The era of defensive captaincy

[Richard]

We were missing McGrath as well.

Well, yes, but that was anticipated, and the pitch prepared with that in mind.
The pitch was prepared in the hope that Pollock would be fit.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Bad decision at the toss, sure, but the catching had far more impact.
As it usually does.
Like it or not, dropped catches very often make a huge impact on a game.

Eh? Hayden made 94 and was not dropped. Ponting made 50 odd before he was dropped. Those innings, along with Clark's bowling and the support from Symonds with the bat and Lee with the ball won the game. How did catching decide it? South Africa dropped what, three catches? And two of them were tail enders.

 

[Richard]

Ponting was dropped at least twice, possibly might have been 3 times, can't remember, and certainly 1 was on 48 or something.
If they'd got Ponting then, then scythed through the rest of the batting as they ended-up doing, they'd have had a much smaller deficit.
While it might not have earnt victory, it'd damn sure have been one hell of a lot closer.
In case you didn't notice, due to marc's propaganda, I didn't actually say "catching cost the match", just "it's a shame they couldn't catch AGAIN".

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Ponting was dropped at least twice, possibly might have been 3 times, can't remember, and certainly 1 was on 48 or something.
If they'd got Ponting then, then scythed through the rest of the batting as they ended-up doing, they'd have had a much smaller deficit.
While it might not have earnt victory, it'd damn sure have been one hell of a lot closer.
In case you didn't notice, due to marc's propaganda, I didn't actually say "catching cost the match", just "it's a shame they couldn't catch AGAIN".

Ponting was dropped for the first time on 52, by Andre Nel on the boundary. The only other drops I saw were at the end when Stuart Clark was batting. I might have missed a couple as I didn't see every minute of that day, but certainly Australia were closing in on South Africa's first innings target before a catch was ever put down.

If anything, the biggest impact that catching had on the match was when Australia were bowling, because they caught superbly (especially Hayden), and didn't put a thing down, aside from Warne's slip catch that bounced just in front of him.

 

[Richard]

Good catching is expected.
Poor catching can lose a game - good catching can't win one, because you expect it.
Of course, with Australia we've come to expect spills aplenty, but full credit to them for there being none that Test.
Anyway - if 52 was the first Ponting drop, who knows, if it'd been taken SA might've been facing a deficit of just 40 or 50.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

How is good catching expected? That's just ridiculous, akin to saying that good bowling is expected, so it had no bearing on the result that Australia bowled South Africa for less than 200 in both innings.

Good catching is by defintition better than average catching, meaning it isn't expected. Good catching is taking difficult chances and ensuring you don't drop any of the easy ones, which is what makes a good fielding side. Most teams on most days would have dropped a catch or two on the first day of that test.

 

[Pothas]

How is good catching expected? That's just ridiculous, akin to saying that good bowling is expected, so it had no bearing on the result that Australia bowled South Africa for less than 200 in both innings.

Good catching is by defintition better than average catching, meaning it isn't expected. Good catching is taking difficult chances and ensuring you don't drop any of the easy ones, which is what makes a good fielding side. Most teams on most days would have dropped a catch or two on the first day of that test.

Very true. Every single test match has a number of drops in it. It is simply part of the game, even a good fielding side is bound to drop some in the course of 5 days and as a result every batsman on occasion is going to protfit and some stage

 

[Richard]

How is good catching expected? That's just ridiculous, akin to saying that good bowling is expected, so it had no bearing on the result that Australia bowled South Africa for less than 200 in both innings.

Good catching is by defintition better than average catching, meaning it isn't expected. Good catching is taking difficult chances and ensuring you don't drop any of the easy ones, which is what makes a good fielding side. Most teams on most days would have dropped a catch or two on the first day of that test.

Every catch which happens is expected to be taken.
That's why commentators and bowlers - even if 4 catches have been dropped that day - always react surprised when one's dropped.
Good bowling, however, is expected only if good bowlers are playing.

