England v Australia, NatWest Series, The Oval June 30, 2012

'Lazy' Warner works to liven up

52

A lapse that cost David Warner his wicket at Lord's epitomised the details that Australia must get right if they are to inch closer to England in the second ODI at The Oval. Warner admitted to a bout of laziness when facing the swing and seam of Jimmy Anderson, resulting in an edge behind to Craig Kieswetter and the loss of a second critical wicket minutes after George Bailey's departure.

There were a few areas in which Michael Clarke's men fell short in the series opener, not least the bowlers' inability to contain a rampant Eoin Morgan in the closing overs of England's innings. Clarke was involved in a catastrophic run-out that ended a promising innings by Matthew Wade, and a handful of lax fielding efforts also helped the hosts win their first ODI against Australia at Lord's since 1997.

Warner had played pugnaciously and well for his 56, but six runs after Bailey had dragged Anderson onto the stumps, he failed to use his feet sufficiently to cover a ball going across him, and snicked it to a diving Kieswetter. Characteristically blunt, Warner said it was the kind of dismissal he should not be allowing himself in England, where the ball can always move the fraction required to defeat a batsman using his hands alone.

"It's me thinking that I'm in and I shouldn't be doing that," Warner said. "It's laziness, that's all it comes down to. Early on I'll be getting across to that and playing the ball on its merits, but as you get in you get a little bit tired, but what you tend to do is you know there's no slips and you think you can get away with just working it down to third man or through extra cover.

"That's my game, I've got to learn from that, get my feet across, not be so lazy through that period, and capitalise on that. You're never in when you're over here, and it was a little bit lazy myself. If I go back there again I'd have used my feet a bit more and tried to work it into the gap for a single."

Among the other critical differences between the two innings was the fact that in the drier afternoon conditions, England were able to get the ball to reverse swing. Tim Bresnan's second spell was much enhanced by the fact he was getting the ball to bend, and a curving full toss was to account for Clarke. Warner said the visitors had struggled to do similar in the morning, when numerous rain breaks kept the outfield damp and the ball less dry.

"With the square that's out there at Lord's and the Oval, the ball's going to be thrown in and going to be hitting the dirt, it's going to allow that one part to get scuffed up a lot," Warner said. "So if the guys work on the ball, keep one side shiny enough to get it going reverse it can prove crucial. Tim Bresnan got a couple to go pretty big, which is good for him, but we've got to try to counteract it and work out how we can play that."

Before he names his team for the second ODI, Clarke will consider his best use of the wicketkeeper Matthew Wade, whose sprightly batting seems under-utilised at No. 7. "He can bat anywhere and he's shown that again," Clarke said of Wade. "He's a wonderful talent, a good striker of the ball.

"It's tough because he plays the new ball well and he's quite positive, but in that middle order he's very good at the death as well, he strikes the ball cleanly. Trying to work out what's best for the team, that's probably the most important thing for us at the moment, try to work out the best batting line-up for our team with the players we have and back and support that."

Clarke will also think again how best to use Steve Smith, who he considers an allrounder but remains reluctant to bowl. Smith's batting looked far from likely to trouble England at Lord's, though he has been cast in the kind of role usually ascribed to the far more experienced Michael Hussey.

"Smithy's a very talented allrounder, as we've seen for a while now," Clarke said. "He can bat, bowl and is as good as anyone in the field. I'd love to see him put his hand up and make some runs, he's batting at No. 6, a crucial position not having Michael Hussey here, and if he gets the opportunity with the ball, he's been bowling every day in the nets and it looks like it's coming out of his hand well."

