WINDIAN SUMMER

Cricket this late in May just doesn't seem right. The last Test in 1999 finished on April 7, the last Test in 2003 finished on the May 13, yet here we are just about to start the first Test in 2008 on May 22. It's not the IPL's fault; that wasn't around when the scheduling was done. And I'm reasonably confident this tour is not an extension of last year's World Cup. Whatever the reason, I'm slightly addled by this late start. I suppose that's what cricket in the West Indies in May and June and matches starting at one in the morning can do to you.

Given the late starts, I won't be much of a presence around here during the wee hours, but if you are not also sanders lape then get stuck in. If the last two tours are anything to go by, there will be plenty of cricket to watch around breakfast time. My only concern are those dreaded hours between three and five when I often wake up anxious about the state of play, wondering whether I can resist the bloody temptation to come downstairs to watch the telly.

What do you reckon of our chances? Silly question. I know how notoriously edgy we are at the AGB, always looking for trouble. My brother recently said to me that he couldn't believe how pessimistic we are. I reminded him the Pat and Carrot are prone to bouts of optimism, but he looked skeptical. Plus, he's really just like the rest of us: old enough to remember the eighties and reluctant to revisit them. Still, nothing lasts forever, and with the retirements of McGrath, Gilchrist and especially Warne we can all smell the writing on the wall.

It's fortunate we are playing the Windies. No! Don't worry. I'm not going there. If we were playing a better side, say the Indians in India, I'd be very worried, but I haven't seen half the Windies players and am only moderately concerned about an ambush.

Ambushed by who? (I suppose that's an age-old military question.) With the four Windies quicks averaging in the low thirties at best, it's not exactly Holding, Garner, Ambrose and Marshall. And even though one of their spinners is called Juggernaut, we shouldn't have too much to fear from their tweakers.

Hopefully we are ready to bat. There's been a long layoff for some, T20 for others, and injuries and absentees have thrown the lineup around. From over here it doesn't seem like the best preparation. Katich, Jaques, Ponting, Hodge, Hussey, Symonds, Haddin is not the best ever lineup, either, but nor is it dreadful. Every one of those batsmen would have played a lot of Test cricket for other countries, and not just Bangladesh. Hopefully Ponting can get back into the runs.

As for our bowling. Lee was fabulous against the Shrees and India. Johnston was very good in patches. Clarke was down on pace but was still naggy. Roy can roll his arm over, but I hope he bowls mediums because his offies are rancid things. Although MacGill has been injured he can certainly bowl, and despite it being a long time ago, he was better than Warne in the West Indies in 1999. Warne only had one arm, though.

I just hope I don't wake up tomorrow with Straya all out for bugger all, or the Windies none for 300.

Comments

[nick]

Katich...almost dropped first ball, and goes the same way 12 runs later. Can't wait to see Hodge bat. Ponting looking good on Cricinfo. Blewie said he was looking good in the nets - but that would have been though his beer goggles.

[Carrot]

Well, at 3/263 as I type, I think we can afford to be a LITTLE optomistic. Ponting's seeing it like a beach ball.

Not the greatest cricket so far, it has to be said. We're barely raising a sweat, and that's just a bit dull.

[Carrot]

Can't believe I'm trying to mozz my own team, by the way. Not that it worked.

[The Don has risen]

Yes Lee was impressive last Summer however he was not as penetrative against India following Melbourne where the Indians were underdone. He is our best bowler however he has lost pace and he will find swinging the ball there hard.

Clark was quite unimpressive after Melbourne and could well struggle IF the Windies don't attempt to slog him. Cutting the ball over there is very hard.
I could play Johnson. He cannot swing the ball so if one adopts a two-eyed stance he is picket fence material. He has an awful action as well.
Mac Gilla should get a number of wickets.

As for 'Roy' as the late Sud Barnes said about Ian Johnson, I could play him with a toothpick. The only way he gains wickets is through the batsman's lack of respect. Give him respect and he will go wicketless.

Having said that I doubt id the windies have the concentration to withstand us.

They don't have the bowlers to get us out

[Tony T]

Wish Ponting hadn't got out before stumps. I blame Carrot.

Has anyone seen any footage? I didn't get to see even one ball. We bat alright? Or was it all down to Ponting?

