Australia 7/376 (A Symonds 137 no, B Hogg 79, R Ponting 55, R P Singh 4/108) 89 ov
Australia won the first day on points by making the most of their own pugnacity and the good fortune which, courtesy of several umpiring errors, came their way.
At 6/134 this looked improbable. R P Singh dismissed both openers cheaply and while Ricky Ponting was fortunate not to be given out to a leg side catch at the wicket off Saurav Ganguly, he added 92 with Mike Hussey before Harbijan Singh had him lbw for 55/69b. Hussey was caught by Sachin Tendulkar at slip off Singh without further addition to the total, while Michael Clarke and Adam Gilchrist followed soon afterwards. The 4/15 collapse brought back memories of
Melbourne 2006 when Australia plunged to 5/84, before Andrew Symonds and Matthew Hayden turned that game by adding 279 for the 6th wicket.
And again today Andrew Symonds was there when a fighting innings was needed. This time his partner was Brad Hogg, with whom he added 173 for the 7th wicket before Hogg fell to Kumble for 79/102b(10x4), an innings which mixed polished strokeplay with robust hitting. It was easily Hogg's best Test score, but shouldn't have come across as complete surprise to those who know that he's mad a lot of runs in domestic cricket
Symonds was lucky - very lucky - not to be given out caught behind early in his innings ( a poor decision by umpire Bucknor) and was probably stumped on another occasion though the third umpire thought otherwise. That said, his innings grew in command as it progressed. Initially Hogg was the dominant partner but once Symonds found the measure of the pitch and the opposition bowling, which started to wilt later in the day, he moved more into his one day mode, finishing the day not out on 137 from 73b (17x4, 2x6).
Of the Indian bowlers R P Singh put India in the box seat with four of the first six wickets to fall. He didn't bowl badly thereafter but didn't quite know how to respond to Australia's belligerence . Harbijan Singh bowled extremely well early on but seemed to lose heart later as the standard of both the team's fielding and his own bowling slipped.
After Hogg's dismissal Brett Lee joined Symonds. The two have so far added 69 for the 7th wicket, and look good enough to continue tomorrow unless the Indians can regroup mentally and put their bad luck and some - Tendulkar excepted - ordinary fielding behind them. Otherwise we could be looking at something which seemed most unlikely half way through today's play: a repeat of the First Test.
Scorecard
Cricinfo Bulletin
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Monday, December 31, 2007
Are India capable of matching Australia? First Test reviewed
Australia 343 and 7 for 351 (dec) defeated India 196 and 161 by 337 runs with a day to spare.
Perhaps nobody, not even the Indians themselves, believed that they could chase down 499 on a fourth and fifth day MCG pitch, but many would have expected, and most, if only for the sake of the series, would have hoped that they would have made a better fist of things in theit second innings.
But it wasn't to be, and they couldn't even match their feeble first innings score. Once again the Australian bowling squashed any flickers of resistance. Nobody made 50; only VVS Laxman 42/112b and Saurav Ganguly 40/78b passed 20, and their 41 partnership for the 4th wicket was the highest for the innings. All five Australian bowlers (Andrew Symonds being the fifth) combined in a most efficient demolition job, one which must have left the Indians wondering how they can present credible opposition to Australia for the remainder of the series.
Scorecard.
What can India do?
First, the batting needs to re-energised (to put it as tactfully as possible). This can be done by, among other things, bringing Virender Sehwag into the team as an opener, and allowing Rahul Dravid (a fish out of water in this game) to drop to his customary no3 position. Either Wasim Jaffer or (more likely) Yuvraj Singh should be dropped.
Second, the fielding, particularly the ground fielding, needs to improve several notches. Anyone who had seen much of either Australian innings in person or on TV would know what I'm talking about.
Third, some thought should be given to the balance and composition of the attack. Anil Kumble was the only Indian bowler who was worth his place for the whole game. Whether Harbajan Singh, who lifted his game somewhat in the second innings, should stay in the XI for Sydney is one moot point, and whether the best available pair of quick bowlers played at the MCG is another.
