Steven Smith, video link, general thoughts

[doctortran]

Aussies - what do you reckon to the Ashes 5-0 whitewash that Jim's predicting (That's England 5 - Australia 0)?

Justified I fancy.

Langer called the English introverted and lacking in confidence. I don't think I've seen a more adequate explanation of Australian bowling. Johnson reserves quick, short, nasty bowling to Graeme Smith and the South Africans. He's always got an easy going smile -- I hope these losses wipe it away. Siddle is only coming back.... but he's barely moved it off the straight. Bollinger (injured?) and Hilfenhaus (tired?) are our two top consistent fast bowlers -- we didn't play them. One wonders if Australia really are looking to win this series.

Happy about Xavier Doherty. I want Krezja back in the team. Hauritz and Krejza are similar in that some games they simply don't look like taking wickets. Krejza flights it more, has better control, bowls overspinners that turn and took 8 for against India. Of course Warne always did except in India. Australia simply need a fifth bowler who Ponting and Clarke have confidence in to take wickets. It seems Katich, North, Clarke only come on to quicken the over rate or when there is absolutely no hope -- I don't think I've heard the phrase "partnership breaker" in Australian cricketing vocabulary since... well I don't remember.

And to sum... Mike Whitney said in a recent "interview" that he didn't see how England could take 20 wickets. Australia haven't for a LONG time. Australia are taking a big game like South Africa, India, New Zealand, England have done in the past against Australia --but this time I feel a role reversal.

 

[macca]

This is a stupid statement, I know, but my son is bowling better legspin than smithy at the moment! My kid hasn't bowled a full toss or long hop this season and has outstanding figures. Plus he can spin the ball more than Smith!

What the hell is going on ?

Hang on, I can hear my phone ringing. It's probably the chairman of selectors.

 

[chippyben]

Aussies - what do you reckon to the Ashes 5-0 whitewash that Jim's predicting (That's England 5 - Australia 0)?

Possible although I'd like to think we would get one test back. It will take us losing the series here to finally get rid of the dead wood and favouritism in Australian cricket. We are in the worst shape since 86/87.
North and Hussey need to go from the test team. They manage to get a century that saves them for the next series but then fail for the next 3-4 tests then get another century and save themselves. I don't know what Hauritz has done to deserve so much loyalty and so many chances. Hes not a match winner and his best performance came at the scg when the pakis threw the match. Look at Krezja, he took 12 wickets in India, INDIA and hasn't even been looked at again, why are the selectors so closed minded. At least one of the selectors has been sacked recently. (Merv Hughes)
And is Mitchell Johnson going to turn up at all. This bloke shits me, he lost us the lords test 09 with woeful bowling. I seriously could have bowled better. Does he have a plan when he is bowling. Does he know how he is trying to get his wickets. How can you bowl with a plan when you are so inaccurate. The most annoying thing is he always tops the most wickets, I bet that annoys his bowling partners who toil away trying to build pressure at the other end.
Hopefully Hilfenhaus and Bollinger get fit and stay fit as they are our only hope.
Cricket in terms of a contest was boring in the 90's to 2005 and I must admit I wanted other countries to close the gap on us but not leave us behind in a cloud of dust.

 

[someblokecalleddave]

I've just watched the Sri-Lanka/Aus ODI, the new Off-Spinner looked good, but I'm inclined to agree with Macca, his son does sound as though he is a better bowler than Steve Smith at the minute. Smith doesn't appear to be particularly accurate, but I'm only basing my observations on highlights, so I'm probably talking out of my arse?

I don't think it's going to be a whitewash, England are in a very good position this time round as it appears our team look like a fairly tight knit unit with people that can do their job fairly well on the day. Whereas it does appear that the Aussies are still in transition. But it's at home for you and that's a massive advantage that may equalise the situation a bit.

