Australia v New Zealand, 1st Test, Perth, 12-16 December, 2019.

Well NZ will have to lift its game if we're to see a contest on Boxing Day, but hard to see this mediocre mob improving much.

Thought rideov would provide more resistance.

Comprehensive win in the end.

Bring on Melbourne.

Well done to the boys in wrapping it up in 4 days.

Well done to Koo on MoM and outstanding effort by the bowlers in the absence of Purple. Great match also for Shrapnel with the bat.

How would Oz have gone had the Snoozies won the toss?

Yes, yes it was a good win, no doubt. However on that dubious pitch and in those conditions, winning the toss was the most decisive factor in the result.

Glass half full, h?

I contend that the Kiwis stepping up to a bouncy Aus wicket from their mud bowls was the main factor.

Can't wait for Melbourne if the kiwis can select and keep a full strength side. Though the curator might go overboard in not trying to embarrass himself.

The MCG pitch has been a dud since the early 80s.

Why have the succession of curators over that time refused to import soil from other sources outside Bleak City in an effort to get a decent bouncy wicket?? Or does the CV require "shitty groundsman incapable over getting bounce above the knee"?

early 80's?

wasnt the sarfraz test in 78/79?

this could start another year zero debate

True enough, I didn't put a great deal of research into it.

I remember the Centenary Test pitch in 1977 being OK.

Not sure when the pitch being dangerous started, but I was thinking of late seventies/early eighties batsmen when they called off the shield game. They must have been thinking "pussies".

the rolled mud of the 70/80's would just grubber or keep low

the shield game was making Cot look like Fot

I can remember a few hitting cracks off a length that didn't keep low.

lardbucket wrote:I notice the squad of 13 is named for the first two tests, with the possibility of squad changes and a spinner added before the Sydney game.

Is Pattinson or Neser (would be a debut) more likely for Melbourne? I'm thinking Neser.

Hopefully no SOK for Sydney. I'd rather Agar, or Bryce McGain.

Still favour Neser to play over Pattinson. He's potentially the all-rounder the tissues are rabbiting on about, too.  However, an argument could be made to play both, resting either Starc or Cummins, both of whom must be exhausted after their Perth exertions.

JGK wrote:Holland hasn't sucked this year has he?   Of course, Warney was talking about Swepson yesterday.

Why wouldn't the Big 3 quicks play in Melbourne as well?  

Fatigue, injury ... can't see Hazlewood being back before Sydney, if then.

lardbucket wrote:Perth and Melbourne are very close together. I suspect there will be some 'player management', 'rotation', and resting of one of the big 3, probably Starc.

... got that one wrong

Basil wrote:Will NZ dare to play Ferguson in the first test?

they did

JGK wrote:It s probably the test where they need him least.

and that's what they got - they had him least

Fred Nerk wrote:Whateley and Crash had Swepson (Schweppes?) on SEN today, he's come under Warnie's wing, but GW said he thought they will prob go for Agar despite lack of wickets  At least no mention of the dreaded Soak.

please don't even mention RD's SOK

embee wrote:Surely Dutchy before 'Orrible

He's off the radar too ... the impression remains strong that he's not quite up to it and that he gets injured whenever a (rare) opportunity beckons. How lucky are we to have Lyon? He's still under-appreciated.

dutchy has a busted finger

They're not going to play Neser, the shield is in hiatus.