3 minute read
Cricket’s holiest of grails awaits as Australia and England battle once again for the most treasured prize in all of the sport – ok then cricket.
Racing and Sports will cover all five tests which are hoped to be played in varying cities across the wide brown land although these days, flux is the default position in sports timetabling. We'll also put in a few gambles which might add to the viewing pleasure.
AUSTRALIA v ENGLAND
Third Test
26-30 December @ MCG
While Omicron sweeps the world, the Aussies are doing their best impression of Pomicron as they try to humiliate and smother England across another home Ashes Series.
They had the new skipper confined to his four hotel walls in Adelaide for a few days and subjected to an informal version of cricketing torture simply because he dined somewhere which eventually rang alarm bells. Had this been in Sydney or Melbourne it's open slather.
They had Josh Hazlewood, with his side strain, confined to his own trips to medical specialists. That is never good for a tall quickie.
They had to face England with Broad and Anderson back adding over 1150 wickets to the attack on a wicket and under conditions which the tourists claimed were in their favour and had gone all-in.
And yet despite everyone having throwbacks to 1950s over-rates and run-rates on Day 1, the Adelaide Test was only heading in one direction. It was as ghastly a memory and as sour a taste as English players, past and present, could stand.
Totally acknowledging the toss was a great advantage. But when you select such a wildly obscure and monotonous team as the 11 they walked onto Adelaide Oval with, you deserve all you get.
Fancy picking some of those out of form or out of their depth batters. Fancy not playing a spinner. Fancy taking four medium pacers onto that deck whose pace variance is that of a flat-lining ECG. That analogy epitomises just where the Series is right now.
Variety may be the spice of life but boy it helps in a cricket team. This Australian line-up is hardly an all-time great one but at the very least they have some diversity.
Left and right handed batsman, left and right handed bowlers, an experienced spinner and an all-rounder who is raw but there is so much potential as both an enforcer or as a quality seamer knicking good batsman off.
Batsman get into a flow. They love monotony, they love certainty. You get into a rhythm of where the ball may pitch, what speed it comes at you, do I defend or attack?
If that doesn't change from over to over then surely you are not asking enough questions of the opponents. England just hasn't asked those questions to date.
Then you tack on the disgraceful performances regarding no-balls taking (or not taking) wickets and the dropping of catches. It's almost a perfect storm.
How does Jos Buttler drop those chances? One is a petty theft, two are criminal. In the end neither of those off Labuschagne in the first innings and Smith in the second cost England much but it was the principle of it.
The team loses confidence and drop their heads. It's only natural for that to occur but it can't help obtain the ultimate goal.
And yet despite all this, Australia has not played its best but stand 2-Nil up. Smith made runs but there was hardly fluency, Warner was much the same in both tests.
Marnus has structured his game around the 'leave'. Such an old-time methodology and yet boy does it work in Test Cricket. Not often you can be out if you don't hit it (unless it clips the pegs or hits the pads).
It also contributes to frustrating opponents. That is especially so when he does his "No run!!" exhortation with the ball settling in the keeper's gloves. You could say it's 50% gamesmanship/50% oneupsmanship.
Travis Head has had two match fluctuating innings. The first was to take the game away in Brisbane, the second was to sail his side to safer waters. Both were at speed and both convincing.
Without Cummins and Hazlewood, the Aussies were always going to be undermanned so to win and win with conviction was satisfying to the group one imagines.
Richardson and Neser were serviceable on the dour, fairly lifeless deck. The Curator said they kept the outfield a little longer than normal which benefits in the composition and lack of degradation of the ball.
The upside is at night, it should move a little more though it was fairly sedate in general and makes it easier to see.
It does make its contribution to the match less than it might be in a day game in terms of reverse swing – something Anderson and Broad thrive on. That is where Starc's performance is to be commended.
He too thrives on flinging and swinging early. But then searing yorkers are his domain late. Without a scuffed, abrasive surface on the field and in his hand, he may have had doubters. But he bowled beautifully.
Often he'd target the pads as would his rivals. Well that was also a talking point.
Cricket's interpretations from sections of the punditry have an amazing way of challenging authority without really knowing they've done it.
The DRS lbw rule is one such measure. A certain former legspinner was on the front foot about 'Umpire's Call'. Of course he's entitled to his opinion which is one such voice in the mediascape. Well here's another view.
Don't have yourself believe DRS is there to determine if an umpire's call is incorrect. Place yourself in the position that there was NO DRS in action whatsoever.