With regards Ponting being crap as mentioned earlier, I'm not convinced he's crap at all, Michael Clarke didn't look too clever in the ODI tonight and like Ponting he has the Mitchell Johnson issue. I reckon it's going to be a very exciting and close run thing, I can't wait to see it albeit on crap highlight packages product. I'm still working on trying to get someone to record the highlights off the SKY programs in the evenings here, at least they're a couple of hours long, but it's not looking very hopeful.

 

[Jim2109]

Sky have got Warney on board again as a commentator, which is fantastic for UK viewers! im reckoning there will have to be a masterclass in there somewhere, quite likely with Steve Smith if he is in the squad. im planning on having every lunch session on Sky+ so that i dont miss it when it eventually happens.

i wasnt predicting a 5-0 England win btw, i dont think it would happen. England arent good enough to take 20 wickets 5 times against Australia, so there will be some draws. but i can easily see us winning something-nil. Australia look awful at present, the worse ive ever seen them in my lifetime, and i cant see a single bowler in their line up capable of taking consistent wickets and building pressure. Hilfenhaus and Bollinger wouldnt even get in the England starting XI, and the entire Aussie hopes are pretty much rested on their shoulders lol. and English batsmen love the shorter stuff now so Mitchell Johnson is going to be even more useless than normal, Strauss will take him apart. there are plenty of weaknesses for England though as well, its important not to get carried away and think that we are the best. we werent great against Pakistan by any means, and if they learnt how to catch we probably would have lost that series. the Aussies are still the best fielding unit in the world, so you dont expect any 2nd chances. and our batting is extremely fragile in the top-middle order (Cook, Pietersen, Collingwood, Morgan (if he plays), Prior. we rely too much on Strauss, Trott and Bell hanging around to stabilise things).

P.S. Ponting really is crap. great batsman, awful captain. he was blessed with some of the finest players of the modern game for the majority of his tenure. now that they have retired and he actually has to manage his players he seems completely incapable. it doesnt help that his bowlers never get the job done, there is only so much you can do as a captain when players arent performing adequately, you cant miraculously think a batsman out. whereas in the past he had Shane Warne, who actually near enough could lol. but still, he has overused the same players again and again, and they never get the job done. Mitchell Johnson springs straight to mind. if he was English he would have been dropped 2-3 years ago.

 

[Sparksy88]

Yes Jim, make sure you free up plenty of space on your sky+ box for that. Would love to hear some more of Warne commentating to Smith and talking about what they have been working on ect. Good bye decent sleeping pattern

 

[someblokecalleddave]

Yes Jim, make sure you free up plenty of space on your sky+ box for that. Would love to hear some more of Warne commentating to Smith and talking about what they have been working on ect. Good bye decent sleeping pattern

I'm trying to find someone that's going to record all the Sky highlights in the evenings and plead that they can burn the programs for me onto DVD's so I can at least see the majority of games rather than just the Channel 5 highlights, albeit days or weeks after the matches.

 

[chippyben]

I'm trying to find someone that's going to record all the Sky highlights in the evenings and plead that they can burn the programs for me onto DVD's so I can at least see the majority of games rather than just the Channel 5 highlights, albeit days or weeks after the matches.

Mate it is a disgrace you can't watch the ashes. I was over there in 2005 when we lost the ashes but it was on free to air and people who never watched cricket before were watching it and telling me how great it was and of course giving it to me. There was huge hype and cricket was everywhere. I actually downed tools one day because it was getting so exciting and told the boss Im going home to watch this, much to his displeasure, only to see us lose by two runs but whats one afternoon of work compared to that! Then what happened, after that the ECB or whoever it is announces a deal with pay tv and no more test cricket will be on tele for 10 years or something like that. How bloody stupid and greedy are they.
Over here we have laws that certain events of social and sporting significance MUST be shown on free to air TV. That includes the Ashes. The pay TV bastards are slowly trying to erode that and there was an ad campaign here recently encouraging people to fight against it.
You should start a petition. Send a letter to all the leagues in England big and small and they can send letters to all their clubs and their players can sign it let it snowball and send it to the Morons who run the show. I reckon you are just the sort of bloke that could do it. Maybe thats my Aussie upbringing of not liking authority and spoiling for a fight but ************ it, when money is the driving influence the fans always get shafted.

