Plumb again and we don't review

Why are we so bad at the drs!

Bold font on espncricinfo every second ball. De ja au here. Our luck needs to turn

Should have them bowled out by now with missed drs catches and runouts

Can we win from here?

After I went to bed, in the second English dig, the TV showed Warner dropping about 4 catches in slips with Smith injured. 

Could we have bowled them out already? 

I’ve just seen them! 

With Smith injured, we need a better first slipper than Warner. 

I’d have to say Archer’s spell last night, was one of the quickest and most hostile I’ve seen in Test cricket. 

He also gets considerable lift off a length. 

His top speed was 155kph. 

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/27412365/not-cricket-fans-mitchell-johnson-condemns-booing-steven-smith

Mitch Johnson does not get it.

It does not matter if Steve Smith continues to average 60+, goes to 70+ or drops to 50+, he is always Captain Sandpaper.

He will always be Captain Sandpaper. 

There is no coming back from sandpaper.

No matter how good you are. Or how many times you get hit. And your courage on display.

 It's sandpaper. There are no blurred lines there. Its not a zipper on your trousers, teeth in your mouth, or a mint you;re sucking on, it's SANDPAPER.

This will never go away for Steve Smith. Ever. It will last longer than legal incidents like the underarm, Thommo and Lillee or Bodyline.

It's never going away. He has to get used to this fact. And he has millions and millions of dollars to comfort him at night. But it's not going away. Cos it just won't. It was sandpaper. Until someone takes an orbital sander or a jackhammer on the field, it's the worst cheating in cricket, ever.

No reviews left for Aus.

well Oz have to survive another 40 overs. Tricky but should be very doable

Archer is a menace. A total and utter menace.

Archer’s bouncer is so nasty. It doesn’t pitch that short but it skips through at pace at head height. 

Poor Labuachagne

I know its only Steve Smith (ko), Khawaj and Warner out, but yeah - I reckon this Archer kid is gonna be a test superstar Baggers.\

SUPERSTAR.

well agree to disagree there

I'd be tempted to hit archer out of the attack in this situation. There is enough of a target that its not the worst idea...

labu's control is 38% according to espncricinfo!

Well so far the only one we haven’t played too late was Labuschagne’s push down the ground. He’s bowling absolute wheels. 

well we struggled to take 20 wickets here albeit with poor luck and not much time

we should rotate our bowlers again

Warner has to come good eventually you would think....

with which part?

Cos he is always Captain Sandpaper, and I don't know of a worse cheating incident ever in cricket... underarm was within rules. lillee and thommo within rules. bodyline within rules. Building tools on a ball.... next level... and outside the rules...

plumb lbw

need to survive another 30 overs

it was a 1 match infringement - a traffic fine

if he played for any other country people would have forgotten. Australia's emphasis on a clean sport is the only reason why he got more than a single match suspension. 

Number 2 since bradman and no bitters can take that away from him

Oh Captain Sandpaper, despite a one year ban, is certainly an excellent batsman. No doubt. He is brilliant at batting. 

just found out my aunt passed away this morning

bad day for me :(

Always wait for the test  to be over with Josh Hazlewood. This test is no different to any others he has played. He once again got the new ball on a pitch that had been covered for a day due to persistent rain. He took 2/3 in his first 5 overs in those lucky conditions. Then what happened? His next 30 overs he took 1/98. And considering he got Denly in his 8th over he really bowled 27 overs 0/93 of complete rubbish bowling where the batsmen let 50% of the deliveries go through to the keeper. 

Australia then had  to rely on a declaration by England, and was lucky to hold on to a draw. Once again another declaration by the opposition when Hazlewood is in the side, Coincidence??? The media jumps all over those 5 overs (just like you did referring to him as a "class act", but don't worry you're not alone in being fooled by Hazlewood, CA and selectors are as well) and you never hear about how poor the remainder of his bowling is. This was a bowling friendly wicket unlike the first test and England proved that, Archer was amazing, unfortunately Cummins was getting tired by the end to effectively return fire.