On paper the team India fielded for the First Test was very strong, especially in batting, so should we suggest that its failure to make 200 in either innings was an aberration? Perhaps so, but then was Ricky Ponting's failure to reach double figures in either innings also an aberration?
Much as I respect the abilities of Tendulkar, Dravid, Laxman and Ganguly, I'm more inclined to think the latter.
Link to Cricinfo coverage.
Perhaps nobody, not even the Indians themselves, believed that they could chase down 499 on a fourth and fifth day MCG pitch, but many would have expected, and most, if only for the sake of the series, would have hoped that they would have made a better fist of things in theit second innings.
But it wasn't to be, and they couldn't even match their feeble first innings score. Once again the Australian bowling squashed any flickers of resistance. Nobody made 50; only VVS Laxman 42/112b and Saurav Ganguly 40/78b passed 20, and their 41 partnership for the 4th wicket was the highest for the innings. All five Australian bowlers (Andrew Symonds being the fifth) combined in a most efficient demolition job, one which must have left the Indians wondering how they can present credible opposition to Australia for the remainder of the series.
Scorecard.
What can India do?
First, the batting needs to re-energised (to put it as tactfully as possible). This can be done by, among other things, bringing Virender Sehwag into the team as an opener, and allowing Rahul Dravid (a fish out of water in this game) to drop to his customary no3 position. Either Wasim Jaffer or (more likely) Yuvraj Singh should be dropped.
Second, the fielding, particularly the ground fielding, needs to improve several notches. Anyone who had seen much of either Australian innings in person or on TV would know what I'm talking about.
Third, some thought should be given to the balance and composition of the attack. Anil Kumble was the only Indian bowler who was worth his place for the whole game. Whether Harbajan Singh, who lifted his game somewhat in the second innings, should stay in the XI for Sydney is one moot point, and whether the best available pair of quick bowlers played at the MCG is another.
On paper the team India fielded for the First Test was very strong, especially in batting, so should we suggest that its failure to make 200 in either innings was an aberration? Perhaps so, but then was Ricky Ponting's failure to reach double figures in either innings also an aberration?
Much as I respect the abilities of Tendulkar, Dravid, Laxman and Ganguly, I'm more inclined to think the latter.
Link to Cricinfo coverage.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Australia set India predictably huge challenge: First Test Day 3
Australia 343 and 7/351 (dec) v India 196 and 0/6.
Apart from surprise at Ricky Ponting being dismissed cheaply for the second time in the match (watch out India for the rest of the series!), there was little deviation from the course plotted on the second day.
Apart from surprise at Ricky Ponting being dismissed cheaply for the second time in the match (watch out India for the rest of the series!), there was little deviation from the course plotted on the second day.
Ponting was the only failure: the next lowest scores were 11 no (Brett Lee), 35 (Adam Gilchrist) and Brad Hogg (35 no) , though Andrew Symonds was bowled by Zaheer Khan off a no ball when he was 8.
Harbhajan Singh bowled much better this time around, but couldn't build upon his figures at one stage of 1/23 from 10 overs as the middle and lower order Australians found him more to their liking. The others kept plugging away but could only achieve intermittent successes.
Left to face 8 overs after the Australian declaration, Wasim Jaffer and Rahul Dravid occupied the crease without being parted.This was a minor accomplishment, but one which may give the Indians a little more heart and stomach for the rest of their fight.
Scorecard and Cricinfo Bulletin .
Friday, December 28, 2007
Australian quick bowlers squeeze life out of 10 brittle Indians: First Test Day 2
Australia 343 and 0/32 v India 196 (Tendulkar 62, Lee 4/46, Clark 4/28)
Those like me who looked forward to another closely contested day's play were disappointed. Yet we were compensated by the brilliance of the Australian quick bowling and an innings from Sachin Tendulkar of high quality.
After India wrapped up the Australian innings quickly when Zaheer Khan took his fourth wicket, their openers Wasim Jaffer and Rahul Dravid were all at sea against Brett Lee, Mitchell Johnson and Stuart Clark. The opening partnership lastted 38 minutes and produced 4 runs, all to Jaffer who faced 27 balls before being caught behind off Lee. Dravid confirmed that he is much better at no 3 than opening and it was a merciful release when Clark had him lbw at 31 for 5 laboriously compiled runs made off 66 (repeat 66) balls in 103 minutes.
