Australia thrash West Indies in very onesided Test: T1D4

Australia 4/583d (Voges 269*, S Marsh 182) beat West Indies 223 (70ov, Bravo 108/177b/20x4, Roach 31, Hazlewood 18-5-45-4, Lyon 3/43 & 148 (36.3ov, Brathwaite 94/122b/1x6 13x4, Pattinson 8-0-27-5, Hazlewood 3/33) by an innings & 212 runs: T1/3 D3/5 at Hobart. Australia lead series 1-0. Player of the Match: Adam Voges.

West Indies followed on and folded lamely yet again, this time principally due James Pattinson, who'd looked underdone on the previous day. Apart from Darren Bravo in their first innings and Kraigg Brathwaite in their second, the team lacked the desire and perhaps the guts to stand up to a proficient but by no means (except on the scoreboard here) outstanding Australia side.  

Can the visitors improve? Hard to see how with the current talent pool. I know that I predicted a similar fate for the New Zealanders a few weeks ago and that they proved me wrong, but I just can't see how the West Indies can lift themselves. No one expects them to win but tighter contests would at least keep some interest in the cricket following public for the remaining two Tests. It's's all very well to criticise the modest turnout at Hobart, but who (including Cricket Australia who must have seen this fiasco coming) expects anything like the huge numbers we've come to expect to show up at the MCG on Boxing Day, or watch on TV? IMO 40,000 would be a very good crowd. And a blow to the reputation of Test cricket and cricket in general.

Scorecard

Voges & Marsh pile on runs, then WI top order leave Bravo to restore modicum of self respect: T1D3

West Indies 6/207 (65ov, Bravo 94*/159b/17x4, Roach 31*/89b/3x4)  trail Australia 4/583d (114ov, Voges 269*/285b/33x4, S Marsh 182/266b/1x6 15x4, Warner 64, Warrican 28-1-158-3) by 376 runs: T1/3 D2/5 at Hobart.

Adam Voges and Shaun Marsh continued to dominate a lacklustre West Indies team, adding a further 132 - 449 in total - and breaking many more records before they were parted. 

When West Indies batted there were a few flickers, and one pillar - Dwayne Bravo- of resistance against a generally tight (if James Pattinson looked a tad underdone) Australia attack. Nathan Lyon bowled particularly well (and took a great return catch) before Bravo and Kemar Roach showed a bit of backbone and began to restore a little self respect to their team. 

6/119 ( the last a wrong but unreviewed lbw decision against Jason Holder) looked like unconditional surrender; 6/207 may save some WI face but is unlikely to prevent an Australian victory.

Australia 3/438 dominate West Indies on first day of series: T1D1

Australia 3/438 (89ov, Voges 174*/204b/19x4, S Marsh 139*/205b/12x4, Warner 64/61b/11x4) v West Indies: T1/3 D1/5 at Hobart. Toss: Australia.

West Indies were competitive until lunch, when they had Australia 3/121, including Steve Smith and David Warner. Thereafter Adam Voges aggressively and Shaun Marsh more methodically exposed the limitations of  the West Indies attack in an unbroken 316 4th wicket partnership which has set the Test on course, as many including me have predicted, for a crushing home win.

Yes, New Zealand, who also amassed 400+ today at home to Sri Lanka) regrouped after their First Test drubbing. I didn't think their revival here was possible, and predicted as much, but I don't think that the lacklustre West Indies can revive, so I'll predict - for the second time this season - a 3-0 Australia series win. Yet even I would be pleased to see more evidence of guts and determination that we saw from them today. Otherwise Test cricket will be effectively over this season.

Scorecard

Late WI wickets keep Australia on track for T3 win

West Indies 218 & 5/173 (67.1 ov Chanderpaul 69, Bravo 45, Clarke 3/34) need 197 more runs with 5 wickets in hand to beat Australia 328 & 259 (85 ov, Ponting 57, Cowan 55, Shillingford 4/100, Roach 3/40, Deonarine 3/45) T3/3 D4/5 at Dominica.

