TOPIC:

anchorman wrote: Looks like the side is set now. All inclusions have set their places in concrete.
Only one who may be under the hammer is Mitch Marsh. Has he done enough to keep his place full time. He will play in Perth for sure. I guess he is bowling well, but will need runs to keep his spot I am thinking.
Burns has set Bancroft a hard task to get into the side. I guess he will have to bide his time to get a berth.
Khawaja certainly has secured his batting spot, but gee he needs to improve his fielding. He looks very, very, pedestrian when fielding. Not sure if he has good hands but dreadfully slow in the field, also doesn't seem to have the best arm in the side either.
Maybe nit picking, but needs to improve I think. He needs to work harder on his fielding, maybe that is why they haven't had him under the helmet at short leg.
A trouncing by any stretch of the imagination.
Only average crowd as well. Will the WACA be any better crowd wise!!! After that hiding I think a lot will keep their hard earned in their pocket.
After watching the slips when the quicks were bowling, I think that Smith is glad to have Voges standing along side him. He seemed to talk in depth to Voges on many occasions. Seems he is seeking the thoughts of Voges and his take on games.

Plenty of Kiwis in Perth, hope they turn out for it and I think they will bounce back to be more competitive

anchorman wrote: Hopefully there will be more turn out than at the Gabba.
Silly isn't it, the oldies get 36,000 at a baseball stadium in America, yet the test in Brissie on dragged 52,000 in a country where the game is a national sport.

I think test cricket is different to any other sport in the world. Not many games go for 5 days, its a game of tactics, patience and mental endurance. I think 52,000 isn't that bad given 3 days are played during working hours. I always say if you played an A-League game over 5 days, you wouldn't get anyone watching 4 of those days. The Perth Test will be lucky to get 50,000 over the 5 days, but that's about normal these days. Its a TV sport as much as anything.

Plus the Kiwis & the Windies are not like they were in the 80's. They were great sides with great players whom the public wanted to see live. They packed out aussie stadiums back then. These nations are nowhere near that level these days. But it was great to see NZ player Williamson bat with real authority. They need more players like him. Personally I am still a huge fan of Test Cricket. And it should be promoted as "the cricketers form of cricket". Stop trying to pimp it up with pink balls, day night Tests and all of this horse shit. There is a place for it in this 20/20 saturated era we are in today. It just needs the right approach.

[quote="jardine"
I think test cricket is different to any other sport in the world. Not many games go for 5 days, its a game of tactics, patience and mental endurance. I think 52,000 isn't that bad given 3 days are played during working hours. I always say if you played an A-League game over 5 days, you wouldn't get anyone watching 4 of those days. The Perth Test will be lucky to get 50,000 over the 5 days, but that's about normal these days. Its a TV sport as much as anything.

Plus the Kiwis & the Windies are not like they were in the 80's. They were great sides with great players whom the public wanted to see live. They packed out aussie stadiums back then. These nations are nowhere near that level these days. But it was great to see NZ player Williamson bat with real authority. They need more players like him. Personally I am still a huge fan of Test Cricket. And it should be promoted as "the cricketers form of cricket". Stop trying to pimp it up with pink balls, day night Tests and all of this horse shit. There is a place for it in this 20/20 saturated era we are in today. It just needs the right approach.[/quote]
If CA wont bigger attendances then make it not a State side with a couple of ring ins.

anchorman wrote: I am tipping the test commencing here tomorrow will be a wee bit short. I see the Aussie giving the Kiwis a fair belting. Hot weather, fast bouncy wicket, Johnson and Starc in full flight,or will that be the Kiwis in fright!!!
I really don't remember the Kiwis being a power house test team. They promised so much so often but gave so little so many ties.
We will belt them here.

They gave us a lesson in 85/86

The NZ captain could do with winning a toss here and there. Their bowlers are under done, tired, injurred, and for the most part, not bowling well enough. Let us hope that their batsmen can show some heart as they did in the first test.

Congratulations to the Australian batsmen.

I heard some people going on about the changing nature of the pitch at the WACA, and, it has indeed slowed down in pace; but, fast pitch or slow, the batsmen have always made runs.

Richards 356
Marsh 355
Slater 219
Walters a hundred in a session

WI nearly 600 in 1975
WI 456 84-5
England and Australia 400 each 1982-3
SA 400 odd to win a test on the fourth innings.

In that sense NZ's position is not unknown at the ground.

Looking to the future, we need to put grass -- and green grass back on our pitches -- as they will be a true test for Warner and co.

In view of the good pitches, the bigger bats, the smaller boundaries, and the general absence of really great bowlers, I usually take 5 runs off a guy's batting average these days.

AR was told yesterday in the middle of Gloucester Park,where they played World Series Cricket.They are trying to replicate the WACA wicket..
Same soil the same preparation same curator.They are preparing the wicket for the new Burswood Stadium.There is speculation the first event on the new stadium will be an Ashes Test.Like the MCG it will be a drop in and out wicket.

ArkRoyal wrote: The NZ captain could do with winning a toss here and there. Their bowlers are under done, tired, injurred, and for the most part, not bowling well enough. Let us hope that their batsmen can show some heart as they did in the first test.

Congratulations to the Australian batsmen.

I heard some people going on about the changing nature of the pitch at the WACA, and, it has indeed slowed down in pace; but, fast pitch or slow, the batsmen have always made runs.

Richards 356
Marsh 355
Slater 219
Walters a hundred in a session

WI nearly 600 in 1975
WI 456 84-5
England and Australia 400 each 1982-3
SA 400 odd to win a test on the fourth innings.

In that sense NZ's position is not unknown at the ground.

Looking to the future, we need to put grass -- and green grass back on our pitches -- as they will be a true test for Warner and co.

In view of the good pitches, the bigger bats, the smaller boundaries, and the general absence of really great bowlers, I usually take 5 runs off a guy's batting average these days.

I agree with the bigger bats part- just unfair, but if you are going to take 5 off a guys average then where do you stop? How do you reckon Bradman for example would have gone v the West Indies of the late 70`s 80`s? He wouldn't have averaged 99!

Swandog wrote:

anchorman wrote: I am tipping the test commencing here tomorrow will be a wee bit short. I see the Aussie giving the Kiwis a fair belting. Hot weather, fast bouncy wicket, Johnson and Starc in full flight,or will that be the Kiwis in fright!!!
I really don't remember the Kiwis being a power house test team. They promised so much so often but gave so little so many ties.
We will belt them here.

They gave us a lesson in 85/86

Interesting analogy dog, but going by your football terms, you don't recognize any past records that are older than swan's last premiership

Swandog: it works the opposite way for bowlers. Brett Lee has a test average of about 30 which is two or three higher than thommo, but bowled on tougher pitches. In addition, he had to bowl without a third-man meaning that his average went up an extra three runs every time the ball went through slips, compared to Thommo, whom had a third man and only conceded a single each time.

On Bradman and the other greats of the game, well the events of today, only make their exploits even greater.

ArkRoyal wrote: Swandog: it works the opposite way for bowlers. Brett Lee has a test average of about 30 which is two or three higher than thommo, but bowled on tougher pitches. In addition, he had to bowl without a third-man meaning that his average went up an extra three runs every time the ball went through slips, compared to Thommo, whom had a third man and only conceded a single each time.

On Bradman and the other greats of the game, well the events of today, only make their exploits even greater.

Fair dinkum mate I hope you are not putting Brett Lee in the same breath as Thommo?? Give me Thommo every day of the week, I rate Gillespie, big Merv and McDermott higher than Lee