Australia recover from slow start to hammer New Zealand at Lord's

I don't have enough suitably sized devices to watch everything at the same time right now :( Barty. Bangers. Bolton. Elysse Perry you champ. 52 with the bat and 26 with the ball is nuts.

the latter now,. shoosh, Schutter is about to bowl the first ball of the real deal! Go Kangawomen!

was there supposed to be "g" (in which case I'll take on the end of that (in which case I will take that as not agreeing) or are you referencing my propensity for zen moments, Peter!

om!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

or exactly what he has been tasked with, given the solidity that comes before and after him.

I can only assume Maxwell is playing to instructions as I doubt he would let his mate Finch down. the instructions being - if it's there to hit, belt it! if this is the case, this may well be because in Carey, at 7, we have the ultimate safety net reverse their positions and we may lose the ying yang thang it's not a yes/no black/white thing, just a pros and cons thing they are winning and picking the same team so you have to assume (can assume, at least) that they are comfortable with the overall approach, and are willing to accept a failure here or there if its within the plan (and we keep winning) ???

Ok we lost. Have a delightful day for small period of time –_–

Khawaja's second 'lucky' 80 in winning World Cup games!

What stood out with Khawaja was, just as with Finch and Warner - sometimes you have that little bit of luck but that means it's your job to make the most of it - and it was hard work out there and he didn't necessarily make it look anything but hard. Early on Finch got one that kept low and Warner almost fell to one that took off - that's cricket - Uzzie held it together so good on him. Certainly Carey was the special innings and a deserved MotM.

How did that turn out?

Hi Ashton, the point of the post was not to look at every innings of Maxwell's form in this period, but rather whether he has not only scored at a high SR but also has the ability to score runs. Apologies, it was 11 innings not 12. His other scores were 1 (last night), 12, 0 & 4*. He hasn't had the tournament he would have wanted, but his job is most often than not to come in late. No team should be aiming to go at less than 6 an over in the final 10 overs unless ground conditions are such that it is very difficult to do so, or as you say, there has been an early collapse. During the period being discussed (11 matches), Maxwell has only had to come in on 3 occasions for the loss of early wickets: - 4/140 (batted 31st to 48th overs): 71 (55) SR 129 -4/101 (batted 23rd to 50th overs) 98 (82) SR 119 - 3/36 (batted 1 over): 0 (2) SR 0 - 4/81 (batted 1 over): 1 (5) SR 20 - last night's game. On the first two occasions he batted 17 & 27 overs, scored runs at a good pace and dismissed right at the end of the 50 overs. On the other two occasions he has gotten out cheaply, however he was no orphan in that regard in those matches. The first of those he skied a bouncer. The second of those was a pull shot where the ball came off the toe of the bat. Not great dismissals, but can hardly put down to pure slogging and again not alone in the context of those matches. It's clear from the above Maxwell can score explosively when faced with just a few overs remaining and can also bat long but at a good pace at the fall of early wickets. Note during this period he has also been moved around in positions 4, 5 & 6, with 2x half centuries at #6, 1x @ #4 and a 46* @ #5. If teams' focus is on having only batsmen that have a good average but can't score more than 100SR, then they typically aren't going to be teams that be confident in setting challenging totals or chasing down where the team has become bogged down. Note Maxwell's career SR is 124. In modern ODI cricket it would be foolish to not have at least one player with the "T20 explosiveness" which is now so commonplace and from which there is a significant talent pool to choose from. As has been mentioned by others, it is about team balance.

what about the other 5 innings of the 12 innings. i dont think cherry picking the best 7 innings is the right thing to do, need to look at the overall picture. yes, SR is more important for a middle/lower order batsman. However you must be adaptable. If you're in at 70/4, you cant be playing the same way as when you are 280/4. That adaptability, ability to knuckle down and guts it out when team needs you even if it means being a strike rate of <200!

