Australia v West Indies, 3rd Test, Sydney, January 3-7, 2016

OP Tipping wrote:I was surprised that the card shows the Australian innings as declared

It was. Declared at 4.50 so they could finish an hour and 10 minutes early .

Hmmm, how does that work? If there was time remaining, why did the dec not just lead to the Windies second innings?

OP Tipping wrote:Hmmm, how does that work? If there was time remaining, why did the dec not just lead to the Windies second innings?

I think you can call the match off with an hour remaining.

Red wrote:Warner MOTM. Perhaps Kraig Braithwaite a tad unlucky given that his runs against a superior attack were hard fought when there could well have been a game on. Today there was zero intensity. Maybe it was too hollow to award anyone in such a truncated and meaningless affair.

It's a joke that such a nothing innings could produce a MOTM.

So then really the dec only shaved 10 minutes

Brass Monkey wrote:

Red wrote:Warner MOTM. Perhaps Kraig Braithwaite a tad unlucky given that his runs against a superior attack were hard fought when there could well have been a game on. Today there was zero intensity. Maybe it was too hollow to award anyone in such a truncated and meaningless affair.

It's a joke that such a nothing innings could produce a MOTM.

On one hand, yes. But on the other they've got to give it to someone.

OP Tipping wrote:So then really the dec only shaved 10 minutes

2 beers.

Smith suggested to Holder before play began today that WI should declare and that he would immediately declare at 0-0 ... Holder (who consulted with his team) was unwilling to go down this path, preferring to have Ramdin make a decent first innings score.

OP Tipping wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:

Red wrote:Warner MOTM. Perhaps Kraig Braithwaite a tad unlucky given that his runs against a superior attack were hard fought when there could well have been a game on. Today there was zero intensity. Maybe it was too hollow to award anyone in such a truncated and meaningless affair.

It's a joke that such a nothing innings could produce a MOTM.

On one hand, yes. But on the other they've got to give it to someone.

Someone who did something when the game was 'live', as suggested above.

lardbucket wrote:Smith suggested to Holder before play began today that WI should declare and that he would immediately declare at 0-0 ... Holder (who consulted with his team) was unwilling to go down this path, preferring to have Ramdin make a decent first innings score.

I'm with Holder on this.

lardbucket wrote:Smith suggested to Holder before play began today that WI should declare and that he would immediately declare at 0-0 ... Holder (who consulted with his team) was unwilling to go down this path, preferring to have Ramdin make a decent first innings score.

Do you blame them? Basically, it's easy for Steve Smith to say that - when his batsmen have plundered this WI attack for millions in a day, time and again throughout the series. Why would Holder gift an easy win to Australia? It's a joke to even ask. 247 in a day? I doubt Australia have scored less in a day, this series.

Brass Monkey wrote:

lardbucket wrote:Smith suggested to Holder before play began today that WI should declare and that he would immediately declare at 0-0 ... Holder (who consulted with his team) was unwilling to go down this path, preferring to have Ramdin make a decent first innings score.

Do you blame them? Basically, it's easy for Steve Smith to say that - when his batsmen have plundered this WI attack for millions in a day, time and again throughout the series. Why would Holder gift an easy win to Australia? It's a joke to even ask. 247 in a day? I doubt Australia have scored less in a day, this series.

Windies would have batted again, but still right to decline.

Ah, that's not as bad - I thought it was the old triple declaration, county-style

taipan wrote:

lardbucket wrote:Smith suggested to Holder before play began today that WI should declare and that he would immediately declare at 0-0 ... Holder (who consulted with his team) was unwilling to go down this path, preferring to have Ramdin make a decent first innings score.

I'm with Holder on this.

Aye, all fair enough IMO.

taipan wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:

lardbucket wrote:Smith suggested to Holder before play began today that WI should declare and that he would immediately declare at 0-0 ... Holder (who consulted with his team) was unwilling to go down this path, preferring to have Ramdin make a decent first innings score.

Do you blame them? Basically, it's easy for Steve Smith to say that - when his batsmen have plundered this WI attack for millions in a day, time and again throughout the series. Why would Holder gift an easy win to Australia? It's a joke to even ask. 247 in a day? I doubt Australia have scored less in a day, this series.

Windies would have batted again, but still right to decline.

Holder could have enforced the follow on.

Brass Monkey wrote:Ah, that's not as bad - I thought it was the old triple declaration, county-style

Smith wanted to chase 370 off 70

I'm glad the Windies refused

Yeah I don't blame Holder, there was no need for him to do anything but try and get away with a draw.

Even by the standards of Windies touring teams this was a very dire series.I suppose all that can be said is that at least in the Sydney match they gave the impression that it could have been a competitive match, if dry.

I suppose Bravo and the Braithwaites just about earned their lunch money ... maybe Ramdin. Not much to say about the bowlers. I suppose JAW at least sometimes looked as though he could be threatening if there was ever someone holding down the other end.

taipan wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:

lardbucket wrote:Smith suggested to Holder before play began today that WI should declare and that he would immediately declare at 0-0 ... Holder (who consulted with his team) was unwilling to go down this path, preferring to have Ramdin make a decent first innings score.

Do you blame them? Basically, it's easy for Steve Smith to say that - when his batsmen have plundered this WI attack for millions in a day, time and again throughout the series. Why would Holder gift an easy win to Australia? It's a joke to even ask. 247 in a day? I doubt Australia have scored less in a day, this series.

Windies would have batted again, but still right to decline.

Smith, another in the production line SGDT nobs