Hazlewood has proven over his last 36 innings bowling that he cannot take regular wickets with anything but a new ball, which lasts for about 12 overs. Look at when he takes his wickets and you will see that the majority are between 1-12 overs and 80-92 overs, there is not much else. He hasn't taken that many wickets to begin with in his last 19 tests, 36 innings, that is a lot of tests for little return.

 Also remember that with his poor strike rate, his ineffectiveness at taking wickets means that the bowler at the other end has to bowl more in the case of Cummins that is 7-8 additional overs to take that one wicket Hazlewood couldn't take, more stress and strain on the body, time and time again. Also remember when he and Starc open the bowling Cummins, an effective opening bowler is relegated to 3rd seamer and does not get use of the new ball, lucky he can bowl and take wickets. If they bring Pattinson back for the 3rd test it will be for Siddle, but I can tell you CA pet Josh Hazlewood will still be given the new ball, and either Pattinson or Cummins will not get that opportunity to bowl with the new ball, and they are both more effective with it than Hazlewood, the difference is they can be effective with the older ball, whereas  Hazlewood isn't. Apart from the first 10 overs of this test Australia effectively bowled 140 overs with only 3 bowlers, thus why selectors usually play M Marsh at the expense of a batsman when Hazlewood plays.

Labuchagne in for Smith proves he has to play the final 3 tests regardless of Smith's fitness. Problem is we need 2 opening batsmen. Warner should go but selectors will give him every opportunity.

My player ranking for this test would be
Warner 1/10
Bancroft 3/10
Khawaja 4/10
Smith 9/10...Labuchagne 7/10
Head 6/10
Wade 2/10
Paine 6/10
Cummins 8/10
Siddle 6/10
Hazlewood 4/10
Lyon 4/10

My predictions for what the selectors will do for the next test. Bancroft will be replaced by Harris, who has been cooling his heals so it is unpredictable what will happen there. Starc will come in for Siddle, maybe they will play Pattinson. Hazlewood will remain and thus M Marsh will replace Wade. If Smith is declared unfit Labuchagne will play, else maybe he will replace Khawaja. If the bowling attack is Starc, Hazlewood, Cummins, Lyon we will lose, but only Starc or the batsmen will be blamed.

Sorry to hear, Grazor.

When I watched last night's play in the second English innings they were right on top.

Earlier on I thought Lyon should've have taken wickets, but England went after him later on and succeeded.

Do you have data to support the proposition that H only takes wickets with the the new balls, Mike?

He bowled well in the  earlier overs in the first innings.

I know his figures have been poorer than the other fast bowlers over the last year or so though.

Good points made by you, Mike. 

Warner basically fucked it.. just had to put the right slips in and we get those two early wicket and anything can happen.

What's with all the praise got Archer yes he is quick but wont take the boys long to get used to him.. we are fine against fast bowlers if be more worried if he was a small spinner lol

First this is the wickets taken over the last 2 1/2 years by Australia

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=wickets;spanmax1=19+Aug+2019;spanmin1=01+feb+2017;spanval1=span;team=2;template=results;type=bowling

So from 35 innings Hazlewood has bowled remembering that is a possible 350 potential wickets, Hazlewood has taken 58. That is poor by any standards. It's only 16%. He is only in  the side as a bowler, can't bat so his selection over the likes of Pattinson or Starc reduces batting ability of the team. He opens the bowling on every occasion. These are his wickets.

before 12 overs (6 overs Hazlewood)
Jason Roy, 1.3 ov, Joe Root, 9.1 ov, KL Rahul, 1.3 ov, KL Rahul, 5.1 ov, Cheteshwar Pujara, 3.5 ov, KL Rahul, 1.6 ov, Aiden Markram, 3.5 ov, Aiden Markram, 8.6 ov, Hashim Amla, 10.5 ov, Mark Stoneman, 1.5 ov, Alastair Cook, 7.3 ov, James Vince, 10.4 ov, Alastair Cook, 3.3 ov, James Vince, 5.3 ov, Murali Vijay, 10.2 ov, Abhinav Mukund, 10.4 ov, Murali Vijay, 6.5 ov
17  wickets 

