The Couch Sitter Predictions for the 2018 AFL Finals Series

Will Richmond go Back-to-Back in 2018

Source: www.foxsports.com.au

Now that the Minor round of the AFL Season is over for 2018, it is time to look at the teams that have qualified for the AFL Finals and rate their chances. This season has had some surprises both in terms of teams that have made the finals and those that have missed out. Fortunately, I have had the opportunity to watch every AFL team live this year and thus can now formulate a reasonable opinion on how the top 8 sides will perform in September.

Richmond – First on 72 points – the reigning premiers have been the best side that I have seen this year. They have not always played well, but have managed to grind out wins when necessary. There has been a relatively even performance by all players with Riewoldt, Martin, Caddy, and Lambert showing the way throughout the season. It will be difficult to beat them in September and almost impossible for an interstate side. My prediction: Richmond go back-to-back for the first time in VFL/AFL history since 1973-74.

West Coast – Second on 64 points – West Coast have been a little surprising this year mainly due to the amount of experience they lost at the beginning of the year plus injuries to key players during the year. Add in the move to a new home at Optus Stadium and this year could have been bad… really bad. To their credit West Coast have been impressive at home and grabbed a few wins away to show their credentials. A top-two finish is vital as their form in MCG is still in question. My prediction: West Coast are runners up with the assistance of home finals.

Collingwood – Third on 60 points (120.4%) – another surprise packet this year and have also had many injuries to key players throughout the year. Coach Nathan Buckley has Collingwood playing an honest brand of football that is hard running and full of belief. If they make the Grand Final and play an interstate side they will win it with the help of their supporters. A Preliminary Final against Richmond will make an interesting contest as they could really push the Tigers. My prediction: Collingwood finish third losing to Richmond in the Preliminary Final.

Hawthorn: - Fourth on 60 points (120.1%) – Hawthorn have outperformed expectations this year by finishing in the Top 8 during what is predicted to be a rebuilding year for them. Key wins against Geelong (twice), Melbourne and Adelaide have been a catalyst for their season. Teams that move the ball quickly will trouble Hawthorn which may be the logic behind their wins over Geelong. Hard to see Hawthorn making the Grand Final at this stage. My Prediction: Hawthorn lose in the Preliminary final.

Melbourne: - Fifth on 56 points (131.4%). - Melbourne have performed on par this season so far in my opinion. Although questions remain on their consistency, somehow they managed to make the AFL Finals for the first time since 2006. Results range from almost brilliant (win over Adelaide by 91 points) to dismal (losses to Hawthorn by 67 points and Richmond by 46 points). How they perform in September is still anyone’s guess and I think emotion gets them into the second week. My prediction: Melbourne suffer a semi final loss.

Sydney: - Sixth on 56 points (109.5%) – Sydney are an enigma, their performances have been inconsistent and they have lost games that they were expected to win throughout the season (e.g. Port Power, North Melbourne, Geelong, and Adelaide at home) but winning matches they were not expected to triumph in (e.g. West Coast, Geelong, Melbourne, and Hawthorn away). This makes it difficult to get a read on them. My prediction: Sydney exit in the second week of the finals.

Greater Western Sydney: - Seventh on 54 points - GWS have had a difficult year with injuries and suspensions to key players. Yet, they have managed to keep themselves in the finals race and are slowly building for a campaign that goes deep into September. A team that relies on quick ball movement and athleticism, GWS will be difficult to contain in the better weather of September. If they can keep everyone fit, they have the potential to go all the way. However, with the impact of injuries this year, it is difficult to see them playing in their first Grand Final. My prediction: GWS lose a close one in the "Battle for the Bridge" and finish seventh.

Geelong: Eighth on 52 points – Geelong made the finals with easy wins at home against their last two opponents being Fremantle and Gold Coast. As a result they play Melbourne at the MCG in the first week of the finals. The game becomes a fifty-fifty contest purely because Melbourne are in the finals for the first time since 2006. If Geelong can keep up with Melbourne's speed they win, but I think emotion gets Melbourne over the line. My Prediction: Geelong will not progress past the first week.

