The Ashes 4th Test, day 1, Chester-le-Street:

The Ashes 4th Test, day 1, Chester-le-Street:

England 1st innings: 9/238 from 90 overs
Nathan Lyon 4-42, Ryan Harris 2-70, Shane Watson 1-21, Peter Siddle 1-41, Jackson Bird 1-58
Alastair Cook 51, Jonathan Trott 49

The only thing that didn't really go our way on day one of the fourth Test is the fact we didn't get 10 wickets to give ourselves a fresh start with the bat come day two. The bowlers will still need to show up for the second day of play to ensure they grab that last English wicket as quickly as possible. The tail has already dragged proceedings on by another 24 runs and recent history has shown that wrapping up the oppositions lower order isn't a quick procedure for us. Still, it was good to come out on top of day one after our misfortune at Old Trafford.

The two English batsmen we have been waiting on to fire looked as though it was their day on a wicket that had a fair bit of drag in it and no real sense of an immediate threat for our right-arm bowling attack - having not selected left-arm Mitchell Starc.

Starc can definitely feel unlucky and the only reason I could see him being left out of the team is his inability to bowl consistent spells and build sufficient pressure from his bowling end. Just seeing how the bowlers toiled for day one of this Test was a clear indication this element is what got us through what could have been a spanking from England's top order. Pressure and bowling in tandem did the trick, so despite his collections at Old Trafford as well as a half-century, this decision to leave him out was purely tactical.

Jonathan Trott and Alastair Cook added 73 runs for the second-wicket partnership. Trott tried to impose himself to get every chance to play to his strengths and regain his confidence, which has oddly enough been slightly dampened. Meanwhile, Cook went along with the patience and resistance he showed against us in the last Ashes series, but there was always this sense I had that we'd get him well before a century as he was seriously showing restraint against straight bat shots - or just shots for that matter. After doing the hard yards at a strike-rate of 31.09, he left a delivery from Jackson Bird which swung into him just enough to trap him LBW without offering a shot. Aleem Dar sent him on his way with no hesitation. His resistance ended being his downfall, rather than a switch to impatience.

The first wicket of the day needs to be briefly discussed as it once again involved umpire Tony Hill (New Zealand) who has had a torrid series, even worse off than the players who generally get more criticism than an umpire - even though it is a thankless job, sadly.

Hill seems to have lost whatever confidence he has in his abilities as an outside edge off the early bowling change of Shane Watson, while slightly faint, was as clear as day to everyone on the field but Hill. Even Joe Root looked sheepish. Yet, Hill didn't give it and a referral then changed our fortunes for the ultimate dismissal. It was frustratingly another worrying sign that DRS is far from our main issue with decisions this series. Had this been India, Hill would have been on his way ages ago with the threat of a series boycott.

Earlier in the day Ryan Harris, Bird and Peter Siddle had all taken a while to get into their routines but fortunately Shane Watson was on song and provided his economical input as always and really mounted the pressure, allowing our bowlers to ease into the game. Soon enough our fast men where definitely get something out of a nothing sort of a track. It still wasn't looking all that threatening.



Enter our bowler who has been left on the fringes despite having taken 81 Test wickets to date from 24 Tests. The dismissal of Jonathan Trott was brought about by our right-arm off spinner, Nathan Lyon. Trott found the faintest of inside edges onto his pad which was well grasped by a diving Usman Khawaja at short-leg. It was a huge wicket but Lyon's ultimate victory came against Kevin Pietersen.

Pietersen has taken to Lyon's bowling and looked to attack him from the word "go". He did so at Old Trafford and again in this match. However, despite Pietersen's momentum and confidence to attack, Lyon had him just nudging at one which moved across him, bowling from around the wicket and Pietersen didn't cover the angle and outside edge carried to Brad Haddin, who has kept wicket excellently so far.

From that dismissal it was the Nathan Lyon show as he picked up another two wickets to take 4-42 from the day.

It was great to see reward go to Lyon as the best performer. He has had to graft really hard match in, match out with the fear he could be tossed into the junk yard of spin bowling rejects in the post-Warne era. Fortunately, the selectors have finally realised there will never be another great leg spinner and Shane Warne was one of a kind legend of the game. Therefore, we need a guy who can spin with subtle variation and bowls with both confidence and intelligence. This doesn't come from twenty Tests. This comes from perseverance, belief from the selectors and team mates, while most importantly being given the guidance and motivation to improve after every series he plays - not every game he plays.