[RT]

Watched from when Ponting and Hussey were steering us on the right path. Ponting looked pretty comfortable, hopefully a sign of good things for Indian / Yarpies / Poms series. Both got out to great catches, bloody Carrot. Hussey in slips by Bravo off the....Juggernaut! gotta love that name. We must have had a few nerves early when 2 down. The replays of the Kat and Jaques dismissals didn't show that they got out to superb balls or anything. Bravo bowled very well, moved it around a bit but the other crowd looked pretty toothless. Good toss to win, assuming Punter won.

Hodge looks set but could have been caught behind down the leg side off the....Juggernaut! early in the piece. Although if Ramdin had caught it it would have been a reflex fluke. Let's hope he gets a large score just to make the selectors debate for once rather than sit around getting pissed talking about the old days and saying "same team". They will have to earn their stripes over the next 12 mths it has to be said. I hope Haddin make runs too, good confidence builder early.

Watching us bowl would be interesting. Hopefully I can wake up in time or go to bed late. Fucking Carribean time zones.

[RT]

And sending in a nightwatchman in front of Symonds at 4/290 odd? Odd.

[Tony T]

I never know where we stand on nightwatchmen. I never know where I stand on nightwatchmen. But if we're going to use one, Johnston should be it because he can bat a bit.

Ponting won the toss, and since it's been reported that a few have stayed down, it was probably a good toss to win.

[Carrot]

It was staying down - particularly at one end. I think aginst a less experienced batting line-up Clark in particular should do well.

Despite that, Ponting made it look easy. Which is why it wasn't super-exciting cricket at times. Hodge looked good, which is not something I've grown to associate with him. I don't think he was really pressed, though, when he was in the Windies were looking pretty pedestrian.

It's a good deck, with a few gremlins that will become more apparent as the game goes on. 400 will be a good score. We'd be disappointed not to get more than that given where we are, though. Hope Johnson gets amongst them this afternoon!

[Tony T.]

But Ponting was the talk of the day after he came out on the other side of a form rut with an aggressive innings which included 17 fours and a six.

That was in today's Strayan. It wasn't the only mention today about how Ponting emerged from a slump to make his ton last night. But point of order: Ponting DID actually make a century in his last Test innings. It's a point worth making.

[Carrot]

Eh? Eh? Eh? "Clark in particular should do well". Do I rule or what? 3/18 off 8 can't be wrong!

[Bruce]

Now then Tone. Don't go expecting sports journalists to remember any earlier than lunch time yesterday.

Punter faced 14 balls in the quicket for a total of 20 runs and 2 goldens. Hence the "slump" word.

Thankfully not all of us are using T20 form as the guide for test selections.

[Tony T.]

C: That would be "Ay? Ay? Ay?". It's a point worth making. Spot on with the prediction, but.

B: You reckon journos looking at the T20 numbers is going to be an ongoing concern? Or do you hope, like me, that the hacks will eventually factor in the relative significance of the two forms?

[pat]

For Ricky:

I love you the best
Better than all the rest.
I love you the best
Better than all the rest.
That I meet in the summer.
Windian Summer.
That I meet in the summer.
Windian Summer.
I love you the best
Better than all the rest.

[pat]

15-6 halftime. Go the Tahs.

[pat]

Wind up the bandwagon - Tahs 28 - Sharks 13. Bring on the Crusaders.

[Tony T.]

Have the Crusaders ever not won the Super Teens? It's a bit like the Scottish Premier League, isn't it?

[pat]

Very much so, but without the murders and sectarian songs. Go Celtic!

[Tony T.]

To get Chanders, MacGill took "sh1t gets wickets" to new extremes.

[Tony T.]

4/17?!? Fvck.

"moderately concerned about an ambush" - make that a little bit more than moderately.

I've had a vaguely uneasy feeling ever since I wrote that.

That feeling increased yesterday when Morton was given not-out caught behind, and today when Chanders had a life when he was ABSOLUTELY plumb elbee on 97.

You reckon Sydney is coming back to bite us? Could be the luck with umpires we've experienced for several years has been popped by the rumpus over our good fortune there. What goes around, and all that. The way it's gone around since then we're a monty to get slaughtered by the umps in India.

(Despite all the usual barbs, it's easy to see why the umpire gave Symonds not out yesterday after lunch - possibly outside off, he might have hit it.)

Our batting, apart from Ponting, was steady at best, and our line-up is hardly reassuring. Nor is it any more comforting that in the only footage I've seen of the Windies attack, Edwards and Powell actually ARE bowling like Holding, Marshall and co. They were on fire in that spell before stumps. Wish the umps had called light half an hour earlier.

