The Official Adelaide Test Thread

[Flowboy]

Gettin' up soon in the mornin', I believe we'll dust the Poms.
(Even Robert Johnson knew it!)

[Gumby]

it's still interesting ... isn't it?

About as interesting as watching grass grow ? (If it could in this climate)

[namtrak]

Yep typical Adelaide wicket.

It would be interesting to get a cricket tragic to tell us how many times there's actually been a result in Tests at Adelaide.

There's only been 1 draw there since 1991

Aus won 38 runs lost 1st n 4th Test Aus v Ind 1991/92 [1184]
WI won 1 runs won 1st n 4th Test Aus v WI 1992/93 [1210]
Aus won 191 runs won 1st n 3rd Test Aus v SA 1993/94 [1246]
Eng won 106 runs won 1st n 4th Test Aus v Eng 1994/95 [1284]
Aus won 148 runs won 1st n 3rd Test Aus v SL 1995/96 [1324]
Aus won inn & 183r lost 2nd n 4th Test Aus v WI 1996/97 [1352]
Aus won 205 runs won 1st n 3rd Test Aus v Eng 1998/99 [1434]
Aus won 285 runs won 1st n 1st Test Aus v Ind 1999/00 [1476]
Aus won 5 wickets lost 2nd n 3rd Test Aus v WI 2000/01 [1523]
Aus won 246 runs won 1st n 1st Test Aus v SA 2001/02 [1576]
Aus won inn & 51r lost 2nd n 2nd Test Aus v Eng 2002/03 [1628]
Ind won 4 wickets lost 2nd n 2nd Test Aus v Ind 2003/04 [1673]
Aus won 213 runs won 1st n 2nd Test Aus v NZ 2004/05 [1723]
Aus won 7 wickets lost 2nd n 3rd Test Aus v WI 2005/06 [1773]

And of those games, Australia has batted second 5 times and won 4.

And to answer the question, since year dot there there have been 62 games in all, with 46 results and 16 draws.

Anything else?

[craigb]

Very tragic!

Maybe it's because the Adelaide test is always so bloody boring that it just seems that they are always draws.

[jmk89]

Hey, Namtrack

Do your stats show how many Adelaide tests:

1. lasted 5 days
2. were affected by rain.

I think that Adelaide has provided some of the best finishes that I can remember and the fairest tests of cricket - bowlers get something out of the pitch if they put effort in and batsmen can make runs if they are prepared to concentrate. Adelaide tests aren't boring - they just use the whole 5 days and don't rely on "tricked up" pitches to give bowlers wickets.

[namtrak]

Hey, Namtrack

Do your stats show how many Adelaide tests:

1. lasted 5 days
2. were affected by rain.

.....Adelaide tests aren't boring - they just use the whole 5 days and don't rely on "tricked up" pitches to give bowlers wickets.

I agree, Adelaide is great for traditional 5 day games.

Sadly I dont think I can figure out those things specifically. Here is the link to the Cricinfo Statsguru

[craigb]

266 runs and three wickets in a day.

I wonder if the people who paid 80 bucks for their ticket thought they got their moneys worth.

However, I do agree that the Windies V Australia test played in Adelaide in the mid 80's provided one of the best finishes I've seen in a test match.

I think McDermott would still say that he didn't glove that catch.

[Gumby]

Very tragic!

Maybe it's because the Adelaide test is always so bloody boring that it just seems that they are always draws.

I give up. Almost 2 days for 500 runs. You have to be kidding. :mad:

BORING !

[bitingmidge]

What a miserable bunch of fair weather sailors you blokes turned out to be!

Rivetting stuff.... remember in the first test, the Aus team scored 600 in a day and a half on a wicket that looked just as flat, then it changed when the poms came in to bat?

Well I reckon, come lunch tomorrow when Aus is 1/150 you'll all start to take notice!

Oh, and 550 is the highest score by an English team on the Adelaide wicket. Tally ho chaps!

Cheers,

P

[craigb]

that looked just as flat

Well there's the rub. This one doesn't just look flat it is flat. In fact it's so flat it's a freakin' road!

To have a good game of cricket you need a pitch that is fair to the bat and to the ball.

This pitch doesn't strike that balance.

And sorry, but watching Warne pitch 2 feet outside of leg for over after over is not my idea of rivetting stuff.

[namtrak]

........Well I reckon, come lunch tomorrow when Aus is 1/150 you'll all start to take notice!......

Come lunch tomorrow when Australia is 4/80 then we'll definitely start to take notice!!!! I got a bad feeling about this, deja vu is strong!!! I'm thinking the Poms could take this one out in 4 days.

Cheers

[Rossluck]

There's a problem with the game, and this test highlights it. In cricket, there's often too much decided by who wins the toss. Under some conditions, if you win the toss you're 40% of the way to winning the game.

For instance, how many times have you sat down to watch a one day game with the Aussies playing really well against some lesser team, Australia wins the toss, decides to bat first, and the game's more or less over. SWMBO comes in just after the toss and asks that famous non-cricket-lover question: "Who's winning?", and you can actually say to her, "Australia's won".

Think of Sydney with McGill and Warney, Australia wins the toss, the poms have to bat last.... Winning the toss in that scenario almost assures the Aussies of either a win or a draw.

[Gumby]

There's a problem with the game, and this test highlights it. In cricket, there's often too much decided by who wins the toss. Under some conditions, if you win the toss you're 40% of the way to winning the game.

For instance, how many times have you sat down to watch a one day game with the Aussies playing really well against some lesser team, Australia wins the toss, decides to bat first, and the game's more or less over. SWMBO comes in just after the toss and asks that famous non-cricket-lover question: "Who's winning?", and you can actually say to her, "Australia's won".

Think of Sydney with McGill and Warney, Australia wins the toss, the poms have to bat last.... Winning the toss in that scenario almost assures the Aussies of either a win or a draw.

Agreed, so we should change it completely and take the luck out of it.
Maybe a quick game of Rock/paper/scissors at the wicket would look good. Now that's skill.

[bitingmidge]

And sorry, but watching Warne pitch 2 feet outside of leg for over after over is not my idea of rivetting stuff.

No, but shortly we'll be able to watch Harmy pitching 2 feet outside of leg, then seven feet outside of off, then over the head of the keeper, then on the toes, then a full toss.....did I mention the occasional wide?

I think it was the Kiwis who last tried to "bore out" the batsmen, which according to today's paper is what the Poms are going to try to do today.

Yep, they may take a few wickets, or they may not, but I'll guarantee the scoring rate will be higher!

Still, this series has brought two new headlines.

Last test it was "Shoddyline"

This one is "The bore war".

For me, all this variable stuff is what makes the game so fascinating.

Cheers,

P

[Gumby]

No, but shortly we'll be able to watch Harmy pitching 2 feet outside of leg, then seven feet outside of off, then over the head of the keeper, then on the toes, then a full toss.....did I mention the occasional wide?

I think it was the Kiwis who last tried to "bore out" the batsmen, which according to today's paper is what the Poms are going to try to do today.

Yep, they may take a few wickets, or they may not, but I'll guarantee the scoring rate will be higher!

Still, this series has brought two new headlines.

Last test it was "Shoddyline"

This one is "The bore war".

For me, all this variable stuff is what makes the game so fascinating.

Cheers,

P

You are the eternal optimist Midge and I hope you're right but I have a bad feeling about this one too.
I was actually going to back the Poms before the start but didn't.

I think I'm going to regret that decision.