There were times on Friday night when I wasn’t sure if I was watching a game of cricket or the Jim Rose Circus.
Some of the contortions going on in the middle of the Adelaide Oval were reminiscent of the guy who can thread his body through a tennis racquet.
Like this – can I even call it a shot? – from Glenn Maxwell.
Search any cricket manual on the planet, you won’t find this.
It’s what I imagine I look like when I’m doing battle with a Huntsman armed only with a full can of Mortein. I don’t want to get any closer than I need to, I certainly don’t want to look at it, but the spider has to die or it’ll tap dance on my face while I’m sleeping.
It’s a shot that defies description, though the man himself gave it a crack.
“To clarify,” he said, “the shot is called the back away, look away, deliberate cut through point.”
At any rate, you can’t teach this kind of stroke play. Which is probably a good thing.
While the scoreboard says Australia had an easy win over Pakistan in the World Cup quarter finals, there was a point when our fortunes rested on the combined shoulders of Glenn Maxwell and Shane Watson. Which is not where you want to be at the pointy end of the tournament.
That kind of viewing should really come with a health warning. Like: ‘This partnership may provoke television vandalism, more than occasional course language and an increased likelihood of aneurism. Channel Nine advises extreme caution’.
Fortunately, by the time these two came together, after a typically classy innings from Steve Smith, Australia was out of the deep, deep hole we could’ve been in had Watto’s top edge to fine leg found a safe pair of hands.
Watto’s innings was really painful to watch. Right up there with a triple header of Titanic, Pearl Harbour and Frozen. No exaggeration.
You see, Watto thought it was a good idea to sledge Wahab Riaz during Pakistan’s innings. “Are you holding a bat?” he asked the Pakistani fast bowler. Not the kind of thing you say when you’re looking for a bit of form yourself.
Those five words could have cost us the World Cup. Because once Wahab had the ball, his weapon of choice, he made it his life’s mission to beat Watto around the head with it.
Two things immediately became apparent. Watto’s a dead certainty for the next season of Dancing with the Stars, as the celebrity with two left feet. And he needs to get some urgent death stare lessons from Julie Bishop.
When, in a tortured innings, he finally skied an edge, I traversed both ends of the emotional spectrum, equal parts relieved and mortified.
Blessed be the deities because there was one person on the field playing worse than Watto at that particular moment in time. Luckily for us, it was the bloke under the catch.
As for Maxwell, well he just makes it up as he goes along. Which is fabulously entertaining. But it’s like holding junk bonds in your superannuation portfolio. Unbelievable upside, until it goes to custard and you’re eating dog food in retirement.
If I had to pick someone to play for my life, I’d bat Lleyton Hewitt from both ends. But on Friday night, it was Maxwell and Watto who saw us through.
It’s not conventional cricket. At times, it’s barely cricket at all.
But we live to play another day.
VL98
Guest
Why my comment has been taken down? Is the word 'rubbish' not allowed? Crazy stuff. Anyway.. Vas Venkatramani, I will repeat. I have no intention in wasting my time replying to such cr*p.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Watto was lucky to be dropped, so was Guptil, so was Rohit when he scored his 265 or whatever it was. It happens. Watson for the most part played that spell pretty well, he made one mistake when he decided to take it on and got a top edge and was dropped. It happens in cricket. It's really frustrating when you are the batsman who seems to always get out to a freakish catch on the first slight mistake you make while watching teammates having sitters dropped all over the place, but it happens. Many great innings in cricket have happened after a slice of luck early on. Unfortunately, some people seem to have this issue raised a lot more than others. Just like I've never heard a single mention of Finch's century against England without it being qualified by the fact he was dropped on zero. It happened, he got lucky, but he then turned around and made the most of that chance.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I thought Watto's stare was great too. Throughout his career Watson has so often seemed to play all his cricket with a continual worried look on his face. He didn't have that at all against Pakistan and I thought he faced it pretty well. He made one mistake and got away with it, but other than that, in a match where they could have afforded to just see off Wahab and score off the rest of the bowlers, he generally played that pretty well. Pakistan had the issue that there seemed to be little threat from the rest of the bowlers. While you could say something similar about Starc at times, against Pakistan they could have tried to see off Starc, but Hazlewood was really good and the other bowlers not too bad at keeping the pressure on either.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
I actually like that team, having Clarke opening with Warner. I've suggested the same myself. In the current environment where it's often about being busy and keeping it ticking over in the first 10 overs rather than going ballistic, Clarke would be a perfect foil for Warner. However, it's probably also getting pretty late in the tournament to be making such changes. You don't want to do a Sri Lanka, play with a certain batting lineup all tournament and then change it up for the most important match to date only to have everything fall apart. And you never know, this may be the match where Finch comes out and scores another big hundred. Finch does have a lot of issues with the moving ball though. In totally flat conditions where it's not moving around he can just stand there and whack it everywhere. But if there's any seam or swing then he's in trouble. Probably why he's been so incredibly poor in first class cricket.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
It wasn't a bad spell in a lot of ways, and troubled the batsman, but as a captain I'd take a Starc, Boult or Southee type spell, getting the ball up, swinging it and sending stumps flying, any day of the week. It was a good display of aggressive short bowling, but in the end he ended up with 2-50. Yes, that included dropped catches in the outfield. But even taking that all into account, it could only rate at best the 5th or 6th best spell in this world cup. Of course, a spell that makes a batsman uncomfortable for a long time and keeps "working him over" rather than getting them out often looks really good. You don't get that effect where batsmen are only lasting a couple of balls before their stumps go flying.