Patience is the key and I have seen notable improvement in Nathan Lyon's performances after his outstanding debut against Sri Lanka back in 2011. Graeme Swann has become a world-class spinner because the English selectors have nurtured his development and kept him in the side. When other competitors have come about they've made him aware of this but he's only thrived off it and continued to find ways to be the best English spinner. Lyon can learn something from Swann and it seems our selectors are learning a lesson.

Lyon will have many, many more battles ahead but this innings was one where he took the initiative and helped the bowlers find a way forward on a track that looked like it would see day one at stumps with England in a dominant position. Well done Gaz!

All our bowlers chipped in and this evidently continues to be our strong point, especially having Bird come in at the expense of Starc to just boast our depth.

Come tomorrow we need to roll England before they reach 250. It will be a small victory in the context of this all important game. England have said they want to win 4-0 but it is not in their nature to be this aggressive. I anticipated them to become complacent knowing they have the urn and I hope this turns out to be the case so we can level this 2-2.

Hard cricket ahead as this seems to be a track where Swann will be used to bowl many overs and James Anderson has a killer average at this ground too, so watch out!

This Test is also important because someone other than Michael Clarke needs to step up. I get the feeling Shane Watson has two more Tests to show his value with the bat because recent years show he does not warrant a spot in the team, even though he is clearly having a mental barrier to his game as he is still playing brilliant shots. Bowling will only keep him in the side for so long, as hard as it is to accept this as a supporter. Chris Rogers needs to once again showcase his experience in English conditions as this ground is unfamiliar to this side. David Warner can play the villain and steal the glory from the hometown heroes, while Usman Khawaja and Steven Smith have another golden opportunity in the biggest, most historical Australian Test series to make their own history. Both have to do it soon as they can bat, no doubts there but are they strong willed enough?

All of these questions will be answered come tomorrow and it's going to be a massive test for the batsmen as should we get that last wicket soon enough, this is the moment where we need to finally bat as a top Test team. This is the moment!

Verdict: Day one goes to Australia, especially on the tactical front where we managed our reviews far better and Clarke used his bowlers effectively.


Welcome to The Baggy Green Blog!
Thanks for reading this article written by Ian.
To comment on this article, click on the 'Comments' tag at the end of the article.


TWITTER
@BaggyGreenBlog
@Ianbaggygreen
@SylvesterAu
@Dan_Stapo

The Ashes 3rd Test, day 1, Old Trafford

The Ashes 3rd Test, day 1, Old Trafford:

Australia 1st innings: 3/303 from 90 overs
Michael Clarke 125*, Chris Rogers 84, Steven Smith 70*
Graeme Swann 2-82
A day of Test cricket that finally went our way, well, nearly. It was inevitable that Michael Clarke would find the ability to dig in and score a century. No surprise really he is our first centurion of the series. It was just as an inevitable that questionable umpiring decisions would be highlighted by technology and made out to be disgraceful through DRS. A frustrating day in many ways for both teams but we have come out on top and finally won the toss!

Michael Clarke had things go his way as we finally won the toss and elected to bat, while he battled on to get our first Test century of the series. In my Ashes venue preview article I stated "History in the most recent Test matches shows an opportunity to get a good first innings total is there for the taking, so it's a bat first wicket in my mind. Visiting teams have struggled to "hold the fort" in their second innings, which England have then handled with home turf expertise to secure victory." This seemed true, the first part at least.

Chris Rogers scored 84 runs and it is fair to say there was a touch of masterclass to his performance. I have continued to back Rogers for his spot and believe he was the right selection for this campaign. His performance was top class and it was special to see him change his temperament. Instead of being the cautious batsman while Shane Watson (19) played the attacking role, it was a reversal and may have caught England off guard.

Rogers raced to his half-century at just below a run-a-ball, while Watson worked hard for his runs and tried to place immense value upon his wicket. Rogers' stroke selection was either cheeky or elite. He played the ball late, used his wrists excellently to angle the ball into the gaps or craft the late swing on offer by English bowlers with finesse. He resumed with as much confidence after the break and it took a break in concentration from behind the bowlers arm to see him on his way. He missed a straight one from Graeme Swann on 84 and he had to leave 16 runs short of a maiden Test century. He'd put us on the board and had secured some momentum.

Rogers also brought up his 20,000th first-class run. One massive achievement! Still a way behind Sir Jack Hobbs' 61,760.

The worry is that when Rogers departed we were 3/129 and we know the pattern that happens from there. Not for this day though!

Watson wasn't dismissed LBW this time but played at a straighter delivery from Tim Bresnan to find a generous edge to Alastair Cook at first slip. It was a straight forward dismissal and Watson will really be feeling the pressure come his second dig.