The scorecard pretty well says it all: West Indies, with one top order batsman left (and Narsingh Deonarine, with all due respect, is not the person who immediately comes to mind if you try to think of a potential, against the considerable odds, matchwinner) aren't even halfway to their target.

Shivnarine Chanderpaul and Darren Bravo retrieved a grim looking 3/45, adding 110 before, in the closing overs of the day, first Bravo 45/148b (5x4) well caught by keeper Wade of Shane Watson then Chanderpaul 69/122b (6x4) was Michael Clarke's third victim (while Nathan Lyon remained wicketless).  West Indies desperately needed Chanderpaul at least and preferably both to fight another day, but wasn't to be and, barring rain, the last rites of the match and series will be played out, quite likely early, on D5.

West Indies have fought hard (most of the time) and haven't had the best of luck (or the onfield and DRS decisions) and a 0-2 loss will not be a fair reflection of the difference between the two teams.

Scorecard

Fox Sports report and link to video highlights





 

Australia consolidate as West Indies struggle to rebuild after poor first innings: T3D3

Australia 6/200 (65 ov, Ponting 57, Cowan 55) & 328 lead West Indies 218 (87.2ov, Chanderpaul 68, Lyon 4/69) by 310 runs with 4 second innings wickets in hand. T3/3 D3/5 at Dominica.

It was not West Indies' day. After the remaining batters, including Shivnarine Chanderpaul  who doubled his overnight score to 68/164b (3x4),  couldn't produce the massive revival which was required to haul the team back into any sort of contention, Australia built on its first innings lead of 110 solidly and was in a very strong position at stumps.

There wasn't much scintillating cricket - certainly not enough to keep me awake even until lunch - but from the highlights it appeared that Australia put in a workmanlike day, exemplified by Nathan Lyon 33-7-69-4 continuing his persistent bowling while Ricky Ponting 57/130b (4x4) and Ed Cowan 55/123b (5x4) found some batting form.
.
The West Indies didn't give up in the field, but despite chipping away at the Australians haven't brought themselves right back into the game.There have been some unexpected reversals of form in this series but nothing approaching the miracle which will be needed if West Indies are to win this match.

  Scorecard

Fox Sports report with link to video highlights

Australia turn tables on West Indies T3 D2

 West Indies 8/165 (65 ov, Powell 40, Lyon 3/49) trail Australia 328 (114.5 ov, Wade 106, Warner 50, Watson 41, Shillingord 6/119) by 163 runs with 2 first innings wickets in hand: T3/3 D2/5 at Dominica.

Matt Wade stepped on the accelerator adding 82 runs in 74 balls to his overnight 22/72b, propelling Australia from a rickety overnight 7/212 to a much more comfortable 328. Then Australia's seven bowlers (thoughful captaincy again from Michael Clarke) chipped away at the West Indies) reducing them to a dismal 8/120 before ...yes, you guessed it, Shivnarine Chanderpaul 34*/110b (2x4) dug in while Ravi Rampaul 24*/33b (4x4) did his bit to see that their team's score at the close of play was a little less dismal.

  Wade and Michell Starc were Australia's great hopes when play resumed . Starc struck a few blows before being narrowly but foolishly run out for 35. Wade was dropped from a return catch to Kemar Roach early on but he, with Ben Hilfenhaus playing a low key supporting role, regrouped and struck out at the bowlers.

His 106/146b (3x6, 10x4) swung the match in Australia's favour. The Australian bowlers, aided by some poor batting, eg Kraigg Brathwaite caught at slip for his third consecutive duck and, perhaps, by a touch of good fortune (eg Kieran Powell dragging an ordinary looking delivery  from Nathan Lyon onto his wicket) worked their work through the order.

