Why didn't Ponting enforce the follow on?

[Barney Rubble]

It's not going to, but it would absolutely make my year if this decision backfired and we somehow managed to draw this Test. I think that would put the nail in the coffin of any arguments that Ponting is anything other than a terrible international captain.

He's also being unnecessarily vindictive by dragging it out. This isn't going to do him any favours for the rest of the series - I think the England bowlers will wake up tomorrow morning with a hell of a lot more incentive to give it everything.

 

[pasag]

How bad are English bowlers that they need something like this for a lift though?

Terrible captain is too harsh as well.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I think all the decision's really done is give people who don't like him and are unwilling to apply common sense to the question they're asking a chance to get on his back really.

 

[pasag]

I think all the decision's really done is give people who don't like him and are unwilling to apply common sense to the question they're asking a chance to get on his back really.

Spot on.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

It's not going to, but it would absolutely make my year if this decision backfired and we somehow managed to draw this Test. I think that would put the nail in the coffin of any arguments that Ponting is anything other than a terrible international captain.

He's also being unnecessarily vindictive by dragging it out. This isn't going to do him any favours for the rest of the series - I think the England bowlers will wake up tomorrow morning with a hell of a lot more incentive to give it everything.

Oh get real. Ponting's captaincy during this test have been nothing short of top class, and frankly he's put Flintoff to shame. To call him a "terrible international captain" is just laughable, regardless of the result of the match.

Anyway, as I said in the other thread, Ponting has never enforced the follow-on, and obviously doesn't favour doing it under any circumstances excluding where time is of the essence. There's nothing unique about this instance of him choosing not to do so other than the size of the lead. Given the rapid deterioration of the surface and the desire to rest the bowlers it's a reasonable enough decision, even if it was somewhat unnecessary given the state of the match. Certainly I don't see the decision as an inexplicable one.

 

[Poker Boy]

I can only think he's worried about back-to-back Tests. In 2002/03 Waugh enforced the follow-on against England at MCG and Windies at Barbados. Australaia won both games but the bowlers had to work hard and in both cases Australia lost the next Test. OK, those two were dead rubbers but this series is just starting. He's lucky its the 'Gabba though - I think if this was say, Old Trafford he would have had to enforce it in case he lost a day to rain - which won't happen here...

 

[BoyBrumby]

Oh get real. Ponting's captaincy during this test have been nothing short of top class, and frankly he's put Flintoff to shame. To call him a "terrible international captain" is just laughable, regardless of the result of the match.

Anyway, as I said in the other thread, Ponting has never enforced the follow-on, and obviously doesn't favour doing it under any circumstances excluding where time is of the essence. There's nothing unique about this instance of him choosing not to do so other than the size of the lead. Given the rapid deterioration of the surface and the desire to rest the bowlers it's a reasonable enough decision, even if it was somewhat unnecessary given the state of the match. Certainly I don't see the decision as an inexplicable one.

Granted it isn't inexplicable, but that doesn't necessarily mean it was the correct decision. Given the state of the match it won't matter a jot, but it has made the draw slightly more likely.

Punter has been by far the better captain, but that's really more of a reflection on Flintoff's ordinary performance.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Granted it isn't inexplicable, but that doesn't necessarily mean it was the correct decision. Given the state of the match it won't matter a jot, but it has made the draw slightly more likely.

Punter has been by far the better captain, but that's really more of a reflection on Flintoff's ordinary performance.

I'm inclined to disagree with the last bit. Ponting is quite seriously underrated as a captain I think, presumably because of a handful of Ashes blunders, when in reality his performance in the last 12 months or so has been fine. His big area of improvement has been his field placings, and he's got much better plans for batsmen these days, and seems a little more intuitive with bowling changes rather than going to pre-set plans, but that may have a lot to do with the fact that his attack is looking a lot better than it was 12 months ago with the improvement of Lee and the addition of Clark. Witness Ponting's sparing use of Warne today when he wasn't really needed, and the plans and fields to a few of the English batsmen, Strauss in particular.

Flintoff's performance has been fairly average, but he's not exactly an experienced leader so you can't fault him too much.

Regarding the decision, I agree that it wasn't necessarily the right decision. I'd have enforced it, even though I usually agree with Ponting's tendancy not to, simply because the lead was in excess of 400 and Australia's bowlers were performing extremely well and bowled out England quite quickly. Nevertheless, it's quite understandable I think, and may even make things a little bit easier with regard to ensuring the result and carrying on to the Adelaide test with a short break.