Usman Khawaja will have a restless night after his questionable decision. It has brought the DRS into question, not as to what it presents but how it is being executed and utilised by the third umpire.

A delivery which seemed to clearly miss the edge (even though there was a slight sound present) and had no hot spot or live video footage (zoomed in) to suggest the ball hit the bat was given out by Tony Hill as standing umpire in live time. With the above mentioned evidence Kumar Dharmasena seemed to make a massive, massive blunder and Khawaja was given out, the umpire's decision remaining. This would suggest there was "not enough evidence" to overturn the decision, but I disagree and it needs to be looked into. The whole system does as far as how the umpires are using it, or lack thereof.

Brydon Coverdale of ESPN Cricinfo listed the various scenarios this series. Worth a read for a recap.

Steven Smith found fortune in the system as well when he was as good as LBW when on 24. However, England got to taste the fault of perception as we had to suffer. They'd used all their reviews and when they needed it to overturn an on-field error there was no review on offer. Smith survived and has pushed onto 70*. A bit of karma I guess.

Michael Clarke's innings was a subtle one. He had to graft hard with the back issue, some tough bowling early on and find support in a fellow batsman. Once Clarke found some rhythm and got his timing right, which was bound to take a bit of time - as pointed out by Andrew Strauss in commentary - he was on his way. The confidence of Clarke was a mirrored effort of his sublime run dating back to late 2011. He now has a stand of 174 runs with Smith and we're in a fine position for day 2.

Best of all is that we've finally made it beyond 300 runs in an innings and England's bowlers have been forced to work hard for the wickets. Some sore bowlers on their part gave indication that it's been far too easy for them up until this point. Still four days of cricket ahead but this performance has changed the tone since Lord's as we fight to stay in the contest.

Well done Michael Clarke on reaching his 24th Test century!

Verdict: Day one of the Old Trafford Test belongs to us.

Welcome to The Baggy Green Blog!
Thanks for reading this article written by Ian.
To comment on this article, click on the 'Comments' tag at the end of the article.


TWITTER
@BaggyGreenBlog
@Ianbaggygreen
@SylvesterAu
@Dan_Stapo

Michael Clarke versus James Anderson

The second Test of the 2013 Ashes clash approaches. The battle will take place at Lord's, the home of cricket. In 2009 we were given a royal hiding which set up the momentum for England after we were unable to squeeze out a victory in Cardiff.

Had DRS existed back then, Ben Hilfenhaus would have had Andrew Strauss LBW for a golden duck, but Strauss went on to score a match winning 161. Rudi Koertzen was still arriving at the ground in that first over.

I have a strong feeling our side will be; Shane Watson, Chris Rogers, Usman Khawaja (in for Cowan), Michael Clarke, Steven Smith, Phillip Hughes, Brad Haddin, Ashton Agar, Peter Siddle, James Pattinson, Jackson Bird (in for Starc).

Pulled out some stats. The clash between Michael Clarke and James Anderson will be the one to watch this match and is already a huge talking point. Fair to say Anderson convincingly won the contest at Trent Bridge.

Michael Clarke at Lord's (one neutral match versus Pakistan):
3 matches, 298 runs, HS 136 (2009 2nd innings vs England), Avg 49.66.

James Anderson at Lord's (all games):
13 matches, 58 wickets, Avg 26.06, BBI 5/42, 4 five wicket hauls.

James Anderson versus Australia at Lord's:
1 match, 4 wickets, Avg 35.25, BBI 4/55

James Anderson versus Michael Clarke:
14 matches and Anderson has dismissed Clarke 7 times from Anderson's 51 Test wickets versus Australia. he has dismissed Jacques Kallis (South Africa) as many times, while Sachin Tendulkar is his prized scalp with 9 dismissals.

From 21 matches against England, Clarke has scored 1,388 runs at 43.27. That is 19% of his Test match runs coming against the old enemy.

Anderson took Clarke's wicket in the first innings of the 2009 Ashes Test, but Clarke's epic second innings performance in that Test stands out as one of my fondest memories of his batting in intense circumstances. Given his form in recent times I believe it will give him a strong foundation to outplay Anderson in this match.

Our side does have a struggle to pull back from an early loss in a Test series, but there's plenty of cricket to come and although there has to be massive improvement from the first Test, there was a fight shown from our boys that has been absent for a long time.

Play hard boys, play smart!

Welcome to The Baggy Green Blog!
Thanks for reading this article written by Ian.
To comment on this article, click on the 'Comments' tag at the end of the article.


