot like Marsh to Healy for Australian keepers, and that took four and a half long years, and Woolley, Phillips, Rixon, Zoehrer and Dyer before we got there.
Now is not the time for panic, as South Africa still have their mental issues and the Kiwis cannot bat. But the Ashes loom, and and England side beginning to get confident about their chances.
Yesterday there was more bad news. Jason Krejza rolled his ankle during a fielding drill and is in doubt for tomorrow's 2nd Test in Adelaide, where Australia always plays a spinner. Australian selectors have called up Nathan Hauritz as cover if Krejza cannot play. Hauritz is currently behind Beau Casson as New South Wales' preferred spinner, and Casson has taken one first class wicket this summer. Not much there to fill one full of confidence.
If Krejza doesn't play, it may be some time before he gets another opportunity. Considering the precedent set in Brisbane, Australia are very unlikely to play a spinner in Perth in the 1st Test versus South Africa. No one can say with any certainty what the pitch will look like in Melbourne, with new drop in pitches being laid in October. But over the years, Melbourne has not been synonymous with spinning success, bar local lad Shane Keith Warne.
By Sydney, Australia might be looking to ensure success against a South African outfit susceptible to leg spin by calling up Bryce McGain, if fit. Surely McGain would be in selector's plans for the upcoming tours of South Africa and England, the two teams Warne enjoyed the most success against. They would love to get McGain a taste of Test action before shipping him overseas on tour.
Australia's batting hasn't looked great since going to India. I believe the selectors want Matthew Hayden to get to England, or at least survive until Phil Jaques is fit. However, with Brad Hodge, David Hussey, Shaun Marsh and Chris Rogers all in good form and pressing for selection, the pressure is squarely on one of Australia's greatest opening batsmen to make some runs.
Hayden's opening partner is safe. Simon Katich may be Australia's most valuable batsman at the moment, because he protects his wicket better and more dearly than anyone else in the side. Also safe are the next captain in Michael Clarke, who deserved a 100 in Brisbane that would have been rated close to Mark Waugh's 116 in Port Elizabeth for importance, and Michael Hussey, who is always making runs.
The real problem, other than Hayden, is that Australia's most out of form batsman is the captain, Ricky Ponting. Since making 123 in the 1st Innings v India in Bangalore, he has made 17, 5, 2, 87, 24, 8, 4 & 17. And in the 2nd Innings v New Zealand in Brisbane, it was not Ishant Sharma getting Ponting out but Ponting himself.
Andrew Symonds will continue to bring more than his batting to the team, but he'll want to stop making 20s pretty soon. In one way his 26 & 20 was more disappointing than if he had made 8 & 5: he got a start both times, and played a pretty silly shot to get out both times.
Lee, Johnson and Clark will be fine, and all looked really good in Brisbane. I would still like to see Ben Hilfenhaus get a few Tests before taking him to England, but he appears to be behind Peter Siddle in the pecking order at the moment.
Finally, Brad Haddin is enjoying a lack of pressure from underneath. Unless Luke Ronchi can keep making runs, I can't see Haddin being displaced for a time yet. But this feels a lot like Marsh to Healy for Australian keepers, and that took four and a half long years, and Woolley, Phillips, Rixon, Zoehrer and Dyer before we got there.
Now is not the time for panic, as South Africa still have their mental issues and the Kiwis cannot bat. But the Ashes loom, and and England side beginning to get confident about their chances.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
A quick preview - Australia v New Zealand
It seems they'll be very lucky to get a result in Brisbane this week. It's been raining heavily every afternoon, and while the Australia of the past could have probably put the foot down to get the victory, I don't trust them that much this time.
Australia, however, will win in Adelaide and take the Test Series 1-0. Why there is no Test in Hobart is beyond me.
Hayden and Ponting will make runs, Mike Hussey will be his usual self, and Andrew Symonds will make one of those run-a-ball-50-not-outs he's so famous for, and that will keep the dogs at bay for another test or two.
