Observations from the Port Elizabeth Test

Play during the Second Test at Port Elizabeth

image: www.cricket.geek.nz 

A historical moment has occurred as this is the first time I have written one of these pieces where Australia has lost the test. The Australians managed to lose the Port Elizabeth test by 281 runs in four days against a South African side that was stung by a poor performance at Centurion. Was it a case of the Australians playing poorly or did South Africa play more to their capabilities than at Centurion?

The result would suggest that the Australians played poorly, although with a day and a half to play the Australians were 1/126 chasing 448 and right in the test match. Then along came Steyn with a great spell of reverse swing bowling that turned the match in South Africa’s favour.

What was revealed at Port Elizabeth?

• Batting form of both captains is disappointing – Both Michael Clarke and Graeme Smith have been struggling with the bat this series. The bowling attacks have been especially targeting the captains knowing that their dismissal is key to providing early in-roads towards a small total. Smith looks vulnerable to Johnson’s short ball, although he could be forgiven for that considering the ball is travelling towards his head at around 150km/h. Both Clarke and Smith would not be pleased with their efforts in this series as they are averaging 20.00 and 9.25 respectively.

• Highway to runs?? – there were four centurions in this test with AB de Villiers, JP Duminy and Hashim Amla from South Africa along with Chris Rogers from Australia. De Villiers maintained his current good form and has now notched up a score of at least 50 in his last twelve consecutive matches (including the Port Elizabeth test and setting a new record in the process). Amla recovered from a first innings duck to score 127 second time around. Duminy looked in control in his first innings 123 until Lyon had him plumb. Rogers, like Amla, recovered from a poor first innings to score 107 in the second innings before running himself out.

• South Africa’s bowling in the second innings – South Africa has the best two bowlers in the world in Steyn and Philander and consequently opposition batting sides struggle on most days. In the second innings South Aftrica were able to get the ball to reverse swing which resulted in Australia losing 10/90 after being 0/126. Steyn and Philander took 6/94 between them in that innings to grab victory for the South Africans late on the fourth day. In contrast the Australian bowling attack was not as effective on a pitch that may have been prepared to suit the South Africans.

The win by the South Africans has set up a very interesting Third Test in Cape Town that starts on Saturday in what now looms as the series decider. Hopefully it is a close contest although I anticipate a victory for the home team.

Observations from the Centurion Test

Australia celebrates the win at Centurion

image: www.abc.net.au

Have to admit to a bout of laziness after the Boxing Day Test that stopped me writing an article for the Sydney Ashes Test. However after winning that test and victory in the One Day series the Australians have headed to South Africa for a three test series against the number one test nation.

The Centurion test was over in four days with the Australians victorious by 281 runs. That’s right you are reading this correctly…281 runs. After Graeme Smith won the toss and bowled first he was probably thinking that he was ahead in the game with Australia at 4-98 and Clarke dismissed. It is amazing how fortunes can turn in the wonderful game of test cricket.

Here are some observations from the First Test:

·        Australia’s fielding continues to impress – Australia fielded really well throughout the Australian Summer and continued this at Centurion. The fielding quality is so good that it backs up the Captain's and bowlers plans almost to perfection. The catches by Marsh and Johnson in the first innings were a treat to watch and Doolan’s catch in the second innings was sublime.

·        Mitchell Johnson’s breathtaking bowling – The juggernaut continues as Mitchell Johnson’s match figures of 12-127 ended up being the difference between the two teams. The bowling was fast, intimidating and on target. Hashim Amla was thankful he was wearing a helmet as the first ball he faced in the second innings was a real brute. Ryan McLaren will now miss the Second Test in Port Elizabeth with concussion after being hit on the head from a Johnson bouncer.

·        Graeme Smith's captaincy was debateable – History will show that Smith made the wrong decision to bowl first at Centurion. Although he probably thought it was the right choice at the time, especially as Australia were 4/98 in the first innings. However he might choose differently if he was given the choice again. In context Smith’s decision was not quite as catastrophic as Nasser Hussain’s decision in Brisbane, but it is close.