Bowling wise, we should have rolled 'em for well under 300, but even so, none of the footage I've seen (yesterday's Fox highlights and bowling to the tail this morning) showed our attack to be particularly hostile. Once again our bowling to the tail lacked precision.

At this point you wonder whether the batsmen can post a respectable target and then whether we can roll 'em. I don't reckon we would defend anything under 200. And we're still 70 runs away.

Is the Shiv going to do a Lara? With a lesser team than we once had, we'd certainly struggle to draw, let alone win, a three Test series if we lost the first Test.

[The Don has risen]

the only person who can call an LBW is the unpire because he is the ONLY person in position to do so. NO TV camera can tell you a person is plumb.

I do not mind bad decisions as umpires have bad days just like players. I do mind corrupt decisions. None here.

Windies have bowled out of their skin and can't that Bravo play! Some very good catching.
IF the Windies play the Aussie bowlers with respect and concentrate then there is no reason why they should lose any tests.

[Tony T.]

"the only person who can call an LBW is the umpire because he is the ONLY person in position to do so. NO TV camera can tell you a person is plumb."

That's a "moderately" contentious statement, Risen Don.

Nevertheless, I don't think the umpires are corrupt, nor am I blaming the umpires for Straya's current predicament. More like I am bemoaning the fact that Lady Luck seems to have turned her back on Straya since Sydney.

I cannot see our current attack rolling the Windies tonight.

We've been saying here ever since Warne and McGrath retired that our softer bowling will put the onus on our batsmen to put up big scores or else we will struggle. Well, we haven't put up a big score and we are about to struggle.

[carneagles]

"the only person who can call an LBW is the unpire because he is the ONLY person in position to do so. NO TV camera can tell you a person is plumb."

What about a camera on the ump's hat?

Completely aside from the fact that he can play a bit, Dwayne Bravo's tops because he's got the best name since Max Power.

[RT]

IF we drop crucial catches and the West Indies sneak in, after they have caught everything in and out of sight, then I'm banning my refrigerator from another further cricket discussion.

Time for Lee to show us that his NSW media touted "best fast bowler in the world" tag is legit. Clark looks the most dangerous, Johnson the least. And we're stuffed if McGill bowls rubbish. Maybe the Kat could be the dark horse. Roy could "chuck" down a few too, as he was important in Sydney.

I just can't work out whether to try and stay up and watch a chuck of it or get up early. Too much major decision making so early in the week.

[Professor Rosseforp]

Carneagles -- a camera in the ump's hat would be obscured by other hats -- or would show revealing glimpses of nice looking lasses in the crowd, which would attract the attention of the umpires. Or imagine them at square leg, picking up the optical illusion of bent arm bowling.
Incidentally (as always) I watched a documentary on the British Empire which showed a few deliveries of bodyline bowling in the 1930s -- in ultraslow motion. If there was a 15, 10 or 5 degree bend in any of the deliveries, I'll eat my baggy green (baggy green lettuce, that is).

[Tony T.]

Was that Nick in the crowd, doing bombies in the pool, and then later gyrating with the pole dancers? I think it was.

Someone give Stuart Clark a knighthood. Or as my brother suggested, make him a National Treasure.

Big pouch in Haddin's right glove. That can't be a Big Issue any longer. Someone get Jeff Crowe(?) on the case.

MacGill, twenty pies and two wickets, both which were dodgy, especially Jugger's. Good on you, Tiff. What was that I was saying about the umpires?

But Magilla got a run out with a direct hit?!?

Surprise, surpriiiiiiissse!!!!!!

33.1 Lee to Chanderpaul, no run, Dropped by Katich at first slip. Lee can't believe it and holds his head. Chanders gets a reprieve. How costly that is going to be. It was full, outside off, straightening a touch and Chanderpaul stabs it off the outside edge low to Katich who clangs it.

37.2 Lee to Ramdin, FOUR, dropped by Haddin. Not easy chance, though. Not very difficult, either. It was on a length, outside off stump, Ramdin pushes hard, outside the off stump and it flew fast to the right of Haddin who dived but clanged it. Sharp chance floored.

40.2 MacGill to Sammy, no run, dropped by Jaques at short leg. It was the googly, Sammy groped forward, it went off his glvoes, on to his pads and dropped to right of Jaques who was initially moving to his left, changed direction and dived but couldn't hold on.