Mitchell Johnson looms as most likely to take the most wickets. The pressure is on Stuart Clark, as he'll be replaced by Siddle or Hilfenhaus by Boxing Day if he doesn't produce.
Australia, however, will win in Adelaide and take the Test Series 1-0. Why there is no Test in Hobart is beyond me.
Hayden and Ponting will make runs, Mike Hussey will be his usual self, and Andrew Symonds will make one of those run-a-ball-50-not-outs he's so famous for, and that will keep the dogs at bay for another test or two.
Mitchell Johnson looms as most likely to take the most wickets. The pressure is on Stuart Clark, as he'll be replaced by Siddle or Hilfenhaus by Boxing Day if he doesn't produce.
Monday, November 10, 2008
In defence of Ricky Ponting
According to the Australian ethos, Test Cricket is the pinnacle. Representing Australia in One Day Internationals or Twenty-20 cricket is a great honour, but is pales in comparison with pulling on the Baggy Green to represent Australia in the long form of the game.
Ricky Ponting knows that better than most. Since the end of October 2004, while being captain of all the Australian men's cricket sides, he has missed 19 One Day Internationals and 4 Twenty-20 matches. He has played all 44 of Australia's Test Matches in that time.
With the threat of suspension hanging over his head yesterday, Ponting needed to make a decision. With India 6-166 and looking shaky at tea, Ponting was 10 overs behind where he needed to be, and he needed to make these up with previous infractions on his record as captain for slow over rates. He turned to Cameron White, Michael Hussey, Michael Clarke and Jason Krejza, and Mahendra Singh Dhoni and Harbhajan Singh put on a 100 run partnership while Australia caught up on the over rate. The test match went from winnable to probably unwinnable.
Did Ponting make the right decision? We would have all loved to see Australia chasing less than 300, with the chance to level the series and retain the Border-Gavaskar Trophy, but Ponting was painted into a corner. He values playing Test Cricket and captaining Australia in same more than anything in his career, and putting this series first before an upcoming series against a lesser opponent would have been disrespecting the game.
Ponting is a victim of the changing game. Heroes of a long since passed day of cricket like Ian Chappell talk loudly about the ICC doing something about over rates, but the threat of suspension to a national team captain turned a deciding rubber of a test series that will give the winner the ability to claim status as the world's best into a farce.
What administrators and commentators alike need to acknowledge is the game is vastly different to the one that was played 40 years ago, when 80 8-ball overs could be fitted into a day's cricket.
The money in the game puts pressure on captains and players, and so does the media scrutiny. Captains, rightly, now spend more time and mental energy getting bowling changes and field placing just as they want them. Ponting was damned either way in Nagpur yesterday; either damned for saving his own hide, or damned to miss his first test in four years.
There needs to be a realisation and an acceptance that 6 hours is probably not enough time to bowl 90 6-ball overs of today's test cricket any more. While we still want to see a cricket match decided over five, 90 over days, it is probably time for the ICC to make a one-off admission, and extend both the opening and closing sessions of a day's Test Cricket by 30 minutes. Along with an increased enforcement penalty for those captains who cannot get 90 overs bowled in 7 hours, this would work and focus the play and the commentary on what is happening on the field between bat and ball.
Ricky Ponting knows that better than most. Since the end of October 2004, while being captain of all the Australian men's cricket sides, he has missed 19 One Day Internationals and 4 Twenty-20 matches. He has played all 44 of Australia's Test Matches in that time.
With the threat of suspension hanging over his head yesterday, Ponting needed to make a decision. With India 6-166 and looking shaky at tea, Ponting was 10 overs behind where he needed to be, and he needed to make these up with previous infractions on his record as captain for slow over rates. He turned to Cameron White, Michael Hussey, Michael Clarke and Jason Krejza, and Mahendra Singh Dhoni and Harbhajan Singh put on a 100 run partnership while Australia caught up on the over rate. The test match went from winnable to probably unwinnable.