Although Richmond are predicted to win the flag, it all comes down to how the team performs on the day. In the last two grand finals the team listed as favourites have lost with bad performances, so Richmond cannot take anything for granted if they want Back to Back glory.

The Rambling Couch Sitter's 2018 AFL Supporter Awards

Are things looking up Melbourne?

Source: www.qbd.com.au



Now that I have been living in Melbourne for 10 years, I thought it prudent to provide an analysis from a personal perspective on supporters from some of the AFL clubs. I wrote a similar article some years ago and things have changed since then. For instance, the "Feral Supporters" award no longer goes to Richmond but returns to its rightful club in Port Adelaide.


The "Little Engine That Could" award - Melbourne: Melbourne has improved from the "Sick and Sorry" award from a few years ago to this new award. Their supporters currently "think they can" make the Top 4 and "think they can" win the flag. Both the team and their supporters have some work to do to achieve both.

The “Feral Supporters” award – Port Adelaide: I bet you were all thinking Collingwood, but history dictates otherwise and it's something that will never change. They scream, swear and bully like a big club’s supporters would and worst of all think the whole world is against them. Furthermore, they got points for trying to make a half decent song into an anthem. Damn, I used to like Never Tear Us Apart from INXS too. Collingwood was a close second.

The “Juvenile Delinquent” award – St Kilda: An award that has not changed teams since the last time this article was written. The Saints supporters will happily “boo” opposition shots at goal and remind you of your clubs off-field indiscretions. The memory often fails the Saints supporters and their jibes often come back to haunt them. They really should remember the line that “Children should be seen and not heard” especially given off-field events of recent years.

The “Scarcity” award – North Melbourne: Another award that has not changed since the last time I wrote this article. The Kangaroos have a reasonably modest supporter base to begin with and when your side is not going well some supporters will drop off. But it is rare for North Melbourne to get more than 20,000 people when hosting an interstate club. I could pick the Gold Coast and Greater Western Sydney but they are relatively new clubs so that would be unfair.

The “Sick and Sorry” award – Carlton: The Blues have progressed (or regressed) from the "Hanging Shit on Your Own Team" award to win this award. Carlton always seem to be rebuilding and its supporters are basically resigned to see their club range from “Woeful to Terrible". After years of this merry-go-round the strain is starting to show. Carlton supporters are often resigned to defeat before the game has started.

The “We are the Competition” award – Collingwood: No change to the winner of this award. I'm not sure how many times I have heard the line from a Collingwood supporter “If it wasn’t for us, there would be no AFL” or the like. What rot, it speaks of arrogance and most of all there is not enough recent success to qualify the statement. Unfortunately it will only get worse if they win another flag in the next year or two.

The “Most Relieved Supporters” award – Richmond: After 37 years of not winning a premiership Richmond finally broke through with a win over Adelaide in the 2017 Grand Final. While we're still hearing about it as the Tigers go for back to back flags, the wait alone justifies the nomination.

So there you have it, congratulations to the winners and if your team did not win an award, there is always next year J

Is it time for a Red Card in the AFL?

Andrew Gaff on the bench after the Brayshaw incident

Source: www.sportingnews.com

Yeah, it’s been a while since I have been here. Have thought about a few contributions to the blog but never got around to them. However, given the Andrew Gaff incident on the weekend in the Western Derby, along with other similar offences over time, perhaps there is need for discussion about how to even up the contest in these situations.

Let’s face it, the team with the injured player has one less player to use for substitutions (which are capped at 90 per game) and therefore those players are fatigued quicker which obviously provides an advantage to the team whose player caused the injury. The earlier in the game that this happens could lead to a greater advantage for the offending team.

So, how could the AFL rectify the potential advantage created when a player is injured during the match. That is, does the idea of a red card system have merit in the AFL?

