Sheffield Shield, Tasmania v Victoria March 17, 2013

Silk, Faulkner power Tasmania into final

ESPNcricinfo staff

Tasmania 6 for 369 dec (Ponting 104, Cosgrove 81) and 7 for 325 dec (Silk 127, Ponting 86, Cosgrove 50, Ahmed 4-122, Herrick 3-97) beat Victoria 358 (D Hussey 112, Rogers 73, Gulbis 5-104) and 225 (Quiney 55, Faulkner 5-56) by 112 runs

A storming final day lifted Tasmania from the bottom rungs of the Sheffield Shield table to the top, their victory over a free-falling Victoria handing the Tigers a third consecutive appearance in the final and the priceless advantage of hosting it.

Set 337 to win and host the final themselves after leading the table for much of the summer, the Bushrangers lost their wickets in two clumps either side of an 80-run stand between David Hussey and Peter Handscomb. James Faulkner again showed his knack for vital wickets, claiming five as Tasmania maintained their standing as the most consistent domestic side in the country.

Tasmania had a stiff task ahead of them at the start of the day to achieve a result on a good pitch, but bold innings by the youngster Jordan Silk - a century in only his second Shield appearance - and Ricky Ponting allowed captain George Bailey to declare for the second time in the match.

They ultimately won with more than 10 overs to spare, before Queensland's win over Western Australia in Perth ensured the final would be played between the Tigers and the Bulls for the second season in a row, only this time in Hobart rather than Brisbane.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Andrew on March 20, 2013, 1:01 GMT

    @blink182alex on (March 18, 2013, 13:53 GMT) - no worries although Burns should play for QLD! @Jono Makim - once upon a time Oz did play Probs & Poss (maybe 70yrs ago?). Anyways, to me the benefit is lining players up in similar circumstances. I can't stand that Beer is still considered ahead of SO'K, (& Doherty effectively too). This means that neither Hauritz nor SO'K are considered in our top 3 spinners. I s'pose that unless the Possibles have a strict selection criteria (leading run or wicket takers), that they still could pick Beer to line up against Doherty. That aside, I think that it adds a bit more credibility to the selection process as there seems to be a considerable difference between what the average fan thinks is FORM & what the NSP thinks. As far as allrounders go, we have quite a few that are selectable on one discipline, but do well in the other.

  • Dummy4 on March 18, 2013, 15:36 GMT

    australia need to make few changes to the squad for the ashes squad: first team: 1.warner 3.clarke 4.watson 5.khawaja 6.burns 7.wade 8.harris 9.pattinson 10.siddle 11.fawad ahmed

    reserve team: 1.cowan 3.doolan 4.s.marsh 5.fergusson 6.haddin 7.henriques 8.agar 9.starc 10.sayers 11.bird

  • Alex on March 18, 2013, 13:53 GMT

    instead of a probables v possibles, you could do an all star game at the end of the season / start of a new season, where the winners of the shield for example QLD, play an 11 made up of the best players not from QLD in the season. so it would be something like this:

    QLD v Shield 11 - 1. Rogers 2. Cosgrove 3. Doolan 4. Ponting 5. Burns 6. Ferguson 7. Ludeman 8. SOK 9. Faulkner 10. Butterworth 11. Sayers

  • Dummy4 on March 18, 2013, 13:38 GMT

    @Meety, i'm not so sure about a probables versus possibles type match, for me that is just too much of a one off event. There is already too much selection based on one-off performances for my liking. I'd much rather just see a guy like Rogers who has had a great season put into the team, most likely down at 5 or 6 to play a Mike Hussey type role. He is the one guy with bucketloads of experience in England plus great current form where you could so, okay, he can make a difference. Apart from Punter and perhaps Haddin, no-one else this shield season has done enough to force themselves into the side.

    On the allrounder thing, I think we already have a few good ones in Watson, Starc and Pattinson. I just hope Watto gets back to bowling soon, he is something of a passenger in the side otherwise.

  • Andrew on March 18, 2013, 8:26 GMT

    @Mitty2 on (March 18, 2013, 5:23 GMT) - I really like Ferguson, but I only put him in as he has done enuff this season for the theoretical chance of playing in a Prob v Poss match. I do think Ferguson has been unlucky not to play more ODIs. @Mitty2/handyandy - to me, three types of allrounders 1) Perfect allrounder who is a genuine dual specialist i.e K Miller, I Khan etc, 2) Batting allrounders i.e Symonds, Kallis, 3) Bowling allrounders Pollock, Vettori. Outside of those categories, you have useful bits n piece players or specialist who dabble. A trend developing in Oz at the moment is, we have a heck of a lot of the type 3s - bowling allrounders. In domestic Oz cricket we have Hauritz, Cutting, Krezja, SO'K, NC-N, Faulkner, & Butterworth that fit in that category & if Starc had of got 1 more run - I's put him in there as well, I now even rate Copeland as a type 3 allrounder. I think that as we are struggling with our batting post-Ponting/Hussey - we need type 3 allrounder @ #8.

  • Luke on March 18, 2013, 6:31 GMT

    From what I've seen of Jordan Silk so far he will be a good player in the future for Australia. Looks technically sound at the top of the order and plays with the full face of the bat, and is a serious gun in the field (is still only 20). That was an impressive hundred against a good Victorian attack. There is some good young batting talent around the country atm like Silk, Burns, Maddinson, Harris and others. The future is actually pretty bright (just the current crop aren't performing).

  • Hamish on March 18, 2013, 5:23 GMT

    @meety.. Don't think I could possibly agree more with you on that. Even the squads are perfect, and I wouldn't generally want ferguson in any team but we have no one else that is better than him to replace him from the non selected

  • Andrew on March 18, 2013, 3:05 GMT

    I agree Mitty.

    If I had to pick an allrounder for the Australian team at the moment it would be Faulkner.

    He could just about warrant a spot in the team as a bowler.

    O'keefe is also in the same category.

    Compare this to Henriques and Maxwell who would really never be considered just for their bowling or batting skills alone.

  • John on March 18, 2013, 2:26 GMT

    We wouldn't have won, if Faulkner & Silk were playing in India now, where they should be) But well done Tassie, well deserved.

  • Andrew on March 18, 2013, 1:59 GMT

    Said a few times now, they should play Possibles v Probables to select a squad. So I would definately recommend one before the Ashes tour. The Possibles (players not currently in the Test squad & are available for selection) would be (IMO) 1. Rogers (c), 2. Cosgrove, 3. Doolan, 4. Ferguson, 5. Burns, 6. Silk, 7. Ludeman, 8. O'Keefe (vc), 9. Faulkner, 10. Cutting, 11. Sayers, 12th Butterworth (had him until I realised I didn't have a spinner). Given I think that Warner, Clarke, Siddle, Wade, Pattinson & Starc are the only certainties to tour - my Probables would NOT contain them & thus be; 1. Cowan (vc), 2. Hughes, 3. Khawaja, 4. Watson, 5. Smith, 6. Henriques, 7. Haddin (c), 8. Johnson, 9. Harris (if fit he would of been in India IMO), 10. Lyon, 11. Bird - 12th Doherty. The venue would have to be somewhere like AB Oval - with plenty of grass on it. See who performs best.

  • No featured comments at the moment.