Ball 1
On Twitter, someone posted a package of every ball Marnus Labuschagne faced against South African seamer Dane Paterson in their recent county match.
What struck me was how Labuschagne never attempted to score. He ultimately made 23 from 41 balls (against all bowlers) - which is actually fine as far as scoring rate goes - although it included at least one nick through the slips for four and four overthrows too.
It is the mindset that bothers me.
Labuschagne’s era of greatness was roughly from when he returned to the Aussie side during the 2019 Ashes until the end of the 2022/23 Aussie summer.
In that time he averaged 65.3; since then he has averaged 30.4.
And look at the reduction in strike rate:
56 is rather brisk; 44 is very slow. (And yes, I acknowledge that strike rate is bound to be higher when averaging more because runs generally come more quickly once a player is set - but this does not explain such a gulf).
If Labuschagne is picked in the side for the final he needs to take heed of what Travis Head does. Balls that Labuschagne leaves, Head cuts. And although he edges some, mostly he scores runs and before you know it he is away.
I realise how glib that sounds - it’s almost like telling soccer players, ‘Just score goals, dude!’ but I think the point is valid.
Ball 2
Someone challenged me on Instagram this week.
Allen Ainiadan took issue with my saying that Kohli’s average of 46.85 meant he was a very good, but not great, player. Allen’s point was the average runs scored per wicket in Tests in which Kohli played was lower than when, say, Dravid and Sangakkara played - and that adjusting for this bumped Kohli’s average above 50.
It was an interesting point, so I crunched some numbers (see the caption below the table for the maths) - and Kohli’s average did indeed rise: to 51.1.
Now, any Indian fans reading this and eager to shout it to the hilltops, a note of caution: the same process brings down the averages of some other Indian stars - most notably Tendulkar’s, which drops to 49.6.
Here are the results across a selection of players.
For interest, I included WG Grace and Victor Trumper too. Both get a nice jump, especially Grace - rising from 32 to 52. He did not play all that many Tests but was clearly one of the greatest of all time. He also took 2,809 first class wickets!
Brian Lara and Viv Richards also jumped up a decent amount.
So, does this mean that Kohli was an all-time great?
I am not sure - but I tend to still say no, despite the fact I do find it interesting. I am cautious about reading too much into manipulated results of this kind - because potentially other manipulations could produce different results. Maybe it is one for Professor Steven Stern - the custodian of the Duckworth-Lewis-Stern Method - to weigh in on!
Ball 3
In recent days, there has been controversy about the proposed new stadium in Hobart, specifically its roof.
The current plan is for a permanent, transparent roof. But although this seems to be fine as far as hosting Australian Football games, Cricket Australia is concerned about the shadows that the lattice frame will produce.
I hope a solution can be found - one in which a roof (either permanent or retractable) is included that is suitable for cricket as well as Australian football.
But it got me thinking, I have not seen any talk of the soon-to-be-built new Brisbane stadium having a roof.
This is concerning, especially given the move to have Brisbane hosting the third Test of the summer rather than the first.
As can be seen in the climate data below, while November is quite rainy, December is even rainier.
Given Brisbane has a blank canvas it would seem mad not to add a roof. No doubt it will be costly - so Cricket Australia should get involved and offer to pay for some of it themselves. They would earn the money back soon enough - 13.3 days of rain per month in December makes for plenty of ticket refunds and surely less broadcast money too.
Ball 4
Heading into the Test series with India, England have some injury problems with their fast bowlers.
Predictably, the media have raised the question of whether 42-year-old Sir James Anderson should be considered - especially given he took 3/53 and 2/25 in his one county game so far this season.
Anderson’s response was interesting:
He is right: the phone call is not going to come. McCullum and co axed him last season and would be loath to implicitly admit they got it wrong.
But they did get it wrong.
Not because Anderson should have been an automatic selection then, and not to say he necessarily should be picked now.
But their reasons for forcing him into retirement were silly.
Here is what England cricket boss Rob Key said at the time: "We just sort of said, 'look, I think it's time for us to move on.' We're coming to a stage now where we've got to start looking towards the future… people now need the opportunity to learn how to bowl with that new ball, to go through a day's worth of Test cricket and then realise they've got to back it up the next day. Now's the time that people have to start learning that."
I mean, seriously. Playing a succession of 4-day matches at the second highest level isn’t going to teach you all that?
It would amuse me if England lose, while Anderson takes county wickets galore. Maybe Key might say, ‘Well, had we picked Anderson we would have beaten India, but so be it: the other bowlers now know that a baseline level of fitness and durability is required at the highest level of a major sport - and that is priceless. And it could not have been learned in any other way.’
Ball 5
There was a dramatic moment in the IPL the other night, to do with a potential run out at the bowler’s end (what used to be known as a ‘Mankad’).