Vas Venkatramani
Roar Guru
VL98, passive-aggressive much? The Roar is designed for opinion pieces, and in this case, the author has simply given his (or hers, don't want to be presumptious). He can say Watto was a god or a goat, doesn't matter. Just as long there is some evidence behind it, which I feel the author has done well. As for your supposed insult of "a woman", what are you implying? That due to the male-dominated nature of the sport, that women don't know as much? So therefore, if a woman does display knowledge, do you automatically dismiss it for no other fault than her gender? As for your comment about the Indians who follow India or Australia, what do you allude that to, and how are you substantiating that? I've followed Australia my entire life, regardless of 20 years ago or yesterday. Just not sure that randomly insulting your fellow Roarers is exactly the best way of creating constructive debate around here.
raz
Guest
And australia have the cowlasher maxwell,pretty even contest i must say in that regard.
raz
Guest
this indian team isn't clearly stronger than Australia in Australian conditions.But If the pitch has a slight grip and turn(not likely),india will win it.
Lea
Guest
I do understand VL98, I also react when I read unfair criticism of Watto and some have been quite ugly. I'm hoping he will silence a few more critics in our next two matches ;)
VL98
Guest
On a different note, on to the next match AUS v IND. Some cool fact. 15-20 years ago, Australian team was twice stronger than the indian team. But many indians supported Indian team back then. Today, indian team is slightly better than Australia, but many indians support Australian team in the next match. Crazy.
VL98
Guest
I am sorry, but i lost it when i read "there was one person on the field playing worse than Watto." The writer must be criticized for writing an article on watto in bad taste, especially when he put up a good performance. Lea, Majority of the women started watching cricket in recent years. They got no idea of how cricket was 30 years ago & naturally have less knowledge on cricket. For example, when compared to the percentage of women watching today, only a few percentage of women saw the test match(against WI in 1995) which i mentioned in my last comment. The fact that he called smith's innings as 'class' & watto's as 'worst' shows he's someone who has minimum knowledge on cricket. Lea, As you can see that '13th man' comment also describes the same, shows the sorry state of some fans. Looks like, in this generation, women have more knowledge on cricket than men.
sd
Guest
"i guess india is the only team who can pressurise the aus in mid overs (11th to 35-40) "and who are the bowlers ?yadev 15.80 economy in test ? belted by burns in single over !
Nudge
Guest
Hope you got big pecker
Lea
Guest
"Your knowledge & ignorance on cricket is so laughable that I can call you a woman." Was that remark intentional or just a horrible mistake VL98?
Bandy
Roar Guru
I found the article pretty funny, and pretty spot on too!
Vikram
Guest
Did not get you met aus is favourit to winnnnnn the cup and best team in the tournament how can u call a chowkkkkkk loosing against them .... If aus looses then it would be chooowkkkkkkkkkkkkk and i am hopping for one what india is able to do in this tournament is to go deep while batting 4odd wicket at 40th over, if they can do that (lets say play out mitchhhhh's which is the hardest part of the tournament) then might be the game on i guess india is the only team who can pressurise the aus in mid overs (11th to 35-40)
sd
Guest
it is going to be australia vs south africa !kiwi and ind will choke in semi's.
ak
Roar Guru
Australia will lose to India in the semifinals surely. I will streak if they don't.
13th man
Guest
Mate give the author a break. He has given writing an article a crack, credit to him. Watto was very lucky to be dropped, Riaz was all over him. Smiths innings was 10 times better! Why don't you write your own article about how much you love Watto instead of being rude to the author who has a different opinion.
VL98
Guest
Congrats for being the worst writer ever. Your knowledge & ignorance on cricket is so laughable that i can call you a woman. Perhaps, you are one of those mindless people, who want no contest between bat and ball(like a no-contest with smith. Smith didn't face a single tough ball. His innings was a childsplay). I have already stated before that, the contest was a classic, very similar to waugh vs ambrose 1995 trinidad. There are many good things about his innings, but, you wouldn't get a thing even if i write an article on it. "Are u holding a bat?" is a rumor by cricinfo. These rumors are created for a bunch of immatures who believe anything blindly. Watto usually sledges, but he didn't in that match.