It was suggested, 'well the ball was going on to hit the stumps, therefore it must be out'. So a zillion leg-before decisions prior to DRS, up or down, included ones where umpires had to decide if the ball was pitching in line or hitting in line or heading down leg or going over the top. A myriad of considerations for the officials.
Just say to yourself this. The umpire made a decision based on the facts as is his/her role. Now, subsequent to their conclusion, draw a line in the sand. Explain to the world why it was so wrong that it needs to be varied?
On what basis are any new facts CHANGING that? If they are not obvious, nor any infractions of laws/regulations, we stay with the original one.
Not why we should change the ruling just because we can.
DRS was not developed to give captains the right to have a 'swing at the stumps' so to speak with a speculative guess or even to take a time-out to regather some thoughts. DRS has actually shown players guess far more than is admitted.
If the 'it was hitting, no matter how much or where it was, so that means it's out' mantra is the new metric of the finger going up, then tests will last 3 days. Tipping broadcasters who pay the big money would freeze at that notion. Are players willing to take less $$$ passed on from rights fees?
DRS is not for 'here's why I say the decision is wrong'. DRS is 'here's why the decision is not wrong – explain why the umpire's reflection of what he saw in that miniscule skerrick of time was incorrect'.
The overlay of 'Umpire's Call' should hold where you start to consider why we need to reverse it. ie the Umpire made his/her call – and being a line ball decision we should accept that.
It seems a fine line to draw but guess what – that is officiating. Otherwise do not have anyone umpiring and just let TV decide every moment. Lord, that way the game would take 15 days to finish.
So now heading to the MCG (and hopefully a far less eventful few days virus-wise), it is England's obligation to press now. Being 2-Nil down they have everything to attack for and nothing to lose (bar the Ashes).
Of all the Australian grounds, they actually have some decent records at Melbourne on Boxing Day. The famous 3 run game with the Tavare/Miller catch off Thommo in 1982 was followed by a thrashing four years on.
Australia then collapsed in 1998 from 2-103 to lose the rest chasing only 175 courtesy of Dean Headley.
Again they gave the hosts a hiding in 2010 making 513 in the first dig and then last time it was only a draw on a bore-fest pitch when Alastair Cook took up residence for several days.
Maybe it is because of the style of 22 yards that leads England to having more security on it. A lower, slower, less combative surface means the batsman have more in their favour. It's why Perth is not their love affair.
Australia has won the two tests but has it picked its best eleven? Marcus Harris surely is not worthy of his selection right now and yet he still may be included on the home deck.
In 12 tests he averages only 22 and just two fifties. The first innings of the match is about 70% influence of a game and his last seven first knocks are 11, 8, 13, 3, 5, 3, 3. I'm sorry but that is not up to Test level.
Khawaja deserves his shot and has a strong record when doing that. He made 145 v South Africa in Adelaide and 85 + 141 in the famous drawn test in Dubai with Pakistan. He should be given another crack at it.
Competition for bowling spots is now at fever pitch. But will this MCG pitch alter any thinking? It has been a dull and positively awful deck for a while. Not quite back to the 'gazunda' days of the late 70s/early 80s but lifeless is an understatement.
Cummins obviously returns (please don't ask young Patrick out for dinner for a few weeks, team) but would you risk Hazlewood? Neser wasn't as impressive as Richardson on the whole so one change seems likely, perhaps two.
It looks to be chook lotto selection opportunities for England. Throw all the balls up in the air and see where eleven of them land. Wood has to return to be that point of difference and a spinner of any kind would do.
As for the batting, literally all bar Malan, Root and Stokes are for the gallows on any given Boxing Day. They have been kangaroos in the headlights.
Only a brave person can confidently see England turning this all around. That said, they can peel off some form of a comeback but surely not three tests straight.
As mentioned earlier Melbourne has been a slightly better hunting ground than elsewhere. The pitch adds to that likelihood.
Watch for Cummins to be a caged tiger. He'll know he has the complete confidence in Smith to help him through any circumstances – too many captains can't spoil this broth apparently.
A bonus week off, no injury, the series status bettered and plenty of time for reflection means we must back the Skipper for wickets.
Thought Stuart Broad, for all his idiosyncrasies in unappealing appeals and rather comical leg before assumptions, came back well in Adelaide. He should bowl well here and has done that previously the twice he ventured onto the big ground.
Let's hope Boxing Day has a huge crowd and is a celebration of some form of normality as we fight this scourge. Or, at the very least let's cheer another SPD Smith century to go with his four already.
Suggested Bets: Pat Cummins 4+ wickets @ $4.00