Australia v Sri Lanka Tour Dec 14th- Jan 28th

First topic message reminder :

This is the thread for the tour of AUS by Sri Lanka...

there is 3 tests, 5 odi's 2 t20's..


Aussies probably favorites in all 3 forms of the game, but Sri Lanka will be dangerous, but let's be honest Rangana Herath will have to play a key part for them, for them to have a chance in the test series.

1st T20: Australia v Sri Lanka at Stadium Australia, January 26, 2013
Start Time: 19:35 (local) 08:35 GMT

Australia:
David Warner [83], Aaron Finch [71], Shaun Marsh [74], George Bailey* [76], Adam Voges [65], Matthew Wade† [71],
Glenn Maxwell [68], Ben Cutting [72], Mitchell Starc [78], Xavier Doherty [69], Ben Laughlin [64]


Sri Lanka:
Kushal Perera [74], Tillakaratne Dilshan [86], Dinesh Chandimal† [85], Mahela Jayawardene [82], Angelo Mathews* [72],
Lahiru Thirimanne [68], Jeevan Mendis [82], Thisara Perera [73], Nuwan Kulasekara [82], Ajantha Mendis [72], Lasith Malinga [86]

* figure in brackets [..] is 2013 'Money Ball' Power Rating

chrisss wrote:The Australia squad for the first two ODIs has been announced: Bailey, Cutting, Doherty, Finch, Haddin, Hughes, Hussey, Johnson, Khawaja, Maxwell, McKay, Smith, Starc.

Clarke, Warner and Wade rested.

I'd imagine the team will be something along the lines of:


Khawaja
Hughes
Finch
Bailey(c)
Hussey
Haddin(wk)
Maxwell
Johnson
McKay
Starc
Doherty

Still looks as weak as the soon to named Test team to me. But a good chance for these guys to shine against a depleted SL team.

There is potential in that squad. I'm not a big Finch fan myself (but can't argue with BBL form) and am not sure Khawaja's ideally suited to one-day cricket - certainly he hasn't done that much for Derbys in one-dayers. Good to finally see Hughes in a one-day squad: its most bizarre that despite averaging 48 in List A he's played 19 Tests and 0 ODIs thus far.

Add in Warner, Clarke and Watson and that's a pretty good side. Without them they lack the 100 makers.

I actually think the team will be:

1 Hughes 2 Haddin 3 Finch 4 Bailey 5 D. Hussey 6 Maxwell 7 Smith 8 Johnson 9 Cutting 10 Starc 11 McKay. Not sure Doherty's really been doing the job lately, and in Oz spinners don't tend to do that much in ODIs.

When the 3 I mentioned above come back expect them to be the top 3 (Warner, Watson, Clarke) unless Hughes comes off. Then Wade can slot in for whichever of Maxwell or Smith performs worst.

I think Bailey's a good ODI player actually. He can fill the No. 4 position (which can sometimes be a bit tricky - you don't want your 100-makers that build an innings that low, but you don't want your finishers that high).

goodbye to Michael Hussey...Magnifcent player, fielder, and all-round team guy, and will be sorely missed in the aussie side!

aussies strolled to victory in the first odi...aussies scored over 300 with Hughes scoring a ton on debut, and sri lanka were bowled out in the 40th over and didnt even reach 200...

why Herath was left out for Mendis baffles me!!

Good performance by the Australians with Hughes and Bailey in particular impressing. Mendis to be fair did ok until he was handed the last over, and then Hussey smashed him around. Chandimal again looks a very good player. Certainly he should now have a run in the test side as well, probably further up the order at number 5 (whether you also burden him with wicket-keeping duties I don't know). What's Tharanga's record like overall? Apart from a century against England in the world cup, I can't remember any serious innings, and he just looks like a nick-off waiting to happen. Surely Karunaratne is a better bet?

Australia were solid. They still lack a quality spinner, but Starc gives them genuine quality, and McKay good variation. Once Watson returns, the 5th bowler will become less of a problem (Maxwell and Hussey are 6th bowlers really). Their fielding was outstanding. Maxwell is IMO the best in the world at the moment (Steve Smith would be 2nd), and that first run-out was reminiscent of Ponting at his best.