It's hard to see West Indies winning or, in the absence of rain, even drawing from here. Sure Chanderpaul is still there, but well as Rampaul might continue to support him, it's hard to see West Indies, even if things go well for them on D3, getting close enough to Australia's first innings score to make a game of it. 


Scorecard

Fox Sports report with link to video highlights

Rain in Port of Spain sends Test down the drain: T2 D4

 Australia 3/73 (30 ov, Roach 3/27) & 311 lead West Indies 257 (104.4 ov) by 127 runs with 7 second innings wickets in hand: T2/3 D4/5 at Port of Spain Trinidad.


The West Indies innings lasted four more balls before Michael Beer ended it with his second wicket of the match (and the third of his Test career).

Australia batted, Ed Cowan was missed at slip off a sitter from Fidel Edwards, but he, David Warner and Shane Watson all succumbed to Kemar Roach either side of a rain interruption. Ricky Ponting started watchfully (and was technically dropped from a sharp chance at short leg from Shane Shillingford's off spin) but grew in confidence to the tune of  32*/ 57b (2x4) before the rain returned, consigning the Test, barring exceptional circumstances, to a draw. Which will please the West Indies.


I'll stay up tonight and see what happens, but I'm not expecting much (though a confidence boosting few more runs to Ponting would make it worthwhile). . 

That's really all I can say.for now.

Scorecard

West Indies falter with bat after steady bowlers confine Australia to par score: T2 D2

West Indies 3/49 (25.3 ov) trail Australia 311 (135 ov, Hussey 73, Watson 56, Roach 5/105, Shillingford 3/93) by 262 runs with 7 first innings wickets in hand. T2/3 D2/5 at Port of Spain

Another slow day's cricket, this time with a rain interruption, during which I fell asleep and didn't wake up until near the end of the day's play.

Australia,thanks to a 79 run 8th wicket partnership between Mike Hussey 73/207b (1x6, 4x4) and James Pattinson 32/119b (5x4), approached 300.  Then the last four wickets fell cheaply, two of them to Kemar Roach who finished with 27-5-105-5, with one apiece to the persevering spinners Shane Shillingford 49-17-92-3 and Narsingh Deonarine 20-6-32-2, leaving Australia with 311, a total they'd have been satisified, though far from overjoyed, with.

But the West Indies batting faltered in the face of a varied attack. Captain Clarke astutely opened the bowling with spinner Michael Beer and Ben Hilfenhaus, each of whom took a wicket, as did James Pattinson later. At stumps Darren Bravo and Shivnarine Chanderpaul were hanging on for dear life (exemplified by the latter's 1 run from 26b).

Australia's 311 now looks a commanding total,though not yet one beyond the reach of the West Indies. But the two incumbents will need to perform well, and be well supported by the lower order if the home team is to take the significant lead which they'll surely need to insure against the pitfalls of batting last on a deteriorating wicket.


Scorecard 

Fox Sports report with link to video highlights

A taste of the subcontinent as Australia graft in Port of Spain T2D1

Australia 5/208 (90ov, Watson 56, Clarke 45) v West Indies: T2/3 D1/5 at Port of Spain, Trinidad.

208 runs in a full day? This was another, like some of those in T1, redolent of 1950s Ashes matches or more recent subcontinental contests.

The team selection reflected each side's expectations of the wicket. Australia omitted Peter Siddle (minor injury) and, surprisingly (and unwisely?) Ryan Harris the T1 player of the match. In came James Pattinson and Michael Beer.  West Indies dropped Devendra Bishoo for Shane Shillingford and replaced the injured Kirk Edwards with Kieran Powell.

Michael Clarke won the toss, Australia batted and began breezily enough, adding 53 for the first wicket while the ball was new and the bowlers quick. But once the spinners came on the ball gripped and the scoring rate dropped. Wickets fell, not as frequently as the West Indies would have wished, thanks to decision reviews (Michael Clarke very fortunate to escape an lbw) and some poor catching.

