Crucket

We don’t have any official word yet on the schedule for the Australian tour here at the end of the home season. However, reports are that there will be only two tests and that the tour will wrap up on 31 March, with the last match being the second test at Hamilton.

That the marquee tour of the summer will only have two tests is very disappointing. However, it seems that NZC just haven’t been given enough time by Cricket Australia to fit in a decent tour. Australia won’t be free from their home commitments against Pakistan and the West Indies until after 23 Feb. A realistic end to the tour would be the first week of April. However, Australian workload restrictions are a further bind and pretty much rule out the possibility of three tests. Cricket Australia require 10 days between the start of the second and third tests of a tour. This would have meant that with the second test ending on 31 March, any third test would not have been able start until about 6 April. In fact it’s hard to see how we’re going to fit in a good 5-ODI series in there as well.

A quick squiz at the Aussie home schedule shows that the reason they won’t make it to New Zealand until late is because they have two 3-test series (both with the luxurious breaks between the second and third tests) and two 5-ODI series scheduled against Pakistan and the West Indies. That’s some workload. Over the same time period, New Zealand will play a 2-test series and an ODI series against Bangladesh.

Ironically we have to squeeze our 3-test series against Pakistan around the Aussie home schedule.

A very interesting aspect of the Aussie schedule is that the Windies have a huge month and a half break between their test and ODI rubbers and apparently have no other international commitments in between. I wonder if anyone has given any though to inviting them to visit for some ODIs in January.

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.

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.

MGMT:

Alright. South Africa lead the CB Series after the first leg and have confirmed their qualification for the (nonexistant) finals. Here are the standings:

The second finals spot will basically be fought over in a straight contest in the five Aus–NZ matches. Australia appears to have the advantage because they carry over 4 points. However, ultimately they will have to win the overall contest with New Zealand – a 2-3 loss will leave them on the same points as NZ, but NZ will go through on head-to-heads. It could all come down to bonus points.

It is hard to tell if this article in the Daily Telegraph is attacking New Zealand or Australia. “One of international cricket’s worst sides” they say of us, which stings a bit. It’s true, sure, but it is our test ranking that brings our overall ranking down and we’re in Aus to play an ODI series.

I suppose the point of the article is actually to point out how crap Australia must be if a crap team like New Zealand rates our chances.

However, they demolish their own argument without realising it. About half-way into the article they quote Rod Hogg who reckons that Australia should really be ranked about number 4 in the world. So, checking the ICC ranking table, shifting Aus down to 4 and shifting the others up, South Africa goes to no. 1, India to 2 and into spot 3 goes New Zealand. Hey look! So in actuality we’re ranked above Australia. No wonder we fancy our chances, and the Telegraph should too.

Last day of the Aus–SA series: 314 runs required, 8 (or so) wickets in hand. Nice!

In one of those rare moments in my life I am hoping for an Australian win. That way I get to enjoy both Australia losing the series and South Africa suffering a turn-around defeat. How cynical of me.

Mostly though, I want Australia to win because Ponting’s declaration was so sporting. It was aggressive, but also risky. It put a big premium on winning the test over drawing it, even at the risk of being whitewashed. It also puts the onus on him to get a winning performance out of his bowlers and fielders. Great stuff. Just the sort of attitude we want to see in Australians.

It is remarkable enough that Australia has not lost a series at home for 16 years, but surprising also that this is South Africa’s first series win in Australia. They join a select group; only four teams have now beaten Australia at home. The West Indies have, of course, during their period of dominance. England too, naturally, in the see-sawing Ashes clashes. And the other team that has been able to beat Australia at home? New Zealand, 1985/86.

Considering the momentousness of what has occurred and who was on the receiving end of it, I am surprised Australia’s loss to South Africa hasn’t elicited a bit more gloating around the blogosphere. Suave, bless him, had a spray at the Aussies, but he would have said the same thing regardless of the result. Apart from Suave, everyone else seems to be acting terribly politely; the epoch-breaking implications of this series have barely been touched on. Damith talks about it, but quietly through statistics. His prediction: “Gazillion, number of blogs that will have a field day writing about how Australia lost and how crap they are,” seems pretty far off.

But Crucket is one of those blogs Damith is talking about. Quite frankly and forthrightly, we are delighted that Australia lost. As a kiwi, we obviously can’t get enough of Australia losing. And as a cricket fan, we are overjoyed that the top of the cricket pyramid has been levelled off, even if it has little impact for New Zealand.

Sadly, the Australian blogs are also largely avoiding commenting on the series loss. We’d like to see a bit of bellyaching or blame shifting. Instead we have Cricket with Balls getting philosophical and being gracious, and rather taking the fun out of the gloating.

Hayden would be odds on to keep his place for the final test against South Africa. He has a big record behind him and with Symonds and Lee likely to be replaced, the selectors will be wary of going into a match with too little experience. These are just excuses however, the truth is that everyone is too scared to tell Haydos he has to go. Surely this is his last series, so what use in playing him in the dead rubber rather than giving his replacement a head start?

Good on Balls then for telling him he should go with dignity and to Cricinfo for shaming the selectors for not having the balls to drop him. In fact, they’re writing his obituaries over at Cricinfo already. How good is Haydos? they ask? Only as good as the bowlers are bad is the answer. Hayden will likely finish with an average over 50, 30 hundreds, a high score of 380…an awesome record. However, Hayden only really got going in 2001, 7 years after his debut, but which time “Hayden’s earliest tormentors – Donald and de Villiers; Ambrose, Courtney Walsh and Ian Bishop – had all conked out. Shaun Pollock’s zippiest days were behind him, Chris Cairns’ too. The few lethal quicks still in circulation were playing on the same side as Hayden”

Yay dammit! South Africa have humbled Australia.

Awesome match. A classic. But I can’t derive too much satisfaction from the result, as I have explained.

However, it was quite amusing to see Ian Chappell have his words turned on him. “Currently, India is energised by the formidable challenge of playing Australia while the prospect still intimidates South Africa,” he claims.

The real measure of where a team stands in relation to Australia is not a computer ranking but how they fare when they play the champions at home. India has displayed the nerve and skill to win matches against Australia on their turf and in the most daunting of venues, the WACA. They are the more worthy heir to Australia’s throne.

Um. Maybe you should have waited for the result of this test before making such a bold claim Ian.