So apparently Vettori is “devastated” about the loss in the the 20-20 on Sunday, but seems to be philosophical about the rained out end to the Chappell-Hadlee. Well Judas Priest! If I wasn’t pissed off enough about the results of this tour, Vettori’s topsy turvy priorities have made me pretty damn grumpy.
Maybe it would have been nice to have won the 20-20, given that it was a proxy tie-breaker for the tied Chappell-Hadlee. I don’t know. I can’t really summon up any disappointment for losing that match. Perhaps it is just swamped by the utter skull-splitting intestine-eviscerating letdown of having our victory in the Chappell-Hadlee decider stolen by the rain.
Goddamn but we were close. 30 or 40 runs away with as many balls remaining and us rattling along at a happy clip. Here’s the Cricinfo graph showing how well placed we were:
We would have cleaned up. Cleaned up the game and cleaned up the series, for the first time on Australian soil. But instead the series goes into the records as a draw and Australia retain the trophy. The series will probably be remembered more for the fact that Aus played themselves back into the series in games 3 and 4 than for the fact that but for 1/2 hour too much time lost in game 5, we would have carried the trophy home.
David Warner was dropped after two games against New Zealand, having scored 7 and 2. You’d drop him too after those scores wouldn’t you? Still, it is a harsh lesson in reality for a 22-year old. The Herald Sun reckons he’s all in pieces and has to be mentored back to mental health by Glenn McGrath.
Best to put your young ones through a proper apprenticeship.
Adelaide is another big bat-first ground. Or maybe, I’m looking at this wrong. Maybe it’s the fact that Australia prefer batting first that makes all the Australian grounds look like bat-first paradises. Anyway. Win the toss and bat is the best option at Adelaide and against Australia in general.
Of course, win the toss and field is the best option for us, so…
What to do?
I’ve run some numbers, accounting for 1. our ability to chase and set targets, 2. Australia’s ability to set and chase, 3. Adelaide’s assistance for chasing and setting and 4. whether the toss was won or lost. I’m taking data for NZ and Australia only for the last 5 years to capture how we have both been playing recently.
My analysis shows that we must win the toss.
If Australia win the toss they will surely bat. Our ability to chase targets when the opposition has won the toss is poor and it is the worst situation to be in at Adelaide. Under this circustance I reckon we have about a 10% chance of winning. Incidentally, in the last 5 years Aus have never lost winning the toss and chasing. So we must win this toss.
In the last 5 years, we have won nearly 4 times as many games as we have lost by winning the toss and chasing. This counteracts both the Aus strength in setting targets and Adelaide’s assistance for batting first. If we win the toss and chase, it’s pretty much an even chance of a win.
The last of the possibilities, we win the toss and bat, gives us about a 40% chance of winning. Advantage Australia, but still a good contest.
Ricky Ponting’s 16 runs weren’t much of a contribution to his team’s total, and we’re as sceptical as the next person of his contribution as captain in the field. However, his return to the Australian team has brought about an instant change in fortune. Yesterday’s 301 runs and successful defence of that total is a return of the Australia we all know and fear.
No doubt having Punter back in the team made a big difference. His experience and comptitiveness would have inspired the rest of the team. However, I think the biggest impact of cancelling his gardening leave was that it showed that everyone was taking the game seriously. That they wanted to win, not just to avoid losing, which really seemed to be the case in Friday’s wishy-washy effort.
Only 1-2 down now and the odds of an Australian boil over have shortened. Winning 3 in a row is a challenge for any team. 2 in row? Even money according to the bettors.
What the eff? Who decides these man of the match awards?
In Friday’s match, the award went to Michael Clarke for his 98, despite the fact that Elliot’s 61 clearly decided the result of the match. Clarke even takes the blame for the loss on Friday. And he was right to some extent – excuse me for being uncharitable, but his inability to take the match away from New Zealand, despite his long, long partnership with Michael Hussey, did as much to lose the match as it did to save the innings.
So the precedent was set. The biggest innings wins the award, not the best or the most influential.
It was clear right through Sunday’s match that Australia were going to take the match. But I took great satisfaction in Elliott’s 115, convinced that it would deny Haddin (109) the award. But someone changed the rules on Saturday, and Elliott went unrewarded again.
Well, applying my own arbitrary criteria, I’m awarding Elliott a double Waitangi weekend Crucket cracker of the match award.
Also, a shout out too to Vettori. Despite the ABC commentators repeated insistance that Bracken is the no. 1 ODI bowler, we’re going by the website, which puts you comfortably at no. 1.
Proper respec’ to the whole team in fact. When the commentators stated that NZ had “pushed into no. 4 in the rankings” they were clearly unaware that the two months we spent at no. 5 were a blip and that we’ve had a pretty comfortable home in the top 4 since 2004.
Vettori has made things hard for the Black Caps before a ball has even been bowled. History shows that batting first at Sydney is a big advantage. 76 games have been won by the team batting first; only 52 by the team fielding. Even when the toss is lost, teams sent in to bat first win far more often than not.
New Zealand defeats Australia by 6 wickets. Neither team was really trying. And in the absence of effort, New Zealand was the better natural team. They fielded and bowled well (only 5 extras given away). Then they paced their innings impeccably perfectly. Raw efficiency.
0-2 down and the Aussie commentators still reckon they are man-to-man the better team. Well maybe this Australian team has a greater potential, but it’s not coming to them naturally.
Brad Haddin walks out. Brydon observes: “There were more jeers than cheers for Haddin when he walked to the crease … the players say they’ve put Perth behind them but the fans still remember.”