Shane Watson's patient 56/172b (7x4) underpinned the innings after a slight wobble to 3/84 (including another Ricky Ponting failure). He added 84 for the fourth wicket with Clarke, who seemed to have ridden his luck before being caught pulling a Narsinghe Deonarine long hop for 45/99b (8x4). Watson followed shortly afterwards caught at short leg off Shillingford whose 32-11-56-2 attest to both his accuracy and the demons stirring in the pitch.

5/178 wasn't good but at least Mike Hussey, who was also missed in the field,26*/83b (2x4) and Matt Wade 11*/47b (1x4) hauled the total beyond 200. It doesn't look enough, especially with no Harris (or Siddle) in the lower order, but it's too early to call. Australia will be pleased with 300: West Indies must try to keep plugging away and get over their umpiring disappointments and fielding lapses.
Scorecard

Fox Sports report with link to video highlights

Now Australia's batting struggles against tenacious West Indies: T1D3

Australia 5/248 (95 ov, Clarke 73, Hussey 47*, Warner 42) trail West Indies 9/449 dec by 201 runs on first innings with 5 wickets in hand : T1/5 D3/5 at Bridgetown. 


Last evening's positive batting by David Warner and Ed Cowan turned today into a defensive crawl which saw  Australia add only 204 runs from 85.1 overs for the loss of five wickets.

First Cowan, then Warner were caught in the slips off Darren Sammy (yes, the same whose bowling ability I've questioned), then Ricky Ponting was needlessly run out for 4 (the only single figure score in the match so far) in a mixup with Shane Watson: 3/84.  A presumably contrite Watson dug in adding 49 with Michael Clarke before he was caught behind off a flashy shot for 39/80b ( 1x6, 5x4). 

Clarke and Mike Hussey then continued the fight back (or struggle) until the captain, having batted solidly and sensibly holed out to the deep off the persevering legspinner Devendra Bishoo (who'd previously had him adjudged caught behind only for the decision to be overturned, on evidence which wasn't clear to me, by the third umpire on review). 73/173b (1x6, 4x4) was a captain's innings of a different kind to the fluent and dominating ones  which he'd played in the Tests against India earlier this year.

At the end of the day (when bad light once again intervened) Hussey 47*/156b (6x4) has hanging on grimly in partnership with an equally grim Matthew Wade 19*/53b (2x4).

From what I saw  (a combination of live action and highlights) the pitch was livelier than on the first two days, or were the West Indies bowlers able to get that little bit extra out of it? Certainly Sammy's two wickets put Australia on notice, while Bishoo, after some inital prodigality, settled down and bowled more accurately, and with some spin..

I wouldn't wish every Test to be played out at this pace but it's fascinating to see the  unexpectedly tenacious West Indies, who for so long have relied on a few individuals (some of whom have opted to play in the IPL), take the game right up to, and probably away from, Australia.  A draw nevertheless  looks the likeliest result, but it's by no means certain.



 Scorecard;

FoxSports report and link to video highlights

Solid West Indies batting minimises risk of defeat as Australian attack struggles: T1D2

Australia 0/44 (9.5 ov) trail West Indies 9/449 dec (153 ov, Chanderpaul 103*, K Edwards 61, Brathwaite 57, Bravo 51, Sammy 41) by 405 runs with 10 first innings wickets in hand: T1/3 D2/5 at Bridgetown, Barbados.

For most of  D2 West Indies seemed content to build a total which would shut Australia out of the match.  And who can blame them given their underdog status?

Shivnarine Chanderpaul's methodical 103*/248b (1x6, 9x4) was the highlight on the scorecard, even if many spectators and viewers might remember Darren Sammy's swashbuckling  41/36b (3x6, 4x4) longer.

