FB "A/T XI" Virtual Series, 2nd Test @ MCG, starting Dec 30 1932

Conditions and conclusions: Surprisingly, the Melbourne turf turns out to be rather soft.

Bowling: Against expectations, the track is not very responsive to sheer pace .... instead, during the match, the pitch may well become ideal for resourceful-but-aggressive spin: using "F&G" (flight and guile) through the air, but also able to impart strong, attacking spin.

However, clever fast-medium bowling - especially with variable swing - may also have a considerable part to play, especially for the first couple of days. (> See Tim Wall's performance in the actual match, linked below.)

Especially by the fourth day, the pitch may begin to wear quickly, spin-friendly footmarks could appear, etc. (But we might not see that coming at the toss?)

For batting, sound defence will be important, especially on the first day, where conditions are likely to favour swing. Increasingly though, the conditions will surely become favourable for bold play - or at least determined front-foot play (forward drives, nimble footwork) ..... as against either stepping back and trying to prod your way to safety, or on the other hand, flinging the bat without footwork, FTB-style.

As the match progresses, luck apart (Hammond was reported as being maybe a bit unfortunate in this match), the most effective batting tactic is going to be the classiest - a well-balanced combination of front-foot courage, agile footwork and sound judgment when and how to hit, when and how to smother.


Possible questions ~ answer any of these you feel like (or none):

> How do you think your team would get on?

> Which of the other bowling attacks would you/your captain most/least like to face?

> Which batting lineup would you/your skipper most like to get your/their teeth into?


> If bowling first, whom would you bring on early, whom might you hold back more than otherwise?

> If batting first, what would be your strategy/tactics? And which players would be your main hope(s) of substantial runs?


> Would you be glad to win the toss, or would it be "a good toss to lose"? (this might be easy! )

> Would you bat or bowl first? ( )


Remember: this one is scheduled to be a "timeless Test". (Potentially that is, but probably nowhere near in fact - unless the batting generally is a sight better, and generally better-judged, than it actually was in 1932.)

..................................................................................................................................................................

Report of the actual match: http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/story/316707.html

Wisden historical report of the actual match: http://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/151780.html

Scorecard of the actual match: http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/62607.html

(Reminder of the teams:)

Baggygreen XI

1. JB Hobbs 2. RB Simpson 3. WR Hammond 4. GA Gooch 5. IVA Richards 6. AR Border
7. IA Healy 8. Kapil Dev 9. WJ O'Reilly 10. MA Holding 11. WA Johnston. Sub. RT Ponting


Brass Monkey Jazz XI

1. VT Trumper 2.ML Hayden 3. FMM Worrell 4. GS Chappell 5. Javed Miandad 6. KP Pietersen
7. MJ Prior 8. Wasim Akram 9. RR Lindwall 10. M Muralitharan 11. AA Donald. Sub. DW Randall


Growler's XI

1. GG Greenidge 2. MA Atherton 3. AJ Stewart (w) 4. JH Kallis 5. CH Lloyd (c) 6. AW Greig
7. TE Bailey 8. Abdul Qadir 9. DL Underwood 10. Waqar Younis 11. GD McGrath. Sub. PD Collingwood


Henry's XI

1. AN Cook 2. H Sutcliffe 3. R Dravid 4. BC Lara 5. SR Waugh (c) 6. VVS Laxman
7. Imran Khan 8. APE Knott (w) 9. RJ Hadlee 10. JC Laker 11. J Garner. Sub. AB DeVilliers


Paul Keating's Lizard XI

1. Hanif Mohammad 2. A Shrewsbury 3. C Hill 4. SJ McCabe 5. S Chanderpaul 6. WG Grace
7. TG Evans 8. AV Bedser 9. H Verity 10. IR Bishop 11. BS Chandrasekhar. Sub. CL Hooper


PeterCS XI

1. BA Richards 2. EJ Barlow 3. GA Headley 4. E De C Weekes 5. E Paynter 6. FS Jackson
7. PJL Dujon 8. AK Davidson 9. SK Warne 10. CEL Ambrose 11. AME Roberts. Sub. KC Bland


Skully's XI

1. WM Lawry 2. KC Sangakkara 3. PBH May 4. DCS Compton 5. RG Pollock 6. G St A Sobers
7. IT Botham 8. A Kumble 9. DK Lillee 10. CV Grimmett 11. CA Walsh. Sub. RA Harper


Taipan XI

1. L Hutton 2. SM Gavaskar 3. GA Faulknerl 4. KF Barrington 5. DI Gower 6. AD Nourse
7. AC Gilchrist 8. DW Steyn 9. H Larwood 10. FR Spofforth 11. SF Barnes. Sub. JN Rhodes


Tricycle XI

1. GC Smith 2. DL Amiss 3. KS Ranjitsinhji 4. C Walcott 5. VS Hazare 6. A Flower
7. KR Miller 8. R Benaud 9. FS Trueman 10. FH Tyson 11. BS Bedi. Sub. ED Solkar

I like this bit:

"As the Melbourne turf is frequently more suitable to fast howling than other Australian wickets" - maybe more Marmaduke than Teen Wolf?

