Cricket: In defence of Shane Watson

I enjoy the banter on social media about cricket and its players and I am a strong defender of everyone’s right to have an opinion. I have read, often with dismay, vitriol on my time line directed at one particular cricketer, Shane Watson, for some time now. After last night’s DRS fiasco I have decided that enough is enough and it is time come out swinging in defence of Watto.

Some background: Watson is from Ipswich, as am I. We went to the same school albeit he was a few years behind me. We played in the same junior club competition. We have some mates that knocked around in the same circles and way back when we knew each well enough to say g’day to.

The school connection and running in some of the same circles does not mean that I know the bloke personally and I do not claim to. What it does mean though is that I do know what Shane went through, at least anecdotally, even to get to first class cricket. I remember the news of the back stress fractures: some kids stop playing after having them once but I know Shane went through them at least twice before he was 16 and maybe more. From a young age he was targetted, as kids are when they are playing with men, for more vitriol than most are required to take in a lifetime of sport. Cricket in Ipswich was no charm school and he did not wilt.

Since he has been playing first class cricket and for his country he has had problems with injury of that there can be no doubt. Indeed, one of the main complaints of those who attack him seem to be that because he has had those injuries he is somehow weak. That hypothesis ignores the fact that where others probably would have quit, Watson has rehabbed, made himself stronger and redesigned his whole bowling action just to keep playing. Having to do that as many times as he has smacks of a person with a strong character who preserveres doesn’t it? Not of someone who is inherently weak?

It is also postulated by those who attack the most that he is selfish and not a team man. To those of you who are in the camp I pose this question: would someone who is not a team man keep coming back to bowling because the team needs him to despite the real and present danger of another injury? Is that not the epitome of being a team man? Putting his own health ahead of the needs of the team would seem to be right up there I would have thought. Similarly, resigning as team vice-captain in the wake of “homeworkgate” must also be seen from the perspective of that act’s benefit to the team rather than the act of someone, allegedly, throwing the toys out of the cot.

I can’t say I have agreed with all of his decisions: moving away from Queensland is a hard thing for any Queenslander to swallow but I can understand the premise behind it. In his position would any other first class cricketer in the country have made a different decision? Show me one who suggests that he would have and I will show you a liar.

I have no cavil with people commenting on the form of players and whether that form warrants a players place in the team. If Watson is out of form or if there is a better alternative to him being in the team then I will be at the head of the queue in making that statement. Like many of Australia’s players at the moment I think he would benefit massively from a season of Sheffield Shield cricket. That said, can anyone tell me who a better option is at the moment from the current pool of talent in Australian cricket? If you argue that the Australian cricket team would be improved by his removal from the team then you are entitled to your opinion but tell me who is around that would improve the team in his absence?

I am an unabashed fan of Shane Watson, in part because everytime he walks out with a baggy green on his head I see the pain he has gone through to be there and in equal part because he is patently in the top eleven players in the country.

If he is out of form and warrants dropping and that is your opinion you are entitled to it. If you believe he is weak, selfish, not a team man or anything else to do with assertions you have about his character then, again, you are entitled to your opinion, but you can expect me henceforth to test that opinion because such statements warrant reply in the strongest possible terms. To date I have chosen to ignore them but I can not countenance that approach any longer. If you do not like that, then use the unfollow button. If you want to have a genuine debate: then I am ready, willing and waiting.

The Ashes, Second Test Day 2: Don’t let DRS drama mask the truth

It has only taken seven days of this series for many Australian fans to return to the view that Australia is well behind England and will not win back the Ashes in England. The efforts of our tenth wicket partnerships in Trent Bridge masked some of the frailties in the Australian batting lineup that ought to have be obvious to all.

Simply put: Australia’s batting was not up to standard in the the first innings and, frankly, has not been for some time. Forget the batsman who come in at number 8 through 11: it is not their job to score runs for us and in recent times they have been doing that job. This issues did not just arise in Trent Bridge but has been a fairly constant refrain through Australia’s test cricket for a number of tests now.

Last night’s efforts from Australia’s top 7 were nothing short of woeful. Did anyone really get a good delivery that lead to their wicket? Shane Watson was dismissed because another bowler exploited his most obvious technical flaw. Chris Rogers missed a full toss. Usman Khawaja had a brain snap and hit one to mid off. Phil Hughes slashed at one a foot outside off stump. Steve Smith meekly gloved a ball to short length. There was no mystery in the English bowling: they simply bowled the ball at Australia’s batsman and even when it was not in the right areas the Australian batsmen contrived a way to get themselves out.