I like Tharanga. I'll admit to being biased because he played for my club a bit when he was very young (before I was playing for them). But he has 12 ODI 100s which is a lot more than most people. Actually I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to give him another run in the Test side...

aussies need to put some experience in the bowling attack, for when the pressure is really on...Brett Lee reitring from this form of the game, will hurt them

CF, I think McKay is good. But, yes, they struggle at the death. Starc has the skills for those pressure overs, but doesn't always execute them well.

Australia have saved their best for Brisbane.

40/9 at one stage (after 18.3 overs)... but they now creeping up to 59. Lowest score for them is 70 on 2 occasions in 1977 and 1985/6. Starc and Doherty are the only batsmen to have reached double figures.

Kulasekara had bowled beautifully taking 5/22 and Malinga has chipped in with 3/14. Nothing wrong with the pitch at all but some excellent and accurate swing bowling and very, very poor batting from the Australians.

Australia all out 74.

They were lucky to get to 45 if you ask me.

Now is not the time for excuses but the question needs to be asked again - what on earth were the selectors thinking fiddling around with the best possible lineup - which although won the 1st match in Melbourne convincingly - got rolled in Adelaide. It's asking for trouble and it's a terrible way to manage players.... and fans.

I'll probably go out to the SCG on Sunday for the 4th match - but they'll really need to turn things around!

I might watch a bit of tennis this evening because this will be all over shortly.

In the third ODI here at GABBA Australia dismissed for 74. This is the lowest score of the Kangaroos here, previous lowest being 139 against PAK. Deciding to bat first on a good batting track, Aussies players were shocked by the hurricanes of Kulasekhra and Malinga, Sharing 7 wickets for just 36 runs. McKay being the top scorer with 22.

Mike Selig wrote:Good performance by the Australians with Hughes and Bailey in particular impressing. Mendis to be fair did ok until he was handed the last over, and then Hussey smashed him around. Chandimal again looks a very good player. Certainly he should now have a run in the test side as well, probably further up the order at number 5 (whether you also burden him with wicket-keeping duties I don't know). What's Tharanga's record like overall? Apart from a century against England in the world cup, I can't remember any serious innings, and he just looks like a nick-off waiting to happen. Surely Karunaratne is a better bet?

Australia were solid. They still lack a quality spinner, but Starc gives them genuine quality, and McKay good variation. Once Watson returns, the 5th bowler will become less of a problem (Maxwell and Hussey are 6th bowlers really). Their fielding was outstanding. Maxwell is IMO the best in the world at the moment (Steve Smith would be 2nd), and that first run-out was reminiscent of Ponting at his best.

Watto has given up bowling.

Rather an extraordinary ODI in Brisbane ! By the time I got home to watch Sri Lanka were twenty runs from victory less than four hours after the match started ...might as well have been a T20.
They contrived to lose six wickets in getting 75 , on what looked a reasonable Brisbane pitch. Just as well for the paying punters that Starc and Doherty managed to nearly double the score for the last wicket or they'd barely have had time for a drink break...
I know this Australian batting lineup is a bit wobbly (apart from the excellent Clarke I wouldn't fancy any of them to bat for my life , or even my lunch ) , but today was quite a descent into madness by any standards. Granted Kulasekara bowled well , but still...
Can we blame rotation ? Not sure it accounted for some of the shoddy fielding efforts even in the hopeless attempt to defend 74 ... Couple of great catches from Warner but some of the other stuff

Bad hair day ? Maybe they were on strike after Channel 9's spokesman suggested George Bailey was lucky not to be "flipping burgers at Macdonalds" in reaction to his objection to the TV station's complaints of Australia playing a "B" team

mate there is a thread for the aussie vs sri lanka series...so this would have been posted on there

Getting a bit fed up with rotation being blamed for every poor performance (but never used to credit when good performances happen) TBH.

The science at the moment tells us for young players it helps reduce the risk of injury. Australia could well have beaten South Africa if they had taken notice of it before it was too late.

I'm just annoyed Mike because instead of watching 100 overs I'm now watching the Cypriot tennis racquet basher ply his trade.

Michael Clarke got pretty angry when Mark Taylor mentioned that, Mike.