·        Debutant Doolan looks a real find – Alex Doolan debuted at number 3 for Australia in this test. His scores of 27 and 89 may not invoke adulation from everyone, however Doolan looked self-assured in the position. His timing and his choice of shot were impressive (including his dismissal stroke in the first innings). If Doolan takes the opportunity to consolidate number 3 this series then the spot may be his for many years to come. His fielding was equally outstanding, especially the catch to dismiss Graeme Smith in the second innings.

·        AB de Villiers deserves his No.1 ranking – de Villiers top scored with scores of 91 and 48 in both innings for South Africa. The most notable aspect of these innings was the amount of time that de Villiers appeared to have whenever he played a stroke. AB de Villiers should pass 7,000 test runs in the Port Elizabeth test which is a remarkable achievement for a player with his talent.

In the lead up to the series, most people would have thought that South Africa would win the series based on the strength of their bowling attack and their reasonable batting depth. For this to happen, South Africa has plenty of work to do. The Australian’s are playing very good cricket at the moment and have the added bonus of confidence. The next two Tests in Port Elizabeth and Cape Town should be interesting to watch.

Were the Adelaide Crows wrong in wanting to use the State Jumper?

SA celebrates a win over WA in 1996

image: www.afl.com.au

In a move that was controversial as well as surprising the Adelaide Crows unveiled that they were going to wear the SA State Jumper for their Round 2 clash against Port Adelaide at Adelaide Oval. This significance of this is that it will be the first match for these clubs at the revamped Adelaide Oval, which was the home of Australian Rules football in South Australia until 1974 when all operations moved to Football Park in suburban West Lakes.

Furthermore, the Crows were going to sell naming spots on the jumper for supporters and/or members. That is, your name would be on the jumper that was worn by the players on match day. In all fairness the idea is good, but NOT for the state jumper. The state jumper is after all a representative jumper and the players who have worn that jumper with pride are the ones that should be aggrieved the most by this decision.

Fortunately commonsense prevailed and the AFL stepped in to disallow the Crows from using the jumper in their clash. But it should never have progressed this far and it shows that the Crows still have much to learn as a football club. Of course their opponents, Port Power, also have a large involvement in South Australian Football history so this move by Adelaide was seen by many to alienate or even disassociate Port Adelaide from that history.

Then there was the other point raised that the jumper will never be used again at the highest level in a State of Origin format so we should use here to celebrate our rich football history. It has been 15 years since the jumper was used in a competitive match at AFL level so this had some weight amongst some fans.

Here are my thoughts as to why the SA State jumper should not be used by any club to wear in this situation or any club game and the state jumper needs to be earned and worn by South Australians.

Firstly I believe (rightly or wrongly) that State of Origin will be played at the highest level again. The players are often quoted as wanting to play SOO and I think that it will happen in the future. The jumper is sacred and to be picked in the best 22 players for your state should be something that is special. It also infers that the players hold earning a state jumper in very high regard.

Secondly, there are instances when non South Australian’s have worn the state jumper in State League matches (eg SANFL vs VFL) I have thought this practice to be wrong in the same way that I think Victoria cheated when Dunstall (a Queenslander) played for the Big V against SA at the MCG.

Thirdly, because of my second point I think it is inappropriate for the non-SA players within the Crows (i.e Dangerfield) to wear the state jumper when there is no allegiance to the state jumper. There are often issues with “qualifying” for a particular state, my answer is simple it is the place that is listed on a birth certificate.

Fourthly, I believe that if football was never going to return to Adelaide Oval then the jumper would not have been used. Yes I understand the sense of occasion, and the reasons why the Crows were created. If Football Park was the venue this year, would the Crows try to wheel out the State jumper to “Honour 150 years of SA Footy” as stated in their advertising e-mail? ... I don’t think so.

Lastly, selling places on the State jumper was outright wrong and indicates to me it was a marketing exercise rather than a opportunity to celebrating a rich football history that includes their opponents. Perhaps it would have been better to include all the names of players who have represented South Australia. The jumper could still be sold to the public as everything is for sale these days.

As mentioned earlier commonsense has prevailed, but it has encouraged healthy (and some not so healthy) debate across the Australian Rules football world. Perhaps this may be an indication to the AFL that State of Origin could be brought back into the football program as the public want to see the best players from one state play against the best players from another state.

Then again, it may take a change in CEO at the AFL before this comes to fruition.