Ok, so Haddin's and Hungry's weren't easy, but!...

[Tony T.]

Please pick Sewnarine Chattergoon.

While you're at it, pick his brother, too: Hemnarine Chattergoon.

[Tony T.]

That was a Big Celebration at the end. Not a lot of hand-shaking. Lot of hugging, lot of jumping, lot of yeaaaahhhhhhhing, lot of happiness.

Strayan cricket is rotten to the core.

[pat]

It doesn't seem right or fair to savour the thrill of victory after having put so little effort, time and interest into this Test.

As for the Oz team ... they seem happy enough from Tone's report.

One things for sure, Tony Delroy will be over the moon and can get back to The Quiz with a fervour akin to a pack of wild dogs feasting on a fly blown ewe.

The most confusing aspect for mine, at this great distance, was once again the state of the pitch. Hodge at the end of day 4 said it was a batsman's wicket, begging the question that was never asked "So what reason do you give for Oz being all out for 167, 88 if you take away Roy's last stand?" Yet at stumps day 5 Clark says "The wicket was good for bowling; it was up and down." Perhaps it was both, an equally good batsman's and bowler's wicket.

Sounded like a great Test. Wish I could have seen some of it. The Windies are on their slow way back to the top levels of Test cricket as the Ozzies continue their long slow decline.

[astrovic]

I pretty much missed this entire test, except for 3 words from someone in the ABC commentary team at 5:30 in the morning on day one when my alarm clock went off:

"Hussey says hmmmmm"

Having reached the summit of Mount Observation, I promptly turned the radyo off.

[Chade]

Despite the cricket, Amit Juggernaut has to be the greatest ever sporting name.

[haiku]

I'll see your Juggernaut and raise you a Misty Hyman

[Bruce]

I've watched the highlights now.

Katich seems to have been found out *again* within about 10 mins of his return to test cricket. Wasn't his file stamped NTPTCA? Have no openers been building their skills while the Rev and the Gnome have been rusted on to the top of the order?

The cordon remains a shambles. It's all very well to talk about potential run outs and building pressure, but to give away so many chances in missing regulation outs is a farken waste!

Stuey Clarke finally gets first use of the pill in the second dig and he delivers. Nothing happened till he came on the first innings. PUNTER!! GIVE HIM THE NEW BALL!!

[Professor Rosseforp]

Haiku, it's not a sporting name, but I remember an organist, Dick Hyman, who released an album called Organ Antics.
It seems that with Parchment and Juggernaut, the Windies have taken over from Zimbabwe, who had a team full of brothers who were all named after common nouns: Flower, Streak, Brain -- the only normal name was Olonga.
Australia and New Zealand are currently both short of at least a Trevor and a Colin.

[Tony T]

Can I take back what I said about Haddin's drop. It was pretty easy for a Test wicketkeeper. Obviously I'm not talking about Party Patel or Oink Jones.

Did anyone hear Greg Blewett... sorry, Blewy call Chanders Sherwin Chanderpaul?

Flatty on the way home. Who do we keep in the team, Hodge or Katich?

Simon Jones back in action in England. Are we going to get stomped next year?

[Professor Rosseforp]

Bruce, can you take back your comments about Katich?

[Professor Rosseforp]

Magill was unlucky when he had an lbw appeal turned down late in the day ; I was listening on the radio and it looked plumb to me. Then in comes Clarkie and takes Magill's wickets! There is no justice.
By the way (or incidentally) am I the only one who can't see the point of sportspersons dedicating sporting deeds to emotional causes? The dedication doesn't get recorded in the big book of dedications somewhere, does it? It seems like emotional claptrap, but what about the guys down at the local park, who turned up to the game in spite of the fact that their car broke down during the week, and their wife was angry because they mowed her flower patch. Could they dedicate their appearance to their grandma who once knitted them a scarf in 1962?
And why are we hearing about Michael Clarke's possible father-in-law's death? Sad as it is, in a squad of 17 and with assorted coaches, officials and medicos, I'd be surprised if noone else has someone with a broken hip, someone going into a nursing home, someone who had measles, someone whose auntie's husband just died etc.
I dedicate this blog entry to Fred Croft, an old Yorkshireman who bowled to me in the backyard when nobody else would, when I were about 8 year old.

[Bruce]

I will stand by my comments for the time being. I reckon the fault is still there but he survived it this time.

We shall see.