Daniel Brettig is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • JG2704 on July 2, 2012, 15:39 GMT

    @zenboomerang- Hello - Re Hughes - I think he has played at 3 or 4 for Worcs but opened when he played in tests vs Eng. Not sure what his natural position is. Anyway I guess they can't call other players up unless there are injuries. I thought Aus might call up another player to replace Cummings. As Starc is already here in England there would be no visa issues/travelling etc. I wonder though if they would have to pay Yorks compensation , which could be a stumbling block. I don't want to jump the gun here as Eng are only 2 up and could still lose the series but if Starc continues his good form then his inclusion could be the difference between Aus staying number 1 and going down to 2 and I'm not saying Eng will realistically win 5-0 butI believe Eng play SA before Aus play again and SA could take over the no 1 if Aus don't perform

  • zenboomerang on July 2, 2012, 5:52 GMT

    @JG2704... Agree on where our teams are at, but Eng are a very settled team compared to Oz in all 3 formats so expect Eng to move ahead steadily while Oz have some major hurdles to overcome - especially our selectors methodology... Interesting call on Hughes - yet to play ODI's but his record in List A is good... Klinger & Cooper had good OD summers & are in the upcoming Aust A matches... Starc - very unlucky, had a good summer in the Oz OD'ers last summer & not a bunny with the bat - would have picked him ahead of Smith & moved Johnson to no.7... Starc also has shown to be more durable than his contempories in recent times...

  • JG2704 on July 1, 2012, 20:09 GMT

    @5wombats on (July 01 2012, 10:52 AM GMT) I believe you and both I and JM were meerly correcting him , no picking a fight there. I've read his posts and he obviously has no agenda

  • hyclass on July 1, 2012, 11:37 GMT

    The failing with Warner's game continues to be that his game only works at absolute maximum.Anywhere below that,it becomes fallible.Most players operate at less intense levels that can be maintained with consistency over long periods.His dismissal fits with a handful of areas to which he is prone when operating slightly below peak,particularly to balls bouncing outside off stump.Early in his innings,the short ball on or outside leg or the off-spinner over the wicket can bring him undone before he hits full stride.I'd like to see far less said by the players in the media.It inevitably ends up with them having egg on their faces.Just read through the last half a dozen statements by Warner,Cummins,Watson and Clarke in articles on this site.Not one of them correct.He followed the Lords innings by making 10 invalidating this article.I believe the old school method of peerless performance and subsequent gracious acknowledgement is far superior to the current hype regime & lack of results.

  • 5wombats on July 1, 2012, 10:52 GMT

    Guys - don't pick a fight with @Marcio. He's always right and never suffers from selective amnesia. He was right about the Tests at Melbourne and Sydney and he hasn't forgotten about the 4 ODI wins for England in the UAE either.

  • pom_don on July 1, 2012, 10:44 GMT

    Well obviously he hasn't worked hard enough, he was all at sea today could have been out to six of the twenty balls he faced quite easily.

  • del_ on July 1, 2012, 9:28 GMT

    Smith is neither a good bowler or batsman and to have him in the team as a specialist of either, or an allrounder is one of the first really bad calls of the new selection committee. Hopefully he isn't one of 'Clarke's players' that gets special treatment.

  • jmcilhinney on July 1, 2012, 9:15 GMT

    @RandyOZ on (July 01 2012, 08:41 AM GMT), as you were at pains to point out in an earlier post, we are talking about ODIs here so I would hardly say that England failed against Pakistan, given that they beat them 4-0. Did word not get back to Australia about that series? How come I heard about it then?

  • jmcilhinney on July 1, 2012, 9:12 GMT

    @Marcio on (July 01 2012, 08:41 AM GMT), are you having a brain fade? England lost the Test series in UAE 0-3 and then won the ODI series 4-0. That's also more recent than either of the series you mention, so maybe England are on the improve. You really are trying to ignore their success aren't you? ;-)

  • JG2704 on July 1, 2012, 8:48 GMT

    @Marcio on (July 01 2012, 04:50 AM GMT) By the same token , since Eng lost to Australia 6-1 , the only series they have lost is away to India (albeit 5-0) and they beat the same team 3-0 at home and before this series we'd won 6 ODI's in a row so we can all find stats to slate a side or big up a side. IMO Australia are a better test side now than what they showed in the last Ashes and Eng are a better OD side , but until anyone officially ousts them they are both top of their respective fmts. As for Smith , I just see it as pointless having a number 7 in the side who doesn't bowl or keep wicket. We had a similar scenario with Luke Wright. You may as well have either a batsman - Rogers,Vogues,Hughes etc or a bowler Starc would be my man