Did Ponting make the right decision? We would have all loved to see Australia chasing less than 300, with the chance to level the series and retain the Border-Gavaskar Trophy, but Ponting was painted into a corner. He values playing Test Cricket and captaining Australia in same more than anything in his career, and putting this series first before an upcoming series against a lesser opponent would have been disrespecting the game.
Ponting is a victim of the changing game. Heroes of a long since passed day of cricket like Ian Chappell talk loudly about the ICC doing something about over rates, but the threat of suspension to a national team captain turned a deciding rubber of a test series that will give the winner the ability to claim status as the world's best into a farce.
What administrators and commentators alike need to acknowledge is the game is vastly different to the one that was played 40 years ago, when 80 8-ball overs could be fitted into a day's cricket.
The money in the game puts pressure on captains and players, and so does the media scrutiny. Captains, rightly, now spend more time and mental energy getting bowling changes and field placing just as they want them. Ponting was damned either way in Nagpur yesterday; either damned for saving his own hide, or damned to miss his first test in four years.
There needs to be a realisation and an acceptance that 6 hours is probably not enough time to bowl 90 6-ball overs of today's test cricket any more. While we still want to see a cricket match decided over five, 90 over days, it is probably time for the ICC to make a one-off admission, and extend both the opening and closing sessions of a day's Test Cricket by 30 minutes. Along with an increased enforcement penalty for those captains who cannot get 90 overs bowled in 7 hours, this would work and focus the play and the commentary on what is happening on the field between bat and ball.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Memo to Australian Cricket Fans - Settle Down
If you have been reading the papers of watching the TV lately, you would be forgiven for thinking the Australian Test Team is a shambles. I actually heard them compared to the Australian team from 1986.
First, some facts. There have been some great players recently exit the stage for Australia. In the last 3 years, Justin Langer, Damien Martyn, Adam Gilchrist, Shane Warne, Jason Gillespie and Glen McGrath have all played their last test match. Also missing from the side playing right now is Andrew Symonds and Stuart Clark.
The era of dominance that Australia experienced from late 1999 right up until last summer was unprecedented, and unlikely to be repeated. It was predicated on a bowling attacked never bettered in the history of cricket, quite possibly the best #7 batsman ever to play the game, and a settled world class top and middle order that always seemed to get runs. And the tail wagged more than any other side.
But back to that 1986 side. That team that played the last test match of 1986, in which an Australian side was humbled by an innings inside three days by an English team no one rated, was GR Marsh, DC Boon, DM Jones, AR Border, SR Waugh, GRJ Matthews, PR Sleep, TJ Zoehrer, CJ McDermott, MG Hughes & BA Reid. Looking at that, I just think they picked one too many bowlers, and it showed.
Fast forward to 2008. Katich has not proven he has the fighting qualities of Marsh, but he wouldn't be far off on the Test level. Hayden betters Boon, Ponting betters Jones. AB is ahead of Hussey, but not by the length you would think. At that stage Steve Waugh was still an impetuous youngster, and Clarke has him covered. Watson and Matthews is a wash, and while Sleep was the better bowler, White is a better bat. Haddin already has Zoehrer covered. While McDermott, Hughes and Reid all become quality bowlers, none were at this stage. Lee, Siddle and Johnson should be in front.
And that side lost by an innings in Melbourne to an ordinary English side. The 2008 side is playing the best side in the world on their turf, and hasn't lost yet after having the better of the first match.
Australia desperately need to develop a better spinning option than Cameron White, but he is an honest toiler and I'm happy he got a baggy green. Brett Lee is struggling, but cricket isn't all that is going on in his life at the moment.
Amazingly, going into the First Test, the only Australians with Test wickets in India were Simon Katich and Michael Clarke. Looking back at four years ago, McGrath, Gillespie and Kasprowicz all had sub-continental experience and were wily veterans. Even at 32, Lee has never been thought of as such, and with good cause.
