SAvAUS 2014: Ghost of Cricket Past

As the teams take the field for the fourth day at Newlands, one of them will be haunted by the Ghost of Cricket Past.  Or perhaps more accurately, the Ghosts of Cricket Matches Past.  The first such ghost will be the last Newlands test between these two nations.   Captain Clarke score a 150 that most who saw it agree was his best innings to that date, one of his best ever.  The Aussies knocked over the South Africans quickly, leaving themselves a solid lead.  All that was needed was two or three sessions of quick scoring to put the game out of reach, and then to take 10 wickets.  To date, this match has gone to a similar script.  Last time the Aussies only reached the lofty heights of 47 because of a spirited, fighting innings by Lyon.  South Africa won convincingly.  Admittedly Warner scored more in the six overs they faced last night than the first nine partnerships scored last time, but their last experience here shows that there is still a fair bit of work to do.  The Aussies need a couple of hundred more as quickly as possible today.

A second match that will haunt them, especially given Faf's first innings effort here, is Adelaide 2012.  There the Aussies led convincingly, and gave themselves what looked like plenty of time to win.  Then Faf stood up and scored an excruciating 100.  He basically batted time- more than a day- to save the match.  A bowler down, the Aussies couldn't do anything about it.  So the Aussies need to give themselves plenty of time to bowl.  But then again, they don't want South Africa to do a Perth 2008, and chase down 400 plus either.  Clarke, being Clarke, will declare earlier than most would, and hope that they can bowl well enough.

The South Africans will face their own Ghosts.  Theirs is the Ghost of Cricket Future.  A future that was already looking less rosy with the departures of coach Kirsten and all rounder Kallis looks more dire with the loss of their captain and batting mainstay Smith.  He has been out of form thus far this series, but his contribution as captain and opening batsman with an average near fifty, not to mention a safe pair of hands, will be missed.  It is a very long time since South Africa took to the field without either Smith or Kallis.  They still have De Villiers and Amla (for the moment), so they are not bereft of batting stars, but for a while their numbers are diminished.  There is also the increasing prospect of life without Steyn- who has looked less than superhuman in most of this series.  After all he has been struck down by both illness and injury, when he is usually impervious to these things.  And The South African bowling looks half as menacing without him.  It is quite possible that the spectre of this future might inspire a last effort- a fitting send off for Smith.  The timing of his announcement seems calculated to do just that.  However, they may also find this Ghost daunts them.

Of course the match will be decided by how well each team puts aside their ghosts and focuses on Cricket Present.  Australia's team of hitters will be looking to score quickly.  The Saffers will look to frustrate, hoping to induce errors, and maybe even panic.  Depending on the target set, the Proteas will bat either for the draw (more likely), or the win- if they knock the Aussies over cheap, or are set too tempting a target.  Whatever happens, the next two days are likely to be enthrall ing cricket.  

SAvAUS 2014: Newlands day 1

On the first day of the final test, Warner's bat proved to be more eloquent than, if just as belligerent as, his tongue.  His century in double quick time finally gave him significant first innings runs after more than a year of being largely a second inning specialist.  It also gave Australia the ascendency in The Decider, as this test is being called.  

Clarke started the good day for the Aussies by winning the toss, giving his team the first use of what was a good batting surface.  Warner and Rogers then set about their task like it was a short format game, racing to a fifty partnership inside ten overs.  While Doolan was struggling, Warner's run a ball fifty meant that the run rate stayed high.  However the most interesting passage of the day came after Doolan's dismissal.  First Steyn broke down with a hamstring twinge.  He was off the field for the rest of the day.  The South Africans were going to see how he pulled up this morning before working out what his involvement in the rest of the match would be- though the time he has been off the field should mean that he cannot bowl until well after lunch today at the earliest (however Morkel seemed to bypass this rule in Centurion, so who knows).  If he is ruled out of the rest of the match, that significantly weakens the South African attack, his importance to which the last test was evidence.  Following Steyn's departure Morkel finished his over and then continued with a hostile spell of bowling the likes of which I have not seen since the Windies were in the last days of their world dominance.  Seriously, if you haven't seen it, look at the highlight reel at cricket.com.au.  I realise he was imitating Johnson, but at his height he found bounce and accuracy to really worry one of the world's best batsmen for a prolonged period.  Clarke ended that five over spell battered and bruised.  But importantly, still there.  That was the main difference between Morkel on the one hand, and Johnson and the 

Windies on the other:  Morkel hurt his prey in every way but the one that counted- his wicket.  Clarke showed the kind of mettle that the English had lacked for much of the Ashes, and found a way through.  In fact, in spite of his "weakness" to the short ball, Clarke needs to be knocked over early by a vicious spell- while his back is still stiff, or it helps him focus and he often scores big.  The last time an attack really took it up to him in anything like this way was England at Adelaide: Clarke got 148.  He starts day two on 92.  Smith is with him on 50, and given his recent conversion rate, will seriously be looking for three figures again.  