Anyway:

> My team would get on fine thanks, I'd back Trumper, Worrell and Pietersen to get a decent amount of runs on this f*cker. Bowling-wise, I reckon Wasim would do well up front, as would Donald. They both got quite a bit of swing on soft pitches. Then, I've got the chucker to really mix things up and Lindwall who was really good at tail-bowling. Reckon even Worrell would do OK if the others failed (yeah, right).

> Which of the bowling attacks would I most like to face? Strangely, maybe Peter's. I always think Warne preferred bounce and Ambrose would be slightly negated, Roberts may have done OK but he used to whack it into the pitch, regardless of his action. Davidson may well have performed the best on the wicket. Least like to face would be joint between Taipan's and Pontoon's - Verity would've been king on this pitch and Chandra would also provide a big threat. For Taips' team - Spofforth and Barnes would be so used to these sort of pitches. Big shout out to baggygreen - who had the master Tiger in his side, as well.

> Growler's. I'd get my teeth into Growler's line-up no probs. I've got Donald in my side - which would account for Athers. I'd bring Murali on to get Stewie. Most of his batsmen like a bit of bounce.

> Murali. Lindwall.

> Get the tonkers tonking and the sex men sexing.


> I'm always a good toss to lose sort of bloke.

> I'd bat first. Not going to get any easier.

So is bodyline allowed or not?

****** this. Anyone fancy a pint?

You won't be joining us on the First Test thread then? Or for the remainder of the Tests?

Actually, us lads are quite good at multi-tasking - play AND pint. Dunno 'bout yourself... maybe a more "traditional" sort of guy?

Do I fancy a pint? Well yeah. I also fancy snorting cocaine off two stripper's vaginas, but as I'm at work, and not that rich, some fantasy cricket thing is the best I'll get.

taipan wrote:So is bodyline allowed or not?

I dunno - what do others think?

Perhaps we should follow historical precedent, and not formally ban it (after all, bodyline became part of the norm at the latest by the time of the mid-1970s-late 80s WIndian speed quartets anyway.....).

If you start softening up the batsmen's ribcages and heads though, you can expect a hot reception from the Australian crowds (unless perhaps Lillee or another Aussie is inflicting the bodyline - *Lever's heh*), diplomatic incidents aplenty, and the opprobrium of history ever after.


btw: I chose the MCG over Adelaide (Third Test, and the high point of the Bodyline controversy, much shit hitting fans) simply because it was the SECOND Test of that year, 20 years after the First we have slated in 1912. I'm sure Growler will get round to three or four South African, Indian, Pakistani or West Indian pitches, including some hard bouncy pitches, anon. Or who knows, Sri Lanka, New Zealand (or Bangladesh)?

Brass Monkey wrote:Do I fancy a pint? Well yeah. I also fancy snorting cocaine off two stripper's vaginas, but as I'm at work, and not that rich, some fantasy cricket thing is the best I'll get.

You poor bastard. The rest of us are of course all snorting away like pigs, Daniele.

PeterCS wrote:
You poor bastard. The rest of us are of course all snorting away like pigs, Daniele.

It's alright - I've done it before. It's overrated.

What's the over rate for deliveries from both ends at once?

About 15 seconds. Maximum.

PeterCS wrote:

taipan wrote:So is bodyline allowed or not?

I dunno - what do others think?

Perhaps we should follow historical precedent, and not formally ban it (after all, bodyline became part of the norm at the latest by the time of the mid-1970s-late 80s WIndian speed quartets anyway.....).

If you start softening up the batsmen's ribcages and heads though, you can expect a hot reception from the Australian crowds (unless perhaps Lillee or another Aussie is inflicting the bodyline - *Lever's heh*), diplomatic incidents aplenty, and the opprobrium of history ever after.


btw: I chose the MCG over Adelaide (Third Test, and the high point of the Bodyline controversy, much shit hitting fans) simply because it was the SECOND Test of that year, 20 years after the First we have slated in 1912. I'm sure Growler will get round to three or four South African, Indian, Pakistani or West Indian pitches, including some hard bouncy pitches, anon. Or who knows, Sri Lanka, New Zealand (or Bangladesh)?

Well since this was played during the bodyline series....

Indeed. I'm not sure if we are supposed to be just creating a set of conditions, or replicating (channeling?) matches a bit more closely.

But fire away!

When I first thought of this virtual Test series, my intention was to incorporate (as far as possible) all aspects of the quoted match played at the time. So for me, although bodyline itself was kind of used up to, and particularly by Clive Lloyds WIndians, the concept of "leg theory" did lead to fielding restrictions behind square leg.

However, since no such restrictions applied during this Test, IMO it should be a legitimate tactic for our virtual match.

It will be interesting to see how forummers rate the teams batsmen when it comes to raw courage in the face of such bowling.

Growler wrote:
It will be interesting to see how forummers rate the teams batsmen when it comes to raw courage in the face of such bowling.