 

[Jim2109]

in fairness to Sky though, they elevate the coverage to a different level! if Channel 4 had the Ashes i pretty much guarantee that it wouldnt even be in HD, most certainly wouldnt have the super slow motion cameras, hotspot, etc in place. and theres absolutely no chance that they would have Shane Warne on the commentary team. they just dont have the money to invest in it. Sky are showing it all in 3D as well i think, not that anyone can really take advantage of that yet, but still, theyre investing the money in it.

it would be good if everyone was able to watch it, but ultimately cricket isnt a popular sport in the UK. the Sky contract with the ECB is for ALL forms of cricket in England, they send cameras to county T20 and Pro 40 matches pretty much every day that there is a match being played through the summer. they dont show county championship for some reason but then i dont think anyone ever has? there must be games that they show where the cost of sending the cameras there is more than the yearly subscriptions of every viewer combined (so few people watch some of the games). why should Sky invest that money to give a good all-round coverage for genuine cricket fans just so that the one event that is guaranteed to get bumper viewing figures gets handed to terrestrial TV to reap the benefits? if Channel 4 had the rights to the Ashes then Sky would have no incentive to show the other matches, and i guarantee that Channel 4 wouldnt do it. so then there would be no cricket on TV apart from the odd England match here and there. as a genuine cricket fan, that would be hugely disappointing for me. the Ashes might well have got 20 million viewers in 2005 on terrestrial TV, but how many of those are cricket fans? 1 million maybe? they were just patriotic fans watching cricket for that one-off occasion when England might actually beat the Aussies. if we were losing the series 4-0 would they have bothered? i absolutely dont agree with having inferior cricket coverage just to please the masses, the majority of whom arent regular cricket fans at all. Sky provide for the genuine cricket fans.

its harsh on those who are genuine fans of cricket but dont have Sky, but there will be at least one pub in every town that is showing the matches live. plus highlights on Channel 4 or 5, as inadequate as they might be.

 

[chippyben]

in fairness to Sky though, they elevate the coverage to a different level! if Channel 4 had the Ashes i pretty much guarantee that it wouldnt even be in HD, most certainly wouldnt have the super slow motion cameras, hotspot, etc in place. and theres absolutely no chance that they would have Shane Warne on the commentary team. they just dont have the money to invest in it. Sky are showing it all in 3D as well i think, not that anyone can really take advantage of that yet, but still, theyre investing the money in it.

it would be good if everyone was able to watch it, but ultimately cricket isnt a popular sport in the UK. the Sky contract with the ECB is for ALL forms of cricket in England, they send cameras to county T20 and Pro 40 matches pretty much every day that there is a match being played through the summer. they dont show county championship for some reason but then i dont think anyone ever has? there must be games that they show where the cost of sending the cameras there is more than the yearly subscriptions of every viewer combined (so few people watch some of the games). why should Sky invest that money to give a good all-round coverage for genuine cricket fans just so that the one event that is guaranteed to get bumper viewing figures gets handed to terrestrial TV to reap the benefits? if Channel 4 had the rights to the Ashes then Sky would have no incentive to show the other matches, and i guarantee that Channel 4 wouldnt do it. so then there would be no cricket on TV apart from the odd England match here and there. as a genuine cricket fan, that would be hugely disappointing for me. the Ashes might well have got 20 million viewers in 2005 on terrestrial TV, but how many of those are cricket fans? 1 million maybe? they were just patriotic fans watching cricket for that one-off occasion when England might actually beat the Aussies. if we were losing the series 4-0 would they have bothered? i absolutely dont agree with having inferior cricket coverage just to please the masses, the majority of whom arent regular cricket fans at all. Sky provide for the genuine cricket fans.

its harsh on those who are genuine fans of cricket but dont have Sky, but there will be at least one pub in every town that is showing the matches live. plus highlights on Channel 4 or 5, as inadequate as they might be.

