Australia v New Zealand: First Test, Brisbane

First topic message reminder :

December 1-5, 2011 at Woolloongabba Ground, Brisbane

Start time: 1000 (0000 GMT, 1100 EDT)

So it's all about to start here tomorrow morning with Australia still favourites; despite the fact that there will be at least 3 debutants and New Zealand believing they have a very good chance of winning in Australia for the first time in 26 years. Either way it should be an entertaining match given Australia's series levelling performance in Johannesburg and New Zealand's slightly more settled line-up since their recent tour to Zimbabwe.

Pitch & Conditions:
There's always plenty of seam and bounce at the Gabba, and captains can be tempted to send the opposition in. The forecast is for thunder and rain on the opening day, while showers could also fall on the final two days.

Australia:
1 David Warner, 2 Phillip Hughes, 3 Usman Khawaja, 4 Ricky Ponting, 5 Michael Clarke (capt), 6 Michael Hussey, 7 Brad Haddin (wk),
8 Peter Siddle, 9 James Pattinson, 10 Nathan Lyon, 11 Mitchell Starc

New Zealand:
1 Martin Guptill, 2 Brendon McCullum, 3 Kane Williamson, 4 Ross Taylor (capt), 5 Jesse Ryder, 6 Dean Brownlie, 7 Daniel Vettori,
8 Reece Young (wk), 9 Doug Bracewell, 10 Tim Southee, 11 Chris Martin

And Brownlie has gone not long after the lunch break cWarner bSiddle for 42. NZ 123-8.

At least the innings defeat has been avoided with No's 9 and 10 swinging. NZ 139-8, a lead of 7.

Lyon has his 6th wkt of the match. Southee gone for 8. cWarner bLyon, NZ 141-9.

Six fielders around the bat for Martin from Lyon.

The 150 up for NZ. A lead of 18.

Martin caught at mid-off for yet another duck. cStarc bLyon.

NZ 150ao.

Australia need 19 to win the Test match.

Warner will be nervy, he will not want another failure before the small chase is knocked off.

11 run's from the 1st over. A boundary for each opener.

More poor fielding, Hughes dropped in the slips whilst on 7.

Hughes gone. Very next ball, same stroke, This time caught. CGuptil b Martin.
Aus 11-1.

Hughes does have a serious problem with that stroke. Pokes too much.

Four to Warner, with a quality straight drive. Aus 15-1.

Then next ball smacks another four for the victory.

Hughes would arguably be the greatest batsman in test history if you couldnt be out caught behind. Sadly under the current laws hes becoming a bit predicatble

Agreed, obviously they have been working on his problem, but how long can you carry someone who is not learning.
The century in SL has only papered over the cracks.

A very convincing win for Australia and special note to Clark for his 139, Haddin for his patient (at first) 80. Ponting too with his second successive 50.
Then the bowling of Pattinson with his five-for and Lyon with 7 wkts in the match.

I thought NZ would have a real chance in this match but they let themselves down badly with their batting and fielding. They are much better than that and hopefully will perform better in the next test.

NZ 295ao and 150ao.

Aus 427a0 and 19-1.

Aus win by 9 wkts.

Maybe when Watson returns Aus could replace Hughes with Warner to see how that turns out.
That opening partnership would scare a few bowling attacks

skyeman wrote:Maybe when Watson returns Aus could replace Hughes with Warner to see how that turns out.
That opening partnership would scare a few bowling attacks

Disappointing performance from NZ this morning yet Pattinson had a magic first few overs and thoroughly deserved his 5fer. Still can't believe Hughes would play an almost identical shot after having just been dropped - and get out next ball. He'd be kicking himself... again!

The word is that Watson might still be rested for Hobart... otherwise I agree that him and Warner would be the better opening pairing. It gets tricky when Shauan Marsh is fit. I'd like to see Khawaja remain in the side and score some big runs - he was unlucky to get run out by Ricky.

The pace bowling is another log jam situation if Cummins is fit to play next week but I'd go for Sidds, Cummins, Pattinson... Starc maybe the unlucky one to miss out. Cutting is unfortunately out of the equation for the moment with a side strain. If the resting option (to prepare for India) is chosen, then we might see an identical side for Hobart with Hughes given one more chance to come up with something good.

What a difference a year makes. From struggling to find threatening bowlers for the Ashes, Aus now seemingly have an abundance of talant coming through.

Pattinson, Cummins, Starc, Cutting, Harris, Copeland and Siddle. Big decisions for the selectors to make.

Might be a long way back for Mitch, only his batting might save him now.

Indeed. And of course Josh Hazlewood (who could be the best of the lot) still waiting in the wings.