  • JG2704 on July 2, 2012, 15:39 GMT

    @zenboomerang- Hello - Re Hughes - I think he has played at 3 or 4 for Worcs but opened when he played in tests vs Eng. Not sure what his natural position is. Anyway I guess they can't call other players up unless there are injuries. I thought Aus might call up another player to replace Cummings. As Starc is already here in England there would be no visa issues/travelling etc. I wonder though if they would have to pay Yorks compensation , which could be a stumbling block. I don't want to jump the gun here as Eng are only 2 up and could still lose the series but if Starc continues his good form then his inclusion could be the difference between Aus staying number 1 and going down to 2 and I'm not saying Eng will realistically win 5-0 butI believe Eng play SA before Aus play again and SA could take over the no 1 if Aus don't perform

  • zenboomerang on July 2, 2012, 5:52 GMT

    @JG2704... Agree on where our teams are at, but Eng are a very settled team compared to Oz in all 3 formats so expect Eng to move ahead steadily while Oz have some major hurdles to overcome - especially our selectors methodology... Interesting call on Hughes - yet to play ODI's but his record in List A is good... Klinger & Cooper had good OD summers & are in the upcoming Aust A matches... Starc - very unlucky, had a good summer in the Oz OD'ers last summer & not a bunny with the bat - would have picked him ahead of Smith & moved Johnson to no.7... Starc also has shown to be more durable than his contempories in recent times...

  • JG2704 on July 1, 2012, 20:09 GMT

    @5wombats on (July 01 2012, 10:52 AM GMT) I believe you and both I and JM were meerly correcting him , no picking a fight there. I've read his posts and he obviously has no agenda

  • hyclass on July 1, 2012, 11:37 GMT

    The failing with Warner's game continues to be that his game only works at absolute maximum.Anywhere below that,it becomes fallible.Most players operate at less intense levels that can be maintained with consistency over long periods.His dismissal fits with a handful of areas to which he is prone when operating slightly below peak,particularly to balls bouncing outside off stump.Early in his innings,the short ball on or outside leg or the off-spinner over the wicket can bring him undone before he hits full stride.I'd like to see far less said by the players in the media.It inevitably ends up with them having egg on their faces.Just read through the last half a dozen statements by Warner,Cummins,Watson and Clarke in articles on this site.Not one of them correct.He followed the Lords innings by making 10 invalidating this article.I believe the old school method of peerless performance and subsequent gracious acknowledgement is far superior to the current hype regime & lack of results.

  • 5wombats on July 1, 2012, 10:52 GMT

    Guys - don't pick a fight with @Marcio. He's always right and never suffers from selective amnesia. He was right about the Tests at Melbourne and Sydney and he hasn't forgotten about the 4 ODI wins for England in the UAE either.

  • pom_don on July 1, 2012, 10:44 GMT

    Well obviously he hasn't worked hard enough, he was all at sea today could have been out to six of the twenty balls he faced quite easily.

  • del_ on July 1, 2012, 9:28 GMT

    Smith is neither a good bowler or batsman and to have him in the team as a specialist of either, or an allrounder is one of the first really bad calls of the new selection committee. Hopefully he isn't one of 'Clarke's players' that gets special treatment.

  • jmcilhinney on July 1, 2012, 9:15 GMT

    @RandyOZ on (July 01 2012, 08:41 AM GMT), as you were at pains to point out in an earlier post, we are talking about ODIs here so I would hardly say that England failed against Pakistan, given that they beat them 4-0. Did word not get back to Australia about that series? How come I heard about it then?