Now, I’m all for Aussie Rules Football that is played tough and hard, but it needs to be done in a fair manner. Aussie Rules is a very physical game in nature, so there is no need to be unfair or against the rules when it comes to physicality on the field.

Unlike sports such as Association Football or Rugby Union, AFL is a high scoring game that is played over a much larger field and for a longer period. Even though the playing time is specified at 80 mins, the clock is stopped quite regularly in Aussie Rules for any score, boundary throw-ins, free-kicks etc. A quarter in Aussie Rules usually lasts around 30 mins so players can be active up to 120 mins during a match. Based on this it becomes unfeasible to have one team with a player short on the field for any length of time as the match would end up being too one-sided.

I have been giving this scenario some thought over the last year or so and perhaps the answer lies in a combination of two ideas. The idea that the player responsible for the incident is no longer allowed to participate in the match is valid. However, we don’t want to make the contest too one-sided by having one less player on the field for one team.

Therefore, we could take the middle ground so that the offending player takes no further part in the game and the offending team keeps 18 players on the field during the game.

This effectively gives the offending team the same resources that the team with the injured player now has for the duration of the game. However, this idea does have a limitation in that in a Grand Final a team could select an average player to deliberately cause injury to a star player early in the match. This would remove both players from the contest but the offending team benefits as the star player for the opposition no longer has an impact.

Another idea and my preferred one, could be to remove the player through substitution and then remove all remaining interchanges for the offending team. Imagine if a team has their No.1 ruckman, midfielder and forward on the bench when the offence occurred and they could not return to the field. The team would have to make one substitution to even up the players on the field and would need to make a choice between the ruckman, midfielder or forward.

Again, this idea could be “gamed” somewhat, but it provides an option for the AFL to consider in removing the potential advantage for a team during the game. Of course, the offending player is likely to be suspended after the match as they would most likely face the tribunal and this affects the club in subsequent weeks.

However, the aim also is to provide an in-game deterrent so that an incident such as Gaff’s on the weekend does not occur. Let's see how the AFL tackles this situation in the coming weeks.

Should the AFL apply history consistently across State Leagues?

Rick Davies - SANFL Champion and AFL Hall of Fame inductee

source: www.australianfootball.com

Each year when the AFL Hall of Fame inductees are announced, I face a paradox in my thoughts about how the AFL treats its history. The general line of my thinking goes something like this. If the AFL is so keen on recognising the contributions that people make to the game of Australian Rules football, why does the AFL still state its records in terms of VFL/AFL history?

Let’s take the highest number of games coached by an individual as an example, Mick Malthouse (718 games) was celebrated as this person when he beat Jock McHale’s (VFL/AFL) record of 714 games in 2015. However both John Todd (721 games WAFL, West Coast) and Jack Oatey (777 games SANFL) have each coached more games than Malthouse in their respective state leagues.

Another example, Port Adelaide are allowed to recognise their 36 SANFL Premierships along with their sole AFL Premiership, but if you asked any Victorian club supporter they would state that Port have only won one premiership when they beat Brisbane in 2004 and the SANFL flags do not count. They will also claim that Essendon have won 16 Premierships, however only two flags (1993, 2000) are in the post 1990 AFL era.

As you can see in these two examples, there is no consistency when discussing history. The dilemma for the AFL is that by not recognising the contributions to the game made by people in states outside of Victoria, it potentially alienates those supporters who genuinely think that the AFL is too Victorian centric. Alternatively, by giving the football history of states other than Victorian greater weight, it risks distancing some Victorian supporters from the game.

When I have this discussion with Victorians, the point is often raised that the VFL was a better standard than other state leagues such as the SANFL and the WAFL in the past and therefore the recognition of history should remain in its current form. (That is, history should be VFL/AFL related in content and records should reflect this). While this is true to an extent, it was often due to the ability of Victorian Clubs to offer interstate players more money than their local club rather than relying on local talent alone.

