Australia A Tour

[lemmon]

Re: Australia A Tour

Not going to read much into that to be honest, looks like they were slogging the spinners, Krejza got carted and even Beers wickets arent that encouraging, Krejza, Copeland, Hilfenhaus and Ferguson arent exactly close in fielders so it looks like it was really hit out stuff.

[Twodogs]

Re: Australia A Tour

Geez Warner must have went off, 152 of 141 balls. And I make it 108 in boundaries but with my accuracy from earlier in the thread I wouldnt put too much stock in the arithmetic.

[Mantis]

Re: Australia A Tour

Actually the guy I am thinking of is Mitchell Starc.

He played for Australia A against Sri lanka A last month. He's tall and uses his height to get enough bounce off a good length to trouble batsmen. Did he play a T20 game at the start of last summer because I can remember seeing him on TV?

Don't worry I have no idea who 1/2 of these guys are either.

[Twodogs]

Re: Australia A Tour

Don't worry I have no idea who 1/2 of these guys are either.

Do we need to differentiate more about what constitutes a legitimate 'international' cricketer these days?

What I mean is, when we were kids it would have been unbelievable to not know who every country's teams player's test/ODI were. Nowadays with the extra form of the game and the extra nations playing, not to mention all the extra cricket played it's hard to keep up with who Australia's internationals are, let alone other countrys.

For instance I picked up the paper the other day and happened to look at the cricket score section in the sports pages (Monday's H/S I think) There were scores from a test series between the West Indies/Sri Lanka and scores from the final game of a five game ODI series between England and India in there that I didnt even know were happening. In fact I wouldnt be suprised if it was a test series between WI/India and ODI series between England and Sri Lanka now that I think about it.

Throw in T20-which I actually prefer to the 50 over form-and should we be more selective or differentiate more strictly about who gets the honour of being considered a 'proper' international cricketer?

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: Australia A Tour

Do we need to differentiate more about what constitutes a legitimate 'international' cricketer these days?

What I mean is, when we were kids it would have been unbelievable to not know who every country's teams player's test/ODI were. Nowadays with the extra form of the game and the extra nations playing, not to mention all the extra cricket played it's hard to keep up with who Australia's internationals are, let alone other countrys.

For instance I picked up the paper the other day and happened to look at the cricket score section in the sports pages (Monday's H/S I think) There were scores from a test series between the West Indies/Sri Lanka and scores from the final game of a five game ODI series between England and India in there that I didnt even know were happening. In fact I wouldnt be suprised if it was a test series between WI/India and ODI series between England and Sri Lanka now that I think about it.

Throw in T20-which I actually prefer to the 50 over form-and should we be more selective or differentiate more strictly about who gets the honour of being considered a 'proper' international cricketer?

For me it's quite simple.

Real international cricketers play test cricket.
Those on the cusp play ODI cricket
Those who have dodgy techniques but can hit the ball well play T20 cricket

I understand sponsors giving the various cricket boards buggery about wanting the headline acts but I wouldn't play the same bloke in two different forms of cricket (unless you are promoting/demoting a player between the test and ODI teams.

[Twodogs]

Re: Australia A Tour

For me it's quite simple.

Real international cricketers play test cricket.
Those on the cusp play ODI cricket
Those who have dodgy techniques but can hit the ball well play T20 cricket

I understand sponsors giving the various cricket boards buggery about wanting the headline acts but I wouldn't play the same bloke in two different forms of cricket (unless you are promoting/demoting a player between the test and ODI teams.

One of the reasons I like T20 is a pet theory I've got. For me one of the true arts of cricket (with leg spin, true swing bowling and the late cut of an off spinner) is wicketkeeping. One day a smart selctor will say "Hang on we dont really need 7 or 8 batsmen for a 20 over innings, let's start actually picking blokes who can keep properly. That way fielding will improve and we'll save enough runs in the field to win games". Then true wicketkeepers will find a way back into the game. Blokes like Darren Berry will have an international career path in cricket again.