Between 12-80 overs
Joe Denly, 31.6 ov, Virat Kohli, 52.5 ov, Rohit Sharma, 22.5 ov, Rishabh Pant, 37.3 ov, Ajinkya Rahane, 34.5 ov, Ajinkya Rahane, 20.2 ov, KL Rahul, 24.2 ov, Hashim Amla, 32.4 ov, Temba Bavuma, 61.1 ov, Dean Elgar, 67.6 ov, Keshav Maharaj, 50.3 ov, Theunis de Bruyn, 42.1 ov, Alastair Cook, 32.3 ov, James Vince, 24.1 ov, James Vince, 25.3 ov, Dawid Malan, 63.2 ov, Jonny Bairstow, 39.1 ov, Craig Overton, 67.5 ov, Joe Root, 64.5 ov, Chris Woakes, 62.2 ov, Joe Root, 40.6 ov, Virat Kohli, 34.2 ov, Ravindra Jadeja, 38.1 ov
23 wickets 

on 18 occassions new ball taken
80-92 overs new ball
Hanuma Vihari, 85.3 ov, Mohammed Shami, 87.6 ov, AB de Villiers, 82.6 ov, Quinton de Kock, 92.4 ov, Jonny Bairstow, 81.4 ov, James Anderson, 88.1 ov, Dawid Malan, 80.2 ov, Cheteshwar Pujara, 85.2 ov, Ravichandran Ashwin, 85.5 ov, Umesh Yadav, 87.3 ov
10 wickets

after 92 overs
Ravindra Jadeja, 169.4 ov, Morne Morkel, 112.2 ov, Keshav Maharaj, 115.4 ov, Tom Curran, 119.3 ov, Chris Woakes, 110.5 ov, Craig Overton, 112.6 ov, Stuart Broad, 116.4 ov, Karun Nair, 107.4 ov
8 wickets

So 23 wickets with an older ball from 36 innings. Gets the new ball after 80 overs every time. After 92 over, the opposition is closing its innings with quick runs, notice nothing between 92-110 overs, every time he gets the new ball.
But from 36 innings he only has taken 17 wickets with the new ball, including 2 from this test. He's really not that effective as a new ball bowler either.


As a comparison look at Cummins, doesn't always get new ball. I'm not going to write all his down just accept these are right.
Pat Cummins 39 innings in total 100 wickets. He's doing his job 25% of wickets available.

Opened the bowling in 12 innings, and on 3 occasions he got the ball before 12 overs.

15 wickets (remember Hazlewood 36 innings for 17 wickets) Cummins is more superior than Hazlewood with the new ball

Between overs 12-80 or after 92 overs, Cummins has rarely if ever taken a wicket between 80-92 overs
12-80 or after 92 overs

85 wickets, Compared to Hazlewood's 31 in total. Who is doing the work?


His opening partner in Starc doesn't do much better than Hazlewood, but there is a discrepency in that Starc does take more with the older ball.

Starc 33 innings 68 wickets 21% of wickets taken (could be better but is acceptable)

With new ball 15 wickets, between 80-92 over 9 wickets

With older ball 12-80 overs 35 wickets, after 92 overs 9 wickets

Starc hasn't played as many games as Hazlewood but has been more effective with the older ball.

So over this period of time of 2 1/2 years, Considering Lyon has taken 127 wickets from 47 innings (27%), the opposition have declared their innings on 8 occasions, in 25 matches Australia have Won 11, Lost 9, Drawn 5. 
Lyon 27% of wickets
Cummins 25 % of wickets
Starc 21 % of wickets 
Hazlewood 16% of wickets
Who is the one letting the side down? Look at their averages and who appears to be leaking the runs? Look at their Strike Rates and who is creating extra work load for the others, leading to injuries?

Hugely impressive with Labuschagne and Head. Both showed real character to gut that out. 

all i know is we have to turn pattinson into a regular