AND WHY IS JOHNSON GIVEN THE NEW BALL AGAIN!!! Sure he got a wicket. A wide long hop that got slapped to point.

1.3 Johnson to Marshall, FOUR, shot! He shuffled into that on his off stump and hammered it through extra cover, on the up

Not a great start for Johnson here either. Hasn't found his line

1.4 Johnson to Marshall, FOUR, even better! Crisply, confidently smacked slightly squarer this time, with perfect timing

...

7.1 Johnson to Smith, FOUR, wide of the off stump - well wide - and short enough to be flayed over the slips
7.6 Johnson to Smith, FOUR, yes, very well played. Good, attacking cricket from West Indies. Short, wide and deserved to be flayed over the slips

etc.

[Tony T.]

I've never really wanted to get stuck into Katich, despite his failings, because I reckon he makes up for his ugly technique with a good batting brain. I've seen him come to the wicket in numerous Pura matches where the batting side was looking brittle and he's peeled off a cool-headed score to stop any rot. I like the lad. That said, he's not really put it together in the Tests, but if he'd been given as many chances as some batsmen (other countries included) he'd have made a bundle of runs by now.

Chanders, who is precisely the sort of batsman who has been given those chances (in his case through necessity because the Windies have been rubbish), is a good role model for the Kat and testament to how much batting is played in the head. In fact, I'm dreading the day KP gets his brain in sync with his technique and flays us alive over the course of a series.

No idea why Johnston gets the new ball given how much tripe he serves up. Give it to Clark, Punter!

Jesus, Magilla bowled some pies, too. Actually, it was worse; he bowled half-eaten sausage rolls. Funny thing is, the Windies had no idea when he put it on the right spot. Simple solution: he turns the five sausage rolls per over into five jaffas and he won't look like such a prune. (Yes, it's dinner time and I'm hungry.)

What happened to the Windies catching from the first Test? At Sabina Park they could have closed their eyes, pulled a bag over their heads and all faced the wrong way and they still would have pulled in screamers. Here at VivRichards Park they are dropping sitters. Even Bravo grassed a dolly.

And, isn't it good to watch an overseas match played on a proper sized ground. None of your stupid postage stamps. They ought to play next year's Ashes there so that Flintoff and Pietersen won't be able to close their eyes and swing wildly for six like they did in 2005.

[pat]

I'd like to dedicate this comment to the Chinese shopkeeper who sold me his waving Lucky Cat he had on display, yet had the gall to take out the AA batteries and offer to sell them to me for 2 bucks.

Talk about Chinese Chutzpah!

I hope he catches a bad case of German Measles.

[Professor Rosseforp]

Reminded by Pat, I dedicate this blog entry to the Chinese waiter, who, whilst chewing on a toothpick, leaned over the counter and put his hand in my wallet to check if I had any smaller denominations than the one I offered.
So MacGill is retiring. Too bad that we missed out on seeing him in more tests when he was at his peak, because of short-sighted selectors, who couldn't cope with the notion of 2 leggies in a side (but were happy to slot in 3-4 average fast medium right hand bowlers for years on end, and still are). The man's legacy is excellent, but should have been so much better ; at the worst estimate, he was the 3rd best bowler in the country behind McGrath and Warne, yet the selctors still would not toss him the crimson orb.
As I've said before, Katich has been similarly jerked around, having to slot in wherever and whenever. This time he's come up with the goods in the form of his 3rd (I think) test century, which places him 3 ahead of Steve Waugh at the same stage of his career (speaking of batsmen who've been given plenty of chances).

[Tony T]

Big news!

Apparently the reason Magilla has been bowling half-eaten sausage rolls is that he's been half-cut. He called it quits to pre-emp the selectors after he arrived late to yesterday's play because he'd been out on the fuel. Probably sampling bucketloads of this season's Antiguan chardonnay or Port au Spain. Ho Ho.

[Vindicate]

Still far from convinced as far as Katich goes, still looks like a rabbit in the headlights and until he makes a ton under pressure or on a deck that's not a complete road I'll remain unconvinced.

As for Macgilla, maybe I've been spoilt growing up with Warnie in the side but I never really thought Macgill was that good a leggie. In any case I'll be interested to see who gets the job next - Dan Cullen gets my vote.

[Vindicate]

Speaking of bowlers throwing pies, what's happened to Mitch Johnson? Sarwan is carting him all over the park as we speak and unless my memory fails me he was something of a lethal weapon against the Whingians last summer?