Chanderpaul has played a similar role many times in previous Tests though rarely would he have contributed just 37% of the runs (103 of 282) added while he was at the crease. In fairness to him had he gone cheaply, say for less than 50, Australia would almost certainly have been batting much sooner. As it was the pitch continued to play well and the bowling was, as on D1, steady without being consistently menacing: ie ideal conditions for the methodical acquisition of runs.

Surprisingly, and from an Australian perspective worringly, David Warner had the best figures with 2/45 from 10 overs (and  by far the highest economy rate of all the eight bowlers used). He did bowl some challenging deliveries but his wicket taking balls (the Edwards namesakes) weren't among them, perhaps underlining the old adage that only ten good balls are bowled every innings. Alas, Australia couldn't meet even this criterion as the home eleven, each of whom reached double figures, lost only 9 wickets (including a run out) before Sammy declared.

Warner and Ed Cowan's reply,  0/44 in a ball shy of 10 overs, was a positive note for Australia on another tightly contested, but undeniably West Indies', day. Yet there's a long way to go to build the first innings lead which will be needed for Australia to win or maybe to just to save the match.

For the West Indies a draw will be a moral victory, for Australia the prelude to some strong questions. The home attack, which, with Sammy as one of the four main bowlers, looks a bit limited, may struggle to bowl Australia out twice: but I may be eating my words this time tomorrow.

Scorecard

Fox Sports video highlights

Reality check for Australia v West Indies T1D1

West Indies 3/179 (73ov, Edwards 61, Brathwaite 57) v Australia: T1/3 D1/5 at Bridgetown Barbados

Despite the shared honours in the preceding ODI and T20 contests I didn't expect the West Indies, still minus Chris Gayle, to put up a strong showing against Australia in the Test series. Yet on the admittedly thin evidence of a first day shortened by rain there was cause for West Indian satisfaction in a hardscrabble batting display as well as for Australian concern at the lack of penetration of the attack.

I watched the live TV relay until lunch (approaching 2am in these parts) when the West Indies were 1/60 from 29 overs.

They didn't improve much upon this rate for the rest of the day. Kraigg Brathwaite anchored the innings with 57/199b (4x4) while Kirk Edwards was more positive with 61/107b (1x6, 10x4). Brathwaite batted in the style of the English sides of the 1950 and 60s, middling if not always sweetly timing most deliveries.

The pitch played well yet the Australian attack didn't seem to have the sharpness it had showed in the recent series against India. Most balls from the quick bowlers went through without deviating much so, even if few might have predicted it before the start of play, it wasn't surprising to see Nathan Lyon bowl the twelfth over of the day.  Three missed chances also blotted Australia's copybook and while not letting the home team off the hook the score indicates that the West Indies had slightly the better of the day, though the weather and their circumspect batting means that they are far from dominant.
 
Fox Sports highlights

Scorecard

Another tight Test match finish as WI (just) hold India to draw

India 482 (Ashwin 103, Tendulkar 94, Dravid 82, Samuels 3/74, Rampaul 3/95) & 9/242 (Kohli 63, Sehwag 60, Rampaul 3/56) drew with West Indies 590 (Bravo 166, K Edwards 86, Powell 81, Ashwin 5/156, Aaron 3/106) & 134 (Ojha 6-47, Ashwin 4-34) : T3/3 D5/5 at Mumbai. India win series 2-0.

A high scoring match for the first four days- 22 wickets for 1153 runs (including Sachin Tendulkar again just falling short of his elusive 100th international century for 94)  - turned sharply (as did  the pitch at times) on the last day when 17 wickets fell for 295.

The West Indies with some honourable exceptions (mostly reflected on the scorecard)  eased off when if not a victory then a face-and clean sweep saving draw looked likely. First the middle and lower order crumbled against the Indian spinners, giving the home team a chance to try for a win against an attack weakened by injuries to Darren Sammy and Devendra Bishoo. Then the available WI bowlers struggled  against positive batting and were let down by poor fielding: Virender Sehwag was dropped three times in his 60, and there was too much fumbling and suboptimal throwing in the tight final overs.

