Sunday, December 30, 2012

Melbourne 2012: Afterwards


When you're not working to a deadline and you don't have anything much to write about the solution is fairly straightforward. Write nothing and wait. Something will turn up. It always does, and the wait allows time for certain other issues to sort themselves out.

It would have been easy to follow Friday's dismal performance from Sri Lanka with a gloating anticipation of glorious victories in India and a successful Double Ashes campaign, which would have been a mistake, because we're going to be doing it tough in both environments and events over the weekend have arguably made things tougher.

What we saw of Friday was the dismantlement of an injury-weakened batting lineup by a bowling group that was starting to hit its straps, following a rather good bit of fielding that got the first wicket.

And it was an injury-riddled batting lineup operating in circumstances where they weren't going to be comfortable even if those who weren't able to front at the crease were absent due to muscle tears or food poisoning rather than broken digits caused by the impact of hurtling cricket balls.

That said, Siddle, Johnson and Bird did their job well, and Lyon backed them up well enough so that the absence of Watson from the bowling crease didn't produce the sort of workload that ruled Siddle and Hilfenhaus out of Perth.

There was the predictable concern over the bowling lineup for Sydney, since the logical rotation would involve Siddle out for Starc, but the selection panel have, in the interim, thrown up an interesting one by going for Maxwell ahead of Khawaja in a move that would seem to be looking towards India rather than turning to the next logical cab off the rank.

The next logical cab will presumably slot into the space left by Hussey's retirement, which was the epitome of wait until something turns up to write about, wasn't it? But we'll be back to that because it wasn't the only thing that turned up.

Maxwell, one presumes, is being looked at as the spinning all-rounder who might go well in India, which is fair enough. See how he goes in Sydney, which is tipped to turn. That should reveal something.

Slot him into Six or Seven (with Wade at Six) with Clarke and Hussey moving up one and you might not have your strongest batting order, but it opens up possibilities assuming Johnson goes in at Eight with a charter as a bowling all-rounder.

That's assuming Sydney looks like a turner and you decide to play the two spinners. If that's not the case there's the possibility of resting Lyon, or naming Maxwell as drinks waiter (which would remove the see how he goes before India from the equation) and playing the four quicks with Johnson batting Seven as the all-rounder.

At 2-0 in the series with one to play that wouldn't hurt either.

If we play both spinners, spell Siddle. He's the go to man if things aren't running our way at the moment, so let's see who out of Johnson, Starc and Bird can slot into that role if he's out injured at some point over the next twelve months.

Hopefully the next go to man, or rather the man who'll remove the need to go to Siddle through The Double Ashes series will be Johnson, based on an article in The Australian (here).

Dennis Lillee's TUFF (Targets, stand Up, Front arm, Follow through) looks to be the formula to right the technical issues that creep into Johnson's action, and with the Target being a spot on the pitch rather than the batsman at the other end (though that'll come later, after the ball lifts off that nasty length), come Ashes time I'm looking forward to a further succession of finger injuries among batsmen playing for their country in front of crowds who definitely seem to rate him as a damp squib.

The English crowds definitely don't rate him, the English bats probably don't rate him and the prospect of proving them wrong will doubtless put a bit of fire in the belly.

Hughesy's tip: Watch the English media for the return of Mitchell's heartbroken mother.

We've also had the news that Watson apparently wants to be considered as a non-bowling batsman rather than an all-rounder, which is fair enough as long as he accepts that the rules that apply to other specialist bats also apply to him. That conversion rate will need to be addressed, and the Hussey retirement delivers him some sort of lifeline.

Ignoring the Maxwell selection, a fit Watson still batting at Four would mean a top six that reads Warner, Cowan, Hughes, Watson, Clarke, Khawaja with Wade at Seven and Johnson/Maxwell at Eight. That'd still be light on in the bowling department if you're looking at bowling 270 overs through three days without anyone going over fifty, but there's an obvious solution to that. Get 'em out quicker and you won't have to worry.

As far as the Hussey retirement is concerned, you'd probably have preferred it to come twelve months later when you look at issues relating to the first four, but it had to come some time, and he's getting out at the right time to give someone (presumably Khawaja) the chance to settle a place before England. Of course, you might prefer to be settling in somewhere other than India.