Much has been made on social media of the use of the DRS system by Shane Watson. Australian fans need to stop whinging about their players and start looking at the real frailties in Australian cricket. Whether the use of DRS was right or wrong arguing about it masks the fact that the batting order Australia has in England and has stuck with since the retirements of Ponting and Hussey is not up to the task at test match level.

I am all for seeking to bring young players through and for trying to develop talent from within the team. That said, a massive question hovers over some of the selection decisions that were made during the Mickey Arthur era that have flowed through into this team now. I am not talking about revisiting the past here: we must stop waxing lyrical for a return of Simon Katich for example. Conversely though here are some names of players who have performed in Shield cricket that have not received an ounce of the chances that others have: D Hussey, A Voges, A Doolan, P Forrest and J Burns. I am not saying that they would have performed any differently at Lords over night but the fact that they have not received a semblance of a chance in the test team is something that must be questioned.

Australia was 9/114 in the first innings of the first test match at Trent Bridge and was dismissed for 128 at Lords on a wicket described by all as a run machine. That is simply not good enough. It is time to forget the vitriol aimed at one player about his use of DRS and focus on just how poorly our top 7 is playing. There is not much Australia can do given that they have squad to select from in England and those players must be relied upon to at least try to get the job done. Equally, perhpas the Darren Lehmann era will proceed when he has the reigns in full back in Australia with the end of the careers of some of the players who have not performed in recent times and the elevation of those who have earned their chance in Shield cricket.

Only time will tell: until then, if nothing else, last night was a jolt to the expectations that Australian fans probably needed after those expectations were elevated by the events of Trent Bridge.

The Ashes, Second Test Day 2: Keys to winning the day

Probably the most important day of cricket for whole Ashes series beckons in a couple hours time. If England win the day then they will go a long way to winning this test match and the series will be all but theirs. If Australia win the day a draw or an Australian win will be the likely outcome of this game and the series will be alive and kicking.

Here are my 5 keys to winning the day today:

How long England bat

This pitch is a 400 run par score type of wicket and today will be the best day for batting all test match by all reports. England will be desperate to get their score to at least 350 from their current position and much will hinge on runs coming from Broad and Bresnan. If they are able to bat into the second hour before lunch, given that they general score around 3.5 runs an over 350 will well and truly be in play. If they get to lunch then the target of 400 will be just around the corner.

How has Ryan Harris pulled up?

Ryan Harris was the star with the new ball yesterday for Australia and given James Pattinson’s lack of current form will be the go to man again for Australia. Given his history of injuries all eyes will be on him in the warm ups to see how his knee and shoulder have recovered from 20 overs yesterday. If he is “cherry ripe” then that will go a long way to helping secure the vital 3 wickets Australia need in the first hour of play.

Runs from Australia’s engine room

A hundred or a “red ink” from any of these three batsmen, Rogers, Watson and Khawaja, assuming time permits, will be massive in the context of the game. Both Rogers and Watson were looking solid in the second innings at Trent Bridge before inopportune dismissals and Khawaja is the new boy looking to secure his spot. That said, Australia’s success in much of the 90s and 2000s was built of someone in the top 3 scoring a hundred in the first innings of a test match and this formula will again be the path to success for Australia.

Support for Jimmy Anderson

Every one knows that Australia will be trying their damnedest to blunt the impact of Jimmy Anderson. It will fall to his support bowlers in Broad and Bresnan to shoulder a much larger load in this game, in part because of the short turnaround since Trent Bridge and, in part, given the heat in London. If these two very experiences players replicate their best Australia will be hard pressed to keep them at bay. Conversely if they are anything like the performance of Steve Finn at Trent Bridge the test could quickly be out of their team’s hands.

He who uses the DRS the best

DRS will raise its head at some point and given the impact of it on the outcome of the game (I am not saying that England would have been bested I am just saying that a more judicious use of the DRS could have seen a different complexion on the game) at Trent Bridge the winner of the in game competition between the captains as to who uses DRS the best could end up with a tactical advantage by days end.

All in all, another fascinating day of cricket is nearly upon us. As I said in the preamble, the stakes for this day are particularly high in my view which will only add to the drama!

