India v Australia Test series 2013

Australia 2/141 (54 overs) during the second session, Warner caught bat/pad which is one of those things, then in comes Captain Clarke finally at first drop & FIRST BALL he dances down the pitch, misses it & gets stumped, i just wondered whether he did his homework as that is disgraceful batting

That's the way he plays, Bayman.

It usually works.

redandblack wrote:That's the way he plays, Bayman.

It usually works.

not FIRST BALL & surely after what's happened in the lead up to the match why wouldn't you have a look at a few first...................i bet you Watson laughed

Watson's not fit to be talked about in the same sentence as Clarke, mate.

I'm one of the few who said Clarke should stay at 5. Get better batsmen at 1 to 4.

redandblack wrote:Watson's not fit to be talked about in the same sentence as Clarke, mate.

I'm one of the few who said Clarke should stay at 5. Get better batsmen at 1 to 4.

well first time up the order & he failed, it is different when the opposition has been in the field for over a day but about halfway through the second session, nup it was irresponsible to say the least

4/231 so far.

Smith heading for 50.

AUSTRALIA 7/266 (100 overs)

SMITH 58

STARC 13

WOULD NEED TO GET TO AT LEAST 400 I WOULD THINK

sorry didn't realise it was capitals, not changing it though

7/273 Stumps

Steve Smith 58 not out batting at 5 batted like the guy who used to bat at number 5

Brad Haddin bowled Sharma 21 , was he ready in his batting stance ?
He looked up as Sharma was almost up to the Umpire

Shane Watson has had an interesting week
Watto became a Dad last Thursday
WILL he or wont he play the last test ?

Scrappy wrote:Brad Haddin bowled Sharma 21 , was he ready in his batting stance ?
He looked up as Sharma was almost up to the Umpire

But Scappy, its Haddin's job to be in his batting stance. Law 42.10 states:

"It is unfair for a batsman to waste time. In normal circumstances the striker should always be ready to take strike when the bowler is ready to start his run up."

Brad Haddin was looking down at his stance at the crease line
Looked up as Sharma was very deep on on approach
Haddins fault, no doubt
Plenty of batsman have pulled out in that situation, Brad didnt and was dismissed

I'm with RIG.

Haddin had options. If he played the ball: Haddin b Sharma 21

Stumps day 3
AU 408
Smith 92
Starc 99

IN 0/283 in 58 overs
Dhawan 185 not out off 168 balls
Vijay 83 not out

What a debut by Dhawan

The Australian must now be rueing a missed opportunity
Dhawan was out without facing a ball
Mitchell Starc got to his bowling delivery point when the ball slipped from his hand
The ball freakily hit the stumps at the non strikers end
Dhawan was out of his crease by almost a metre
Starc giggled
Clarke motioned jocularly a 3rd umpire camera signal and giggled
And Dhawan by stumps had the last laugh

Question
The Aussies , within a spiritualness of fair play , didnt appeal
But in a country where the opposition has refused to comply with a 3rd umpire , should the Aussies have appealed ?
Anywhere else in the world I would say that the Aussies did the right thing
But in India, I would have been very tempted to appeal

Scrappy wrote:Stumps day 3
AU 408
Smith 92
Starc 99

IN 0/283 in 58 overs
Dhawan 185 not out off 168 balls
Vijay 83 not out

What a debut by Dhawan

The Australian must now be rueing a missed opportunity
Dhawan was out without facing a ball
Mitchell Starc got to his bowling delivery point when the ball slipped from his hand
The ball freakily hit the stumps at the non strikers end
Dhawan was out of his crease by almost a metre
Starc giggled
Clarke motioned jocularly a 3rd umpire camera signal and giggled
And Dhawan by stumps had the last laugh

Question
The Aussies , within a spiritualness of fair play , didnt appeal
But in a country where the opposition has refused to comply with a 3rd umpire , should the Aussies have appealed ?
Anywhere else in the world I would say that the Aussies did the right thing
But in India, I would have been very tempted to appeal

I haven't got the rule, I think 42.15 in front of me, but the way I have always understood it is that you can't accidentally Mankad someone. I have always thought that the rule says something along the lines that the bowler may deliberately attempt to run out the non striker as long as he breaks the stumps prior to commencing his delivery.