  • jmcilhinney on July 1, 2012, 9:12 GMT

    @Marcio on (July 01 2012, 08:41 AM GMT), are you having a brain fade? England lost the Test series in UAE 0-3 and then won the ODI series 4-0. That's also more recent than either of the series you mention, so maybe England are on the improve. You really are trying to ignore their success aren't you? ;-)

  • JG2704 on July 1, 2012, 8:48 GMT

    @Marcio on (July 01 2012, 04:50 AM GMT) By the same token , since Eng lost to Australia 6-1 , the only series they have lost is away to India (albeit 5-0) and they beat the same team 3-0 at home and before this series we'd won 6 ODI's in a row so we can all find stats to slate a side or big up a side. IMO Australia are a better test side now than what they showed in the last Ashes and Eng are a better OD side , but until anyone officially ousts them they are both top of their respective fmts. As for Smith , I just see it as pointless having a number 7 in the side who doesn't bowl or keep wicket. We had a similar scenario with Luke Wright. You may as well have either a batsman - Rogers,Vogues,Hughes etc or a bowler Starc would be my man

  • RandyOZ on July 1, 2012, 8:41 GMT

    @dscoll - after failing against Pakistan and SL, where Oz has previously dominated, I would've thought you wouldn't count your chickens, but that tour didn't happen did it?

  • Marcio on July 1, 2012, 8:41 GMT

    @jmcilhinney, I did not include the tests, only ODIs. 0-5 vs india, 1-6 vs Australia. They are not the kind of results any team vying for #1 should have in their recent history.

  • jmcilhinney on July 1, 2012, 7:12 GMT

    @Marcio, I think your match may be a bit off. Where does England's 4-0 win over Pakistan fit into that "1 from 12". Personally, I don't see England as anywhere near invincible but I also think that many opposition fans like to dwell on their failures and ignore their successes, you among them apparently. Would you rate Australia's 2-2 against WI over That England whitewash of Pakistan? Some may say that Pakistan's intensity was down after winning the Test series so convincingly but, if you credit that theiry, surely you must take their just having won the Ashes in Australia for the first time in a long time as mitigation for England's poor showing in the ODI series that followed. I guess we'll be able to say more about the progress of the two sides after this series and then England's series in India. Australia may well not be #1 by then, possibly having been overtaken by England, SA or India.

  • 200ondebut on July 1, 2012, 6:59 GMT

    I was there and I thought Warner played out of his skin. He really does make the best of his limited abilities.

  • on July 1, 2012, 6:31 GMT

    Sadly Mitchell Marsh is wounded and so is Ben Cummins who could be lethal in England. Both bowl good medium swingers at pace and both can bat well, especially Mitchell. Bailey did ok but doesn't enthuse me at this level. Give him one, at m,ost two, more chances then give Forrest a go.

    I would drop Smith if he isn't going to be bowled and bring in either Hilf or Mitch Johnson. Either can win you a match, yeah yeah I know, Mitch J can bowl crap also, but on song he can go through England like a bad curry. However Clarke has already said here that he luvs Smith, so sadly it won't happen for a few more matches.

  • Marcio on July 1, 2012, 4:59 GMT

    @dscoll, how quickly you have forgotten your 6-1 drubbing in the last series, declaring yourself invincible becasue of a single 15 run home win against a teram that just arrived on your shores. If anything, I think ENG's one win from the last 12 away ODI games says "simply not good enough", not AUS's close loss in the first game of an away series. AUS is the # 1 ranked team, not ENG, and deservedly so based on home and away success.

  • Marcio on July 1, 2012, 4:55 GMT

    Steve Smith is an excellent T20 player of international standard, whose style is less suited to longer formats of the game. I've seen him play some excellent T20 innings. He's certainly not a test player at present, but i still have hopes he'll adapt to ODIs. But he has to start performing. I'd give him one more chance, two at most.