Mitch should probably still be around the squad for his experience and match-winning ability, but I think within the next 2 years he'll probably finish his test career. Maybe he'll become a WACCA specialist?

Hughes is obviously trying to sort out his issue, but it's a tough environment to do that. Remember Cook last summer when he was playing on the move with an upright front leg? Hughes needs to get in line and stop fishing (and you can tell he's trying). Maybe he needs some time off to work on it in more detail?

I remember plenty of experts and fans saying Cook should be dropped because of his bad run of form before his century against Pakistan. Then we all know how he played in the Ashes and again this year. He managed to curb his problem whilst still staying in the team.

I still rate Hughes, but he was dropped before with the same problem, took time out to remedy the problem, then returned for the Ashes, but the problem is still there.

Should/will the selectors show the same faith with Hughes, as England did with cook.

well bowled James pattinson

Following on from Chris Martin's batting efforts (which in fairness weren't much worse than some of his more illustrious team mates - it's tough being a New Zealand cricket fan), I stumbled across this old clip. At least we can laugh at ourselves I guess.

I've seen that video a few time now Kiwi. And it still gets me laughing! "Get my DVD, like me it's out now."

JDizzle wrote:I've seen that video a few time now Kiwi. And it still gets me laughing! "Get my DVD, like me it's out now."

I do miss Pulp Sport (the sporting sketch comedy show that made the Chris Martin sketch), they had a few cricketing gems (warning, some swearing included)
this Hadlee themed spoof of a NZ Cadbury ad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcdwzL-RHRc
Simon Doull office cricket https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIa7LTAlOQw
Harbhajan vs Symonds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QgRf00ilWY

skyeman wrote:

I still rate Hughes, but he was dropped before with the same problem, took time out to remedy the problem, then returned for the Ashes, but the problem is still there.

Should/will the selectors show the same faith with Hughes, as England did with cook.

To be fair, Hughes was mainly dropped because he couldn't handle the short ball. Since he has returned he has seemed better with the short stuff, but is now nicking off constantly. I don't think it's a case of faith, it's a case of giving him the chance to go away and sort out his technique. for this he either requires a break (Cook had a month or so between Pakistan and the ashes) whether down to schedule or being dropped. It is impossible to work over technical diffenciancies (sp?) while playing matches every week.

The Selectors have decided to go with the same side from Brisbane.

The only change to the squad is the inclusion of Dan Christian for Ben Cutting who is out due to a side strain.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/current/story/543790.html

The thing with Cook wa sthat his technical difficulty was only really exposed by the kind of swing yyou get in English conditions. The Aussie pitches were much more up his street. Hes pretty unique amongst English batsmen in having a far bettr overseas average to his home one.
He had also proven himself a more than competant test batsman in the past prior to his poor run of form.
You also then have to look at whos pressuring for the spot, England had essentialy no options for a genuine opener... Carbery (what ever happened to him?) or moving Trott up (far from ideal when hes the only guy to make runs at 3 in recent times for England). Mind you might be able to say the same for Aus, theya re sticking by a makeshift Watson ( who has done a more than adequate job) , the current comeptition for spots coming form a good limited overs player with little first class experience and a poor test record to date.
You really could go either way with Hughes. Theres something to work on and the potential to be better. Cook was fixed by a short perios of intense focussed training and getting to bat on pitches that suited him, Strauss was fixed by being dropped and told to sort out his game from scratch. Both approaches aorked for England, either could work for Hughes. Or he could turn out to be a continuing dissapointment.

Well hopefully thi result gives us a good kick up the proverbial and we come back hungry in the second test. The top order batsman have to do the job for NZ. McCullum has to have a word to him if he stays at opener that this is not a one day international. It´s one thing to get on top of the Aussie bowlers but he has to stick around and get a big score. That means patience and not thinking every ball has to go to the boundary. We always seem to be in too much of a hurry. You can get away with low scores in one dayers because you can apply pressure in the field that´s not there in test cricket. But building a big total is the best way to strike fear into your opponent. It makes them do things they wouldn´t do otherwise to get a result. This has been our main problem in test cricket.

Well done the Aussies. Hopefully some harsh words are spoken to the Kiwi top order and they come back with some application and fight.

Fast bowler Pat Cummins is almost certain to miss the rest of Australia's Test summer after being diagnosed with a bone stress injury in his foot.

Looks like his injury concerns from some have started already.

skyeman wrote:

Fast bowler Pat Cummins is almost certain to miss the rest of Australia's Test summer after being diagnosed with a bone stress injury in his foot.

Looks like his injury concerns from some have started already.