If my understanding is correct Dhawan was not out anyway. Do you have the rule Scrappy?

No , have not got the rule
One of the commentators said it was a dismissal
No doubt in my mind it was an accident by Starc , but how does one prove it accidental if there is an appeal ?

Accidental run outs happen often enough
What about when the non striker is run out from a bowlers deflected attempt to field the ball

AU 408
IN 499
AU 3/75

Hughes 53 not out
Best things that happened for Hughes was the very early dismissal of Warner , and the injury to Clarke
All of a sudden he was batting 4th ball of the innings
Phil was able to get his eye in against the faster bowlers before his tour nemisis Ashwin came into the attack

Arguably the the best left hand batsman that has played for South Australia was born on this day 136 years ago
He has been acknowledged as being the best left hand batsman to play for Australia before WW2
And he played league footy for Southee's mob !
Clem 'Kruger' Hill born 18/2/1877

Scrappy wrote:No , have not got the rule
One of the commentators said it was a dismissal
No doubt in my mind it was an accident by Starc , but how does one prove it accidental if there is an appeal ?

Accidental run outs happen often enough
What about when the non striker is run out from a bowlers deflected attempt to field the ball

AU 408
IN 499
AU 3/75

Hughes 53 not out
Best things that happened for Hughes was the very early dismissal of Warner , and the injury to Clarke
All of a sudden he was batting 4th ball of the innings
Phil was able to get his eye in against the new faster bowlers before his tour nemisis Ashwin came into the attack

I've checked. The commentator was wrong.

The law states "The bowler is permitted, before entering his delivery stride, to attempt to run out the non-striker. The ball shall not count in the over.”

At no stage did Starc attempt to run out the batsman, therefore the umpire correctly called dead ball.

Most knowlegable journalists are now saying that in their reports.

I think that common sense has prevailed over technicalities with that Starckad

AU 408
IN 499
AU 223
IN 4/136

Australia beaten fair and turning square again ...

Well if I Haddin seen it I wouldnt believe it again !
Brad Haddin was out LBW in the first dig , looking up to Sharma as Sharma closed into his delivery stride

Yesterday I turn on the TV , to see a poor TV add about a Soy after taste face
When the cricket coverage comes on I see Brad Haddin with his left hand out halting India and Ashwin
Haddin takes up stance, patting the crease, head down
Ashwin takes several steps , without Haddin looking up
Haddin looks up when Ashwin is almost up to the umpire
Haddin LBW Ashwin

Brad needs to adjust his stance preparations
Its appearing like a bad habit and needs to prepare earlier when facing bowlers

Australia 2/86.

Warner 0

Hughes 45

Watson and Cowan in.

I cannot fathom how you drop a bloke for disciplinary reasons for one test and then bring him back as captain for the next one.

Just doesn't sit right with me.

I think the whole thing has bitten the selectors on the bum.
Sure discipline them if necessary but dropping them, I can't have.

From my perspective Australian Cricket has lost its way.

Yep. Too many cooks in the kitchen IMO.

basically no 'ticker' in the team

Chambo Off To Work We Go wrote:From my perspective Australian Cricket has lost its way.

There is nothing more certain than that. They either need to revert to the old structure of Australian cricket, with far greater emphasis on the Sheffield Shield, or burn it down and start all over again. All they are doing at the moment is meandering towards the horizon with their backsides on fire.

As they say in the classics, you can't employ clowns unless you are creating a circus.

Siddle made a total of 101 runs in this Test, I wonder how many top order "batsmen" could say that this series?

Well done Nathan Lyon, made the selectors look silly once again with 9 wickets for the match.

First time ever that the No 9 top scored in both innings.

redandblack wrote:First time ever that the No 9 top scored in both innings.

yeah i heard that from someone at Kapunda today when he was looking up the scores, i found that truly amazing as i would have wrongly thought it would've happened at sometime.......top order batting shows no application needed for test cricket & is as brittle as they come

i'll bet Mickey Arthur is glad he closed his twitter account down