The Australian selectors obviously do not care because they have selected the same squad despite the obvious flaws in the squad.

India on the other hand have brought another opener into the squad as Shaw has been ruled out for the rest of the series. They have also added Hardick Pandya who might come in to bat 6 and bowl quite a bit. I think Umesh Yadav will not play with Ashwin, if fit, or Jadeja replacing him.
I wonder if this team might be India's best option
Agarwal, Pujara, Rahane, Kohli, Vihari, Pant,  Pandya, Jadeja, Ashwin, Shami, Bumrah 
Swap out Jadeja for Sharma if it is a green top.

I kind of like it tbf.... With Sharma that is... 

But it wont happen... But I do like it...

I am certain they will drop Vihari which is crazy. I know he did not make many runs but he certainly looked the goods, he is a potential 50+ average player. I have no idea why Rohit Sharma played the first ahead of him or why Sharma is in the squad at all instead of Karun Nair

Is Ashwin going to be fit?
Is Agarwal going to get a game ahead of Vijay?

The pitch used for the Perth Stadium's inaugural Test match, last week's second Domain Test between Australia and India, has received the lowest possible pass mark from the ICC.

It is understood match referee Ranjan Madugalle rated the pitch at the new Perth Stadium as 'average', which is the lowest pass mark provided by the ICC when they rate the pitch and outfield of Test grounds.

Hypocrisy at its greatest by the ICC. They trash talked the lively Perth deck that provided cricket lovers with an thrilling contest between bat and ball yet refuse to punish those that produced the lifeless Boxing Day MCG  batting -friendly shocker. Evidently they were originally going to come down hard on the perpetrators of that 2017 deck  after condemning it. Now this weak cricket organisation.. supposedly the sport's governing body (god help cricket then) has given those in charge of curating this archaic 'G' drop- in carte blanche to produce another BD bore fest deck.  As a cricket tragic I wanna see something like a cross between the Adelaide surface and Perth Stadium on BD. A happy medium so to speak. Fat chance of that.

comments

I think average is fair enough, it showed uneven bounce and cracks on day 1. If it had been hot for the whole test, not just day 1, then I think it would have misbehaved a lot more.

They would have rated it low due to the uneven bounce and players getting hit.

Unlike the Melbourne pitch last year which was bad because it didn’t deteriorate and offered absolutely nothing for the bowlers.

I think it underscores that test cricket is at its most exciting when it is hard to score runs.

It was a deck in favor of the paceman but the match still went into the fifth day. So in essence it was a good Test wicket and the ICC is wrong. 

As I understand it drop ins are prepared weeks in advance. So does that mean there is little chance to change them should the weather dictate change?  Perths odd weather created a good test match more than the pitch. If as you say hi 30C temps prevailed on days 2-5 it would have been a nitemare on which to bat. The curators may have learnt a lesson here. 

I agree.

Test match cricket is certainly at its worst when pitches are completely dead. However a pitch can offer all bowlers enough and be testing but not impossible to the batsmen without there being uneven bounce and wickets caused purely by the pitch on day 1. Harris got out to Vihari purely because the pitch, but if that had happened on day 5 or even 4 it would not be a big problem.

I have already agreed that the day 1 pitch was not Test standard.

And why does that matter?

I am amassed at the criticism of the Perth pitch & I am local & biased as I loved the fiery WACA wicket.
This pitch produce a ton for the batters, plenty for the pace men. a 5fer for spin & went into the 5th day - how can that be a bad wicket.
It was one of the few exciting test matches played recently.

It still passed on the ICC assessment and I still pass it but the inconsistent bounce on day 1 was a real negative to the pitch. If it had been 5 days of really hot weather it probably would have been a lot more of a problem. 
Still it was an excellent test match and the wicket did give batsmen and bowlers of all types a chance to make significant contributions to the test match if they were good enough. The poor quality of a lot of the batsmen also needs to be considered when looking at how the test played out. I wonder how Hayden, Langer, Ponting, Hussey, Martyn, Katich etc would have gone on that wicket.

Yes it did. That is why it was a good test wicket. For mine it had too much for the quicks. Those that survived on it did so due to a good technique and temperament plus a good dose of luck.

Agree with this comment.

I see Sanjay Mandrekar suggesting Vihari should open in the 3rd test. Not an idea I though about. He was suggesting Vihari, Vijay, Pujara, Kohli, Rahane, R. Sharma. etc.