Shumpty’s Punt: the weekend multi and a few horses

A very unsuccessful weekend on the punt with only one collect however I have run the ruler over the form lines again this weekend and have come up with another 4 leg multi that I think is looking the goods as well as four bets on the horses for the weekend. As always: please bet responsibly and only gamble what you can afford to spend. All odds are courtsey of sportsbet.com.au.

Horse Racing:

Flemington Race 7: Number 1 Broken (each way) ($8.50/$2.70)

Rosehill Race 6: Number 1 Mic Mac (win) ($5.50)

Eagle Farm Race 3: Number 1 Double Impact (each way) ($7.00/2.15)

Eagle Farm Race 7: Number 5 Shafeeq (each way) ($5.00/$1.90)

Sports Multi:

Leg 1: Detriot Tigers to defeat the Kansas City Royals in the MLB ($1.70)

Leg 2: Collingwood to defeat the Gold Coast Suns by 40 or more points in the AFL ($2.40)

Leg 3: Canberra Raiders to defeat the Parramatta Eels by more than 13 points in the NRL ($1.45)

Leg 4: Brumbies to defeat the Cheetahs covering the line (-8.5 points) in the Super Rugby ($1.92)

This multi will return $11.35 for every dollar expended.

Have a great weekend watching the plethora of sport that is on offer. Enjoy!

The Ashes, Second Test Day One: Reflections

Day one of the second Ashes test from the home of cricket once again was riveting viewing that represented the very best of what Test cricket is about. After being introduced to the Queen of England both sides could lay claim to having the best of this day whilst rueing missed opportunities.

Here are my 5 main talking points arising from day one:

The Shermanator rises

Ian Bell came to the wicket with England in significant trouble but batted with such ease that he could have been having a net. He was very good at Trent Bridge but this innings was more complete with shots to all parts of the ground. Now joins illustrious company having scored hundreds in three consecutive Ashes tests.

Ryan Harris: bionic man

There are two camps of Australian cricket followers: those who think he is the best bowler in the country and those who think he is just an injury liability. Last night we saw again what the former have been harping on about. It was a trademark performance from Harris: length bowling with some swing and aggression. All eyes now point to how he comes up tomorrow.

Trott: another bad shot

If Ian Bell’s innings looked like a net then, right up until he got out, Jonathan Trott’s 58 had look of an innings played again schoolboys such was his control of the conditions and his opposition. That is right up until he got out top edging a hook shot to deep square leg. After letting two hundreds go begging via inopportune stroke play, it is obvious that a big hundred is around the corner for the English number 3.

Captain Courageous strikes

Say what you like about Michael Clarke’s off field management of the team, on the field there are few better tacticians in the game. Always prepared to try things three bowling changes during the first day reaped immediate results for the man many say has a more important job than Kevin Rudd. The move to bring on Watson in the fifth over was equal parts bold and brilliant given the result and when he rode his luck and tossed the ball to Steve Smith, it was a move that evened the ledger for the day.

Will the real James Pattinson please stand up?

I am an unabashed fan of the way James Pattinson bowls and goes about his cricket. It would not be hyperbole to say that his 18 overs on day one where probably his worst in international cricket. Variously full and wide, short and wide and, consecutively, just wide it was a woeful day for the Victorian. To avoid being tarred with the “Mitchell Johnson brush” he must improve on Day 2.

Final synopsis:

The fortunes of the teams ebbed and flowed throughout the day with both well and truly on top at various points. At 7/289 both teams, I suspect, would have been satisfied without being overjoyed with their day’s work.

Day 2 beckons with a perfect pitch and conditions akin to a heat wave hitting London. If Australia can rest the three remaining English scalps in the first hour and remain with all of their wickets intact at lunch they will be in the box seat.

The Ashes: Australian Team Named for the Second Test

According to reports on News Limited websites the Australia cricket team has been named as follows:

Shane Watson, Chris Rogers, Usman Khawaja, Michael Clarke (c), Steve Smith, Phil Hughes, Brad Haddin, Ashton Agar, Peter Siddle, James Pattinson, Ryan Harris

Usman Khawaja, how moved to Queensland last year for an opportunity to play under Darren Lehmann, comes in for the out of sorts Ed Cowan and Ryan Harris, a brilliant but injury plagued right arm fast bowler, comes in for the erratic Mitchell Starc.

The only question mark for me is that sameness about the fast medium bowling attack: four right armers (if you include Watson).

Six and half hours to go until the first ball.