VVS Laxman, Saurav Ganguly and above all Tendulkar improved upon this dismal performance but never prised their team free of the grip of the Auustralian pace attack. Brad Hogg was punished by Tendulkar, but he came back with two wickets (of which his dismissal of Ganguly - bowled - showed him at his best).
And Tendulkar? 62/77b/113 minutes (8x4, 1x6) was something more than a cameo yet, for all his brilliant strokeplay, it was considerably less than the situation needed.
But it was not his fault that India's response was so feeble, the Australian bowling so dominant and allowed to be thus. As the weather forecast for the next few days predicts no rain, in the absence of second innings turnaround such as India have achieved a couple of times before (but not with Dravid opening), the game will run its course towards a comfortable and, now, inevitable Australian victory.
Scorecard and Cricinfo Bulletin
Those like me who looked forward to another closely contested day's play were disappointed. Yet we were compensated by the brilliance of the Australian quick bowling and an innings from Sachin Tendulkar of high quality.
After India wrapped up the Australian innings quickly when Zaheer Khan took his fourth wicket, their openers Wasim Jaffer and Rahul Dravid were all at sea against Brett Lee, Mitchell Johnson and Stuart Clark. The opening partnership lastted 38 minutes and produced 4 runs, all to Jaffer who faced 27 balls before being caught behind off Lee. Dravid confirmed that he is much better at no 3 than opening and it was a merciful release when Clark had him lbw at 31 for 5 laboriously compiled runs made off 66 (repeat 66) balls in 103 minutes.
VVS Laxman, Saurav Ganguly and above all Tendulkar improved upon this dismal performance but never prised their team free of the grip of the Auustralian pace attack. Brad Hogg was punished by Tendulkar, but he came back with two wickets (of which his dismissal of Ganguly - bowled - showed him at his best).
And Tendulkar? 62/77b/113 minutes (8x4, 1x6) was something more than a cameo yet, for all his brilliant strokeplay, it was considerably less than the situation needed.
But it was not his fault that India's response was so feeble, the Australian bowling so dominant and allowed to be thus. As the weather forecast for the next few days predicts no rain, in the absence of second innings turnaround such as India have achieved a couple of times before (but not with Dravid opening), the game will run its course towards a comfortable and, now, inevitable Australian victory.
Scorecard and Cricinfo Bulletin
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Seniors to the fore as Australia start well then falter against Indian attack: First Test day1
Australia 9/337 (90 ov) v India
Australia won the toss and managed to batted through the first day after looking at one point as if they might bat through the first two days. That point came to an end at 135, when Phil Jacques was stumped by no longer hirsute wicketkeeper M S Dhoni off Anil Kumble for 66/108b (8x4)
Thereafter it was a struggle for all the other batters except for Matthew Hayden. Yet again he showed his class in making 124/183b ((9x4), while the next highest scorers were Andrew Symonds 35/42b, Adam Gilchrist 23/42b(which says something about the bowling when he was in) and No 11 Stuart Clark who swatted 21/17b at the end. Australia finished the day with a respectable, but far from dominating, 9/337.
The Indian bowlers varied in quality: the openers started well yet seemed to lose their collective way until captain Kumble (24-5-84-5) dismissed Jaques and thereafter, apart from a couple of overs which were punished, checked held the Australians. Zaheer Khan (22-1-93-3) was the best of the others.
Australia won the toss and managed to batted through the first day after looking at one point as if they might bat through the first two days. That point came to an end at 135, when Phil Jacques was stumped by no longer hirsute wicketkeeper M S Dhoni off Anil Kumble for 66/108b (8x4)
Thereafter it was a struggle for all the other batters except for Matthew Hayden. Yet again he showed his class in making 124/183b ((9x4), while the next highest scorers were Andrew Symonds 35/42b, Adam Gilchrist 23/42b(which says something about the bowling when he was in) and No 11 Stuart Clark who swatted 21/17b at the end. Australia finished the day with a respectable, but far from dominating, 9/337.
