I don't see for mine Hussey reverting to 08/9 horrors, simply because he isn't playing like that. He still knows where off stump is, for one.
'cause in a clearing when the sunlight comes
exposing all the shadows in our intricate behaviour
i feel a sort of fading
we build our own unfolding.
Infact,Australia were the better side at Perth.
I.e my point that it unfair to compare the two series and call one closer ,specially far closer than the other specially when at 3 tests it was probably more closer.
And i am over with this debate.
Last edited by Cevno; 07-01-2011 at 08:21 PM.
The evidence for Ponting being out of form is not that the English bowlers keep getting him out, it's the manner in which he is playing (which happens to be conducive to getting out) - i.e. his extremely fidgety style of batting these days.
But it still would not have been as big a win for the Aussies than at Perth against England,which is my point throughout.
I.e after 3 tests the Ashes would not have been a more comprehensive in one sides favour than one in India.
After 5 tests yes,but it is unfair to compare a series of 5 tests to a one of 2 tests which did not have the chance to become as comprehensive if not more.
Last edited by Cevno; 07-01-2011 at 08:26 PM.
Even at Perth, as BB has been at real pains to point out, that was a case of two monumental performances and two good ones covering up for seven inadequate (or worse) ones. You can't go around relying that on a team for very long.
I do see your point, but no one ever says of a batsmen who's averaged under twenty in a five-match series, "he was actually in pretty good nick there, the bowling was just too good for him." It's as though it's entirely impossible for a bowling attack to be good enough to frequently dismiss an in-form batsman for low scores, and obviously that isn't the case. You're using circular logic if you claim a batsman was out of form as a means of demeaning the achievements of a bowling attack that repeatedly dismissed him for low scores when the only evidence you have for that batsman being out of form comes from his performances against that bowling attack.
He does look like he has some technical glitches though (never seen him so squared up), which for whatever reason I hadn't noticed before.
On the other point, Chappell actually pretty much said that exact thing about Ponting - he said, paraphrasing, "Ponting's foot movement suggests he is actually in really good nick. He has just been out of luck this series and getting good balls early on". I don't disagree with that idea, but in the case of Ponting he really just didn't look in good nick for the most part. I don't think it's circular logic either; Ponting's technical problems are independant of the bowling he is facing - e.g. he might get stuck in the crease and play the wrong line. The bowling can exploit those weaknessess, but it doesn't really elicit them. I.e. going back to the example of India, I'm sure many of his technical problems were still there, but the bowling simply didn't take advantage of them.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)