Which brings me back to the Hall of Fame dilemma. In 2013 South Australian Rick Davies was inducted to the AFL Hall of Fame. Rick had an illustrious career at Sturt and amongst his achievements are two SANFL Premierships, four Sturt Best & Fairest medals and a Ken Farmer medal with 151 goals in 1983. If we apply the logic that history should be VFL/AFL related in content, then Rick Davies effectively entered the Hall of Fame based on the 20 games he played at Hawthorn.

It is obvious that this is not the reason, which makes the Victorian logic flawed.

Where does the solution lie? My suggestion is that the AFL could make 1990 its base year for AFL records and history.

This would be a substantial change for the AFL. To give an example, Tony Lockett’s VFL/AFL goal-kicking record would be split as 530 VFL and 830 AFL goals. In terms of AFL records this would be second behind Matthew Lloyd whose 926 goals were all kicked after 1990. 

This change would allow the AFL to recognise all the State leagues' histories prior to and beyond 1990. Even then it does become somewhat tricky with Victoria as the VFL morphed into the AFL. But this should enable some consistency in how we as supporters discuss our game and refer to its history.

What have we learned from the 2015 CWC?..so far

Ireland celebrates the dismissal of West Indian player Chris Gayle

Source: www.sports.yahoo.com

Well the Cricket World Cup preliminary round has been completed and the quarter finals are almost upon us. There has been plenty of exciting cricket played over the last few weeks. The World Cup started with a big bang, but slowly petered off in intensity over the last week. In hindsight, the draw could have been done differently, but achieving the right balance is always difficult.

Here are the takeaways from the tournament's preliminary round:

·        Team scores have risen – This World Cup will be known as the World Cup where batting changed forever. With T20 cricket now starting to take hold, the scoring rate has increased in this World Cup. For instance, prior to this event there had been only one match where a team scored more than 400 in an innings (India 5/413 vs Bermuda at Port of Spain in 2007). However, in the preliminary rounds for this World Cup there have been three scores over the 400 mark. This could be due to the new fielding restrictions in force during the 41-50 overs, but could also be a result of a more aggressive batting approach. Surprisingly, none of these 400+ scores were made in New Zealand which generally has smaller grounds than their co-hosts Australia.

·        Is 300 the new 200? – There have been 25 innings where a team has scored more than 300 during the preliminary rounds of this World Cup and five of those instances were in the second innings. Three of the five second innings instances resulted in a successful chase. That is the team batting second won the game. Compare this to the 2003 World Cup in South Africa and there were only 8 instances of a team scoring 300 or more in the preliminary rounds and all of these were by the team batting first.

·        The demise of England – For a cricketing powerhouse, England has played poorly during this World Cup and seems to be a side that is dysfunctional and rudderless. Their only wins came against Scotland and Afghanistan which were expected. Their losses are a different story, Sri Lanka won by nine wickets chasing 309 in Wellington. New Zealand demolished England by 8 wickets at the same ground by chasing 123 in just 12.2 overs. Australia won by 111 runs in the first game of the tournament at the MCG. Lastly, Bangladesh rubbed salt into the wound with their 15 run win at the Adelaide Oval. Apart from the Bangladesh game, England’s losses were by big margins and really showed how far the team had slipped in recent times.

·       The rise of Associate nations – Ireland and Afghanistan both performed well in the preliminary round of the World Cup with Ireland only just missing out on qualifying for the quarter finals by losing their last game against Pakistan. Ireland won their matches against the West Indies, Zimbabwe and the United Arab Emirates. Afghanistan won their first World Cup game against Scotland which is a great achievement considering they only started in the World Cricket League in 2008. With the next World Cup containing just 10 teams at this stage, it seems unlikely that Ireland and Afghanistan will be competing in the next tournament…..unless common-sense prevails.

