The toss on Thursday looms as a crucial one for Michael Clarke, with both convention and common sense suggesting that if he wins, he should bat.
But with an eye on the five-day forecast and a glance at how first-class cricket has played out this season, he should go for broke and insert England.
To be fair, the forecast for the five days looks pretty reasonable for an Old Trafford Test, but one thing you can rely on is that at some stage there will be rain, and Clarke will need to make the best of the conditions if Australia is to keep this series alive.
He needs to roll the dice and take a punt on the road less travelled.
If the forecast is to be believed, Thursday looms as a warm but overcast day, and one where there is the potential for the ball to swing, whilst Friday looks to be a brighter day, and in an ideal world, when the wicket should be at its best.
Inserting England is obviously a risk given their depth of talent, but if the Aussies are going to win, they might need to do it against the normal grain of cricket thinking. That would require them to put the hosts in, get them out for less than 200, and bat the whole of Friday as well as most of Saturday, hoping that there is no ‘rearguard’ by England in their second innings.
But is this madness, I hear you say? A glance at the performances of Lancashire and their opponents at Old Trafford this season also provides a pointer towards inserting England. Of course, this should be just used as a guide, given the vagaries of early season form and weather (especially up north), but there is evidence to show that second innings performances have been outweighing first innings efforts.
The statistics for first innings scores reveal 1660 runs for 60 wickets at an average of 27 per wicket, compared to 2188 for 54 wickets at an average of 40 per wicket in the second innings.
The highest score in the first innings is 474, versus a low of 62, with six completed innings yielding an average of 277. In comparison, the second innings averages a much higher score of 365, with a high of 567 and a low of 159. In broad terms, it shows a 90-run difference, or if we go by the average per-wicket difference, 130 runs for a completed innings.
Making an analogy to studying the form on the horses and by taking in to account the current form at track and in the ‘going’, the Aussies would be better suited ‘second up’ rather than ‘first up’.
But, of course, this does not take into account all of the other form factors, such as the fragility of the top six, the superiority of James Anderson and Graeme Swann, or critically, what the wicket presents.
But if Clarke wins the toss, he should take a deep breath, cross his fingers and toes, and insert England.
It’s ‘Truth or Dare’ time for the Australian skipper.
Floyd Calhoun
Guest
Standards of what?
nickyc
Guest
So you're not in favour of raising standards?
Floyd Calhoun
Guest
Priapism has no place in modern cricket. Especially the rampant variety. I don't know what it is, but I'm fairly sure we don't need it.
nickyc
Guest
Yep, and 4-0 for the summer which just goes to show you can turn things round.
Hookin' YT
Guest
Swann, Rooty and Monty have apparently summoned the team doctor to give them something to quell the rampant priapism they are suffering after reading the rumours they may get to bowl on day5 if Australia wins the toss (obviously Cook will bat unless its bright green with more grass than a Jamaican wake).
jameswm
Roar Guru
I think inserting the opposition is an underused option. Pitches don''t deteriorate like they used to. Batting on days 2 and 3 is usually easier than day 1. Insert them, bowl well, keep them to under 300, then go out in the good conditions and score 500. That's how to win. Unless the pitch is likely to deteriorate, it might be a good toss to lose.
jameswm
Roar Guru
He's 2-0 this series.
Brian
Guest
Agreed if we bowl we will be on top at stumps and make our 150 on Day 2. If we bat first we will be on the backfoot as soon as we reach our customary 6/110 or so. As an aside great to see Melbouren host the WC Final. Will be interesting to see how the WC goes with the Final on March 29 - very much into AFL/NRL seasons.
Dave Richardson
Roar Guru
I am English
Hookin' YT
Guest
I was wrong, wrong, wrong, England won the toss, sent Australia in and lost. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63609.html 74 Tests at Old Trafford, toss winner fielded 8 times for: 7 draws; 1 loss and no wins. 74 Tests at Old Trafford Results: 34 Draws; 25 wins to team batting first; 15 wins to team fielding first (all tosses lost). Australia's highest 4th Innings batting second 402 in 1981 - Lost. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63293.html
Gr8rWeStr
Guest
According to Ben Horne, "Lehmann stressing that Michael Clarke’s back is good enough for the skipper to bowl.", so appears to be no doubts he'll play. Quote from http://www.theroar.com.au/2013/07/30/australia-consider-lyon-for-third-test/
Jammel
Guest
Disagree. We need to win the toss, bat and bat slowly and steadily. And actually make a big score. Sounds simple....
nickyc
Guest
Against a serial toss loser like Cook he must have a chance. Prior to this summer Cook had only managed to win two out of nine tosses as captain.
nickyc
Guest
What replace one flighty opener with another........definitely not.
Chris
Guest
None at all. You'll have some on here suggesting one replaces Watson as opener...
nickyc
Guest
The trouble is I was a little unsure how much emphasis to put on the impact that the Canada geese are likely to have on the outcome of the test.
Chris
Guest
Or even "one". Brain fade...
nickyc
Guest
If Oz leave out Harris it would go a long way to avoiding the creation of any "craters".
abigail
Guest
Our strength is our pace bowlers, so if the conditions are overcast then I agree that we have to send England in. Then hope like hell that our batsmen actually perform when the pitch is at it's best and that we only have to bat once. If we bat first and get a low score then the English batsmen will be under no pressure at all when they have to bat. However if its a clear sunny day then conventional wisdom says bat first. Clarke shocking record in predicting the toss says the decision may well be out of hands anyway. If we are going to stick with a batting line up, and assure them of the last three tests to make them feel warm and fuzzy and secure then I would advocate that its the kids we stick with not Watson and Rogers. Neither have long term futures in the team. We are much better putting the time into the kids. By the way has anyone actually heard if Clarke will be fit enough to play the third test?
Chris
Guest
Just to clarify, only won team has CHOSEN to bat second and won. Teams losing the toss and batting second have won many times.