 

[Nate]

Fuller, Coco and Burgey are all spot on pretty much. I think you can question Ponting`s decision, but you can`t call it foolish. He has a good reason in doing what he did, and a context that has led to it.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I'm inclined to disagree with the last bit. Ponting is quite seriously underrated as a captain I think, presumably because of a handful of Ashes blunders, when in reality his performance in the last 12 months or so has been fine. His big area of improvement has been his field placings, and he's got much better plans for batsmen these days, and seems a little more intuitive with bowling changes rather than going to pre-set plans, but that may have a lot to do with the fact that his attack is looking a lot better than it was 12 months ago with the improvement of Lee and the addition of Clark. Witness Ponting's sparing use of Warne today when he wasn't really needed, and the plans and fields to a few of the English batsmen, Strauss in particular.

Flintoff's performance has been fairly average, but he's not exactly an experienced leader so you can't fault him too much.

Regarding the decision, I agree that it wasn't necessarily the right decision. I'd have enforced it, even though I usually agree with Ponting's tendancy not to, simply because the lead was in excess of 400 and Australia's bowlers were performing extremely well and bowled out England quite quickly. Nevertheless, it's quite understandable I think, and may even make things a little bit easier with regard to ensuring the result and carrying on to the Adelaide test with a short break.

Have to give him credit for Strauss, yeah. KP too, as Clark really should've taken his chance before he went LBW.

Makes it all the more infuriating as an England fan that there was so much talk about the plan to use the short-stuff against us & we still tried to out-macho the bowlers. It's not rocket science, is it?

 

[PhoenixFire]

Australia would have thrashed us either way, it doesn't really matter to be honest. I see it as Ponting wanting to rest McGrath (who had bowled a fair few overs), the chance for some batting practice for the Australian batsmen, and the chance for Warne to totally decimate the England line up on this pitch.

 

[age_master]

I reakon Ponting will bat till about 15-30 mins after Lunch today, making the english players work hard all morning and think they might have to do it again for another session before declaring.

 

[BingLeeElectric]

I reakon Ponting will bat till about 15-30 mins after Lunch today, making the english players work hard all morning and think they might have to do it again for another session before declaring.

If he does do that......he's an idiot.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I reakon Ponting will bat till about 15-30 mins after Lunch today, making the english players work hard all morning and think they might have to do it again for another session before declaring.

Yeah, that's what I was getting at last night. If I had to guess at a time I'd say just before lunch, but I don't think he'll declare in the break itself. If it goes through to lunch, he'll make England come out to the field again for a bit before he declares.

 

[tooextracool]

quite a stupid move IMO. Ok i can understand wanting to give his bowlers a rest and what not, but if thats the case he should have batted about an hour yesterday and then put England back in for a few overs at the end of the day. If England miraculously bat till tomorrow and we see a thunderstorm, i will certainly LMAO.
the 'Waiting for the cracks to open up' is a ludicrous reason, If Australia cant defend 500 with or without cracks they dont deserve to win.

 

[Craig]

I've said my piece on this, but it's just petty bitterness from last year.

Pointless cricket. Hope England draw it, for the sake of cricket.

If they do it would go down as one of the greatest comebacks of all time.

 

[Craig]

Fair Decision from Ponting, i'm leaning towards the "the follow-on was not enforced to give McGrath & Co. a rest" theory. McGrath was just finishing a Long spell, and he is 36 afterall, and there's every possiblity that we could face a far more determined english batting line-up in the 4th innings.

The idea of having our 2 old Warriors in Warne & McGrath in the field for 2 days straight, and then possibly following it up with at least another day in the field in Adelaide later in the week makes it a top decision imo. However, i would've liked to have seen Punter give Lee & McGrath another crack at the top order with 10 overs at the death today.

What is so wrong with opening the bowling with Clark and Lee?

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

quite a stupid move IMO. Ok i can understand wanting to give his bowlers a rest and what not, but if thats the case he should have batted about an hour yesterday and then put England back in for a few overs at the end of the day. If England miraculously bat till tomorrow and we see a thunderstorm, i will certainly LMAO.
the 'Waiting for the cracks to open up' is a ludicrous reason, If Australia cant defend 500 with or without cracks they dont deserve to win.

****ing AMEN.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

****ing AMEN.

Except that's not the reason he didn't enforce it...

 

[tooextracool]

Except that's not the reason he didn't enforce it...

Well Glenn Mcgrath is a liar then.
Quoted from BBC:
"All the bowlers were ready to go if required, but we thought we'd let the sun get on the wicket a bit more and let the cracks open up a bit more."

and gotta love Ponting the hypocrit. Wasnt he the one that said that Lara was selfish for scoring 400 instead of trying to win the game? Yet he waits until Langer gets a century before he can declare.