Sorry Jim can't agree with you at all there. So young kids in England can't watch England play cricket in any form if they don't have pay TV. How is that good for cricket? Channel 9 here has all the Australian games and has all the fancy gadgets( the latest one the PROTRACTOR!). To be fair we all used to watch cricket without these things so do we really need them.
Pay Tv televises all the other state one dayers and T20s and the Shield Final. The One dayers are lucky to attract a few hundred people. You can hear single hand claps from the crowd the crowds are so small. They do it because it is actually a cheap way to fill in hours and hours on the 100 channels they have. Here Fox don't get the revenue from the Ashes and still think its worthwhile.
One of the most pathetic things I saw in England, (Please don't think I'm having a go at England, just the TV situation) was a show on Saturday afternoons on BBC where you watched blokes who were watching football matches and they told you what was going on because they didn't have the rights to show it. I mean really, in a football mad country you couldn't even watch one game of football on tele on a saturday afternoon!!!
My parents wouldn't have had the money or inclination to get pay TV when I was a kid and I hate to think I would have missed out on all those great days of watching endless hours of cricket and football and trying to emulate my favourite players.
How many millions in England don't have pay TV and get no exposure to cricket. Id almost go as far to say the lower socio econonic groups in England don't get exposure to a game that should be available to all and it reinforces the image of it being elitist in England whereas its a game for all in other countries in the world. But we Aussies never got that class system thing here. Whoa getting a bit carried away now!!
Anyway we both love the game and I'm sure we can agree to disagree.
By the way I have pay tv!!!

 

[macca]

Yeah the protractor. They reckon they are going to put it on some old warne deliveries during the tests one of the commentators said.

 

[Jim2109]

the protractor is an interesting bit of kit actually. at first you just think to yourself that its stating the obvious. but its often hard to tell which balls have turned the most because of length. drop a ball short and its not hard to turn it a couple of yards, its the ones that pitch on a length and then flash across the face of the batsman that are the most impressive. it will give a very good insight into how much turn spinners are genuinely achieving. i reckon on Shane Warnes best deliveries trumping Swann, Smith and Hauritz by 20 degs+

 

[someblokecalleddave]

Mate it is a disgrace you can't watch the ashes. I was over there in 2005 when we lost the ashes but it was on free to air and people who never watched cricket before were watching it and telling me how great it was and of course giving it to me. There was huge hype and cricket was everywhere. I actually downed tools one day because it was getting so exciting and told the boss Im going home to watch this, much to his displeasure, only to see us lose by two runs but whats one afternoon of work compared to that! Then what happened, after that the ECB or whoever it is announces a deal with pay tv and no more test cricket will be on tele for 10 years or something like that. How bloody stupid and greedy are they.
Over here we have laws that certain events of social and sporting significance MUST be shown on free to air TV. That includes the Ashes. The pay TV bastards are slowly trying to erode that and there was an ad campaign here recently encouraging people to fight against it.
You should start a petition. Send a letter to all the leagues in England big and small and they can send letters to all their clubs and their players can sign it let it snowball and send it to the Morons who run the show. I reckon you are just the sort of bloke that could do it. Maybe thats my Aussie upbringing of not liking authority and spoiling for a fight but badger it, when money is the driving influence the fans always get shafted.