  • Marcio on July 1, 2012, 4:50 GMT

    I like Warner's attitude. He's always trying to improve. I have a feeling it will take a couple of games for AUS to adjust to English conditions, but by the third game I expect them to be doing very well. All talk of Eng being the best ODI side are just silly. By my accounts they have lost 11 out of 12 of their most recent ODI away games in India and AUS. I don't see how any team can be rated much on that basis. Conversely, AUS has beaten SL, SA, BAN and drawn with WI all away in the last season, and all in very unfamiliar conditions. That's why they are rightly ranked #1.

  • Point2Cover on July 1, 2012, 3:55 GMT

    Lookes like it was Australia who was one batsman short not England. Watson should focus more on his team than on commenting about the opponents' strengths and weaknesses. Winning and losing is part of the game, but mouthing off before the game can make one look like a fool afterwards. Aussies have a tendency of talking big before the start of a series. They did the same thing before the last Ashes in Australia and went on to suffer a real drubbing in their own backyard.

  • Aspraso on July 1, 2012, 3:12 GMT

    @Mervo -- I can't figure out too what role Steven Smith plays -- he does not bowl well enough (which is a disguised blessing for Oz, as otherwise he will leak runs in huge way) - let us not forget even in the IPL with spin-friendly pitches he was not given a bowl -- and he does not bat well enough for test or ODI level batsman. Did Clarke pick up faith in him while rubbing shoulders with him in Pune Warriors dressing rooms?

  • dsig3 on July 1, 2012, 2:32 GMT

    @Hammond this "aura" that you are speaking of with England. I assume its too big to fit in planes, because they dont seem to bring it overseas. Thats the difference between a good home team and a great team mate. Would of thought you guys had figured it out after getting wacked by Pakistan and SL after all the boasting.

  • featurewriter on July 1, 2012, 2:25 GMT

    Two very peculiar inclusions in this Australian ODI team: Smith and Bailey. James Hopes must have annoyed someone. Personally, this would be my ODI team for the next two seasons: Wade, Warner, Watson, Clarke, Mike Hussey, David Hussey, Christian/Faulkner/Hopes, Johnson, Cummins, Pattinson, Doherty. I hope the selectors are watching the limited overs form of Phil Hughes at the moment...the guy is in sublime touch.

  • jmcilhinney on July 1, 2012, 2:18 GMT

    @landl47 on (June 30 2012, 16:38 PM GMT), I'm not quite sure that your theory of Watson not being able to open and bowl 10 overs holds in all situations. Surely if Australia bat first then it's better that Watson open because it means that he'll have more time to rest before bowling, meaning that he should be able to bowl 10. I can see the issue if Australia bowl first though. I guess one solution could be to open with Watson if they bat first and Wade if they bat second but I'm guessing that they would much prefer to find a single batting order that works and stick with it if possible though.

  • jmcilhinney on July 1, 2012, 2:14 GMT

    It does seem to be a bit of a joke that Michael Clarke is talking up Steve Smith as an all-rounder and not bowling him. Maybe the fact that Australia were going along OK for most of the England innings in the first game prompted Clarke to figure that he didn't need to look beyond his 5 main bowlers and it was really too late to look to Smith by the time Eoin Morgan went nuts. If Smith plays another game without bowling though, I really have to question what Australia are doing. In that case I would have to guess that Clarke has been told to play Smith but doesn't actually want to. If people are talking about replacing Bailey with Forrest then surely Forrest must be a better batsman than Smith and deserves the place if Smith doesn't bowl. Maybe Forrest at #3 and Bailey at #6 would be a better bet for Australia, with Clarke, Hussey and maybe even Warner to make any overs they need. Those three could even possibly replace Doherty, who is unlikely to make an impact in England.

  • jmcilhinney on July 1, 2012, 2:02 GMT

    It is good to see Warner openly admitting to his short-comings and indicating that he wants to do something about them. He's definitely a talented player and if he does address some of his weaknesses then he could be a real force. I'm not sure I believe everything he says though. If he was getting a bit tired after 20 overs of an ODI then I don't see how he could ever be considered as a viable Test opener, which he wants to be. All batsmen will have lapses in concentration and those who can keep them to a minimum will have more chance to show their talent. It's worth noting that, for all his destructive power, Warner's ODI stats are significantly inferior to Alastair Cook's since he came back into the side as captain and Cook is probably the best Test opener around at the moment.