TWITTER
@BaggyGreenBlog
@Ianbaggygreen
@SylvesterAu
@Dan_Stapo

The Ashes 1st Test, day 3, Trent Bridge

The Ashes 1st Test, day 3, Trent Bridge:

England 1st innings: 215 all out after 59 overs
Peter Siddle 5-50, James Pattinson 3-69, Mitchell Starc 2-54

Australia 1st innings: 280 all out after 64.5 overs
Ashton Agar 98, Phillip Hughes 81*, Steven Smith 53

England 2nd innings: 6/326 from 133.0 overs
Mitchell Starc 2-66, Ashton Agar 2-86

Match situation: England lead by 261 runs with 4 wickets in hand.

After getting the vital wickets of Kevin Pietersen and Alastair Cook, and having England at 5/174, England have found invaluable runs in their middle order (Ian Bell 95*, Stuart Broad 47*) and as a result they're in a winnable position for the opening Test.

Tactically it would seem taking the second new ball when we were still making something of the worn down first ball was a mistake, especially since there was evidence of reverse swing and something for our spinner to work with. England were then able to glide the new ball around with the extra pace on offer and take advantage to get settled (notably Matt Prior) with not much swing to talk about. Momentum was killed.

A lead of 261 runs and 4 wickets in hand ultimately gives us one option. We need 4 wickets in the first session at least come day 4. A run chase of over 300 runs, while not impossible, is an unlikely score to chase down successfully at Trent Bridge.

284 runs is the highest successful fourth innings chase at the ground, done by the home side in 2004. Stats in England paint a picture.

We saw Ashes heroics in Ashton Agar and Phillip Hughes on day 2. Day 4 and 5 is a chapter unwritten for our batsmen to make history. It will be a tough challenge as no rain is forecast and this lead will advance, meaning this game should bring a result.

Good news during the day was Ashton Agar taking his maiden Test wicket, a screamer of a catch by Clarke in the slips.

The blunder of the day was Aleem Dar not using the technology at his disposal as an umpire. DRS was introduced to rule out doubt over a decision (although players use it as a get out of jail free card and not tactically enough - Clarke's error too) and put away those "howlers" and uncertainties.

Stuart Broad clearly got an edge to the slips off Agar's bowling. We had used our reviews so we couldn't get the wicket, but it was however an opportunity for the umpire to double check his decision and use the technology to ensure the game went on with no fault on the umpire's watch.

We are always ridiculously having to "check for no balls" after an LBW, bowled or slip catch dismissal. Why couldn't a professional umpire do the same in this instance in checking for a probable edge?

I will defend Broad in that he didn't have to walk, so no point in blaming him or calling him a bad sport. Some people walk, others don't. Always been that way in the game for many, many years. It was the umpire's decision and it was an error of judgement.

Day 4 will be a challenging day but who knows what could go our way.

Verdict: Day 3 goes to England after winning the final session. 

Other recent articles at The Baggy Green Blog:
Ricky Ponting's final first-class innings.

Welcome to The Baggy Green Blog!
Thanks for reading this article written by Ian.
To comment on this article, click on the 'Comments' tag at the end of the article.


TWITTER
@BaggyGreenBlog
@Ianbaggygreen
@SylvesterAu
@Dan_Stapo

Innovations and rule changes in limited overs cricket

This article isn't going to be one ranting on like an old dog about the way the game is not like it used to be. I actually found myself watching some old limited overs footage and was simply recalling some of the changes that have occured within my time.

I started watching cricket in 1992 and given this was during World Cup time, when colour clothing was introduced for the international sides, I decided to take a look at a World Cup History book I had nestled on the book shelf and pick up the different format changes that have taken place.

Now, Test cricket as we know it has seen minor changes in comparison to that of limited overs cricket. I guess this would simply be to protect tradition and that the game has simply found a way to survive even with the world itself becoming a system for a more complex, fast paced environment.

Limited overs cricket has however had to adapt and is desperate to survive.
Although this has now been a topic of concern the last 5 years and brought up during the last two World Cups that have fallen within this time frame, it is a realistic debate.

Twenty20 cricket - the ODI challenger - brought about obvious changes to help speed up the game and, in some regards, enforced stricter rules for bowlers, making it that extra bit harder for them in a format which usually sees dominance from the men with the willow blade.

Some of these rules have been brought into the 50 overs form of the game.

So, here's a basic run down with the notable changes that have occurred since the first World Cup in 1975.

Now this may seem like more of a history of each World Cup but it has actually been the grounds for changes to be implemented and tested with all teams in one contest.

In 1975 the game was still developing for the limited overs concept, not just the format itself but for the teams as well! Sunil Gavaskar batted for 60 overs to score 37* runs in the first World Cup match. India were under the impression they could play for a draw.