Digvash Rathi, a spinner for Lucknow, stopped as he reached the crease and, without ever starting to turn his arm over, reached back and broke the stumps, with non-striker, Jitesh Sharma, out of his crease.
The bowler appealed and it went to the third umpire, who - incorrectly - gave the batter not out.
Confusing the issue, Lucknow captain, Rishabh Pant, withdrew the appeal while the third umpire was deliberating.
So, what happened? How did the umpire get it wrong?
It seems he thought that because the bowler had got into his delivery stride that it was too late for him to effect a run out. (From memory, a previous version of the law did say something along these lines).
But these days, the bowler can break the wicket any time prior to his arm reaching the full vertical position (ie the point at which it would normally be released).
The reaction has been big. Ravi Ashwin has said that Pant had shown a lack of support for his young bowler by withdrawing the appeal. Harsha Bhogle tweeted that he was disappointed that the appeal had been withdrawn because of a desire to play within the ‘spirit of cricket’.
Personally though, I think Pant did the right thing.
Because this was not a normal ‘Mankad’. The non striker was not trying to steal a march - I paused the previous ball when Sharma had been non striker and he did not move out of his crease until the ball had left the bowler’s hand. And that was his intention here too - he was timing his movements with the expected moment the ball would be released.
Now, to an extent I get where Harsha Bhogle is coming from. Cricket - especially at the top level - is a ruthless game played for big stakes. Players deserve to be able to play to the letter of the law without having to also abide by a nebulous ‘spirit’ of the game.
However, there are times when it is just the natural thing to do - and this was one. Jitesh Sharma was not trying to gain an unfair advantage. Rathi, in propping and stopping, baulked him. Sure, Sharma should have waited until he actually saw the ball in the air but I suspect most batters would have done the same.
Occasionally the right thing to do is just obvious and I think this was one such occasion - and Pant deserves credit. The aggressive ‘YOU MUST ONLY PLAY TO THE LAW NOT THE SPIRIT’ brigade should think where the endpoint of their stance is.
If a player forgets their gloves while walking out to the bat should the fielding side appeal for timed out the moment 2 minutes has elapsed, even though the batter is mere metres from the crease?
If a player twists their ankle while running, and collapses writhing on the ground, should the fielding side eagerly run them out?
If a batter gets a fly in their helmet just as the bowler is delivering the ball, backs away and is bowled and the umpire judges he/she backed away too late, should the fielding side insist they are out?
I think that in all three scenarios, depending on the specifics, even the most ardent ‘PLAY TO THE LAW’ types would accept that actually, sometimes, let’s just be human about it and do the right thing, naturally.
Ball 6
It’s just 177 days until the first ball of the 2025/26 Ashes will take place in Perth.
Recent series in England have been excellent - 2023 and 2019 among the most entertaining ever. Unfortunately, the same is not the case here - the last time that an Ashes series in Australia reached the final Test with the destination of the urn yet to be decided was way back in 1982/83.
So, what have been the greatest Ashes series ever? I’m glad you asked. Here are my 5th and 4th best: top 3 to follow in upcoming newsletters!
5. 1894/95
Come on, you know I’m right!
The series began extraordinarily, with England winning after following on at the SCG. Australia were 2/113 after day 5 (it was a timeless Test), needing only 64 more to win. But it poured overnight and, the pitch became treacherous and Australia lost 8/54 to lose by 10 runs.
England won the second Test in another close one, Australia hit back to make it 2-2 but England, after being well behind, stormed home to win the fifth and take the series 3-2, in what is regarded as the first ‘great’ Ashes series.
4. 1902
This series is remembered because the final two Tests are contenders for the greatest of all time.
Victor Trumper scored a century before lunch on the first day of the fourth Test - an innings which has come to symbolise the joy and exhilaration of cricket’s so-called golden age. Then, at 3/92, needing 124 to win, England looked home, but Hugh Trumble ran through the England side. England lost 7/28 to lose by 3 runs.
In the final Test, set 263 to win, England were 5/48 - and gone. Enter Gilbert Jessop - the Ian Botham/Ben Stokes of the age. Just 77 minutes later, Jessop was out - having struck an incredible 104 runs, while his partners, plus extras, contributed a mere 35. His hundred came up off just 74 balls. England ultimately crept home by 1 wicket.
The match itself has forever been known as ‘Jessop’s match’ and the bare scores described above do not do it justice. English cricketer CB Fry later wrote, ‘I have seen the spectators at Test matches strained and excited, but this is the only Test match in which I have seen a spectator burst into tears when the winning run was scored.’
Australia won the Ashes 2-1, in a series that still resonates 123 years later.
Labuschagne seems to be carrying on from the India series where he was quite timid, letting balls hit him.
The Brisbane stadium for the Olympics is a massive hot potato up here. Both the current and previous Governments have been scared to overcommit.