2016/17 Shield Cricket

[GVGjr]

Some interesting performances in Shield cricket at the moment

Tassie were dismissed for 98 in the first innings against SA with Chadd Sayers taking 6 wickets in that innings and Tas are now 4 for 57 in the second dig with Sayers snaring another 3 wickets.
SA made 481 in their first innings with Weatherald and Lehmann making centuries.

Vics have a big lead against QLD who were dismissed for 137 in their first innings and are in trouble again in the second at 4 for 50. Jon Holland took 4 wickets in the the first innings and already has 3 in the second.
The Vics made 417 in their first innings with a century to White and good scores by Harris, Handscomb and Maxwell.

NSW vs WA is the close game with WA out for 216 in the first innings and O'Keefe getting 5 wickets and NSW scoring 298 with a Maddison century the highlight. Forgotten man Ashton Agar got 6 wickets for WA.

The bowlers seem to be doing well with Chadd Sayers doing his best to get his name to start being mentioned as a potential Australian bowler and 3 left arm spin bowlers all performing well.

The 3 teams leading in this weeks games are also leading the Sheffield Shield table.

[lemmon]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

Been a tough year for the batsman, Marcus Harris has been very good in his switch to Victoria and leads the run table and Kurtis Patterson is delivering on potential but if you were picking the next batsman for Australia, you'd be scratching your head.

Pitches have been very dry and Chadd Sayers has loved the conditions. I prattle on about him, but how you could watch he and Mennie bowl in tandem and not come away thinking Chadd is the better player is worrying. Jon Holland has been surprisingly picked ahead of Fawad so far and is justifying it, he's taken 10 wickets at 13.

[GVGjr]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

I see Jackson Bird made 39 today batting at number 11. Perhaps he has heard the message loud and clear from the selectors.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

I see Jackson Bird made 39 today batting at number 11. Perhaps he has heard the message loud and clear from the selectors.

Was that the message they will not only not change the 12 for the next test, a ground he knows very well, but they announce it with two days left to play and that Siddle bowling mid 120's or an uncapped Mennie is considered a better option, or Mitch Marsh.

Man I'd hate to have a career resting on the current group of selectors.

[lemmon]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

Was that the message they will not only not change the 12 for the next test, a ground he knows very well, but they announce it with two days left to play and that Siddle bowling mid 120's or an uncapped Mennie is considered a better option, or Mitch Marsh.

Man I'd hate to have a career resting on the current group of selectors.

Siddle was the best bowler in South Africa's second innings and deserves to keep his spot. It's that funny quirk of cricket, the batsman fail so we drop a bowler.

Nice to see George Bailey fight for Tassie with 140. Other interesting thing is Agar batting at 5 for Western Australia. I reckon Langer is pushing a case there.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

Siddle was the best bowler in South Africa's second innings and deserves to keep his spot. It's that funny quirk of cricket, the batsman fail so we drop a bowler.

Nice to see George Bailey fight for Tassie with 140. Other interesting thing is Agar batting at 5 for Western Australia. I reckon Langer is pushing a case there.

I'd consider managing Siddle as opposed to dropping him, I thought he tired greatly and a quick turn around. I'd very happily drop all three Marsh's, give a shot across the bow to Voges and maybe Neville. But these selectors won't make one single change let alone 2, 3 or 4. I don't get it.

[GVGjr]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

Siddle was the best bowler in South Africa's second innings and deserves to keep his spot. It's that funny quirk of cricket, the batsman fail so we drop a bowler.

Nice to see George Bailey fight for Tassie with 140. Other interesting thing is Agar batting at 5 for Western Australia. I reckon Langer is pushing a case there.

I didn't think Siddle bowled that well but Starc was right out of form and he probably shaded Hazelwood. With Marsh bowling so many overs I was disappointed to see Siddle's bowling often under 130km.

I wasn't sure what to make of Agar's promotion in the batting order but there is some speculation that Smith doesn't have a lot of confidence in Lyon at the moment.

[Twodogs]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

I didn't think Siddle bowled that well but Starc was right out of form and he probably shaded Hazelwood. With Marsh bowling so many overs I was disappointed to see Siddle's bowling often under 130km.

I wasn't sure what to make of Agar's promotion in the batting order but there is some speculation that Smith doesn't have a lot of confidence in Lyon at the moment.

Why did Smith take Siddle off in the first innings in his first spell. He had only bowled two or three overs he had just taken a wicket but Smith puts Marsh on to get tonked around the park.

No wonder he's only bowling in the 120s and early 130s. He doesn't want to take a wicket in case Smith brings Mitch Marsh on again.

[LostDoggy]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

How many weeks to the NAB Cup?