Even so, as India came within 20 runs of victory with 4 wickets in hand the West Indies refocused. Bishoo had Virat Kohli caught at slip: 7/224, then, as Ishant Sharma and Ravichandran Ashwin looked like getting their team over the line, the dogged Ravi Rampaul bowled Sharma with a yorker: 8/239, 4 runs or two wickets (depending on your side) to win. Yet neither side did, as the only further wicket to fall was Ashwin's, off the last ball of the last over (well bowled by Fidel Edwards) of the match.

In a limited overs game, this would have been a win to India, but in Test cricket it was a draw, only the second time a Test has ended with the scores level: the other instance was Zimbabwe v England in 1996  (when the current England coach was a thorn in the English side).

Over the series India were unquestionably the better side but the West Indies blew their chances of a win here with a feeble performance on D5. Let's hope the strong home team performances keep, as it deserves, the flame of Test cricket alive in that part of the world.

Presumably the Indian team to tour Australia will be built around this one. After the strong performances by spinners Ashwin and Pragyan Ojha in the three Tests I can't see Harbhajan Singh in the starting XI on Boxing Day let alone in the touring party, which may be a relief to some Australian players (and officials). But the two new guys look good, and seem to work well in tandem, at least on their home tracks. It will be good to see them (or whoever is chosen) on our pitches.
  
Scorecard

South Africa win T3 as tempers flare

South Africa 349 (A Prince 78*,AB de Villiers 73, Smith 70, S Benn 6/81) & 3/49 def West Indies 231 (D Bravo 61, J Botha 4/56) & 161 (S Chanderpaul 71*) by 7 wickets. T#3/3 at Bridgetown, Barbados. South Africa won series 2-0.

In the end South Africa won comfortably a Test which was increasingly acrimoniously contested.

The pitch which, unlike that in the drawn preceding T#2, gave some help to the bowlers. West Indies, who were forced to include an inexperienced quick bowler Brandon Bess for his debut, relied too much on their veterans.

Only Dwayne Bravo and Shiv Chanderpaul with the bat and Sulieman Benn with the ball kept West Indies from an even bigger trouncing. As for all the badmouthing, spitting etc I'll only say that even watching the last day's highlights on TV left a bitter taste in my mouth.

Scorecard

Proteas win as tempers flare - Cricket - Fox Sports

South Africa crush West Indies in T#1

South Africa 352 and 4/206 def West Indies 102 and 293 by 163 runs: T1 (of 3) at Port of Spain

Scorecard

From what I saw on TV (a bit of live action and each day's highlights) West Indies rarely looked competitive, let alone like winning. Not a good advertisement for Test cricket, though the South Africans played extremely well.

Two teams turn up, only one really tries as Australia win series 4-0

Australia 5 for 324 (R Ponting 61, J Hopes 57*, S Watson 51, M Clarke 47, A Voges 45*) beat West Indies 199 (D Sammy 47, K Pollard 45) by 125 runs: ODI#5 at MCG. Australia won series 4-0.

ODI#5 was embarassingly one sided as West Indies fell apart in the field and, with a couple of exceptions, with the bat.

A 125 run margin if anything understated the differences between the sides. The tone of the match was set (lowered?) in the second over, bowled by Dwayne Smith, during which Brad Haddin was missed twice, once by Travis Dowlin at second slip (straight to him but missed his hands before bouncing off his chest), then two balls later by Smith himself (a harder return catch). Watch the highlights (link below) for more of the comedy of errors and footage of some robust Australian batting, where several, notably James Hopes 57*/26b (10x4) and Ricky Ponting 61/55b (1x6, 3x4) scored at more than a run a ball (as well as benefiting from fielding errors) and the lowest score was 22.