1st Test: 13-5-25-0 & 15-6-21-3
2nd Test: 37-2-148-2 & 11-4-33-0
3rd Test: 28-7-86-4 & 10-0-58-1
4th Test: 37-6-126-4 & 16-1-33-2

Maybe he's just one of those bowlers who doesn't do too well away from home, which does not bode well for the Ashes.

[pat]

Sarwan gets his ton with a 4 off Magilla.

211 required, 7 wickets in hand, 37 overs left RR required 5.7. Current RR 2.6 to 2.8.

If the Windies don't give this a crack then they may as well give the game away.

[pat]

Windies might be going for it with their RR now up to 3.4 to 3.10.

Magilla could get a huge endorsement here if he were to sign up with Mrs Macs meat pies - the Mr Mac extra delicious, extra huge, sloppily massive meat pie just begging to be scoffed.

[pat]

Extra special delicious after a night on the turps.

[Tony T.]

Sure it was a good pitch (and a day four pitch, too, given the loss of most of day three) but we are going to struggle to get out good sides unless we win a lot of tosses.

Bowlers win matches and we are going to have to find two more - pronto!

When I woke up at six o'clock the Windies needed about 170 off 23 overs. Even then, at eight an over, they should have been looking to win. It was the only way they could reclaim the Frankie.

[Adsy]

A more than honorable loss compared to a whitewash on the back of 20 overs of defense would have definately been their thinking.

Watwhyshes get people sacked. A new dawn, however false for the Windies after a good few tests is a much more palatable outcome given the way they have been going.

[Tony T]

Reckon that's a pretty fair point. (Watwhyshes is a wretty pair ford.)

Did you know that that's the first draw between the Windies and Straya since 1995?

[Russ]

Given the rubbish the Windies have served up over the past decade, an honourable loss, even at home is something of an improvement. Something to build on. In any case, they can still draw the series, which would - trophy aside - represent a win of sorts.

Which brings up an English dilemma for the Australian selectors. Teams bat out the fourth day, even with Warne and McGrath; the Windies played well, and credit to them. But after Clark and Lee aside, the bowling has been pretty woeful.

MacGill is gone, so we replace him with a rookie spinner of questionable ability. This won't necessarily help. Johnson could be replaced by Noffke or Bollinger, but again, it is a raw lineup.

Hence the English dilemma. Four bowlers aren't doing the job. With Noffke and Casson in the batting lineup, there should be no reason not to pick five bowlers (with presumably Hussey and Jacques to open). Except, even though the batting has generally got the runs this series, it has never quite looked comfortable doing so. Switching the order around seems like folly under those circumstances.

Playing a deep batting lineup (Casson for MacGill, Noffke for Johnson) would probably guarantee Australia a draw at least, but also puts a burden on Symonds, Clarke and Katich to bowl, while Ponting wrings his hands. Conversely, with three part-time spinners, we don't necessarily need a full-time one, depending on the pitch (though I suspect there are no better opportunities to blood Casson).

Not sure what I'd do, to be honest. Tony, your thoughts?

[David Barry]

I'll be happy to be proven wrong, but Casson does not deserve a Test spot. He had a few good games at the end of the Shield season, but that doesn't really overturn the years of mediocrity that preceded his lucky couple of months. I'd rather go with four quicks with Clarke+Symonds as the spinner. Johnson, even as ineffective as he's been lately, is still a better bowler than Casson, who I think will go the way of Hauritz unless his batting can keep him in the NSW side.

Medium-term, I'd rather McGain comes in as a stop-gap solution to the spinner problem, if we need a specialist spinner. Otherwise, the cupboard's bare, and I think we'll be back to a four-pronged pace attack.

[Tony T]

Thoughts.

I'm with Dave. We won in India with no great contribution from the spinners but with plenty of contribution from the quicks. In fact, the best spin performance was Clarke's in the sand-pit dead rubber. Our quicks, though, bowled line and length and prevented the Injuns from cutting loose. The old Windies always played four quicks against India in India and won lots of series; they didn't try to beat the Indians at their own game. Don't throw no Viv Richards, Roger Harpers or Clyde Butts at me.

Not that I'm very confident we'll beat India, just that I think we'll be better off with our four best bowlers - none of whom are spinners. Clarke is pretty handy, anyway. He puts it on the spot just about every ball and that's more than you're going to get from any other Aussie spinner. He turns it, too, as the last over in Sydney demonstrated. Ahhhh... good times.