All these new seamers from Australia seem brittle. Cummins out for 2 months. Hazlewood missed 14 months. Starc missed 6 months last year. Harris is a walking injury. Cutting out for 4 weeks. Johnson out for 6 months. Pattinson has had back problems. Whilst Australia have lots of seamers to choose from, they don't have reliable bodies for the stress of International cricket at present.

Demon Racer wrote:
All these new seamers from Australia seem brittle.

All young fast bowlers are brittle before they gain enough core strength to bowl flat out week in week out.

Harris seems to be injury prone, but it's Johnson's first injury since playing test cricket that I can remember...

I don't get your point.

Mike Selig wrote:

Demon Racer wrote:
All these new seamers from Australia seem brittle.

All young fast bowlers are brittle before they gain enough core strength to bowl flat out week in week out.

Harris seems to be injury prone, but it's Johnson's first injury since playing test cricket that I can remember...

I don't get your point.

Australia are rushing these youngsters. Most of them have hardly played any first class cricket. Without a decent amount of overs under your belt, you wouldn't recognize your bodies limitations. Just look at what happened to Tait...

OK got you.

Not sure they're rushing them, they're certainly making the right noises about managing Cummins' workload. Also, Starc and Hazlewood had injuries which had nothing to do with Australia, they weren't in the national set-up at the time.

Mike Selig wrote:OK got you.

Not sure they're rushing them, they're certainly making the right noises about managing Cummins' workload. Also, Starc and Hazlewood had injuries which had nothing to do with Australia, they weren't in the national set-up at the time.

Hazlewood's injuries where sustained from over bowling though, he played u19s, NSW and played an ODI, before his body said enough. They need to look after these kids, as there are very few rapid bowlers left and they don't want to burn them out/injuries to ruin their careers.

In Cummins case, the longer formats seem to cause injuries. After the Shield final last year he had a back stress fracture and now after a Test match an ankle has suffered a similar injury.

it's an interesting one, England's fast bowlers used to have a reputation for often being injured. This was put down to them playing too much cricket, and indeed since the Central Contracts were introduced things have improved beyond compare. I think TBH Aus are just a bit unlucky with all these injuries occurring simultaneously, fast bowlers will always (with rare exceptions) suffer from injuries.

Harris seems injury-prone though, which is a shame as he's a fine bowler when fit. Also, what happened to Dougie Bollinger? Discarded after Adelaide ("hit the wall") he hasn't been seen since?

Mad for Chelsea wrote:it's an interesting one, England's fast bowlers used to have a reputation for often being injured. This was put down to them playing too much cricket, and indeed since the Central Contracts were introduced things have improved beyond compare. I think TBH Aus are just a bit unlucky with all these injuries occurring simultaneously, fast bowlers will always (with rare exceptions) suffer from injuries.

Harris seems injury-prone though, which is a shame as he's a fine bowler when fit. Also, what happened to Dougie Bollinger? Discarded after Adelaide ("hit the wall") he hasn't been seen since?

Bollinger is deemed to 'lack the fitness' for Test cricket. Laughable really, he had one bad Test, and his overall record is very good.

Harris is certainly very good, but he can't play back-to-back matches. To me it leaves Australia confused, as Harris is their leader, yet not all ways able to play. Someone like Siddle is a trier, but doesn't have that X Factor.

It was interesting to hear Sir Richard Hadlee on Inside Cricket talking about the way he used to prepare back in his days.

He said they probably didn't play as much early on in their careers - and fitness usually involved long sessions in the nets, basic fitness training such as running - they hardly lifted weights he said. However his rise on the international scene did bring both physical (back problems mainly) and also psychological stress - since he was heavily involved in coaching sessions for young kids, giving speeches, etc.

His action was based on DK Lillee's action - the close the to wicket approach (wicket to wicket) however like Lillee he also suffered physical problems. So much so that he also followed Lillee's method of employing the short run up in about 1983, which he said: "could still put batsmen on their backsides on many an ocassion..."

So, even the best have had to re-adjust and maybe the key is to use these 'young hopefuls' sparingly. Also, with the advent of more frequent ODIs and T20... across a wide variety of conditions in various countries, it seems quite obvious that a player will be even more susceptible to injury or other concerns. It's a huge demand on the body. We all know that pumping weights may build body mass and a certain type of muscular strength but is this appropriate for what a fast bowler has to endure in the test field?

Talking with a mate about it yesterday we both acknowledged past players would play through the niggly injuries (save for Thommo who played with a broken bone in his foot because was too fired up & too scared to tell Ian Chappell) but these days we are maybe at the other end of the scale - technology reveals a relatively moderate injury - which could get worse if not treated and managed properly - and the team decide not to take the risk.

I have a feeling this is where Patrick Cummins is at. Best to give him a chance to fully recover rather than rush him back when 90%+ fit.