So far, I think the tournament has been great, there has been a large amount of runs scored and the first ever 200+ score by Chris Gayle against Zimbabwe in Canberra. However, it has not been all doom and gloom for the bowlers with brilliant spells from Southee (7/33 vs England), Boult (5/27 vs Australia) and Starc (6/28 vs New Zealand). At this stage, it is difficult to pick a winner from New Zealand, India, South Africa and Australia. However both South Africa and Australia have tricky quarter finals to overcome first.

Who will win the Cricket World Cup?

Source: www.aussiedigest.com

Well, it is less than one week until the start of the cricket world cup in Australia and New Zealand. The tournament officially starts on Valentine’s Day at the MCG and finishes at the same venue on March 29. To be honest, I am really looking forward to the next six weeks of cricket and expect that many hours will be devoted to watching the great game.

The format is fairly simple this time around, with two pools of seven teams playing six matches in a round robin format. After playing the six matches, the top four teams in each pool progress to quarter finals where it takes a knockout format until the final. The pleasing aspect of this format is that the minnow nations such as Afghanistan, Scotland, and the United Arab Emirates all play six games against quality opposition. This is important for the development of the game and should provide valuable experience for those nations.

The obvious question is which teams are the most likely to win the tournament. Well it is difficult to go past Australia, South Africa and India at this stage. However New Zealand come through as a dark horse given that they play all their group matches in New Zealand, including the one against Australia.

Australia will be aiming for their fifth World Cup trophy and have won the World Cup on every cricket playing continent except their own. The pressure is enormous to win this one given that it is on home soil. The squad is full of match winners such as Warner, Maxwell, Johnson and Smith just to name a few. They are currently the best team on the planet and are in form, as proven by their recent win in the one day series against India and England. Anything less than an appearance in the final will be considered a failure by many pundits. Barring injury and self-implosion, I believe the team will make the final and they should win it. However keeping a lid on expectation within the team will be the key.

South Africa are the perennial chokers in major cricket tournaments and amazingly still have not won a World Cup. Quite simply they are the masters of self-destruction and I expect that both Allan Donald and Lance Klusener still have nightmares about their exit from the 1999 World Cup. In terms of talent, South Africa oozes as much talent as Australia with de Villiers, Amla, Steyn, Vilander and du Plessis. For South Africa everything is in place, it simply comes down to execution and mindset. Basically, this team needs success like I need coffee. They should make the March 29 final at the MCG, but will they win….well that is anyone’s guess.

India, they would only make the quarter finals based on current form. However tournaments such as these also rely on timing and if India finds form at the pointy end of the tournament then they are in with a real shot. The Indian’s have the ability to score runs quickly with players such as Dhoni and Kohli. Their bowling is still a little raw and if they bowl first their batsmen could find themselves chasing some large totals. The advantage India has over most other teams is that they have been in Australia for a couple of months now and hence should be used to Australian conditions. For me I think India can make the semi-finals if they find their form.

My dark horse is New Zealand, who has two things going its way. First, New Zealand get to play all its group matches at home and possibly even a quarter final. This is a huge advantage for New Zealand who really knows how to play to their conditions. Plus their grounds tend to be smaller than the Australian grounds which will bring players such as Brendon McCullum and Ross Taylor into play. Second is their squad, while it does not boast the depth of Australia’s or South Africa’s squads there is enough depth to trouble most sides. Their bowling attack of Trent Boult, Tim Southee and Daniel Vettori is very capable of bowling out most sides. This is complemented by the aggressive style of batting from McCullum and Taylor, the accumulation capabilities of Williamson and the all-round abilities of Corey Anderson. The Kiwis have an opportunity to make the semi-finals and if things go their way then who knows it could lead to their first finals play-off.

Like many others, I suspect that the World Cup Final will be played between Australia and South Africa. However both India and New Zealand will have a fair amount to say in the matter and either country is quite capable of causing an upset in the semi-finals and progress to the final.