Hayden and Pietersen would get out hooking - Hayden didn't particularly like it in '05 and it showed in his stats - similarly KP struggled a bit with a barrage against a couple of teams. I'm not sure how they'd like, say, Garner and Larwood respectively. That sort of stuff would be unprecedented to the likes of Trumper - I'm sure he'd find the whole thing very ungentlemanly . I reckon he'd do pretty well, actually, quick on his feet and a good eye. Chappellg similarly. Miandad didn't particularly like it up him - although if he was facing the spinners of Aus, he'd probably do alright. Worrell would be fine - he was apparently a complete player on both back and front foot.

Phurt @ Trumper.

Anyway, he's a goner. Stale Dane slew him 20 years ago.

Victor Trumper - the David Sales of yesterday.

To start with the most obvious things (comments on the batting and on other teams probs tomorrow):

It's a toss to win, and bat. As Monkey said (and obvious?), a soft, wearing track is not one you want to get caught on late in any Test where good spinners are involved - especially not spinners of the sort that give it a proper tweak, and can get the ball lunging, jagging and spitting like a cobra as the game progresses, .... when it is just a lamely bouncing tennis ball in the hands of most seamers.


On Danny's point - Warne probably being relatively ineffective .... I doubt it!

Probably true (as Dan says) that TGM preferred a bit of bounce in the pitch. But top legspinners always have. Top spinners, and especially wrist spinners, have usually seen themselves as just a cleverer and more resourceful version of a fast bowler - and have bowled with that mentality. (The same irrepressible, aggressive, in-your-face mindset - only, by choosing to bowl a bit slower, they can give the ball more rip and jag, and more varieties of rip and jag, and control more variations of pace, than quicks. > Think of "Tiger" O Reilly (and his nickname!); think of Tony Lock (recorded as a "S"LA, but slow only later) who tended in Tests to try too hard, bowl too fast, get frustrated and tend towards chucking; at a lower level of skill, but not intensity, ferocity, or psychosis, think of Afridi; think of Abdul Qadir when he broke on to the Test ripping into the English with 57 varieties, most of them attacking) ~ The "Ball of the Century" was a legspinner's dream come true, not just for the huge degree of deviation, but for the conquest, the triumph of skill, will and wits over the bewildered batsman. (That's right - top legspinners are generally nutcases. They make keepers appear sane.)


My point is: Warne might have preferred a more baked wicket - but he would certainly fancy his chances on any wicket that took spin (or even, didn't!).

And this one in 1932 clearly did - particularly the attacking sort of spin, "leg rip" and all the bamboozle-rich variations of flipper, zipper, nipper, topper, tipper, zooter, shooter, balabalooter - and it took that sort of spin with a vengeance.

As (field) captain, I think Warne would know when to bring himself on (as well as, err, bring himself off ...), would test out the pitch early in the first innings, see how it went, and take it from there. And his cricket-superintelligent mind would work overtime on how to use the pitch and conditions to outwit and crush each and every batsman idiotic enough to face him (oops, soz - slipped into the "legripper's" mentality there).

And on his home ground, the MCG, I think he would fairly quickly work out ways to turn a fairly soft pitch into a killer - as did "Tiger" before him, in 1932.


You're right about Davidson though - I'm certain Warne would look to use him quite a lot for his swinging, sliding-across and skidding talents.

I'd also agree with you to an extent that conditions do not seem favourable for Roberts or Ambrose.

This was why I was asking whether our "12th pick" was to be a notional substitute (nod to the great fielders of cricket, and move on), or an active, usable player.

My 12th PLAYER would have been Johnny Wardle (perhaps more about him tomorrow! ) ~ and for this particular match, I might have done the unthinkable, and dropped Curtly for him.

BOUNCE might not be such an asset, but Roberts would be valuable, first as a "shake-up and soften-up" bowler (like Larwood in this Test as well as Adelaide, and also in 1929) - and then, his slingy, airy action at disguised various speeds might prove dangerous to stumps as well as torsos. There were a LOT of clean-bowleds in the MCG Test of 1932! Warne would no doubt advise him not to strain for top speed (after a bit of duffing up of the opposition - a few smashed ribs, the odd cranial trauma, shattered legs), but instead to make the most of the swing from the air, and pitch it up at a full length (yorkers to selected batsmen).

Don't forget Stanley Jackson and Eddie Barlow too - the one with his faster off-break deliveries, the other with his shrewd, swinging wobblers!

Despite the lack of a second frontline spinner - a weakness in my team in "slow" conditions - I think Warne's bowling lineup would fare pretty well against most of these top sides.

Particularly when my lot has the best 3, 4, 5 of all nine teams for such conditions!

(Of which a few more words probably tomorrow. And words on the other teams. and maybe a word on Wardle, - since this is not just about proving cases! )

Brass Monkey wrote:Victor Trumper - the David Sales of yesterday.

There's a tautology if ever there was one.



Yesterday
Trumper looked like he was here to stay
Now it seems that he's been blown ... away
But Dan believes
In yesterday

did anyone select ponsford?...he would have enjoyed batting and dominating at the G again

Ahem: My team has the man who excelled most in Bodyline!

Paul Keating wrote:Ahem: My team has the man who excelled most in Bodyline!

Actually Larwood is in my team.

Doubt that what Jardine did could be described as excelling

Excelling in q'untery?