Maybe it's a glass half full attitude, but I'm fairly upbeat about both of those series. India don't appear to have their heart in the Test cricket bit recently, but I expect we'll be served up a regular diet of slow and low tracks with the odd raging turner. England, of course, will be different, and one assumes we'll be taking a squad of fifteen or sixteen on both tours, so let's do a bit of crystal ball gazing.

Based on the current twelve remaining fit we've got room for three or four more. Given the fact that Watson will be one of the extras, and two of them will be bowlers that only leaves room for one spare bat. Assuming there isn't a big move in the Shield aggregates over the rest of the season you'd figure the extra bloke will be Doolan, but I'd go slightly out on a limb and take Chris Rogers, who might be getting on a bit but has plenty of experience in English conditions.

Alternatively, if we're looking for a spare bat who can keep, that'd more than likely be Paine, though Chris Hartley has been among the runs in the Shield.

The bowling's more open, since it's largely a question of who hasn't broken down recently.

For India, with Lyon, Maxwell and Warner in the side and the likelihood that Clarke will also roll the arm over, the spin options look to be covered, so you'd take the four current quicks with two more to cover for injuries along the way. Assuming Pattinson isn't fit, I'd go Hastings and whoever finishes on top of the Shield wickets table for India. England is a little bit different, and not just because of the conditions.

Pattinson, one hopes, will be fit by that stage, and a fast bowling group of Siddle, Pattinson, Johnson, Bird, Starc and one more would look pretty sharp, so it's largely a question of continuing fitness with those five and what you're looking for in the other bloke.

You might go for the bloke who's going to do well in the conditions, do a fair bit of donkey work and swing the ball, but I'd be inclined to head for the fastest, most aggressive bloke going around at the top of the Shield table at the end of the season or, preferably, a fit Cummins.

I think you can take it as read that we'll find wickets that are conducive to fast bowling and conditions amenable to swing, and an English side that'll be looking to their fairly impressive array of quicks with support from Swann, so we might as well set out to fight fire with fire.

We're going to cop plenty from their media when we arrive, and the crowds while we're there, so an aggressive mindset will, I think, be helpful.

Which is probably where we should turn our attention to the other major story over the weekend, namely the passing of Tony Greig, but given the fact that I loathed the man's commentary while he was on Nine and I was still listening, you won't find him being mourned around these parts. Strangely, I didn't mind him when he was working elsewhere, which suggests an issue with the Channel Nine approach and how Mr Greig fitted into it.

The key bit here, I think, is the repeated use of the word provocative in the flow of tributes that have appeared since the news broke. If you're going to be provocative, you can expect a reaction, and since my reaction could be fairly described as contemptuous loathing, maybe I should leave it at that.

But I won't, because I see a lot of the same provocative behaviour in the English media and, when you get to the ground, the old Barmy Army, who we're told are part of the spectacle (or something). We're going to be copping a fair bit of that provocation over the next twelve months, so the question is what we do about it. With the Greig commentary it was easy. Turn him off and it won't bother you.

With the Barmy Army there's nothing you can do over there, so I'm hoping for an aggressive display from the pace bowling group and a stream, or at least a trickle, of batsmen retiring hurt to see how the reactions from the other side of the fence go. They do mockery and ridicule fairly well, so the only thing to do on their turf is to stand up and be counted.

Over here, things ought to be different. This is our turf, they're the visitors, and if they're going to mock and ridicule they should expect the same thing to be coming straight back at them.

I'd put an extra couple of conditions on anyone visiting an Australian ground and behaving in an obviously Barmy Army manner.

For a start, if they wear something that identifies them as an English supporter they should expect to pay a surcharge for beer at the ground, and forbidden to bring any noisemaking device into the ground. This should be clearly discriminatory and designed to rankle. They're out to rankle, so don't dish it out if you can't cop it back, boys.

Better, for my money, would be the issuing of a cake of soap to all inbound English supporters and the requirement that anybody engaged in obvious Barmy Army activity should be able to produce the article or face being evicted from the ground.

And if they use the items in question as part of their antics, there should be a message on the big screen at the ground like Yes, but are you actually going to use it?

Offensive? Quite possibly. But, on the other hand, if you want to dish it out…

Alternatively, of course, you could just sit down and watch what looks like being a fairly tight contest, which is what I'd prefer to do.

Without distractions.

What’s wrong with that concept?

No comments:

Post a Comment