Observations from the 2015 Sydney Test

David Warner kisses the spot where Phil Hughes was hit by the bouncer that resulted in his death

Source: www.examiner.com.au 

As I predicted prior to the start of the series,  the Border-Gavaskar trophy was won by the Australians two matches to nil. I may have got the individual test results wrong, but the overall score line is what matters. So it is time to celebrate !!

The Sydney test itself ended up in a draw, Australia batted first and made 572 before India replied with 475 in their innings. Australia made a quick fire 251 before declaring and setting the Indians 349 to win which seemed unlikely from the start. The Indians held on in the last ten overs to force the draw.

What were the takeaways from the Sydney Test:

• An emerging talent – when Joe Burns was selected it was unexpected, but Joe showed some justification in the decision with fifties in each innings. The second innings was a well-made 66 off only 39 balls with three sixes and eight fours. Burns started his innings slowly with 11 off 12 balls before launching into 55 off the next 27 delivers. It was entertaining, but more importantly it allowed Australia to set a decent target with plenty of overs available to bowl the opposition out. Could Burns be Australia’s next permanent number three?
• Both captains show the way – Smith and Kohli continued their rich vein of form by scoring hundreds in the first innings, although Kohli may feel that he missed out with only 46 in the second innings. These two batsmen scored 1,461 runs in total for the series with Smith scoring 769 and Kohli contributing 692 for their respective sides. If they maintain their form it will make the ODI series and the World Cup really interesting.

What have we learned from the series?

• India is now a side in transition – India’s bowling attack is relatively young and spearheaded by Ishant Sharma. There is some promise with Umesh Yadav, whereas Varun Aaron needs to become more consistent and reminds me of a younger Mitchell Johnson. There has been a change in leadership from MS Dhoni to the more combative and aggressive Kohli, which will prove to be a good strategic move in time. The Top 6 can build itself around Kohli and Murali Vijay which should mean that most opposition sides could be chasing some rather large totals.
• Australia is starting to build consistency – Although its best batsman and regular captain Clarke was missing for most of the series, Australia was still able to post large totals. Smith had a blinder of a series with the bat and seemed to thrive even more with the captaincy role. The Top 6 may need a reshuffle perhaps by moving Burns to three and Australia will most likely need to find another opener within the next 12 months as Rogers is expected to retire soon. At the moment the Top 6 would probably be Warner, Rogers opening with Burns, Smith and Clarke at three, four and five. Number six is difficult but I would put Mitchell Marsh ahead of Watson once he regains fitness. The pace bowling stocks are plentiful for Australia and considering that Siddle only played one test and Cummins, Bird and Faulkner did not play at all, there would appear to be sufficient depth for Australia.

Overall the series started with a tragedy and finished with the tradition of test cricket remaining firmly intact. The cricket was very entertaining with 5,870 runs scored across the four tests. Naturally, the bowlers would think that the wickets were too docile, however there was the possibility of non-draw results in every test.

Observations from the 2014 Boxing Day Test

The Australian and Indian teams shake hands after the Boxing Day Test

Source: www.smh.com.au

The Boxing Day Test was a tightly fought contest in the first few days and resulted in a draw. There has been some debate about whether Steve Smith missed an opportunity to go for the win by declaring earlier on the fifth day. This would have provided more opportunity for his bowlers, however by declaring when he did he ensured that Australia would win the series. In the end India were set 383 to win off 71 overs and at 2 for 5 spent the rest of Day 5 in survival mode.

