The Ashes: Sydney

[meninblue]

Adi,

When England last toured India, they picked Dawson, Ansari (who ended up injured and retired) and Rashid, the first two being highly controversial over leech.

When England started to get pounded on pitches that were suitable for spinners, questions were thrown around about the absence of leech. As the last test approached, the ECB were getting massacred and leaked to the press that leach had failed a routine bowling test before the series, which was flagged on computers and had been something no one had suspected or questioned. As the matter was highlighted outside of competition, there was no sanctions. Leach remodelled his action almost as quickly as the question was raised, but apparently they couldn't retest him in UAE and sidelined him for the winter until the A tour to Sri Lanka......wonder why they didn't send him on a plane back to England where the equipment was?

If you trace all that's said, originally (subsequently corrected) reported comments said leach was informed after the squad and series were underway in India, then it was changed to him being called in October before.

Essentially, it all sounds dodgy, and while leach isn't in the position to criticise a system for fear of his career, some of his county mates have been clear in their opinion of it being a stitch up to cover England's dumb selection

I have not watched Liam Dawson bowl more than a spell iirc on that tour. I don't think i have watched Ansari bowl as well. So cannot comment on those two subjectively. Rashid, yes i have seen him bowl more.

If Jack Leach is now bowling with correct action and then also if he is averaging best in domestics then why they have not picked him for Ashes tour.

[GarlicJam]

Fun facts: Barring 2016's washout v the West Indies, the winning team (or in the one draw, both teams) has scored 430+ in 8 of the last 10 first innings here (2013 was an exception, where Australia only scored 330 in the first innings and went on to win due to England having no stomach for the fight against Mitch1 any more, and 2010 v Pakistan, where Australia scored 127 in the first innings and went on to win. Australia were 257-8 in the second innings only 55 ahead, yet managed to score 381 all out thanks to a 120 run 9th wicket partnership between Hussey and Siddle, and then bowled Pakistan out for 139 in pursuit of 176. Later than year of course three of the Pakistan line-up were banned for spot fixing. If that 2010 game at the SCG wasn't dodgy I'll eat my hat).

That SCG test and was played on a green top wicket that did everything early on, both teams struggled, but the pitch flattened out in the second innings and became easier to bat on. Was a pretty good test match to watch to be honest, not even with hindsight did it feel Pakistan threw it away on purpose.

That was the game Kamran Akmal kept with a pair of cymbals. It was the phoniest game I've seen. he had the chance to run out Hussey and actually threw the ball in the opposite direction from the stumps.

i am terrible at remembering details, but I think it was this match that had several questionable Pakistani dismissals - not. In the umpiring decisions, but in decision-making by the bats,en. In particular Akmal's dismissal, I think.

[Arthur Crabtree]

And Vic Marks.

?

Felt Leach's test fail was an invention.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Adi,

When England last toured India, they picked Dawson, Ansari (who ended up injured and retired) and Rashid, the first two being highly controversial over leech.

When England started to get pounded on pitches that were suitable for spinners, questions were thrown around about the absence of leech. As the last test approached, the ECB were getting massacred and leaked to the press that leach had failed a routine bowling test before the series, which was flagged on computers and had been something no one had suspected or questioned. As the matter was highlighted outside of competition, there was no sanctions. Leach remodelled his action almost as quickly as the question was raised, but apparently they couldn't retest him in UAE and sidelined him for the winter until the A tour to Sri Lanka......wonder why they didn't send him on a plane back to England where the equipment was?

If you trace all that's said, originally (subsequently corrected) reported comments said leach was informed after the squad and series were underway in India, then it was changed to him being called in October before.

Essentially, it all sounds dodgy, and while leach isn't in the position to criticise a system for fear of his career, some of his county mates have been clear in their opinion of it being a stitch up to cover England's dumb selection

I have not watched Liam Dawson bowl more than a spell iirc on that tour. I don't think i have watched Ansari bowl as well. So cannot comment on those two subjectively. Rashid, yes i have seen him bowl more.

If Jack Leach is now bowling with correct action and then also if he is averaging best in domestics then why they have not picked him for Ashes tour.

He went with the Lions, so he is out there. But the Lions are hardly playing any cricket.

[meninblue]

Adi,

When England last toured India, they picked Dawson, Ansari (who ended up injured and retired) and Rashid, the first two being highly controversial over leech.

When England started to get pounded on pitches that were suitable for spinners, questions were thrown around about the absence of leech. As the last test approached, the ECB were getting massacred and leaked to the press that leach had failed a routine bowling test before the series, which was flagged on computers and had been something no one had suspected or questioned. As the matter was highlighted outside of competition, there was no sanctions. Leach remodelled his action almost as quickly as the question was raised, but apparently they couldn't retest him in UAE and sidelined him for the winter until the A tour to Sri Lanka......wonder why they didn't send him on a plane back to England where the equipment was?