If Vihari is going to open then I would go with
Agarwal, Vihari, Pujara, Kohli, Rahane, Pant, Pandya, Ashwin/Jadeja, Shami, Sharma, Bumrah

It looks the deck is going to be green without much pace like the shield matches Victoria played against NSW and SA. Not like the pitch that was used against WA which was failed attempt to prepare a harder faster surface but just ended up being a road. Marcus Harris is expecting a slow scoring test match but one which bowling or batting well will get rewards.

There is also strange suggestions that Jadeja was not fit for the Perth test but will play in this test even if he is only 80% fit. 

I am always amazed when pitches are blamed for "boring tests" It's not the pitches it's the bowlers.
This is how you bowl on "lifeless" pitches.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLrvJngq_xE

As Michael Slater says "Its fast bowling at its best" . You put Johnson bowling like this on a fast, variable bouncy wicket, he becomes deadly. He got his wickets by bowling fast at the wickets

The rating of the Perth pitch is an arbitrary rating, it means nothing. It's like player ratings, for that test who cares if Lyon was rated an 8 instead of 10. He was still the player of the match.

The problem is currently with our bowlers there is no M Johnson. Last MCG test Hazlewood and Bird, why would you ever play those two together, they're the same sort of bowler, if one isn't successful, neither will the other. Pat Cummins did bowl Ok taking 4/117. Honestly it was just a good innings from Cook scoring 244 no other English batsman did that well. But when you look at England bowlers Broad and Anderson did take 7/112 combined in the first innings, so they could bowl on the wicket. The only people that blame wickets following a poor bowling performance are only protecting the individual bowlers, glossing over the fact that they have a limited bowling artillery, and when conditions aren't suited to them they have nothing to fall back on.

Australia were responsible for that draw England had a run rate of 3.4, Australia 2.77 and 2.11. England were trying to win Australia shut up shop and blamed the wicket. If the wicket was so poor then why was the scoring rate so low?

The only other drawn test in the last 20 years was against India 2014. Once again Harris and Johnson took 7/200 in the first innings but had no support even Watson had to chip in with a wicket. Hazlewood and Lyon did bowl poorly. Then Australia left the declaration too late declaring at lunch on Day 5 so 2 sessions for the bowlers to win the match. They used up 23 overs of the 5th day play to set 382, they didn't need that many. Australia had them 6 down with Dohni and Ashwin at the crease so just the 4 Indian bowlers to go who contributed 12 runs in the first innings. So poor captaincy by Smith in his first test as captain. Poor support bowling in India's first innings. Not the pitch fault, a result was possible.

I agree with you to a certain extent, better bowlers can get wickets even on unfavourable pitches although if a pitch is complete dead then it can make both bowling and scoring runs quickly difficult. On those wickets faster bowling can only help the batsmen as it gives them pace to play shots more effectively unless it is top quality.

Interesting to see the changes in both sides since the 2014 test match. Australia will have 3 players from that side playing this test match, Shaun Marsh, Lyon and Hazlewood. India could have up to 8 or as low as 5 is possible depending on who plays out of Vijay, Rahul and Ashwin. Still expect Pujara, Kohli, Rahane, Shami and Sharma to definitely play and probably one of Rahul and Vijay, and Ashwin if he is fit.

Johnson was a dud for most of his career. 2014 against the Poms was one of his rare golden moments. Had pace and that was about it. Had an awful low shoulder action that perpetuated his lack of control and inability to swing the ball. How he took 300+ wkts is a complete mystery to me. He and Starc are the two most over rated bowlers we have produced.

I prefer this clip. Shows a good seamer prospering on a grassy deck using skill and impeccable control rather than sheer pace.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pQBzckYG8w

Johnson was always extremely inconsistent, he would have one very good match in almost all series, but then be pretty bad at the rest. He kept promising to be something far more than he was until he finally delivered in 2014.

For instance the 08/09 series against South Africa. First test, first innings 8/61, then 3/98, by far and away our best bowler in a losing test. Next test match figures of 2/163 as the side lost again, also made 43 not out with the bat to be second highest scorer in the second innings. Third test Australia won, Johnson 4/118 and 64 runs to be second highest scorer in the first innings.. So a series with one excellent match, one mediocre match and one terrible match. 

I think Johnson and Starc get a bit of extra credit for exciting dismissals and also handy runs can help booster their stock as well, but mostly the promise of a fast spearhead of the attack gets bowlers like this a lot more chances to succeed.

He definitely had talent, as did this guy. Have a look at most of the caught behind, tight line just outside off, put the doubt in the batsman mind. The Graham Smith one in particular, that's the perfect line.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scww3qeYvAU

They haven't been able to replace those two yet.