His argument was "would you prefer someone (i.e. me) who is only 70-80% fit to risk further injury? (by playing in the first 2 ODIs).... but don't get me wrong... you're entitled to say what you think." (what about the 3rd Test then? He must have only been 60-70% fit)

Clearly Clarke values test cricket higher than ODI cricket. He obviously wasn't 100% at either the MCG or the SCG, but chose to play anyway, and made good contributions in both matches. ODI cricket is a different game though, and not being able to run so well between the wickets (Clarke missed by my reckoning 5 or 6 runs at the SCG), or more importantly move around freely in the field (he spent both tests at slip) is probably more of a handicap.

Everyone seems obsessed with rotation, but Australia under S. Waugh did a lot of it in the years 2000-2002 in ODI cricket. Didn't stop them winning world cups or practically every ODI tournament they played in.

The sensible thought is "let's give it a try and see how things work out". I'm not saying it's great, but if it's a way to keep this plethora of young fast bowlers fit, then it's worth a shot.

Of course Mike but it contradicts what he said after today's match about not risking players in any format of the game.

Anyway, they'll have a good team talk, work on what needs to be worked on and probably come out firing on Sunday.

SL will be feeling confident but as we all know - the pendulum has a habit of swinging back & forth in these ODI series. It was just one of those days I guess when the guard was let down enough for Kulasekara to rip through the gap or hit the right spot in a brilliant spell of bowling.

I was quite pleased with the Australian bowling reply - at 48/4 SL looked to be on the ropes also but 74 was too few runs to get in the end. Also at least 3-4 chances went begging. If they were chasing 125-150... then maybe Australia could have dug themselves out of it.

My view is that rotation is necessary, but not quite in the form Australia do it.

I do think that bowlers need to bowl regularly over periods of time to find rhythm (even Steyn needs this, although his out of sorts isn't bad) and also fitness. Thus, I think its better to do what England do and take a player who plays more than 1 format out of a couple of limited-overs series each year rather than keep taking people out of 1 Test of a couple of games. That can both disrupt rhythm, and surely isn't that much of a rest.

Having said that I doubt Australia being bowled out cheaply today had much to do with the changes after the first couple of matches. After all, its only a short time since these players were winning the Test series.

Australian batting in a bit of trouble again in Sydney this afternoon...94/4 with only Warner really holding things together. Only 23 overs gone so if Wade settles in a decent score might still be reachable....otherwise the bowlers will have to try and save the day...

Ball doing a bit , so not impossible at all , mind.

Fifty for Warner

Warner gone...rather unlucky in that there was a big inside edge but still given lbw...
I have absolutely no sympathy for Australia though , as Clarke had earlier wasted their one review in a purely "hopeful" and unsuccessful review of his own pretty clear cut lbw. Use the system as it was intended just to correct real howlers , or put up with the consequences.

127/5

And now Henriques also given lbw despite edging it ...

Quite funny in a way : TV commentators going on about changing the drs system to prevent this etc...but they rather overlook the fact that if Clarke hadn't essentially misused the system earlier both those would have been overturned.

Don't get me wrong , I am a Clarke fan , but today he was dead wrong in taking a speculative review. Arguably selfish too. Fact is , all teams use the drs tactically , and sometimes it comes back to bite them..

137/6

Last wicket stand between Starc and Doherty - some very good shots , and some lucky boundaries - has seen Australia to a lot more than seemed possible when the eighth wicket fell at 166

Fine fifty for Starc and they total 222/9

Complete farce. I was at the game and the rain wasn't that heavy. I left just after the first break (was feeling a bit crook!) and was home in 40 mins.

When I switched it on back home they were still fiddling around out there. The rain had stopped.

That brush thing is ridiculous but I can't see how the umpires/match ref thought there might be a risk for the players.
SL are understandably upset about it. International matches have been played in much worse conditions!

I might add: it was a fantastic atmosphere there with only 22,000 spectators at the ground. The outfield looked so dry... yet not cut so low making it slow. The SL fans looked amazing from the Members'. They are great supporters and a little crazy too!

Another fine bowling performance from SL. Starc's little gem really perked the locals up. Those 2 'lbw' decisions were not at all well received by the Australian fans. Reminded me of 30 years ago when the crowd used to be quite hostile when playing England or the Windies.

