Perth Wicket's Roar Profile

Batting is far too comfortable down under. So, when conditions are not favourable to batsman as David Warner knows all too well, the Australian’s struggle immensely.

Continuing to use the Dukes ball in Shield cricket is a positive step forward. But more impetus in creating juicier wickets needs to happen too.

The results might mean less Australian wins. But give me a tight series over a whitewash any day of the week.

Gripping Ashes proves yet again that England, not Australia, has the hosting formula

View Comment

2019

Carey has certainly proven himself. He’s so calm.

I think there was fault with Maxwell, as you say. He has potential to destroy a bowling attack. But the amount of times he’s succeeded over an extended period of batting (20+ overs) is very small.

Australia's success down to super coach Langer

Agreed – I think India and England go in as favourites (as they did prior to the tournament)

Yes. I think there’s been a realisation that the win-at-all-costs mentality is not a good long-term strategy for success. A process-oriented approach works much better.

Great call, Neel.

Very influential, indeed. He holds a huge amount of respect among the playing group.

Agreed, Ben. Quality bowlers are a rarity and often prove the difference. Any number of bats can stand up in a game but a good spell from a bowler can change the game’s complexion.

Dousing the Scorchers flame

Oops, my mistake – noted. Thanks, John.

Yes, this game was a classic example of that. There is rarely momentum swings in Twenty20 cricket – it’s hard to regain control when a side gets the upper hand.

“It’s like swapping baked beans for caviar” – beautiful work, Ryan!

West Coast wildcard: Where do the Eagles fit into 2018’s AFL hierarchy?

AFL

Agreed. Adam Zampa is out of sorts. I think Nathan Lyon is the logical choice as a genuine spin option while Ashton Agar fits the spinner/lower-order hitter role, should Australia adopt a different model.

Australia needs a tweak and NSW may offer the solution

Great article – there are some excellent points within.

I agree with your point regarding Smith. He is batting too high and is better suited to batting at 5.

Warner at 5 is an interesting thought!

What's the best template for Australia's ODI team?

I like your thinking, J Ball. That way international players can feature in the BBL and that provides them ample game time. Smith, Warner and co. don’t get enough practice in the shortest format and this is why Australia struggles.

The road to the BBL finals: Adelaide Strikers

This is gold, Dane: “With the nation’s entire cricketing resources stretched across various formats, commentary boxes and hair replacement studios”

Well written!

Cameron White hasn't failed, he's just been doing his job

I think Head deserves another shot – he’s only failed twice and has otherwise been in good form this summer.

A missing Finch leaves plenty of Head room

Good point, Paul. Warner has indeed underwhelmed – especially in a format where he should prosper.

I question burn-out. Is it a contributing factor after the test series that is always the inevitable focus of the summer?

Sound argument, Eddie. Maxwell could fill the void at number three but he could do equally well lower down too. I think that if he continues to sure his maturity and applies himself consistently then he’ll find himself back in the limited overs squad.

But where will he be of most use to Australia? Would you continue to play both Mitch Marsh and Marcus Stoinis? They’re all powerful strikers but does this create an imbalance?

Could Glenn Maxwell be better at the top of the order?

Smith’s comments sum things up nicely in my opinion: “Just playing smarter cricket and executing our skills a lot better is a good place to start.”

Learning from England is a great idea; hopefully Australia does it soon

That’s part of the point, Christo. There doesn’t need to be a significant change in strategy. A balanced and stable squad is the key.

Australian selectors must follow the Sydney Sixers example

Fair call, Paul – I see where you’re coming from. But what makes the selectors so sure that express pace is the answer? The reason Starc and co. have been successful is not purely because they can bowl 140+. They have other skills too.

Why did they opt for J. Bird in Melbourne when Starc was unavailable? Wouldn’t a Starc-like bowler have been warranted based on your rationale?

Selectors show Jhye hopes trump persistence in pace stakes

Great point, matth. That rationale makes a lot of sense. Treating Richardson as a project player allows him to gather experience and time around the side and I get that. But it still doesn’t reward consistent cricket. That’s why having a development squad trailing the test squad is sometimes worthwhile.

Exactly, Wayne, A balanced and varied bowling line-up is ideal. That way batsmen can’t settle and it creates more chances to find a batsman’s weakness.

I agree, Buttler certainly isn’t to blame.

Cricket must embrace technology or abandon it

It would be interesting to see what would have happened if the same thing had happened on Channel Ten’s coverage. Would there be a difference, I wonder?

Agreed, James.

Good comment, Paul. My point is that the umpires should have decided on the field without a referral (and backed their judgement) or the technology should have over-ruled the soft signal because there was too much doubt.

The umpires should have backed themselves entirely then. The soft signal is what led to the dispute and is one of the major factors in this problem.

Older Comments