The Indian bowlers varied in quality: the openers started well yet seemed to lose their collective way until captain Kumble (24-5-84-5) dismissed Jaques and thereafter, apart from a couple of overs which were punished, checked held the Australians. Zaheer Khan (22-1-93-3) was the best of the others.
After a day of good quality Test cricket I'm not willing, and I expect I won't be alone in this, to make any predictions about its future course. But I'm looking forward to the struggle continuing.
Scorecard and Cricinfo BulletinSunday, December 23, 2007
Santa watches over Redbacks as they deliver Christmas cheer to supporters
SA 3/171 (32.1 0v) def Queensland 170 (45 ov) by 7 wickets with 17.7 overs to spare: interstate one day match at Adelaide Oval
Many years ago South Australia used to play a Sheffield Shield match against Queensland in Adelaide over Christmas (they often played on Christmas Day).
Today, on the threshold of Christmas, those with memories as long as mine were reminded fleetingly of the old times as the red and black garbed South Australians took on the rhubarb and custard clad Queenslanders in a one day match. (To the initiated, the Redbacks played the Bulls)
The Redbacks continued where they'd left off with their crushing defeat of WA (to the initiated, the Warriors) five days ago.
The Bulls struggled to come to terms with the home team's bowling and fielding as well as the overcast, wintry conditions (the max temp was 18.5 degrees which may seem mild, but if you could feel the sou' wester in your face you'd have thought otherwise).
The Bulls began with a partnership of 58, but catastrophe (viz 2/61/, 3/61, 4/63, 5/67) ensued before this season's domestic cricket Mr Reliable (aka Ashley Noffke) with support from recalled veteran Lee Carseldine saw the total to 144. Then another collapse saw an early conclusion to their innings. 170 from 45 overs was not a competitive score.
The lights were switched on as Matthew Elliott and Daniel Harris opened the batting and at once went after the bowling. Elliott was aggressively fluent, as we've come to expect from him in one day games ( why don't we see more of this in the four day comp?). The Bulls attack was at less than full strength but wasn't handled well: stand- in captain James Hopes had less faith in his own bowling than did Ricky Ponting in the higher level Chappell-Hadlee series a few days ago . The part time off spinner Aaron Nye was the best of a modest bunch, and was rewarded with Elliott's wicket, caught on the boundary going for the six that would have brought him a century and his team victory. Still 94/91 b was nothing to be ashamed of.
The Redbacks are now second to Tasmania in the one day (FR Cup) comp. Is it too much to hope for a long-overdue appearance in a final?
Scorecard
PS: In the interval between innings SACA held a simple presentation ceremony for the U-17 Redbacks and Scorpions (SA women's) teams. It was good to see them acknowledged in this way.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
The Age covers cricket's broad spectrum
Today's Age has some very good (or better) articles about what it describes as "the game's broad spectrum".
These range from the future of Test cricket (Greg Baum"'s "Put to the Test") , several pieces about the Australia - India series (including Alex Brown on Australia's apparent fast bowling riches, Peter Roebuck on Sourav Ganguly and Lyall Johnson's analysis of Mr Cricket's way with words) , Twenty20 IPL cricket (Mr Brown and Chloe Saltau's analysis of the player contracts) , and club cricket (the first of a promised series by John Hanlon).
There's also an historical item "Weighing up Bradman's MCG legacy", once again by Mr Baum.
The Age looks like being the print and online media outlet of choice for serious Australian cricket followers over the next few weeks.
These range from the future of Test cricket (Greg Baum"'s "Put to the Test") , several pieces about the Australia - India series (including Alex Brown on Australia's apparent fast bowling riches, Peter Roebuck on Sourav Ganguly and Lyall Johnson's analysis of Mr Cricket's way with words) , Twenty20 IPL cricket (Mr Brown and Chloe Saltau's analysis of the player contracts) , and club cricket (the first of a promised series by John Hanlon).
There's also an historical item "Weighing up Bradman's MCG legacy", once again by Mr Baum.
The Age looks like being the print and online media outlet of choice for serious Australian cricket followers over the next few weeks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
