SAvAUS 2014: Wrong, again

Wrong, again

It seems that cricket is determined to prove me wrong this last couple of weeks.  It started when I felt that the Aussies couldn't keep up their dominant displays against a team of the quality of South Africa. I even tipped South Africa to take a close series when I did the series preview.  Then Centurian happened.  The best team in the world was blown away by Mitchell Johnson, in both innings.  And the Aussie batsmen made runs against one of the best attacks going around.  It seemed I was wrong.

Then I looked at the NZ India match, with New Zealand 5/95 in their second innings and still a long way behind.  I tweeted that without Taylor, I didn't think NZ could get out of this match.  Then McCullum happened.  

Finally, following the second innings at Centurion, I thought that South Africa had little chance to get back into the series.  They did not seem to have an answer to Johnson.  Then the St. George's pitch happened.  The South Africans found a way to nullify Johnson- prepare a pitch that would need to improve dramatically to be rated as "dead" then play slow defensive cricket on it for at least a day.  Credit to De Villiers, who once again made the Aussies work for his wicket, and this time dragged Duminy along with him.  Then the Aussie top order did what they do in the first innings and imploded.  It will be a long haul for them to get back into this match, perhaps needing another Haddin special.  If they do manage it, it is likely that the test will head towards a draw.  However, I am just as likely to be wrong.  Again.

Lyon

Lyon had the best figures of the Aussies in the first innings.  His second five-for of the summer came in the second match in which the Aussies bowled first.  Like Melbourne, Mitch was not quite at his best, and Lyon stepped up with five.  (Is there something to the idea that Johnson bowls better with a score to bowl at?). Unfortunately, De Villiers and Duminy meant that the Saffers got further in front than the English did.  The four wickets at the end of the second day did not help the Aussie cause. 

However it seems that the Aussies have been reading my comments about the undismissable Lyon.  It is over seven tests since he was last dismissed.  So Clarke put him up the order (ok so he is really playing the night watchman role) to make the most of his propensity to stick around.  Even the South Africans and the umpires want to keep his record going- he was dropped, and once when he was caught, he was given not out, and it was not reviewed.  I suspect that his run will come to an end sometime today.  If he is not out at the end of this Aussie innings, then either he will have his best score in cricket, or the Aussies will be in trouble.  I for one am hoping his undefeated century anchors a massive score for the Aussies.  I'm not holding my breath though.  

SAvAUS 2014: Centurion Wrap

In my series preview, I noted that it was hard to tell where the Australians were in the world pecking order.  After all, they had only played the English since their resurgence: an English team that has lost Trott, Swann, Prior, KP and their coach in the last few months.  While this was seen as a consequence of Australia's dominance, the loss of both players and matches could have been due to disharmony in the dressing room, or the English management style- both have been blamed- rather than the rise of Australia.  However, I think we now have an answer.  

The Australians have systematically dismantled an even more highly fancied South African team.  While the Aussie batting still looks brittle, it finds ways of making runs- even better, now it is not Haddin doing all the rescuing.  The Johnson-led bowling dominated everyone, apart from De Villiers- who is rightly rated as the best batsman in the world.  The fielding was where the difference was seen most - even more than the bowling.  Compare the three dropped catches when Warner was batting to the two screamers by Doolan, not to mention the sharp catch by Smith in the second innings.  The first three should have been caught (though G. Smith's effort was a very difficult one).  The last three were such that had they been dropped, few would have blamed the fielder.  (As an aside: the Tasmanian fielding coach must be good- I thought we would miss Bailey's close catching, but Doolan has more than matched him.)  That having been said, the Saffers are also in transition- they recently changed their coach and lost Kallis.  Still, they are a team that has a habit of not losing, and are still full of champions.  All of this points to Australia's acendancy being real, not a figment of English disintegration.  

So what does this mean for the rest of the series?  I had predicted a narrow win to the South Africans. If any team could still pull it off the South Africans can.  But it looks unlikely.  The manner of the defeat was reminiscent of the recent Ashes.  If Johnson continues to hold fitness and form, I cannot see South Africa turning the series around.  I expect Steyn to lift a bit, no longer hampered by his food poisoning. Also it would be unlikely that Johnson can keep knocking Smith over on his second ball to him.  So some improvement can be expected.  However, Petersen's dismissals did not look very good for an international opener.  MacLaren did not look even close to a replacement for Kallis, and probably needs to be replaced with a batsman.  And Peterson is not a test class spinner, and I am not sure that South Africa has one.  Overall, the Aussies are likely to run away with the series given the way South Africa folded twice this test.

SAvAUS 2014: Smith, Warner and the NSP

Another good day for the Aussies, led by Johnson, Doolan and Warner.  De Villiers did well again before falling to Johnson while trying to push the pace as he ran out of partners.  However the only other highlight for the Proteas was the opening spell by Steyn, in which he dismissed Rogers and looked threatening.  Their fielding was well below par - to give Warner one life is bad, but 3 dropped catches and a missed run out is awful.  Then there were the various misfields and overthrows.  The upshot is that the Aussies are a long way ahead and likely to declare in the first session on the fourth day, looking for the kill.