I hope Roy doesn't bowl; that action make me sh1t. With him you are seeing the tip of the 15 degree iceberg. He is pushing the envelope close to the wind across thin ice. Someone has decided that since those extra degrees latitude are there, you may as well use them. After all, it's within the rules now, and what chumpire is going to call him if he bowls at 20 or 25? It sucks, but there it is.

I'd certainly take McGain to England next year. (Not India.) He's accurate, persistent and best of all, he's a leggy. The Dodgers hate leggies. What's more, we need a good spinner to stop England skewing their pitches to Monty. Not saying Monster is the best spinner of all time, just that he would be good against us who are notoriously unsteady against steady offspin.

Dunno how our quicks are shaping up for next year. Lee and Clark will probably still be the main guys. Johnston could still be in action. I wish he'd tidy up his line. His action lacks fluency and repeatability, too, which is a bummer on a less than skittish pitch. I suppose someone will throw up Paper Cut. He's been kicking arse in India, but let's see if he can make it through a season of Puras first. Peter Siddle could be a surprise; he's quick and handy. Dunno about Doug Champagne. I haven't seen him bowl more than a few balls, but touring parties have been littered with the detritus of fast medium bowlers who haven't been able to, ahem, step up from one level to another. Jrod over at CWB keeps tossing up Noffke and Hopes, and they must be in the frame. A good Pura campaign from either will see them very close to selection. What's Larry Tait up to? I've got him in the Johnston category: very good and not very good.

Be interesting to see where our batting is at next winter. Two Husseys, Ponting, Marsh, Roy, Clarke and Haddin is not bad at all, but will the selectors feel the need to pick TWO new players? Chuck in Noffke, Hopes or Paper Cut and that's a side that bats deep. Lee next then Clarke. Can McGain bat?

Still, if the Poms can assemble a consistent battery out of Flintoff, Jones, Monty, Sidearse, Anderson and Broad they'll be a fvck sight more threatening than the current Windies attack. Harmison, anyone? And forget all that codswallop about US being hopeless against reverse swing. EVERYONE is troubled by good swing bowling. Lee might have had some help from the Tiff, but he would have gotten out better batsmen than the Windies tail with what he was serving up two days of nights ago. And if the Cooler can get Lee ducking the agate around like that, and maybe do the same for Johnston (or someone better) then Clark, Lee and Johnston is V.Good. Chuck in McGain for the scare factor.

And don't forget Sorth Efrica.

[Russ]

Dave, I don't disagree on Casson, except for one thing: selectors sometimes do a good job of recognising when a player has something, despite apparent first class mediocrity, so who knows. Conversely, I don't have much time for chinamen bowlers, and good batsmen tend to have no trouble with them. If they have a well disguised wrong-un they are generally hard to hit (which is why Hogg was a useful one-day player). But a defensive (right-handed) player can play for the one coming back in, and inside the rest without drama. Unless the opposition is packed with lefties (Sri Lanka for instance), Casson would need to be a rare talent to have a long career.

Tony, the real worry for me regarding Lee and Clark is that they might break-down without better support. And, given the upcoming schedule, there is no way to give them a proper chance to get right again if they do. Like Flintoff, they'll just either play semi-injured for months on end or be missing completely. Four quicks (+ Clarke) is definitely the option I am leaning towards. After next year's Pura we'll have a better idea. I wouldn't complain if we played Noffke, Paper Cut, Lee, Clark and McGain over there. Is Hayden likely to still be around?

[Professor Rosseforp]

Russ, it's true that selectors may see that certain something -- although more often they need to be bludgeoned about the head with a blunt object to recognise what fans already know -- Magill is a case in point, and they still wouldn't pick him. Yet Tim May and Ray Bright were regulars! Okay, Bright was semi-regular.
Let's not forget that one of Magill's major injuries was caused by a team bonding camp. Whatever happened to the good old days of bonding over a beer (or milkshake in simpler times), a packet of cigs (or chewy) and a deck of cards?
The West Indian tests have had one major benefit -- they have reduced Macca's time on Sundays when they run overtime. Fantastic. There you go. Following the close of play, he ran a fascinating interview with a war veteran last week. Fascinating because his tape recorder was mucking up and the guy's voice kept speeding up and changing pitch, then slowing to a crawl. But Macca persisted with it. There you go. The most interesting Macca interview in a long time. There you go.