One Day Series

[BB67th]

Well I think Australia didn't do too badly tonight. 220 was a competitive total and would've made a good run chase. We certainly could have done better though, wickets just fell needlessly at sometimes like Bailey. The batting order certainly needs to start to score more thouh as we are leaving way to much to (the very reliable) pair of
Starc and Doherty. I find it interesting that Hussey has been batting above of Bailey which is different to what it has been in the past. Does this point to Hussey maybe being preffered for the Ashes and India?

On the match being called off, I think it was very poor by the umpires to call off the game, like the commentators suggested, they could have played with a damp outfield and a few white balls. Still ot was probably a good result for the Ausssies as you feel the Lankans could have chased 120-140 in 20 overs fairly safely. The D/L system places too much weight on wickets in hand, it still doesn't work fairly and I don't think anyone will ever understand it.

Bring on Hobart, and let's hope we can bat well like in game 1 and square up the series.

[upthemaidens]

Starc to open from now on

[Sapientia]

Why do we suddenly suck so much,

We don't - any international team would have been outdone by the bowling of Kula and Malinga.

Where is Watson

Injured. No point playing an underdone injury prone player anyway with the rigorous season coming up.

and also Mike Hussey

The selectors main mistake. There's no worry about his injury status/fitness as he's off anyway, so he'd be perfect to play and allow others to be fresh.

Finch,

Flat track bully. Every innings he's actually succeeded in in the list a format has been on a flat deck, not much in it for the bowlers and generally 125-135 km plodders. The moment he faces genuine swing/seam bowling or excess pace he struggles. He's not a genuine ODI prospect.

Furgason,

While excellent in his ODI career in the past, there's a requirement that he proves his worth after his major absence. He has not - he's been sub-par in the Ryobi/Shield and doesn't deserve selection based on that. He's not an incumbent, he's got to knock on the door.

Marsh,

Selecting players for one day games based on T20 or FC performances (especially T20) is idiotic. The same goes for selecting T20 players based on FC/ODI performances as well. The lads been in a severe form rut for an extended period of time and at the moment isn't even an incumbent in his state FC or OD side. T20 performance shouldn't justify a return for him.

Khawaja?

Khawaja's major weakness is that he plays to stay in, not to score runs. This doesn't bode well for test matches, but he can survive doing it - in one day matches, it's suicide. He needs to score runs and right now he tries to stay in. The only way he'll ever end an innings with a strike rate befitting an ODI player is if he makes a considerable score. If not, he'll go cheaply or start slowly (i.e. 20 off 40) then get out. Needs more confidence and aggression before being considered a genuine one day prospect.

[Sapientia]

The two review system per team is a joke, no other way to describe it, it's been said before but the icc need to sort it out quick smart!

I genuinely believe the best way to go about reviews is to review all OUT dismissals. I.E. check the edge was there, check it was LBW in hawkeye. If it takes longer than 30-40 seconds to decide, he's still out as there's not enough evidence to overrule (to avoid holdups). The batting team therefore don't need referrals.

Allow the bowling team 3 referrals in test matches, 2 in ODIs and 1 in T20Is.

[Sapientia]

Christian, Ferguson, Marsh and Khawaja should be getting games. Use Wade as an opener.

Warner
Wade
Clarke
Ferguson
Khawaja/Marsh
Dave Hussey
Christian
Starc
McKay
Johnson
Doherty

The only realistic position Khawaja can play in ODIs is an opener (and only as foil to an aggresive batsman). In the middle order he'd flounder, he's near on incapable of hitting quick runs the moment he gets to the crease and often at 5/6 he'd come in at 3/200 off 35 or something.

Marsh is a great player but needs to work his way back on the basis of performance in the format he desires selection in (OD). Ferg's not been good enough to justify a spot.

Christian too has been poor, and also clearly has discipline problems however there is no realistic competition for his spot; Henriques bowls straight pies and isn't a genuine strike/bowling option. Christian can bowl death and also take wickets despite the fact that he's not an awesome bowler. I do think he should be playing.

