Was our last Test really as long ago as Sydney in January? It seems like only 44 weeks.
DAY ONE
Naturally, most speculation has centered on our attack, with the emphasis on our ability to replace Warne and McGrath; especially their ability to pinch a wicket when things were starting to dawdle. We all remember Sydney 2004 when the Indians spanked us for 705, and none of us want a repeat. That! was gruesome. Stuey Clark is an admirable McGrath clone, but Lee worries me. Johnson was good in India with the white ball, but has he got what it takes in proper cricket with a red agate? MacGill can bowl, but despite being a wicket taker, he's never really been able to take control like Warne. Would Magilla have been able to turn Adelaide last year the way Warne did? And I've seen bugger all of Hillfenhaus, but as long as he can put it on the spot, I'll be reasonably happy.
The batting isn't too different. Hayden, Ponting, Clark, Hussey and Gilchrist still comprise an impressive line-up and while Gnome B.N. is gone, his technique is no better or worse than Jaques' so it will come down to Hungry's application, and probably a little luck in his first few Tests to get his career going. For me Sideshow Roy is still a worry; being good in one-dayers is no guarantee that he can become a solid middle order Test batsman. How will he go against Murali?
Lots of people have been talking up the Shrees. Certainly Murali and his controversial action can present a threat and take wickets, Chaminda Vaas is a good bowler, and Fernando has a good reputation. Slinga is the odd one. Can he threaten often enough? He looked a good thing when he first started playing, but I'm of the opinion he's been slightly off the pace in the last twelve months. And that action... it seems to lack the repeatability necessary at Test level. A bit like Larry Tait. Your best Test bowlers just keep trundling in an plonking it on the spot. I guess the Shrees will use him in short(er) spells.
The Shrees' batting is not great, and they'll definitely miss Kumar At No.3. Still, if Jayasuriya, Jayawardene and Attapatu can hold up, they could be hard to roll. There's been talk that Marvin's selection was wrong, but it's odd how often someone will come in via those circs and make a good fist of things. However! If the Aussie bowlers get among them early, they could be skittled quick sticks.
Should Straya win? Probably. Am I nervous about our prospects post Warne & Pidge? Definitely. It could all come down to dropped catches and tosses... and the Shrees just won the toss and will bowl. Given Ponting will never again win a toss and bowl, it was probably a good toss to lose.
The Slinga is out, too, Maharoof is in.
DAY TWO
Putting on my best Tim Lane -> Bruce sums up proceedings thus far:
First Test - Day 2.
Australia resumes at 3/242 after a solid first day.
Comprehensive stuff.
Still...
Hungry's hundred reminded me of Hayden's dreadful century against the Windies in 1997. Numerous lives; sloppy footwork; dodgy bottom hand; slappy through the off side; unconvincing on the pull; shit shot to get out. Still, a ton's a ton, so he's got that going for him. But if he goes on to have a long and fruit-filled career I'll eat Murali's arm brace.
My brother texted me last night: "dud." I don't necessarily concur. Rain delays aside, it was an interesting enough day's play. You never got the feeling Straya were comfortable, except when Ponting was out there. But because the Shrees really only had Murali as a threat, they couldn't crash through. Their crap catching didn't help.
May I be so bold? The commentary on both rayjo & telly wasn't too bad. Yes, the TV ads are still shit; they even make me pine for the days of the Mojos' Whack Whack Whack-a-Doo. But if you switch between the two outlets and pick the bones from the chaff or the wheat from the fish or the... ahem, there are lots of good bits. Possibly one of the reasons Straya has great cricket depth is because viewers get so many handy pointers from the commentators; even from the idiots. Yes! I know! They can be unbearable, but an example of what I'm on about was Damian Fleming's succinct and informative explanation of a good run-up. More please.
And here's a question: who are Greg Buckle, Jim Morton and Drew Cratchley? No, they are not mechanics on the Holden Dealer Team; they are, in fact, the blokes filling in at the Herald Sun for Ben Dorries and Jim, sorry, Jon Pierik. Crash Craddock has two shots at CricAussie. There's plenty of "biting the hand that feeds you" and "cricket, not for the first time, could be the loser" and according to Helen Coonan it's "unAustralian." But really, if no one mentioned the dispute, would the readers notice? And anyway, who doesn't love the picture of the standoff with Stakeholders Sutherland?
Unca Rod makes some fair points.
Even on replay this looked like an average day of test cricket, so still 4 times better than the average day of cricket out of South Africa.
While The Atheist is typically upbeat:
God, it's so depressing when Australia win.
TELL TALE SINE
Stolen from Yobbo who expands: "Cheating Cheater Muricheateran."
Mark is star quality.
DAY THREE
Probably have to resort to a Bruce Report here:
First Test Day 3
Shrees resume at 2/30 after being belted.
I mean, what can you say? The Herald Sun doesn't muck around: "Aussies deliver Lankan Spankin".
Strange, at the start of play I figured a couple of quick wickets and we might be wobbly, but once the Shrees failed to break through after a tight start, they were in big trouble in little Gabba. When Straya had gone to lunch without losing a wicket, it was only a matter of time before they started to go the tonk with an eye on a declaration.
Now the Shrees are two wickets down and already playing for the draw with the key question being, can Australia bowl them out twice? Despite only a few over having been bowled, the Hun is confident the answer is yes:
Maybe the Hun hacks are a little light-headed - being back at work, and all - because it doesn't stop with just the postcard.