Tell me about it! I've had this conversation with several people on here and elsewhere several times. Cricket is stuck between a rock and a hard place and the bottom line is short-termism. There is no money in cricket here in the UK and it can't support itself, so it has had to go to Murdoch or Murdoch saw an opportunity and now it's where it is. Many commentators have made the point (and it was something that I witnessed) that the last win here wasn't accompanied by loads of small boys on fields all playing cricket for the first times in their lives all trying to be Shane Warne and Flintoff as they were in 2005. The majority of SKY suscribers in this country are Bogans that love their football, so the bigger percentage of them wouldn't have been watching the cricket, so the 'Trickle down affect' to the kids as we witnessed in 2005 when covered on terrestrial tele simply didn't happen. The viewing figures are readily available so that you can see the difference between 2005 and 2009 and it is staggering. So while we're currently surviving on Murdochs money at the minute, you have to wonder how the future generations of kids are going to be introduced to cricket in order that they take it up? It's not in schools anymore in the UK in the way that it was in the 1960's and 70's so the future may be effected by the current broadcasting arrangements. But we wont know for another couple of decades I suppose.

You're right about the politics in this country as well, but we'll not get too much into that, I kind of get the sense that you're on a similar wavelength to me. With regards campaigning for the rights, that's already happened and as far as I can recall it went to the courts and as high as the House of Lords, where it was decreed that SKY could keep the rights and charge the fees as they do thus limiting the exposure of cricket to the population.

Here's a question - how much would it cost to for a Dad to take his kids to go and see Australia play in a one dayer against England?

With regards Jim's point about the HD quality - it's not something I'm bothered about personally, I'd just like to be able to watch it. My current avenue of investigation is bit torrents, but I'm struggling to get my head round them as well.

 

[Teesra]

There are many streaming sites out there on which you can watch it live. There's also a guy that makes his own highlights videos of every match and posts them on his website. The video quality is horrible though but better than nothing. Pm me if you want the site list...

 

[chippyben]

"you have to wonder how the future generations of kids are going to be introduced to cricket in order that they take it up? It's not in schools anymore in the UK in the way that it was in the 1960's and 70's so the future may be effected by the current broadcasting arrangements."

Exactly Dave. Its one of my pet hates, the way sport is ruined by TV money. Wouldn't it be great if kids in the back alleys of Liverpool and Manchester and the like played cricket like in India instead of that fairies game you call football over there.
Cricket can only lessen in popularity with the current arrangements. I'm annoyed because Im heading over there to live next year so I am going to have to put up with it too.

It costs $125 for a family ticket to a one dayer in Sydney. 2 Adults 2 Kids. Thats the cheapest seats in the full blazing sun though. I sat in the Oreilly stand 2 summers ago to watch a one dayer and swore I'd never get seats that weren't in the shade again!!!. Of course drinks and food are way overpriced although thats to be expected. Not too bad really. I got pretty good seats for a test match 2 summers ago too and they cost $107 each. The seats were great actually and well worth the extra money.

 

[macca]

There are many streaming sites out there on which you can watch it live. There's also a guy that makes his own highlights videos of every match and posts them on his website. The video quality is horrible though but better than nothing. Pm me if you want the site list...

Teesra, does that mean i could have seen some of the last australian/india test series like that?

 

[Teesra]

Teesra, does that mean i could have seen some of the last australian/india test series like that?

Yeah, that's how I watch all my test cricket

I didn't want to post them here as they're a bit shady, like torrents. Not sure if the admins here will be fine with me linking to them. But check your inbox for my pm, sending you and Dave the list.

 

[macca]

Thanks for that teesra. I knew there would be something like that, i just couldn't find it.

 

[Sparksy88]

Im sitting on the fence on this one. I think sky has done a great job with the cricket and people forget the money the ecb get from sky which goes into grass roots and coaching (my coaching badge had somthing to do with sky cant remember now). Sky money really helps some of the English countys stay afloat, and there is a great amount of coverage of the domestic game (short formats). But again i agree its a shame test cricket has been taken away from alot of people.

 

[someblokecalleddave]

There are many streaming sites out there on which you can watch it live. There's also a guy that makes his own highlights videos of every match and posts them on his website. The video quality is horrible though but better than nothing. Pm me if you want the site list...

That (highlight) bloke is a legend!