[PowerBug]

I saw the news, and saw the two shocking decisions. And that is why the DRS is in play, but why didn't they use it? Coz the greedy, selfish captain decided to on a straight-forward, plumb LBW decision. I hope that everyone involved in International cricket looks at this, and realises that you can't review every LBW decision. :)

Warner and Henriques don't deserve to be out, but they derseve to belt Michael Clarke with their bats when they return to the dressing rooms but they should look at what happened and make sure that it doesn't happen again, as the DRS was bought in for that EXACT reason, to remove the howlers. :)

[Capper]

It will get to the stage where all wickets will be reviewed by the 3rd umpire. This when then slow the game down more, but if used correctly (to do what the review system was designed for, to remove the howlers) then this shouldnt slow the game down too much. I may be an Aussie supporter whinging like Jukes and his pommy counterparts, but this is what it will end up being like.

Umpire says out
Third umpire reviews no ball
third umpire reviews wicket
drinks come on the ground
channel 9 commentators discuss the Block coming soon on 9
Third umpire decision given

This will be on top on each teams reviews

[Tominator]

I think if the umpire is not 100% sure he should go upstairs anyway, sounds radical I know but they could do worse than to trial it

So for example, if it looks plumb LBW but he thinks there may have been some bat there, he'd signal the third umpire... No DRS required (maybe one per innings) but the correct decision is made through technology

Thoughts?

[JBs-Hawks]

Or just have it how it is but if there is a howler like that the third umpire just radios the umpire before the batsmen leaves the field.

[Capper]

Or just have it how it is but if there is a howler like that the third umpire just radios the umpire before the batsmen leaves the field.

But this is where it gets tricky as if the batsmen doesnt leave the field after being given out he could be in trouble for showing misconduct towards an umpire

[tbagrocks]

Or just have it how it is but if there is a howler like that the third umpire just radios the umpire before the batsmen leaves the field.

Agree, leave it up to the third umpire, if it is a howler then over rule

It does get tricky though on dodgy lbw's, we don't want to wait a minute on fine lines, just keep the rule for the howlers

[PowerBug]

But that's why the DRS is there fellas. It makes sense to have everything reffered, but the DRS is there for that exact reason. If Clarke hadn't used it on his plumb LBW, then Warner and Henriques wouldn't have been out.

If every decision is going to be reffered then there's no point in the Batting side having DRS.

[upthemaidens]

I think if the umpire is not 100% sure he should go upstairs anyway, sounds radical I know but they could do worse than to trial it

So for example, if it looks plumb LBW but he thinks there may have been some bat there, he'd signal the third umpire... No DRS required (maybe one per innings) but the correct decision is made through technology

Thoughts?

The problem there is that (using the 2 aussie wickets as example) if the umpire isnt 100% sure then he shouldnt have given the wicket out in the first place.(benefit going to the batsman and all)
  With those 2 LBW's, the umpire WAS sure that there was no bat involved. So he may not have reviewed them anyhow.
  Maybe something like this could work :-   Every wicket gets reviewed(quickly) to avoid a howler  and the bowling team gets a couple of reviews for when they feel  the wicket wasnt given in the first instance.

[PowerBug]

Certinaly a logical solution, but you are all whinging about Australia losing 2 wickets they shouldn't have. (Don't take that the wrong way, they were the only words i could think of) We have DRS there to remove howlers, go look it up. When it was brought in, it's intention was to remove howlers. Now if everyone is using it for it's wrong purpose then you're asking for it tbh, and that's what Clarke did. (And every other team in the world, everryone is trying to exploit the system)

[upthemaidens]

Certinaly a logical solution, but you are all whinging about Australia losing 2 wickets they shouldn't have. (Don't take that the wrong way, they were the only words i could think of) We have DRS there to remove howlers, go look it up. When it was brought in, it's intention was to remove howlers. Now if everyone is using it for it's wrong purpose then you're asking for it tbh, and that's what Clarke did. (And every other team in the world, everryone is trying to exploit the system)

Like the commentators keep saying, "Keep the DRS out of the players hands". Otherwise it will be used(as is now) as a strategy, and thats not what its for.