Also, the Australian side can't settle. They have now played seven consecutive tests with a change to the side, as Phil Jacques, Chris Rogers, Andrew Symonds, Adam Gilchrist, Stuart Clarke have all played. But the real problem has been with the fourth bowler, as Shaun Tait, Brad Hogg, Stuart MacGill, Beau Casson and Cameron White have all been tried.
The last time the Australian Test Side played that many consecutive tests with a change was in 2005 in England. During this seven match period, Australia have won only two test matches, both in the West Indies. During an eight match period in 2005 which covered series against England and the West Indies, Australia could only win the First Test at Lords and the last three all against the Windies.
It's a bit of a chicken and egg argument, but either way it's not good and the Aussies need stability. Peter Siddle will probably get other chances, but Clark will return when fit. The rest of the team should be left as is for the rest of the Indian series. The selectors will probably get toey about White and Katich, but they should leave them as they are to work through their problems, and especially in White's case, learn. Australian cricket will be richer for it.
First, some facts. There have been some great players recently exit the stage for Australia. In the last 3 years, Justin Langer, Damien Martyn, Adam Gilchrist, Shane Warne, Jason Gillespie and Glen McGrath have all played their last test match. Also missing from the side playing right now is Andrew Symonds and Stuart Clark.
The era of dominance that Australia experienced from late 1999 right up until last summer was unprecedented, and unlikely to be repeated. It was predicated on a bowling attacked never bettered in the history of cricket, quite possibly the best #7 batsman ever to play the game, and a settled world class top and middle order that always seemed to get runs. And the tail wagged more than any other side.
But back to that 1986 side. That team that played the last test match of 1986, in which an Australian side was humbled by an innings inside three days by an English team no one rated, was GR Marsh, DC Boon, DM Jones, AR Border, SR Waugh, GRJ Matthews, PR Sleep, TJ Zoehrer, CJ McDermott, MG Hughes & BA Reid. Looking at that, I just think they picked one too many bowlers, and it showed.
Fast forward to 2008. Katich has not proven he has the fighting qualities of Marsh, but he wouldn't be far off on the Test level. Hayden betters Boon, Ponting betters Jones. AB is ahead of Hussey, but not by the length you would think. At that stage Steve Waugh was still an impetuous youngster, and Clarke has him covered. Watson and Matthews is a wash, and while Sleep was the better bowler, White is a better bat. Haddin already has Zoehrer covered. While McDermott, Hughes and Reid all become quality bowlers, none were at this stage. Lee, Siddle and Johnson should be in front.
And that side lost by an innings in Melbourne to an ordinary English side. The 2008 side is playing the best side in the world on their turf, and hasn't lost yet after having the better of the first match.
Australia desperately need to develop a better spinning option than Cameron White, but he is an honest toiler and I'm happy he got a baggy green. Brett Lee is struggling, but cricket isn't all that is going on in his life at the moment.
Amazingly, going into the First Test, the only Australians with Test wickets in India were Simon Katich and Michael Clarke. Looking back at four years ago, McGrath, Gillespie and Kasprowicz all had sub-continental experience and were wily veterans. Even at 32, Lee has never been thought of as such, and with good cause.
Also, the Australian side can't settle. They have now played seven consecutive tests with a change to the side, as Phil Jacques, Chris Rogers, Andrew Symonds, Adam Gilchrist, Stuart Clarke have all played. But the real problem has been with the fourth bowler, as Shaun Tait, Brad Hogg, Stuart MacGill, Beau Casson and Cameron White have all been tried.
The last time the Australian Test Side played that many consecutive tests with a change was in 2005 in England. During this seven match period, Australia have won only two test matches, both in the West Indies. During an eight match period in 2005 which covered series against England and the West Indies, Australia could only win the First Test at Lords and the last three all against the Windies.
It's a bit of a chicken and egg argument, but either way it's not good and the Aussies need stability. Peter Siddle will probably get other chances, but Clark will return when fit. The rest of the team should be left as is for the rest of the Indian series. The selectors will probably get toey about White and Katich, but they should leave them as they are to work through their problems, and especially in White's case, learn. Australian cricket will be richer for it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