The National Selection Panel (NSP)
I'm not sure whether the NSP are very lucky or absolute geniuses.  Their latest two picks have proved really useful.  Marsh is approaching 200 runs for the match, having put on over 200 with Smith in the first innings.  Doolan narrowly missed out on a century on debut, having combined for another 200+ run partnership in the second innings with Warner.  They were picked in spite of the fact that neither of them average over 40 in first class cricket.  Marsh in particular must feel a bit lucky to be there:  His last three tests netted a total of 17 runs at 2.83 in a summer where the runs were flowing for Australia against an average Indian attack.  His red ball form was not great this year either: he was 34th on the Sheffield Shield run scorers list for this season when he was picked (he has probably dropped a few more places over the last few days).  Furthermore, over a decade of first class cricket has only resulted in 9 centuries, including the one in the first innings here. Doolan's record, whilst improving over the last couple of seasons, is not much better than Marsh's.  Yet the gamble paid off.  As did the one with Johnson earlier this summer - at the time many people questioned whether he was really up to returning to test cricket.  These three picks make the NSP look like geniuses.  But remember this is the same panel that picked Bailey, and went through several players in England, including the inexplicable move of dropping Lyon for Agar - however well he may have batted.  For the moment we will call them geniuses, and hope that their luck holds out.

Warner and Smith
Warner has now joined Smith on three centuries for the southern summer.  They have both had very contrasting experiences, however.  Warner has done better overall, scoring 650 runs at 59.09.  Smith, in a couple less innings, has only got to 427 @ 47.44.  However it is interesting to compare their performances.  Warner's centuries have all come in the second innings, each time while Australia was in the ascendancy and it was more about keeping the opposition down than wresting control of the match.  I suspect that Johnson has more than a reasonable claim on a large chunk of Warner's runs.  Overall Warner has scored 475@95 in the second innings this summer, compared with 175 @29.16 in the first.  Smith's figures are the opposite.  Smith's three centuries have all come in the first innings, with Australia in trouble and the test still in the balance.  He has scored 382 @63.66 in the first innings,  while only managing a measly 45 @15 in three completed attempts in the second innings.  Warner has the better overall record because of the number of scores he has made between 20 and 100 - five of them this summer including an 83*, a 60 and a 49.  In contrast Smith has largely been an all or nothing player.  Indeed, since his first century at the Oval, he has only passed 20 twice without getting a century, scoring 31 and 23*.  On the plus side, his conversion rate from fifty to 100 is very good in this time.  While their summers have been contrasting, they have both been very important to the team.  Smith has set up the totals for Johnson to bowl at, Warner has taken the game away from the opposition.  They will both want to work on getting more runs in the other innings, and Smith will want a bit more consistency (though 3 tons in four matches is pretty good).  However they can both be happy with the work done so far.

 

SAvAUS 2014: Smith, Lyon and Johnson

Day two was a day of wickets.  In a day shortened by a storm, 12 wickets fell, all within the space of 192 runs (from first wicket to last).  Steyn ended up with four for the innings, a very good return for someone who was sick for much of the first day.  De Villiers also rates a mention as the only batsman to look really comfortable on a pitch where batting seemed a bit of a task.  His will be a key wicket on day 3.

However there are three Aussies who get special mention today.  First Smith lodged his fourth century in his career, all in the last seven matches, and as noted yesterday, all in the first innings.  

Second, Lyon managed another "red inks".  He has not been dismissed since the fourth test in England.  This is the seventh test since then, and Lyon's average overall is above 17.  When he bowled he got Duminy (thanks to a good catch by Johnson), which means that he has at least one wicket in each of the last 11 innings he has played.  Considering the success of Harris, Johnson and Siddle over that time, his consistency is admirable.  

Finally, Johnson has done it again.  Four wickets have cut through the South African batting.  Notable here are the continued dominance of Smith - another brutal ball dismissing him, and probably giving him flashbacks to two broken hands in 2009; the fact that three of them were at the top of the order- it has largely been Harris and Lyon opening up England for Johnson to finish off while here Johnson did most of the surgery himself; and finally he took a burst of wickets with someone other than Lyon at the other end.  So far, Johnson has been at his best, while Steyn was not.  This has been one of the major differences between the teams.  

Overall the Aussies will be very happy with the position of the match so far.  They will want to get the South Africans out as quickly as possible today, starting with De Villiers, and then bat for a day or so to put the test beyond doubt.  The South Africans on the other hand will be wanting to eek out another 100 runs or more, feeling that if they can get within 150 or so, they can turn it around in the second innings.  Survivors of the record run chase in Perth know it is not impossible.    