  • jmcilhinney on July 1, 2012, 1:52 GMT

    @Behind_the_bowlers_arm on (June 30 2012, 18:13 PM GMT), I'm not quite sure why you would be amused that we're discussing Australian players during a series against Australia. We were discussing WI players a week or two ago and we'll be discussing SA players in a week or two more. If you're laughing then I'm guessing it's so you don't cry over the players we're discussing. Australia were the benchmark for world cricket not that long ago. As we're all saying, they no longer are that but it will take a few more years of their ordinary performances before we get out of the habit of comparing our players and team to them. We're not in a rush though because, after years of coming up short, it's kinda nice to see a rosy comparison and that won't get boring for a while yet.

  • ozwriter on July 1, 2012, 1:07 GMT

    mervo, got to agree with you. steve smith is a liability, he can't hold a bat, he can't bowl a bowl and i can't imagine australia needs a specialist fielder. george bailey, a joke also, but not as funny as mr smith's selection. with the wonderful talent australia has in the domestic circuit, i really can't fathom these 2 selections in particular. hopes, khawaja,hauritz even klinger should come ahead of these guys.

  • VivGilchrist on July 1, 2012, 1:07 GMT

    Well done England. You have shown through careful recruiting you can strengthen your national team by bringing in guys from other countries to fill areas where you are deficient.

  • HadleeCrowe on July 1, 2012, 0:51 GMT

    warner will always get out to balls like that ... nothing lazy about it just his style front foot plant and swing .... with his footwork knicks to slip are just gonna happen. Biggest joke was watson's comment before the game about bresnan at 7 being a mistake and wade being superior... how about steve smith at 6?????? averaging the princely sum of 22.... Even think our number 6 may average higher..

  • heathrf1974 on July 1, 2012, 0:17 GMT

    Steve Smith is not good enough for the ODI side. England are a very good side and Australia have a couple of players that aren't up to ODI standard yet.

  • Smithy49 on July 1, 2012, 0:04 GMT

    Give Smith another chance and he will take it if not then still keep him because you need good fielders in One dayers and look at Aus fielding last game they could've stopped... um maybe 15 runs so you need Smith for bowling, batting and fielding.

  • Hammond on June 30, 2012, 23:50 GMT

    This will be a an interesting series all round. Australia still trying to the climb the mountain that England are sitting on. They are two very even (ODI) sides in reality, but England, and especially at home, are starting to exhibit that "aura" that Australian sides used to have, although not an arrogant bully boy version like the green and gold displayed, but a calm, disciplined almost military precision. Not a team of brilliant individuals, but just a brilliant team. Go England!

  • on June 30, 2012, 22:27 GMT

    Well - Watson seems to be athe know-all guy. He said England had a poor balance with a poor batsman at #7, while Australia had Matthew Wade to brag about. It was a very slow start for England with the bat. but the conditions during first 10 overs were testing. Bell and Trott were out when there were ready to shift the to top gear. I could see why Bopara was there - he scored some good runs in local matches. Someone may have to tell Watson to shut up and just worry about his and Australian cricket.

  • dscoll on June 30, 2012, 21:50 GMT

    Behind_the_bowlers_arm - Eng are not bothered about Aus. The real opponent this summer is SA that will be close. This series is simple, Aus are not good enough.

  • Mervo on June 30, 2012, 20:56 GMT

    Cant see why Clarke promotes Smith so much and so often.. He can't bat and can't bowl. Hauritz is way better at both. Bailey is another strange selection. Can't see how he warrants his place, especially with James hopes sitting still in QLD after leading his team to the national championship. Am I missing something where?