With the bat the West Indies went down with only a couple of guns blazing. After a brief flourish from Chris Gayle they collapsed to 4/39. Kieron Pollard, one of the few WI successes of the summer (another - Brendan Nash - did well in the Tests but for reasons which I can't fathom didn't even make the ODI team despite being in the squad) justified his belated elevation in the order but he left at 80. The last rites were strung out by Darren Sammy hitting out against debutant Stephen Smith (who almost certainly wouldn't have bowled as much if the match had been closer).

To say as Cricinfo does, partly echoing Ricky Ponting, that the main reason for the poor crowds was "overload" doesn't tell the whole truth. Long (more than 3 match) ODI series between unevenly matched sides just don't work. The discarded tri-series format at least kept interest alive (even if attendances at the matches not involving Australia were often low). Bring them back!



Scorecard

Australia take series: Windies a match for Afghanistan?

ODI#3 at the SCG was a washout where only one over, delivered in in two instalments - seven balls (including two wides), punctuated by a long rain break, then the sixth legit one - could be bowled as the West Indies began to chase down Australia's 225.

Today Australia won ODI#4 comfortably, more so than the scorecard indicated. After Chris Gayle, for reasons which eluded me, chose to field after winning the toss, Ricky Ponting's 106/112b (2x6, 6x4), his best ODI innings of the season, led the charge against a modest attack. 7/325 was always going to be too many for the uneven Windies batting to chase unless Gayle matched Ponting though they gave it a good shake, which might have been even better had Kieron Pollard and Dwayne Smith come in earlier.

Australia now leads the series 3-0 with one to play. Would, I wonder without too much of my tongue in my cheek, Afghanistan who have just qualified for the ICC World Twenty20, provide a more even contest if they played the West Indies? We may soon find out.

Feeble West Indies succumb again to disciplined Australia

Australia 2/171 (26.3 ov, R Ponting 57*, S Watson 53) def West Indies 170 (39.4 ov, D Smith 43, D Bollinger 4/28) by 8 wickets: ODI#2 at Adelaide Oval. Australia lead series 2-0

Hot weather was forecast for Adelaide, and hot it was: the temperature stayed in the high 30s all day; and the wind blew hot from several directions, including the south west, which is normally from where cooler breezes blow.

I arrived early and had no difficulty getting a seat in the shade under the Moreton Bay figs. Further evidence of the temperature was given immediately after the toss (which West Indies won) when match referee Javagal Srinath strode off the ground not breaking the purposeful stride (which I recall from his days as a spearhead of India's attack) while removing his suit jacket and revealing a short sleeved shirt underneath. Wise man.

And the match itself? The result was determined quickly, if not from the first ball when Chris Gayle was lbw to Doug Bollinger, then soon after when the Windies were 4/16 (Bollinger 3/5 from 5 overs) on a good (is there any other kind?) Les Burdett pitch.

Things couldn't get any worse but they didn't get much better for the visitors either. Some of the middle order got a start and Dwayne Smith with 43/63b (only 2x4 but one straight driven 6 which landed four rows back near the sightboard - one of the longest hits I've seen at Adelaide) led a revival of sorts to 170 all out from 39.4 overs. Perhaps the calls to reduce ODIs to 40 overs a side are designed to even things up even more?

The last two WI wickets were impressive demonstrations of Australia's prowess. Ricky Ponting ran out Ravi Rampaul with a direct hit and next ball Mike Hussey ran perhaps 40 metres then dived to catch Smith.

An early finish meant a long break between innings, which seemed silly in the circumstances. But of course there were the TV schedules to consider. I expect many viewers looked elsewhere for their evening's entertainment: not many spectators augmented the thin numbers who'd braved the heat (and in some instances the overzealous security and police). Despite what many others said I thought given the weather, the one sided contest and that it was a working (and school) day, that 8,378 was not a bad attendance, even if it was the lowest ever for an ODI featuring Australia at Adelaide.