SAvAUS 2014: The Rise of Smith

Shaun Marsh is, rightfully, getting a lot of plaudits for the first day of the test at Centurian.  However it is Smith's performance that is really pleasing.  For the third time in four tests Smith has put together a good first innings score, each time having come in with Australia in a bit of trouble.  If he can get another nine runs today, it would be his third century in those four matches.  In fact Smith has had a great year this year.  To add to the two hundreds in the recent Ashes and the 91* here, he has a 92 in Mohali, an 86 at Manchester and 138* at the Oval.  Interestingly, all of these were in the Aussies' first innings, as was his 53 at Nottingham.  His hundred at the Oval (his first) means that he is in a good position to record his fourth hundred in seven matches.  In fact in the last year since his return to test cricket, he has scored 924 at 44.  Only Clarke has more runs in that time, and no one has a better average.  Smith scored 810 (at 73.63) in the Aussies first innings during these tests.  All in all, not a bad effort for a player who many thought was lucky to get picked to tour India (though he was seen as a player who could use his feet to the spinners).  

SAvAus 2014 series preview

Another Australian international cricket summer has finished and the focus shifts to South Africa.  England have headed home with very little to cheer about.  The Aussies are riding high having won all three formats convincingly, and are set to take on the top nation over the next few weeks.  The recent win by New Zealand over India puts Australia very near if not actually in the unofficial second place in the test rankings (the rankings are only officially adjusted at the end of series).  However it is difficult to work out where Australia are really at.  Was this summer more about Australia's resurgence or England's capitulation?  Are the Aussies on the rise, or are the results more about England's slide?  Remember that only six months ago the Aussies and the English were in almost the reverse positions.  The Aussies had been thrashed mercilessly in India, and (though I have argued the the score line was flattering to the English) beaten soundly in England.  

However this is part of a bigger picture of confusing form lines.  The English form line has fluctuated wildly.  A couple of years ago Pakistan whitewashed them, and Sri Lanka pushed them to a drawn series on the road.  This shortly after beating the then world number one India in England 4-0.  More recently they beat India in India- almost impossible in this day and age.  However since then they barely escaped New Zealand unscathed, only to thrash them in England before the Ashes marathon started.  Their form at home has been very strong- except against South Africa 18 months ago.  Their form away has been poor- except, strangely, in India which is one of the hardest places to tour.  

The Aussies have a more consistent home form.  In the last few years we have whitewashed India, Sri Lanka and England at home, and pushed a strong South Africa in the first two tests before being beaten in the third test to lose the series. Only the draw against New Zealand was really disappointing.  The last twelve months have also produced consistent away form as well, though more of the negative than positive variety- losing seven of the nine test we played away.  

Indeed, with the odd exception, the trend to dominance at home and capitulation away seems to be increasing for all the major teams.  Only South Africa seems to consistently buck the trend, often winning away (eg their most recent tours to England and Australia), while being pushed at home by the likes of Australia and Sri Lanka on their last tours, and India in the first test of this summer.  The fact that, in spite of being pushed, they rarely lose is the main reason they are the number one team.  Indeed they rarely dominate against the top teams, but they usually win and rarely lose.  Their last series loss was by a Mitchell Johnson inspired Australia in 2009.  

A battle of the bowlers?

The question for the Aussies is whether Johnson can do it again.  In fact not just Johnson but the whole of the reported "best bowling attack in the world".  Unfortunately this is a title that has been, and probably still is held by the hosts.  The comparison of the two attacks is a bit like the comparison of their leading bowlers.  At their very best Johnson is better than Steyn, but as the years have shown since that series in 2009, Steyn is at his best far more consistently than Johnson, and his worst is still very good, unlike Johnson's.  

Similarly the Aussie attack has the potential to be better than the South African attack, but the Saffers are more consistent in the long haul.  Johnson has had a summer of consistency, like 2009, but can it continue?  Can the Aussie attack take the mantle of the best in the world?  

While the bowling has been the main focus in the lead up to this series, the difference between the sides is more likely to come not from the relative bowling strength, but the batting.  Here South Africa have the clear advantage.  Even in the absence of the prolific Kallis, there are proven champions like Smith, de Villiers, and Amla.  Only Clarke has a similar pedigree for the Aussies.  Of the rest, only Rogers and Warner average over forty.  Warner and Smith are developing, the former into a potential match winner, and the latter has played a couple of really good fighting innings.  However the Aussies will have two players with very little experience, without brilliant red ball form, and with first class averages in the thirties batting in the top six.  The only way to avoid this is to pick Hughes for his fourth attempt at test cricket.  He has the best first class average, red ball form and experience of the candidates to replace Watson and Bailey (Henriques, Doolan and Marsh are the others).  In most cases he would be an obvious pick, but his unorthodox style and perceived technical weakness (no worse than most others) mean that the selectors have shown themselves reluctant to pick him consistently.  Contrast the Aussie line up with the rest of the South African line up, where players like Faf would walk into most teams in the world.  The only area that Australia may have the advantage is in the tail.  

While this series is billed as the battle of the bowlers, it is more likely that how the two batting line ups cope with the expected high class bowling will be the difference.  On paper South Africa should be ahead in this battle, and I predict that they will go on to win the series by one match (1-0 or 2-1).  However, as watchers of the Australian international summer will attest, cricket is not played on paper.  That is why this should be a series well worth watching.  

** edited to include Warner as averaging over 40 before this series.