(There were a few hundred anti-SL Gvt protestors in the park outside the ground on the way in. It was quite justified, imo. A mix of Tamils and Australians with pamphlets in outstretched arms. It felt a little awkward to say the least. It was like 'running the gauntlet'. They had gone by the time we had left.)

Sri Lanka are taking the abandonment to a higher authority. Be interested to see what the ICC can do.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia-v-sri-lanka-2012/content/current/story/601512.html

Yeah, I read that. Fair enough. Something wasn't right about the way it was handled. Hate to say it... but I wouldn't mind seeing SL win the final match. I'm still fuming over the way Australia has performed in this series.

Not much they can do about it now...appears the umpires were a bit too fussy.

Obviously conditions would have been tricky , but even Test cricket has been played in worse I suspect. Anyway neither side wanted to call it off : Sri Lanka was in the stronger position , and Australia being behind in the series had to play to have any chance of winning...the paying spectators the big losers.

Not good PR.

These things are difficult and I have some sympathy with the umpires. Perhaps they should have waited a bit longer, but if a groundsman (and a lot of them are pessimists!) tells you that it won't dry out in time you really have no choice.

It was getting on to 9pm though and with the lights I think the cut off time is 10:45pm. Might be 11pm.
Played stopped just after 7pm. It only rained for about 15-20 mins. So it was one of the most drawn out rain delays I've witnessed.

Clarke rotated his ankle so is out of this one.

After a 'cold & hot' start both Warner and Wade got out in quick succession to have Australia at 37/2 after 10 overs. They were just starting to look pretty good.

Phillip Hughes batted responsibly and made 138* One lucky escape for him: after mistiming the ball it rolled onto the base of the stumps but the bails weren't dislodged.

SL require 248 runs to make it 3-1 after Australia scored 247/5. They looked to be coasting along until Mahela and just now Thirimanne got dismissed. SL are currently 69/2 after 17 overs.

Henriques gets Dilshan now - who faint edges it to Wade.

SL are 71/3

Chandimal now clean bowled by Doherty.

77/4

Thought Sri Lanka would struggle to get 248.

Australia - owing much to Phil Hughes - made a pretty good finish , I thought ; although guest commentator Ed Cowan seemed a bit underwhelmed with seven per over for he last ten apparently Tasmania like eight plus. International bowling might be a bit better...

Hughes seems to me a much better fit for the fifty over thing than Tests...maybe not better so much as more natural. Not that he's rubbish at Tests , but he is and remains inconsistent at present. But in this format ..

I thought SL might get close to that total with the openers off to a decent start.

I am no fan of Ed Cowan. I heard him on the radio today too. He's probably a better 'journalist' than a Test cricketer. His average is very, very poor and I just can't see him in the same light as other opening batsmen.

My mate calls him Pulitzer... wrote his way into the side and the selectors took the bait... hook, line and sinker. He's quite vocal and defensive about it and even gets his wife to talk him up.

I agree on Hughes though, alfie. Looks more natural in his 4 x ODIs I still think he can contribute well to the Test side but more time will tell. I know lots of England fans would love to hear that but the same can be said of Cook (pre-2010 ashes) when he seemed to be struggling to score runs and in danger of being dropped (iirc?) then he struck gold so to speak.

It's the same with certain bowlers (James Anderson / Mitch Johnosn) - one should never write them off but by the same token selectors need to persevere a little more with 'developing' players and not chop and change (Australia + England seem to be doing it more and more now) and build their confidence by backing & selecting them. It just seems very inconsistent.

I mean look at Khawaja... he needs to be treated much better imo. I was 5 meters from Inverarity a few months ago - felt like confronting him about it... but would have had to have leaned over Rod Marsh to get my point across! (gave him an concerned "what the hell are you doing?"/evil stare instead...)

England did well to get over 250. It's quite uncanny how games in different parts of the world seem to mirror each other - low ODI/Test scores (Oz/NZ) and 2 very similar innings today with England and Oz. 257/7 not bad. Hope they can level things up.

Back to this game... like Tubs just said: even though Australia are in a good position at present it's still far from over.

(note that Brayshaw already had 'the win' in the bag 10 overs ago)

Need 87 from nine ...if Matthews bats through they will probably get it !

Wicket anytime soon will make it difficult though...