Those of us who stayed watched Australia sweep (and pull and drive) the West Indies attack aside in 26.3 overs (and 109 minutes). The visitors played like losers - there were no Ponting or Hussey moments in the field - but this doesn't detract from Shane Watson's 53/50b (2x6, 7x4) and Ponting's 57/55b (2x6, 8x4).


Scorecard

West Indies make captain's ODI series prediction look shaky

Now that the Pakistan tour is over with the visitors failing to win a match, though they came close in the T20 International, the West Indies have returned for the short form leg of their visit.

Chris Gayle's prediction of a 4-1 ODI series result to his team looks shaky, very shaky, after a professional Australia won ODI#1 by 113 runs in Melbourne: 8/256 from 50 ov v 143 from only 34.2 ov . West Indies seem to lack the depth to be able to challenge the home team for more than a few overs. Of course many of us thought the same after the First Test.

There has been some media comment about the small crowd of 25,000 or so, and comparisons have been drawn wirth the 60,000 who attended the T20 game v Pakistan on Friday. Yes, a big difference, but a good total, and in any event what do you expect when two internationals are scheduled at the same ground a day apart?

It will be interesting to see how many turn up here in Adelaide tomorrow for ODI#2: it's a working day and hot weather is forecast.

Only 21 balls but still controversy

Australia 520/7d & 150 defeatedWest Indies 312 & 323 (94.3 ov) by 35 runs: T3 D5 at Perth. Australia win series 2-0.

21 balls and a lengthy though fruitless review of the umpire's decision was all it took to decide the match this morning. The result was not unexpected though the slender margin was, at least after the first two days.

Had video umpire Asad Rauf interpreted the guidelines anywhere near as liberally as he did in Adelaide with Shiv Chanderpaul he might have overruled Billy Bowden's decision that Kemar Roach nicked Doug Bollinger to the keeper. Certainly the replays I saw on TV were inconclusive. The

I've been flooded by emails saying that Roach should not have been given out because replays didn't show an edge. I don't think that's how it works. Bowden gave him out on the field and since replays did not prove that he didn't nick it, the on-field decision should stay. The irony is that, if Bowden had given him not out, and the Australians had asked for a review, Roach might well have been given not out after the review because replays didn't prove that he was out. It's complicated, this UDRS. I couldn't tell whether he nicked it or not. Hot Spot didn't show much, but it often doesn't pick up faint edges. This debate will rage on and on ...

They are showing Snicko now and there's a faint indication of an edge. Ever so faint, it could have been an edge, it could have been something else. I guess only Roach will really know.

The Cricinfo commentator (access via summary scorecard) agreed with me yet thought that the decision should stay:

I've been flooded by emails saying that Roach should not have been given out because replays didn't show an edge. I don't think that's how it works. Bowden gave him out on the field and since replays did not prove that he didn't nick it, the on-field decision should stay. The irony is that, if Bowden had given him not out, and the Australians had asked for a review, Roach might well have been given not out after the review because replays didn't prove that he was out. It's complicated, this UDRS. I couldn't tell whether he nicked it or not. Hot Spot didn't show much, but it often doesn't pick up faint edges. This debate will rage on and on ...

They are showing Snicko now and there's a faint indication of an edge. Ever so faint, it could have been an edge, it could have been something else. I guess only Roach will really know.

Did Roach know? He called for the review at least as, if not more, quickly than I can recall any player doing so in the brief time the Umpire Decision Review System (UDRS) system has been in place. If anything his rapid response suggests that he didn't believe that he'd hit the ball. In any case the video umpire should have looked at the objective evidence before his eyes. If it was inconclusive then IMO Roach should have been given the benefit of the doubt, a core principle of umpiring decision making.

This aside Australia were the better side in this match, though less emphatically than they would have expected after the first two days. A 2-0 series victory doesn't accurately reflect the differences between the teams, particularly the improvement which the West Indies made in the last two matches. Australia might claim that they were unlucky with injuries, yet this is a feeble excuse for their underperformance when many commentators predicted three emphatic victories.


Scorecard