Test match at the WACA

[redwood]

There was no way Ponting was going to leave a target of 330 - you'd might as well say if he'd declared at 200 it would have been better. And even at 330, the chances of the final innings getting up are remote and I doubt the South Africans would have made the attempt.

Ponting left himself plenty of time to bowl them out. On that pitch against stubborn batsmen, it didn't happen. Such is test cricket.

Richard

i know ponting wouldnt have given them a chance because hes got no balls. steve waugh would have made a game of it, so to tubby and even ab would have and im sure if warnie was captain he would have given them a big chance and attacked them. 332 was the highest 4th innings chase in aust test history and that was 76 years ago so why bat on for a lead of 491. to many blunders from some one so experienced. just not captain material

[outback]

Didn't Bill Lawrie bat on for a lead of nearly 600?

In his defence he did leave almost 2 session to bowl the oppositon out, WI or England, I can't remeber one of you lot will have to fill in the details.

[Gumby]

Didn't Bill Lawrie bat on for a lead of nearly 600?

.

He must have really had his nose to the grindstone that day

[Studley 2436]

Ian Chappell has often said that he thinks you need to leave the other team with a sniff of victory. He thinks taking a risk is the best option. Ponting didn't really do that this time but give him the chance to learn his trade. Steve Waugh had a pretty poor start to his captaincy as I remember but went on to become one of Australia's better captains.

With the benefit of hindsight it is easy to criticise Ponting although it is a fair point. After all if he had 491 in the first innings everyone would have been saying can South Africa save the match and draw. I think 380 or 400 would have been a good declaration but anyway I can't bat or bowl and my throwing is rubbish. I wonder if you can be captain and 12th man at the same time. Thesedays I could just use my substitute fielder for carrying the drinks etc.

Studley

[bitingmidge]

Ian Chappell has often said that he thinks you need to leave the other team with a sniff of victory. He thinks taking a risk is the best option. Ponting didn't really do that this time but give him the chance to learn his trade. Steve Waugh had a pretty poor start to his captaincy as I remember but went on to become one of Australia's better captains.

So how about we check out Ian Chappell's win/loss record against Ponting eh???

Sheeeeshh... there's somethings the old Chappelli chooses not to remember...

P

[bitingmidge]

Won Lost Drawn Tied
93 AR Border Australia 32 22 38 1
48 GS Chappell Australia 21 13 14 0
30 IM Chappell Australia 15 5 10 0

So Border won 34%
Chappell G 45%
Chappell the grand pooh bah and expert on what Ricky's doing wrong 50% of only 30 matches of course.

Now, how's Ricky looking???

P:confused: :confused:

[Gumby]

So Border won 34%
Chappell G 45%
Chappell the grand pooh bah and expert on what Ricky's doing wrong 50% of only 30 matches of course.

Now, how's Ricky looking???

P:confused: :confused:

I don't think you can compare them that way. Greg had the Windies at their best, Ian had Lillee and Thommo at their peak, etc etc

[Grunt]

I think Ponting is a victim of being in a successful side for too long. Almost any time in the last 10 years we would have knocked over any side in the last 4 sessions of a match if they were chasing such a target.

[Studley 2436]

P W L D
I think Ponting has 23 15 3 5

so a 65% winning percentage. Anyway don't think you can compare teams across eras like that. I am pretty sure that Viv Richards has a better percentage than Clive Lloyd but Lloyd is the better captain for my money.

Studley

[bitingmidge]

I don't think you can compare them that way. Greg had the Windies at their best, Ian had Lillee and Thommo at their peak, etc etc

If you can't compare them that way, you can't compare them anyway. You can't knock off "captain's" points because he's got a glamour team full of Haydons and Symons's.

The only difference between Windies then and now, is that then we couldn't beat them.

Now we can.

And we're bitching about it .


P

[Grunt]

The ABC has been playing highlights of the Windies tour of '84. I've watched a few hours of it. Two things that really stand out is that our fielding was complete and utter crap, 9 catches dropped in an innings, most complete sitters. Secondly was they got hit in the head alot and they didn't wear helmets.

The West Indies had the most lethal bowling attack I can remember. They were just awesome.

I feel sorry for Kim Hughes. He basically played the West Indies at their peak, 3 series in a row.

[lesmeyer]

If you can't compare them that way, you can't compare them anyway. You can't knock off "captain's" points because he's got a glamour team full of Haydons and Symons's.


P

You call Crusty the clown glamorous !!!!!!
Les

[Studley 2436]

That Windies team of the 80's was something, incredible deadly fast bowlers, Grenidge and Haynes opening Lloyd and Richards. Gus Logie too was a good bat and a great fielder usually picking the batsmans pocket.

We might have been rubbish then but that was one of the all time great teams. Remember too that we were getting over players being banned for touring South Africa. No more Lillee and Thommo or Chappell both of them and Marsh too had gone was a big empty patch until Border came along and got things happening again.

Studley

[Daddles]

Ian Chappel was a better and more attacking captain than his brother, not that Greg was all that bad come to that. Both of them, and Border, and Tubby, and Steve, all suffered in their early days in the job. Ponting's doing alright. Sure, he's not a glamour captain yet, but give him time. How many of you knockers saw Gilchrist's and Warne's (I think it was Warney, might have been one of the other senior players) defence of him tonight? Gilly wasn't being politically correct - he was too incoherent for that, just confused by the criticism.

We aren't the great team we were a couple of season's back AND our opposition has improved since them. In reality though, all that means is that we now have to earn our wins AND wear a few draws. Test cricket is supposed to be played over five days, not the three or four we became used to under Steve Waugh. And, believe it or not, draws, often gritty, drawn out draws like this one, are part of test cricket, as big a part as victories.

Ponting isn't the greatest captain we've ever had. He may never become as good a captain as the three great men that preceeded him, and to be honest, that is no cause for criticism as they were great captains. But give him a chance to grow into the job. Sure, he's nearing the end of what could be considered his apprenticeship and hence will have to start producing series wins soon, but every captain needs time to learn the job. Hell, even Bradman stuffed up his first two series as captain, and that comment was made by the great man himself.

Give Ponting a chance ... and having a few players fullfilling the role they've been asked to play would help. We aren't like England or Pakistan who like to change leaders every time they lose a game and it's a policy that has resulted in stable leadership and men of the stature of Border, Taylor and Waugh, all of whom did no better than Ponting in the early days of their career. Ponting may not make it long term ... but it's too early to tell by Australian standards, though I must admit that it is frustrating waiting.

Richard

[Tikki]

Richard, what's cricket?????