Yeah, that's the worry for us. He's caning it right now.

13 off that one...

Johnson may yet win the game with wickets , but you'd never put money on him to bowl a maiden...

Mendis bowled.

187/6... 61 runs needed off 36 balls

And Matthews gone ...game over

Drawn series. Just about fair ...

A slower ball from Johnson gets Angelo Mathews. Much needed wicket that.

Thisara Perera and Herath out in quick succession.

Now you can talk Mr Brayshaw.

200/9

Someone tell me why it took so long for Australia to pick Hughes in ODIs again? Mind you, I really hope the guy makes the most of his latest test opportunity, I think he could be a very good player there as well. I like his work ethic.

10 an over is doable in the last 10 but you need about 7 wickets in hand IMO, so Sri Lanka were always likely to come up short, particularly with Starc having his 2 overs up his sleeve still, so they knew they'd need to leave themselves 30 off 3 tops. Top couple of overs from Henriques sealed the deal, mixed up his slower balls and yorkers really nicely and hit the right length with his slowers.

On a final comment, just how good a fielder is Maxwell? A treat to watch...

I was thinking exactly the same thing this afternoon Mike.

It was quite a painful period for an Australian fan with his absence from the Test arena but for him not to be in contention for ODIs given his domestic form is one of life's mysteries. It just made no sense. He's a confidence player and has screwed his head on a little tighter in the last year or two.

Maxy is a superb sportsman. Saw him the other day running on as 12th man... he was enthusiastic a a drover's dog. Quite a character - made for the game.

All over. Australia win by 32 runs and level the Series 2-2.

Full credit to them and to Sri Lanka of course. They really played well in Adelaide and Brisbane... maybe short-changed in Sydney.

One thing I did notice the other day (and throughout this series) - they are magnificent side to watch in the field.
Sure, a few mistakes here and there (which happens to the best of them) but they are giving that extra 1% and I was very impressed with they way they handled themselves over here after the Test series considering the massive injury blows they suffered. They are certainly made of the right stuff.

So it's on to the T20s now. I'll probably watch those. Big game on Saturday (Australia Day) at Homebush Bay.
'2 tickets for 1' is being offered as an apology after Sunday's debacle. There should be a huge turnout.

Hughes has now probably cemented his place now in the odi side..

so if everyone is fit, i would assume this would be the side now

1.Warner
2.Hughes
3.Clarke (c)
4.D.Hussey
5.Bailey
6.Watson
7.Wade (wk)
8.Johnson
9.Starc
10.Doherty
11.McKay

CF wrote:Hughes has now probably cemented his place now in the odi side..

so if everyone is fit, i would assume this would be the side now

1.Warner
2.Hughes
3.Clarke (c)
4.D.Hussey
5.Bailey
6.Watson
7.Wade (wk)
8.Johnson
9.Starc
10.Doherty
11.McKay

Would they really drop Watson down to 6 after all the success he's had as a ODI opener? I think it'd be more likely that Watson would open with Warner and everyone else would drop down the order one place.

Australia really messed Phil Hughes around. Signs of them doing similar things to Khawaja who impressed me with his fielding (which was a real weak-point of his - shows good work ethic). Both IMO significantly better cricketers than Cowan (who is not a poor player, but I can't see him scoring serious runs regularly), and of course younger.

Hughes I think may be more suited to the number 3 slot in both formats. He has the attributes of a number 3 in that he's capable of dominating bowlers and scoring good hundreds (in this respect he's more suited there than Watson).

chrisss wrote:

CF wrote:Hughes has now probably cemented his place now in the odi side..

so if everyone is fit, i would assume this would be the side now

1.Warner
2.Hughes
3.Clarke (c)
4.D.Hussey
5.Bailey
6.Watson
7.Wade (wk)
8.Johnson
9.Starc
10.Doherty
11.McKay

Would they really drop Watson down to 6 after all the success he's had as a ODI opener? I think it'd be more likely that Watson would open with Warner and everyone else would drop down the order one place.

I agree. Also Clarke is more suited to 4 than 3 anyway. If Watson has given up bowling as Shanky said earlier, than Hussey or Bailey will have to be replaced by an all-rounder - Heniques, Smith and Maxwell are all reasonable options.