I understand where you're coming from about Maxwell Jason. The thing is though, it's rare that he is going to get the perfect scenario to show us what he can do. He had it set up perfectly once, against Bangladesh, but had a potentially brilliant innings cut short by that run out. Maxwell is clearly the most talented player in the team, IMO, but I also don't believe he thinks enough about situations. Many believe he has the potential to get back into the Test side, but that calls for players who can make quick judgments about how to bat in a given situation. This series has shown to me he lacks that judgment or perhaps the ability to execute fully. He's had lots of occasions where he could bat for 20 overs, including last night, but on each occasion he needed to shelve the big shots, get in get settled, then launch in the last 10 overs. Instead he's made a quick small double figure score and got out. That is simply poor from one of the most explosive players in the game.

hi Dave, I look at Smith's brilliant catch as well as his wicket, the general fielding from Australia, the tight bowling from Lyons & Cummins that kept a lid on the scoring. the small but important innings from Stoinis. When you add all this up, plus the guys who made most of the runs and took the wickets, there's hardly a guy who doesn't deserve a mention. I agree there was a bit in the pitch, but not that much that if batsmen applied themselves, they couldn't get a decent score, as both Khawaja & Carey proved. The batting conditions were by far the easiest of the day when the Kiwis batted and Behrendorff 12 months ago, would have gone for a lot of runs in his later overs. The fact that he didn't across 9 overs, shows to me he knows he can't only be a strike bowler. He must be able to contain which he did pretty well.

Oh dear, I didn't hear that gem. He was brought in to contain and build pressure. What a Goose!

I can't agree that SR is over rated in ODI cricket Ashton, not for batsmen 5 and below. Your example is a very simplistic one. Would you take an average of over 100 for a middle order batsman that has made 6x not out scores of 15 to 20, coming in to bat in the 45th over? Great average, but has likely badly let his team down. In any event, you've used a generic example when the discussion is about Maxwell and what the team expectations may be for his approach and how this balances the side. Seven of Maxwell's most recent 12 scores have been runs/(balls)/SR: - 71 (55) 129 - 98 (82) 119 - 70 (33) 212 - 46* (25) 184 - 28 (14) 200 - 20 (10) 200 - 32 (10) 320 In all but two of these innings, Maxwell has been dismissed (or not) as 5th or 6th wicket down, with between o and 22 balls remaining in the innings. In all of those, AUS has finished 5, 6, or 7 wkts down, therefore his dismissal has not resulted in lost opportunities for remaining batsman to score off the relatively few balls remaining. I would take runs scored by a late-middle order batsman at a fast rate, irrespective of whether he then gets out with a few balls remaining in the innings, over a slow scoring batsman who protects his wicket, any day for ODIs.

Last night's was even worse than normal. A cringefest. Seriously, how did Slater get the gig? Not a huge fan of Clarke either but he does have some insightful comments. On the whole I have enjoyed the commentary of the WC, though I'd still love the ability to turn it off when I want to. Watching Australia play and not having an Aussie commentary team cheering them on (a la Nine and now Seven) is all the more enjoyable. Sadly, for the Aus WC games somebody has decided that the Michaels should get extra turns. At least Warne isn't there! Or Healy. Speaking of which... why do Nine bother with their little panel sessions? Every wicket: let's cut back to Australia to hear what some other Australians think about that, from an Australian point of view. It kills the atmosphere.

i think clarke has improved a lot to be honest. he was very tacky and superficial when he started, now he can give a few useful insights. Slater on the other hand....omg, he is past his use by date. Keeps saying same thing over and over again, annoys the other commentators, annoys the listeners, can't help with his personal subconscious biases.

Strike rate is over-rated. example: a player of huge potential gets 10 off 5 balls for 8 innings in a row. His strike rate is an astonishing 200%. His average is an astonishing 5! I would take average above strike rate any day for ODI cricket.

There was more than an average dose of luck on display in this match. Dropped catches and some crazy looking shots that could easily have ended badly. Yep, if it is an Aus vs NZ semi then Aussie beware! At 5/90 Australia were gone. NZ could do that again and next time might not turn out so well. And NZ probably learnt more from this match than Aus did.