 

[Richard]

Very true. Every single test match has a number of drops in it. It is simply part of the game, even a good fielding side is bound to drop some in the course of 5 days and as a result every batsman on occasion is going to protfit and some stage

Not true.
I could name you several Tests - and I bet you Richie Benaud could name you about 100 - without dropped catches.
Even if there are drops, many prove insignificant.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Not true.
I could name you several Tests - and I bet you Richie Benaud could name you about 100 - without dropped catches.
Even if there are drops, many prove insignificant.

Of course there are tests with no dropped catches. There are also tests where the bowling is brilliant all-round, or when batsmen dominate, or whatever. MOST tests have dropped catches, and overall a bare minimum of 10% or so of chances go down. That means that it's something you can anticipate happening. I don't know about you, but every time the ball goes up in the air and a fielder is under it I think there is a chance it could be dropped, I don't automatically think "he's out" and then choose to pretend he was when the catch is put down.

At Newlands there were four missed chances or near-chances I can think of offhand. Warne had a slips catch bounce just in front of his fingers without coming forward much, which a better slip fielder might have caught. Hayden dropped a very tough chance at first slip when Warne was bowling to the tail. Nel dropped Ponting on the fence just after his 50, and then he dropped Stuart Clark at mid-off towards the end of the innings, both were easy. That's four in one test. How many were in the Ashes? 20? 25?

 

[Richard]

Yes - in The Ashes both sides' catching was terrible. With Australia, we were near enough certain of it. With England, I felt it was always possible, because I can't remember an Ashes where we've not put down scores of chances.
I don't know about you, but me and just about every commentator I've heard generally thinks it's out as soon as the ball goes up. Bill Lawry, for instance, usually shouts "gone" before a slip catch is even taken, which says something about the standards he expects.

 

[luckyeddie]

Not true.
I could name you several Tests - and I bet you Richie Benaud could name you about 100 - without dropped catches.
Even if there are drops, many prove insignificant.

I've watched test cricket for over 40 years now - and I seriously doubt that any one would go by without at least one dropped catch.

I'm intrigued that you think that you can name 'several'. Not disagreeing - just think that it's about as likely as a rocking-horse winning the Grand National.

/got my fiver ready to bet on Dobbin.

 

[Richard]

As far as I remember there weren't any in the Headingley 2000 Test.
Just one example.
I don't actually remember any at Faisalabad 2000\01 either. May be wrong there, though.

 

[luckyeddie]

As far as I remember there weren't any in the Headingley 2000 Test.
Just one example.
I don't actually remember any at Faisalabad 2000\01 either. May be wrong there, though.

You may well be right about the 2000 Headingley test - point withdrawn.

 

[jadeey]

I don't know about you, but me and just about every commentator I've heard generally thinks it's out as soon as the ball goes up. Bill Lawry, for instance, usually shouts "gone" before a slip catch is even taken, which says something about the standards he expects.

I'm the same. I'm already celebrating the wicket (or commiserating if we're batting) before I see whether or not the catch has been taken. I expect every catch to be taken. It's not that I'm shocked when I see a catch put down (well maybe I was shocked during the latest NZ/WI test when Edwards put an absolute sitter down), it's more that I'm disappointed. I know dropped catches will happen but still watch every chance thinking that it WILL be taken rather than thinking it won't.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Yes - in The Ashes both sides' catching was terrible. With Australia, we were near enough certain of it. With England, I felt it was always possible, because I can't remember an Ashes where we've not put down scores of chances.
I don't know about you, but me and just about every commentator I've heard generally thinks it's out as soon as the ball goes up. Bill Lawry, for instance, usually shouts "gone" before a slip catch is even taken, which says something about the standards he expects.

You don't remember it because there has never been an Ashes in which catches were not put down. To suggest that it was even remotely possible is ludicrous.

Bill Lawry yells "gone" when he thinks a batsman will be out because he's trying to be exciting, not because he believes a batsman is certain to be out just because he edges one. Hell, I've seen Lawry yell "gone" when the ball has gone to a third slip that hasn't been there or whatever, and I've heard Tony Greig shout "SIX!" when a ball was about to be caught 5 metres inside the rope. Doesn't mean a thing.