Great bowling, he got wickets by confusing the batsmen. He got Atherton out by keeping one straight when he had been bringing the ball into him a lot and making him play for more movement than happened. He then gets Stewart with the big in movement to bowl him not offering. This kind of bowling does not need to be super quick, it just shows accuracy and skill.
Pace is one weapon of a quick but I think it is very overrated at times. When Darren Lehmann said Australian bowlers needed to all bowl over 140 he had lost the plot, McGrath was nowhere near that speed most of career and he is right up there among the best Australian fast bowlers, perhaps second only to Lillee.

Yes, he did become a very good fast bowler, but I am always puzzled how a low quality medium pace bowling all rounder transformed himself to be a top fast bowler at age 27-28. Very, very strange and I don't like it.

Any other examples of such a transformation with a bowler getting such a massive improvement in speed at such a late ages?

Agree in part, but you have to look at what a player brings to a game, in some cases it is the runs they score, which as you say increases their stock. Bowlers are there solely to bowl sides out. Their primary role is to take wickets, averages show how many runs are scored on average per wicket. If too high they won't play many matches. Our best bowlers have always been measured on number of wickets they take in a career. Everyone can have a bad test but how regular are those bad tests, is the true sign of how good a player ranks IMO.

When I look at the only Australian legendary bowler IMO in Dennis Lillee, this is what I see.
70 tests, took 5 or more wickets in a test 35 times (50%) took 0-1 wickets in a test (poor test) 10 times (14%).

Another high wicket taker is Glenn McGrath but not in the legendary status but still very very good
124 tests 5 or more wickets in a test 58 times (47%) 0-1 wickets in a test 12 times ( 9.7%) 

When you look at Johnson, remembering he brought batting to the side (a better all-rounder than M Marsh IMO)
73 tests 5 or more wickets 29 times (40%) so yes that could have been higher, but 0-1 wickets only 7 times (9.6%), so are the "poor tests" really that poor? Less than Lillee ( I am not saying he is in the Lillee class but he was a under-rated performer). And Baggers for the record there is no such thing as a tail end bully, Mitchell Johnson has very low percentage of tail wickets 28% (compared to Dale Steyn (32%)), yet was call a tail-end bully a term that some use for Starc, but there is no such thing. The stats for the majority of bowlers fall in the 27-32% in this regard

This is one area where I don't mind Starc currently (he does bring batting)
47 tests 5 wickets or more 21 times (44%) took 0-1 wickets only 4 times (8.5 %) this shows me he rarely lets the side down, better the other previously mentioned bowlers, CURRENTLY. Starc is entitled to have a bad test occasionally without media pressure straight on his back. The others did.

As for the other current bowlers
Cummins 16 test 5 wickets or more 4 times (25%) 0-1 wickets 0 (0%) brings batting as well, early in his career but needs to improve his 5+ wickets to justify his continued selection.
Hazlewood 42 test 5 wickets or more 17 times (40%) 0-1 wickets 9 times (21.5%) and no batting skill, I'll let people make their own mind up about who truly is over-rated, I am sick of being called bias.

I saw Johnson bowl a four over spell just before stumps at the SCG during that 2014 Ashes series, when he got Michael Carberry out caught at leg slip.

I've been watching cricket at the SCG for the last 20 years - that was BY FAR the fastest and scariest spell of bowling I have ever seen live (and I've seen Lee, McGrath, Akhtar, Bond, Walsh, Ambrose, Steyn and Allan Donald).

Fast 148kph deliberies, mostly aimed at the body. It was unbelievable to watch, everyone in the stadium and the dressing room was scared that the batsman was going to get injured. 

I think it took a long time for Johnson to figure out what kind of bowler he was. I actually blame the way he was coached early on. Being a left arm bowler people tried to turn him into Wasim Akram (bowling 140kph inswingers)  but he never was a natural swinger of the ball with his low arm action and dodgy release. If anything he would swing the ball away from the right hander with his action rather than back in. Earlier in his career when he bowled wayward stuff, people were talking about him needing to be more a line and length bowler like McGrath. 

It was only late in his career that he figured out he was neither of those two. His best weapons were always sheer pace and his low bowling arm, which made his short ball a nightmare, especially on fast and bouncy pitches in the southern hemisphere. When he figured out how to bowl the 148kph rockets into the right hander's armpit, he was unstoppable. If he'd figured out how to bowl like that earlier in his career he would have beaten Glenn McGrath's record. 



. 

interesting post

you always need at least one tearaway bowler that takes wickets on any surface so starc is here to stay

you also need a line and length bowler like hazelwood to choke up an end but still threaten. He has gone missing in a few too many games and needs to learn how to adjust to unfavourable conditions

its a shame about pattersons injuries

he could have been an all time great

 You mean Pattinson grazor. He is not finished yet.