While Australia are clearly on top at the moment, the Saffers are not out of it yet.  They need a calamitous batting collapse or two to help them, but Australia are just the team to do it.  Look no further than their last test innings (90 runs between the last 9 partnerships) or their last effort on this ground (don't mention the number 47).  The first hour or so of day two will be very important.  If Clarke and Smith can survive, then the Proteas will struggle to get into the match.  If the Aussies get another couple of hundred, then the South Africans will be looking for a draw.  The Aussies however will be hoping that their bowlers will use the scoreboard pressure like they have most of the summer, and take wickets.  In this they might be helped by a pitch that has reportedly been a bit up and down already (I did not see enough of this myself to comment), and had at least one ball that spun on the first day, if a it slowly.  

*edit: Morkel was injured in Centurion, not PE.

SAvAUS 2014: Third Test Preview (plus)

Well it is time for the last match of the series: the decider.  The South Africans bounced back in PE, as only they could.  Steyn lifted that little notch from almost-at-his-best to at-his-best, Morkel did his best Johnson impression (WWJD- what should Johnson do) and the Australian batting showed just how brittle it was- 10 wickets for under 100 (if you ignore the runs from the opening partnership).  It proved again why first innings runs are so important.  Warner did his best, before throwing it away, but few others really contributed in the first innings, which left Australia vulnerable.  Rogers scored his third second innings century, but it was not enough.

So to Cape Town.  With the Saffers having found a way to neutralise Mitch, I expect that the pitch will be uncharacteristically slow and low.  They will be relying on Steyn to produce some more classic reverse, and Morkel to continue to use his height to get the venom that Mitch lacked.  The Aussies will be hoping that someone steps up and scores runs in the first innings.  Smith and Haddin still look the most likely, though Warner once again teased with potential.  We need someone else to show that can do it too.  The Aussies will also be hoping that Clarke comes back from being MIA at the batting crease.  His run since Adelaide has been downright awful.  Harris has had a (for him) poor performance this series, and will be looking to lift, and Johnson will want to bounce back after PE.  

However I think the biggest key to this match will be the toss.  Clarke will be hoping it is his turn to call right given Smith's two successes so far.  The Aussies perform far better batting first, and winning the toss gives them the best opportunity to make a real contest of this match.  Their batsmen seem to struggle under the weight of chasing, and score more freely when they are ahead.  Their bowlers seem to lift with a target to bowl at.  

I guess the other question is whether the win at Centurian was a combination of the afterglow of the Asjes combined with South Africa's habit of starting slowly, or if PE was just a slip in concentration after a long summer,  So to my prediction: I have no idea- there are too many variables at the moment, but I will tip which ever side bats first to win the match.  Clarke, try to call correctly.

Other points of interest:

David Warner.  Is it just me or is David Warner trying for the Stupidest comment by a Cricketer in 2014 award.  De Villiers is a highly respected international player.  Even if you think he is doing the wrong thing, bring it up with the match referee or the umpires, don't air it in public.  You end up looking petty and a bad loser.  And this is just the latest attempt to win the prise.  Look back at the press conferences and comments he has made this year or for that matter late last year.  He certainly adds colour to the usually bland commentary in the press.  However doing this to the best test nation on earth, and on that is as proud and determined as the South Africans may be counter productive.

Vernon Philander.  One of Warner's targets has been Philander- saying he only bowls well In a limited range of conditions.  This prompted someone on twitter asking why the Aussies don't rate Philander.  The answer is simple.  It is the same reason we never rated Cullinan, didn't rate Bell until the middle of last year, and the English were hoping to face Johnson in the Ashes last summer.  We haven't seen him at his best consistently.  Cullinan was a very good batsman who just happened to run into a bowler with a flipper he couldn't pick.  Philander is a player with a record that any Aussie would love to have.  He just hasn't shown it to the Aussies yet - at least not in Australia (when most of us are watching).  His record against the Aussies in South Africa is similar to his overall (averaging 19.95 as opposed to 18.87 overall).  However in Australia he averages almost 50 (4 wickets @49.75 at a strike rate of over 100).  This in spite of the fact that he bowled on the two best pitches for his style of bowling, and missed the match in Adelaide, where the pitch would not suit him at all (hence Warner's jibe).  This gives him an overall average against the Aussies of 24.91- still very good, if a third higher than his overall average.  He is one of the top bowlers in the world for a very good reason.  The Aussies will be hoping he doesn't regain top form in the last match of this series (in which he is averaging 34).   

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 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.