Ben Dorries:
The new-look Australian team yesterday served notice it was set to prolong its world domination as the Test match against Sri Lanka turned into a public flogging.
Again Ben:
Lee answers spearhead call
BRETT Lee returned to the scene of his greatest triumph to send a strong message to the Australian selectors and give himself a belated birthday present.
At leash Dorries & Crash sought out Terry Jenner and Hoggy for reality checks:
Mortal detectors
TERRY JENNER
THAT'S a huge question. You work on the basis no one is irreplaceable, but there is a case for Warne with 708 wickets, 3000 runs and 125 catches.
Just replacing a bowler or a batsman is one thing, but to replace all of those qualities is difficult. Stuart MacGill could not replace Warne with the batting and fielding, and not necessarily with the bowling, either.
Stuart Clark has a bit going for him as he attempts to replace Glenn McGrath, even though he might never be as good as McGrath. I think Australia will continue to dominate. They probably just need to bat better. McGrath and Warne bailed out Australia so many times. That will be harder now.
RODNEY HOGG
IT'S the end of an era. We are replacing 1271 Test wickets. We need a new star. We can't be as good as we were because MacGill is near the end of his career. We are not going to be the side we were because we won't be able to take 20 wickets in a Test like we did. We've been spoilt. The rest of the world is not as bad at batting as we made them look.
Yep, it remains to be seen whether we can roll the Shrees twice...
Clark just got Jayawardene caught behind.
... or any Test side, for that matter, despite the lack of depth in world cricket. Or, as Hoggy alludes to, is cricket actually stronger than recent appearances might indicate?
DAY FOUR
Just like the Day 2 and Day 3 reports, I figured there's be bugger all to write about. That was until I read today's papers and saw that Marvan Atapattu said the Shree selectors were muppets.
And read that Terry Jenner has been reading the AGB:
Jenner demands Murali match assessment
SHANE Warne's long-time mentor, Terry Jenner, has called for the ICC to scrutinise Muthiah Muralidaran like never before - by forcing him to prove his action in a Test match.
With Muralidaran seven wickets shy of passing Warne's record 708 scalps, Jenner warned the Sri Lankan risked being branded a chucker for life unless the ICC tested him in cricket's most demanding cauldron.
Regarding yesterday's play. Well, we rolled them fairly comfortably, not easily, just fairly comfortably and sent them back in again on a good pitch. We're all on the record here: following-on in rubbish, just grind the opposition out of the game; and DON'T give them a chance at winning. Apropos, so far today it looks as if the Shrees will take some getting out. In fact, it's around now, or even a little earlier, that we could do with a hint of Warne & McGrath.
DAY FIVE
Well, if Days One, Two and Three were less interesting for what happened on the field, Day Five is especially less interesting: the Shrees digging in, the Aussies toiling away, rain and light.
Apropos the light, or lack of it, I'm still not sure what kind of scientific guesswork is employed to get the players on and off the field. Reading between the commentary lines: the umpires make a judgment call, record what the current reading is on their light-meter, then all subsequent judgments are related to that datum. Fair enough, I suppose, but it seems to work better in theory than practice, with interruptions appearing to come via an ICC style haphazard array of readings. Like "who won the toss and did what in Brisbane" in the comments, this issue requires further detailed analysis.
The main talking point from Day Four would have to be Stewie Griffin's Warne-ball to get rid of Van Dot. Those of us pining for the G.O. days - "Come back, Shaaaaaane!" - will take some comfort from this ball; especially in that it got rid of a dug-in batsman. Picking up Sammy not long after was a bonus.
Today? As Wicky says, if we can't roll 'em now they're five down, we're kidding ourselves. Fingers crossed.
IF YOU CAN'T BEAT 'EM CLONE 'EM
Nick's already linked to Kerry O'Keefe's article in today's Herald Sun in which he says we ought to copy Murali.
Kerry O'Keefe's call to clone Murali's action
SPIN guru Kerry O'Keeffe has urged cricket officials to "clone" Muthiah Muralidaran in a bid to help Australia find a match-winning finger spinner.
Muralidaran's controversial bowling action has divided the cricket world. But former Test leg-spinner O'Keeffe says it's time to follow the Sri Lankan's lead and allow youngsters to use a bent arm.
Cynical me says it's a good idea; after all, it's not as if the other sides aren't going to flaunt the laws and "push the boundaries" now that the ICC have opened the floodgates with their Hmmm-Was-That-14-Degrees-Or-16? Law.
Pragmatic me says the new set up is a pandora's can of worms.
Cynical me nags on. He says off-field interference in a sport is a lawyer's paradise.
Pipe-dream me - not to be confused with Melbourne Cup jockey, Vlad Duric's "realistic pipe dream" - says that all Murali's wickets taken before the 15 Degree Law was incorporated in the rules, sorry, Laws O' The Game, should be expunged from the records. After all, it's scientifically been proven that his bent action wasn't, in fact, the optical illusion espoused by the Shrees, other chuckanistas and various other vested interests, and WAS indeed the chuck we, and Daryl Hair, said it was.
Killer Fact! Five of the Shree players whose names end in vowels are batsmen, one is the wicketkeeper and only one is a bowler. Only one.