To be fair by this time there were only 18 international limited overs games recorded.
As you may have picked up, it was 60 overs a side and East Africa was a featured side.

In 1979 it was still 60 overs a side with 12 overs per bowler and East Africa no longer featured, while Canada played their first World Cup.

It appears that the format was still seen as exciting and fresh and the only change by 1983 was regarding the Umpires. They were asked to be stricter with judgement of wides and no balls, something we see nowadays as a law that gives little room for error with bowlers, along with greater penalties!

An innovation in the 1983 World Cup also saw the inner ring, or "fielding circle", brought into the game, which was an oval shape 30 yards away from the stumps. Four fielders were to be inside during the duration of innings.

1987 saw the 50 overs format come to life and a bowler could only have a maximum of 10 overs in an innings, no longer 12.

The reason for this change was actually due to the daylight hours in the sub-continent not being as generous for 60 overs of play per side as it was during the English summer.
It would seem that fans were still finding it entertaining enough but by 1992 it would change!

The 1992 World Cup in Australia saw the direct influence of Kerry Packer's World Series Cricket.
Colour clothing was brought into the game with a colour identity given to each team which is still fairly relevant to this day.

White cricket balls were used with one at each end and fielding restrictions were implemented where only two men could be outside the inner fielding ring for the first 15 overs.

1992 also saw the third umpire make his debut in front of TV audiences for run outs (done so in Test cricket) but became a massive player in ODI cricket, while in 1996 the third umpire could be seen by his TV monitor when a decision was pending.

The complications of ties became a talking point in 1999 and as a result the 'net run-rate' became the determinant factor for a result. This is the law that ensured Australia went into the finals after a dramatic, cricketing classic, semi final clash against South Africa saw a tied result.

Due to Australia's net run rate being better, South Africa lucked out and made the Donald/ Kluesner run out even more dramatic and disastrous.

After 2003 saw the exit of South Africa in a rain affected match where Shaun Pollock and his support staff confused the teams calculations, better understanding and execution was seen to with the Duckworth-Lewis method to provide adjusted targets, taking into accounts all the various factors for rain delayed games.

As of 2007, Power Plays came into the mix and these were two mandatory 5 overs Power Plays.
This rule, further explained, is divided into 3 parts of 10, 5 and 5 overs, while batting and bowling Power Plays must be completed between the 16th and 40th overs of an innings.

The big one which added to entertainment value by 2011 was the front foot no-ball resulting in a free hit, which was taken straight out of Twenty20 cricket.
The bowlers still incur a one run penalty but also have to pick up the courage to bowl a "freebie" at the batsman who can only be dimissed via a run out.

On the topic of run outs, "runners" were no longer allowed in all forms of the games.
The runner would be used when a batsman was injured and was struggling to run between the wickets. A team mate would then come out, fully kitted, and act as his runner to communicate with the batting partner for any attempted running between the wickets.

This rule was implemented in 2011.

It is also deemed fair that a bowler can run out a non-striker who is unfairly backing up, also known as 'Mankading', which occured recently in the ICC u19 World Cup.

The innovative change has been the DRS (Decision Review System) and this was used in the 2011 World Cup where each team could challenge a decision.

I guess we will now wait on Super Overs to be brought into ODI cricket and perhaps further subtle changes will see survival of 50 overs cricket?

Split-innings was trialled and tested at State level in Australia but has since been pulled.

So I guess the conclusion we can draw is that like most things, change in inevitable but its essentially how that change is managed and making sure it still stays relevant to the game with respect to tradition and supporter/ player appeal.

Do you think these changes have improved the game?

I most certainly feel that the fornat is fine and the biggest killer is when too many ODIs get played, basically overkill cricket. If the format is moderated within scheduling (especially World Cups) then it has a greater chance of survival and I guess marketing appeal as well.

The changes have resulted in tougher tactical execution and has improved the pace of the game in many regards, especially with slow over rate fines against the captains.

Many of the changes have been positive and hopefully the format will continue to exist and find ways to survive, as some young Australian is going to have to try find the time to chase down the following batting stats...

463 ODIs, 18,426 runs, 49 centuries, HS 200*.

Well done on a splendid ODI career Sachin Tendulkar aka The Little Master
What changes he saw during his playing time in the format!

Welcome to The Baggy Green Blog!
Thanks for reading this article written by Ian.
To comment on this article, click on the 'Comments' tag at the end of the article.

TWITTER
@BaggyGreenBlog
@Ianbaggygreen
@SylvesterAu
@Dan_Stapo