What were some of the takeaways from this test:

• Runs galore - the glut of runs scored in the series continued with the Melbourne test providing 1,487 runs over the five days and compares to 1,556 runs in Adelaide and 1,267 runs in Brisbane. The cricket has been entertaining over the three tests and it would appear that this will continue in Sydney.
• Fielding woes - perhaps it has been the result of playing three tests in quick succession but the standard of fielding in the Melbourne test was well below par. On the first day the Indians leaked almost 30 runs in the field through poor fielding and the Australians were uncharacteristically sloppy. 
• MS Dhoni retires - like England's Graeme Swann last year MS Dhoni has retired mid-series effective immediately with the Sydney test remaining. While I wish Dhoni all the best I do find it a little soft to retire mid-series and especially in a series where the quality of cricket played has been very good. MS Dhoni scored 4,876 runs at 38.06 per innings with six hundreds and 33 fifties. As wicketkeeper he took 256 catches and made 38 stumpings during his career.
• Kohli's red-hot form - Virat Kohli scored another hundred for India, this time it was a very classy 169 in India's first innings. In doing so, he became the first Indian player since Sunil Gavaskar in 1977-78 to score three centuries during a series in Australia. Kohli's partnership of 262 with Rahane in just under 58 overs was very entertaining and showed a glimpse of what might be on the horizon for Indian cricket.
• Watson's missed opportunities - In the first innings Shane Watson had the opportunity to make a stand and put all those who have doubted him in their place by scoring a hundred. But Shane played true to form and threw his wicket away after scoring 52 that was scratchy at best. Finally my prayers might be answered as one selector has now hinted that he needs to score runs to retain his spot.
• Did Australia declare too late? - Australia played safe and won the series which will be great for Smith's confidence as captain, but there was a lesson to be learned about decision making for declaring an innings and setting a target that encourages the opposition to chase it and provide enough time to bowl the opposition out. Admittedly, there was some bad weather in Melbourne on Day 5 and play did stop on a couple of occasions, which may have impacted the decision.

So Australia head to Sydney with the Border-Gavaskar trophy already in the cabinet and India begin life without MS Dhoni. Virat Kohli steps in as captain and going by his performance as captain in Adelaide we should expect that India will continue to play aggressive and entertaining cricket.

On a special note - Congratulations to Brendon McCullum who scored 1,164 runs in 2014 to become the first New Zealander to score more than 1,000 runs in a calendar year.

Observations from the 2014 Brisbane Test

Josh Hazlewood celebrates taking his fifth wicket in the first innings

Source: www.sports.ndtv.com

In what would be described as somewhat of a surprise.... well not really, the Australian's have won the Brisbane Test by six wickets with more than a day to spare. This is actually quite remarkable given that India scored 408 in their first innings and had Australia on the ropes at 6-247 and staring a 70-100 run deficit on the first innings. The Australian tail wagged and Australia went on to make 505 to lead by 97 and be in a very good position.

India's task was simple bat out Day 4 to establish a lead of between 300 and 350 runs, then declare and ask the Aussies to either chase the runs or bat out Day 5 for the draw. Instead the Indian top order collapsed in the first session of Day 4 as 1-76 became 5-87 and all was lost. India eventually made 224 which was never enough and Australia was set a target of 128 which was easily achieved even though six wickets were lost in the process. Australia is improving at chasing small targets of late, however there is some room for improvement.

So, what were the takeaways from this test:

• A fine debut - Josh Hazlewood made his test debut by coming into the side for the injured Ryan Harris and bowled admirably taking 5 for 68 in the first innings. This was backed up with 2-74 in India's second innings and a handy 32 with the bat in Australia's first innings. Hazlewood hits the pitch hard and has improved his ecomony rate recently which is what is required from a fast bowler. He is another one of the young generation of Australian quicks that will emerge in the next few years.
• Smith shows leadership qualities - Steve Smith was appointed captain for the remainder of the series after Michael Clarke became unavailable with a hamstring injury. Smith did not miss a beat with his field settings and lead the Australian fightback in the first innings with a much needed 133 runs. Leadership seems to come natural to Smith which bodes well for Australia's cricketing future. If there was one blemish it was his unnecessary run out in the second innings.
• The Australian tail wags... again - In what is becoming a familiar sight for the Australian's, the tail-enders contributed significantly towards the first innings total at a time when a deficit of 70-100 runs was looking very likely. This time the last four wickets contributed 258 runs to the total. In fact ten players out of eleven made double figures with only Brad Haddin missing out.
• An inspired bowling spell - Just when the game was in the balance Mitchell Johnson's first spell on Day 4 yielded 3-10 and wrecked through the Indian top and middle order. Johnson took advantage of a calamitous morning for the visitors where Dhawan was unable to bat due to a slight wrist injury he received in the nets whilst warming up pre-match. India were in disarray and then complained about the facilities... just get on with it folks it's better for the game.
• Indian collapso - The Indians have had a batting collapse in three out of their four innings this summer and continually have this problem when playing away from home. They lost 4 for 11 during the second innings in Brisbane coupled with 5 for 45 and 8 for 73 in Adelaide, which is not a great record. Unfortunately it appears as though the Brisbane collapse may have been of their own making with the problems they had in preparing for the fourth day.