Every cricket fan knows that when the ball goes in the air towards a fielder it could be out or it could be dropped, just like an edge to the slips might carry or it might not, and a close LBW shout might be out or it might not. If there's an edge straight up in the air to the keeper obviously it's more likely to be out than a general skier to the outfield, and certainly there are instances where we might expect it to be out, but either way a drop is possible and everyone knows it is. Good fielding isn't the norm - if it was, it'd be average fielding, not good. Australia's fielding on the first day at Newlands was good - they took catches and made stops which were unlikely and on another day might not have happened.

 

[Richard]

You don't remember it because there has never been an Ashes in which catches were not put down. To suggest that it was even remotely possible is ludicrous.

Let me assure you, there will have been contents - plenty of them, in all likelihood, where far, far less catches have gone down than in 4 of the last 5 series. Of course, it's unrealistic to expect an entire 5- or 6-Test-series to go by without a single dropped catch, but the standard of both sides in the last 2 series has been pathetic, and for England it's been pathetic for longer (can't recall it being too bad in 1997, though of course there was inevitably one single drop that possibly cost the series, along with a bad decision).

Bill Lawry yells "gone" when he thinks a batsman will be out because he's trying to be exciting, not because he believes a batsman is certain to be out just because he edges one. Hell, I've seen Lawry yell "gone" when the ball has gone to a third slip that hasn't been there or whatever, and I've heard Tony Greig shout "SIX!" when a ball was about to be caught 5 metres inside the rope. Doesn't mean a thing.

I highly doubt he's "trying to be exciting" - probably more "is being excited".
I've not watched as much C9 as you, obviously, but I've watched a fair bit and I've never heard the Greig example.
Even so, I still feel it means they expect anything going to hand to be taken.

Every cricket fan knows that when the ball goes in the air towards a fielder it could be out or it could be dropped, just like an edge to the slips might carry or it might not, and a close LBW shout might be out or it might not. If there's an edge straight up in the air to the keeper obviously it's more likely to be out than a general skier to the outfield, and certainly there are instances where we might expect it to be out, but either way a drop is possible and everyone knows it is. Good fielding isn't the norm - if it was, it'd be average fielding, not good. Australia's fielding on the first day at Newlands was good - they took catches and made stops which were unlikely and on another day might not have happened.

Good fielding is not what I'm on about. Fielding is one hell of a diverse thing. I'm talking about one single aspect of fielding - and it is expected that every catch be taken.
Dropped catches are contra-norm. For a good fielding side, a single dropped catch in a day is poor.

 

[Jono]

Ponting was dropped for the first time on 52, by Andre Nel on the boundary. The only other drops I saw were at the end when Stuart Clark was batting. I might have missed a couple as I didn't see every minute of that day, but certainly Australia were closing in on South Africa's first innings target before a catch was ever put down.

If anything, the biggest impact that catching had on the match was when Australia were bowling, because they caught superbly (especially Hayden), and didn't put a thing down, aside from Warne's slip catch that bounced just in front of him.

Ponting was dropped on 52 by Nel yes, but before that he had a genuine edge go at catchable height to Boucher's right, and he didn't go for it. That's the same as a let-off I'd say. Ironically he's been dropped in his knock in the 2nd test today, and edged a ball at catchable height in between first and second slip which should have been taken by one of them. He's had his luck.

Not saying I even REMOTELY agree with Richard's contention here. Just saying that Ponting's knock, whilst good, wasn't brilliant. Hayden's was pretty damn impressive though.

 

[honestbharani]

Look guys, I am not saying that the batsmen should be given a free reign on a flat track, but honestly, when England were on top against INdia with Dhoni and Pathan batting on a perfectly good track for bowling (Actually it was getting better and better for bowling at that time) with 6 guys in the deep and 3 catching is a bit TOO much. I tell you now, such captaincy and tactics cost England the CT in 2004 and I think it will cost them again, BIG time. Not sure when or how, but I just have this feeling that they are gonna rue not attacking a particular batter and allowing him singles.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

South Africa did the Hussein trick to Ponting today. 5 men on the leg-side for most of the day, with two on the fence for the hook from the first over Ponting was at the crease (second of the day). Bowled a straight line with the leg-side field to cut off his scoring opportunities. Ponting would get a half-volley on the pads and hit it sweetly and get just a single for it every time.

Certainly did well at slowing him down, but the fact that he made 103 says a lot.