If you trace all that's said, originally (subsequently corrected) reported comments said leach was informed after the squad and series were underway in India, then it was changed to him being called in October before.

Essentially, it all sounds dodgy, and while leach isn't in the position to criticise a system for fear of his career, some of his county mates have been clear in their opinion of it being a stitch up to cover England's dumb selection

I have not watched Liam Dawson bowl more than a spell iirc on that tour. I don't think i have watched Ansari bowl as well. So cannot comment on those two subjectively. Rashid, yes i have seen him bowl more.

If Jack Leach is now bowling with correct action and then also if he is averaging best in domestics then why they have not picked him for Ashes tour.

He went with the Lions, so he is out there. But the Lions are hardly playing any cricket.

Havent seen him bowl, is he the best spinner in English domestic cricket.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Best English bowler but plays on helpful wickets. Rashid is handy at county level. Rayner is a stalwart off spinner who is reliable. Hard to tell how they will do until they get a chance. Swann didn't come into the England side with any fanfare.

[andy]

I think Crane needs a proper run....can't just pick him then drop him...give him 10-12 tests seee how he goes, no use going on the spinner merry go round, pick one and stick with him for a period of time

[meninblue]

Best English bowler but plays on helpful wickets. Rashid is handy at county level. Rayner is a stalwart off spinner who is reliable. Hard to tell how they will do until they get a chance. Swann didn't come into the England side with any fanfare.

But when Swann came he must be the best of the lot i guess. Reading posts of England posters i feel the bowlers tried were not best of the lot. So it seems more to be wrong selections to me.

[andy]

Crane's the man they want for now, he has to be given a long run to prove himself, not one or two tests, yeah he's gonna have off days and be expensive...so what...let him learn and bowl and bowl and bowl

[Dr Cricket]

Talking about that pakistan game even before the Lords fixing stuff, they were rumers of the game being dodgy and fixed.
they were some big rumers on that, which is probably what gave news of the world the motivation to start a sting operation although it is beyond me why ICC didn't see it happening if the newspapers did, but suspect they were just hoping the rumers were not right.

Sussex not sure what game you watched but that game was dodgy like hell.
poor batting, poor fielding, even Australia are not really proud of that win since they felt odd about it.

[andy]

Good to see Curran showing he can bat too...didn't look out of place at number 8...too much made of the tail being required to bat....at the end of the day, top order supposed to score the runs, and bowlers bowl....you don't expect batsman to bowl sides out, so can't expect bowlers to constantly get runs...but Curran did a good job with the bat, as did broad once again...

[rich1uk]

Good to see Curran showing he can bat too...didn't look out of place at number 8...too much made of the tail being required to bat....at the end of the day, top order supposed to score the runs, and bowlers bowl....you don't expect batsman to bowl sides out, so can't expect bowlers to constantly get runs...but Curran did a good job with the bat, as did broad once again...

agreed

if your 8,9,10 and 11 can score runs that is a bonus

if you are picking your 8,9,10 and 11 based on a need to get some runs then it just exposes a problem with the top order, and you should be fixing that problem not trying to paper it over

[bigfluffylemon]

I'll agree about Leach. He should have gone to India.

For today, to state the bleeding obvious, England need early wickets. Australia still have to bat last, so keep the lead manageable and England could set a challenging target. But you'd have to say Australia are strong favorite s from here.

[sussexpob]

And Vic Marks.

?

Felt Leach's test fail was an invention.

To me it's clear. Simply from the initial reactions, and then the fact the dates England released didn't correspond with the tour squad dates. It's like they invented it and then announced it without getting the back story right.

Also, no one else questioned it ever, his county team mates have attacked it, and he apparently reworked his action instantly but couldn't be tested again even though he was 8 hours away from the equipment....apparently England couldn't pick him for three months because he was in uae and not loughborough


Stinks to high heaven

[sussexpob]

Talking about that pakistan game even before the Lords fixing stuff, they were rumers of the game being dodgy and fixed.
they were some big rumers on that, which is probably what gave news of the world the motivation to start a sting operation although it is beyond me why ICC didn't see it happening if the newspapers did, but suspect they were just hoping the rumers were not right.

Sussex not sure what game you watched but that game was dodgy like hell.
poor batting, poor fielding, even Australia are not really proud of that win since they felt odd about it.

Sorry, but I'm sure ponting is on record saying its arguably his most satisfying test win. Lots of Aussie cricketers came out after the London test to defend that win.

Worth noting that in the post England tour scrutiny, that test was the second most investigated match in cricket history, and absolutely nothing was found to suggest it was anything dodgy. Initial judgements and suspicions I believe have lead to nothing, while the English series lead to three jail terms with enough evidence to convict.

Had it not been thoroughly investigated in the background of provable corruption, I'd agree. But it was heavily scrutinised and dug into, nothing came of it.

And so, yes, it was an excellent test match.