That's my theory anyway and I'm sticking to it like shit to a blanket. I dunno what it's got to do with your post but it seemed like a good time to bring it up.

[hujsh]

Re: Australia A Tour

One of the reasons I like T20 is a pet theory I've got. For me one of the true arts of cricket (with leg spin, true swing bowling and the late cut of an off spinner) is wicketkeeping. One day a smart selctor will say "Hang on we dont really need 7 or 8 batsmen for a 20 over innings, let's start actually picking blokes who can keep properly. That way fielding will improve and we'll save enough runs in the field to win games". Then true wicketkeepers will find a way back into the game. Blokes like Darren Berry will have an international career path in cricket again.

That's my theory anyway and I'm sticking to it like shit to a blanket. I dunno what it's got to do with your post but it seemed like a good time to bring it up.

Will never happen.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: Australia A Tour

Will never happen.

Not while Andrew Hilditch is above ground

[Twodogs]

Re: Australia A Tour

Not while Andrew Hilditch is above ground

Hmmm. Do you remember a talk we once had that started with me asking you "Would you kill somebody if it meant that the bulldogs would win a flag?"


Hmmm.



Twodogs walk's off into the sunset whistling the theme from the Good, the Bad and the Ugly to himself

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: Australia A Tour

Hmmm. Do you remember a talk we once had that started with me asking you "Would you kill somebody if it meant that the bulldogs would win a flag?"


Hmmm.



Twodogs walk's off into the sunset whistling the theme from the Good, the Bad and the Ugly to himself

That's a little disturbing.

I think you've gone a bit Danny DeVito on me

[Twodogs]

Re: Australia A Tour

That's a little disturbing.

I think you've gone a bit Danny DeVito on me

No, I'm Ok about cricket. I've seen Australia bestride the Earth like gods and Warnie, McGrath and Gilchrist with Tubby/S. Waugh cataining them is going to be a once in a lifetime experience. I was there at the start and enjoyed the ride all the way through. It will never happen like that again and I'm reconciled to it.


The Bulldogs premiership however. I would kill with my bare hands without a second thought if it ensured even one.

[lemmon]

Re: Australia A Tour

Quite a comfortable 7 wicket win for the Aussie boys in the first four dayer against Zimbabwe, a few pleasing performances but the quicks still have a lot of work to do:
Zimbabwe First Innings:
All out for 230
Krejza took 3/24 and Siddle 3/50
The quicks lacked penetration with the new ball though all were tidy, Krejza was the only bowler to get much penetration with three top order scalps, Siddle cleaned up the tail with the new ball and Hilfy took his sole wicket for the match, the Zimbabwe number 10. Copeland was economical going for 24 runs from 21 overs but not picking up a scalp.

Aus First Innings:
All out for 439
Hughes the pick of the batsmen with a 125 and was well supported by 56 from Ferguson and last man out Paine for 98. All the recognised batsmen were able to get starts with the exception being Marsh out for 10.

Zimbabwe Second Innings:
All out for 346
Copeland and Beer the pick of the bowlers with 3 for 60 odd apiece, again Siddle and Hilfenhaus were played well, Siddle returning a sole wicket and Hilfenhaus continuing his bad run of form without one. Interestingly Mitch Marsh was the one to break open the middle order with two quick wickets as he returned the tidy figures of 2/16 from 8, both the spinners were expensive with economy rates above four an over.

Australia Second Innings (Target 138)
Quite a comfortable chase on the last afternoon, which took only 26.4 overs. Warner was the only one to really get going smashing 82 off 57 balls with 9 fours and 2 sixes.


Looks like the Zimbabwe batsmen were willing to scrap out the game on a track without much assistance for the seamers. Australias batting was the difference in the end though Khawaja would be hoping for some runs after a relatively mediocre stint in county cricket preceding the tour. The quicks are a concern though, especially Hilfenhaus after the summer he had, a return of one match wicket isnt great and his spot in the starting XI come Sri Lanka could be under some threat.