[Twodogs]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

How many weeks to the NAB Cup?

The poor old Shield comp looks tired and a bit of an inconvenience that gets in the way of the Big Bash these days. I can't remember who won the Matlock cup.

[Greystache]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

Ashton Agar had a pretty massive game. Batting at 5 he got 35 out of 170odd in the 2nd innings batting at 5, and got 10 wickets for the match. If there's no faith in Lyon surely we'd be better off playing 4 quicks and Agar batting at 6 than trying to persist with nothing players like M Marsh or Henriques?

[Ozza]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

Ashton Agar had a pretty massive game. Batting at 5 he got 35 out of 170odd in the 2nd innings batting at 5, and got 10 wickets for the match. If there's no faith in Lyon surely we'd be better off playing 4 quicks and Agar batting at 6 than trying to persist with nothing players like M Marsh or Henriques?

Probably depends on whether Agar is considered a good enough spin bowler to be picked as a bowler.
Because if he isn't considered the best spinner - to me it sounds like more of the same search for an all rounder.

For me, you pick the best 6 bats - and if one of them happens to bowl a bit, then great.
Pick your best keeper - with the batting as a bonus.
Pick your best 3 quicks, and your best spinner - and if any happen to bat well, then its a bonus.

Sounds stupidly simple - but in all of the years that we were a very very good side - that was evident in the selection.

The worst 2 things that ever happened to Australian selections - was Freddie Flintoff and Shane Warne.

Freddie having one outstanding series - started an 11 year and counting - search for an Australian Flintoff.
Warne's career has given us totally unrealistic expectations for spin bowlers.

[Greystache]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

Probably depends on whether Agar is considered a good enough spin bowler to be picked as a bowler.
Because if he isn't considered the best spinner - to me it sounds like more of the same search for an all rounder.

For me, you pick the best 6 bats - and if one of them happens to bowl a bit, then great.
Pick your best keeper - with the batting as a bonus.
Pick your best 3 quicks, and your best spinner - and if any happen to bat well, then its a bonus.

Sounds stupidly simple - but in all of the years that we were a very very good side - that was evident in the selection.

The worst 2 things that ever happened to Australian selections - was Freddie Flintoff and Shane Warne.

Freddie having one outstanding series - started an 11 year and counting - search for an Australian Flintoff.
Warne's career has given us totally unrealistic expectations for spin bowlers.

Agree with all of that but we know that's not going to happen. We're going to play an all rounder, possibly 2 or even 3, regardless of how far off Test level ability they are. The selector know no other way. It's just a matter of minimizing the damage their ridiculous obsession causes. At least with a spinning all rounder we can play 4 genuine bowlers, and given it's a day night Test that would be a positive. Marsh can't bat so we're going to be horribly weak in the batting line up anyway, Agar is arguably an improvement.

It's all a moot point because Swampy Marsh is a ripping fella, so both Marsh's will play, but we should be working to make the team less terrible while working within the limitations the selectors framework creates.

[Twodogs]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

Agree with all of that but we know that's not going to happen. We're going to play an all rounder, possibly 2 or even 3, regardless of how far off Test level ability they are. The selector know no other way. It's just a matter of minimizing the damage their ridiculous obsession causes. At least with a spinning all rounder we can play 4 genuine bowlers, and given it's a day night Test that would be a positive. Marsh can't bat so we're going to be horribly weak in the batting line up anyway, Agar is arguably an improvement.

It's all a moot point because Swampy Marsh is a ripping fella, so both Marsh's will play, but we should be working to make the team less terrible while working within the limitations the selectors framework creates.

You mean something radical like picking bowlers that are fit enough to bowl for the whole match? Or bowlers that the captain will bowl? Something like that.

[Greystache]

Re: 2016/17 Shield Cricket

You mean something radical like picking bowlers that are fit enough to bowl for the whole match? Or bowlers that the captain will bowl? Something like that.

That's another can of worms all together. CA has empowered the sports scientists to the point we're not likely to ever have a fit list of bowlers again, and in fact it's going to continue to be a noose around our neck forever and a day. It's extraordinary, the more influence they have the more injuries we get, and the more injuries we get the more we allow sports scientists to influence preparation.

Then again we're talking about the same executive team that appoints selectors with an all rounder fetish which is killing the team. Australian cricket is in terrible disarray, but by the time we hit rock bottom no one will care anymore anyway. We're halfway there now, and in the mean time CA will try to wring as many dollars as they can out of a never ending list of meaningless ODI's of ever diminishing return. Meanwhile the players will be little more than paid mercenaries with gaping technical flaws that the public has no connection with.

If cricket was a share I'd be selling futures