Yours truly may have over estimated India's batting capabilities away from home in predicting a 2-0 series win to the Australians and now India are in real trouble of a 4-0 series whitewash. It is worth noting that Australia have not lost a test match in Brisbane since 1988 (against the West Indies) and have won 19 and drawn 7 in that time.

Observations from the 2014 Adelaide Test

Tribute to Phil Hughes at the Adelaide Test

Source: www.cricket.com.au

Well it looks like that my earlier prediction of an Australian 2-0 series victory is in doubt after only one test. The Australians won the Adelaide Test by 48 runs, but not after a spirited fight-back on the last day by India who looked like possibly snatching an unlikely victory during the day. Chasing 364 to win the match, India lost 8/73 in the final session and the test was over. It was an emotional week for cricket and especially the Australians, who I suspect will never be the same again after the death of teammate Phil Hughes.

The memory of Phil Hughes was everywhere to be seen, his baggy green number of 408 painted on the ground and every time an Australian cricketer made a milestone or took a wicket the celebration was near that number. The Australians wore shirts with No.408 embroidered on the front to respect the memory of Hughes. This victory meant everything to the team and it is possible that they may win the series 4-0 based on the emotions evident in this test. 

So what did we learn from this test?

• Batsman's Paradise - There were six hundreds made in Adelaide with Warner and Kohli making centuries in both innings which is outstanding. This suggests that the pitch was a road. But even with both sides making over 400 in the first innings a result was still produced and the game went into the last session of the fifth day.
• Emergence of the Lyon King.... (well perhaps) - Lyon's 12 wickets was a match winning effort and also resulted in his maiden 10 wicket match haul. Lyon bowled very well his 5/134 in the first innings complemented his 7/152 in the second. There were questions over his ability to close out matches which he has gone some way in answering. Lyon now has the belief that he can produce this type of effort, now he needs to do it consistently.
• Welcome to the captaincy - India's stand-in captain Virat Kohli performed outstandingly in the test, he scored centuries in both innings (115 and 141) and almost masterminded a surprise victory for India. Kohli comes across as a fighter and when he does take over the captaincy full time, he should win more than he loses with this desire to win.
• Australia's future looks good - Australia may have found three young stars in its batting order in Warner, Smith and to a lesser extent Mitchell Marsh. Warner has scored 1061 runs at 75.78 so far in 2014, but what is more impressive is his strike rate or 81.67 runs per 100 balls faced. So when Warner makes runs he makes them quickly which gives Australia a good start. Smith has scored 779 at 77.90 so far this year and shows maturity beyond his years every time he bats. Mitchell Marsh is only just starting his career but shows plenty of promise and as shown in the second innings will put the team first ahead of individual glory (Shane Watson take note !!!) 

Lastly given that the test started three days earlier than originally scheduled, it was great to see that over 113,000 people attended the match over the five days. India have some work to do in Brisbane next week and it might be difficult for them to recover from this loss. Although this might be easier with the expected absence of Michael Clarke for the rest of the series with a hamstring injury.