    The South African Kietwetter, did well in England colours.

  • mukesh_LOVE.cricket on June 30, 2012, 20:23 GMT

    i think he did well to reach 50 , unlike sehwag here who keeps saying 'that's my game & that's how i play' he is willing to adjust to the condition , also what is smith doing there ? bring in peter forrest at no.3 and david hussey for smith..i would say this team-- warner , watson , forrest , clarke , bailey , wade , d.hussey , lee , mckay , cummins , doherthy

  • nlight on June 30, 2012, 19:15 GMT

    Presumably, we won't be seeing David Hussey again. Warner looked vulnerable early on, but he got away with it this time; I'm not convinced he's suitable as an ODI opener. Smith doesn't seem worth a place on this showing and don't get me started on Doherty.

    England have their problems too. Bopara is simply not good enough at international level. Cook and Trott should never be allowed at the crease together in an ODI. Kieswetter is ok for t20, but not up to the demands of ODI. As this series isn't important, England should experiment with Bopara and Kieswetter replacements and try floating Trott down the order.

    Once Watson and Warner come good together England won't be able to match their strike rate.

  • on June 30, 2012, 19:02 GMT

    Well played David Warner, I was thinking you would get out to Swann, but the way you played him, I think all the so-called text-book-shot-playing lefties should learn a lesson from you. But England is always difficult to play and I am sure you will adjust your game (actually it will correct yours) and shine in England.

  • on June 30, 2012, 18:36 GMT

    Oz could have been one up had Wade not let his captain down with his silly run out. It is still early days, watch out for Warner, he is bound to come to the party soon and all his critics should then be invited to comment.

  • Behind_the_bowlers_arm on June 30, 2012, 18:13 GMT

    I presuming Mitchell Marsh is the long term replacement as an ODI (& Test?) all rounder when he is fit and Smith won't be seen. Was Clarke asked why Smith didn't bowl as he certainly isn't just a no6 batsman. I'm relaxed about these games as Aust has a team with other goals in mind though some of those are some of these batsmen standing up and performing against a top class attack. I have been impressed by the way Warner seems determined to adapt his game and think about it and hopefully his Test game will develop. I'm always amused by England fans obsession with Australia and Australian players. When we were on top we paid no notice to your hacks and certainly wouldn't have sat round discussing the merits of English hopefuls.

  • SDHM on June 30, 2012, 17:56 GMT

    landl - I actually think they'd be better off going in with another bowler, perhaps bring in Pattinson for Smith alongside Lee and Cummins and try and blast England out. McKay bowled well yesterday I thought and can keep it tight from one end whilst the other seamers go hell for leather at the other. Either that or they could leave out Doherty for Pattinson on an Oval pitch that, according to the preview, is going to be hard and true. Hussey, Clarke and Smith could then make up 10 overs of spin between them, or you could be doubly bold, drop Smith for Forrest and let Clarke and Hussey alone manage it.

  • on June 30, 2012, 17:41 GMT

    Its not Warner's fault. Its Clarke's complete inability to ever finish off a game on his own bat, he is yet to do it once but has left Australia in the lurche countless -- and I mean countless -- times. Me and my mates lost count ages ago.

  • Partyman on June 30, 2012, 17:22 GMT

    Don't kid yourself pal, you are not good enoughto play Anderson. You are another hype created by the media on the back of flat track bullying in IPL and you are going to struggle against good sides like England. Look what happened to Gayle - he got found out by a good bowling side despite his heroics in puppet show called IPL. Its a shame that a side once boasted the likes of Hayden, Langer, Waugh twins, Gilchrist, D Martyn and S Warne to name a few can only field the likes of Warner, Bailey, X Doherty and S Smith today!! Despite the hammering the Aussies handed out to us, series in series out during the 90s, we held them in high regard and felt awe of them. But this Aussie side only inspires irritation and certain sense of cringe.

  • Front-Foot-Lunge on June 30, 2012, 16:50 GMT

    What did everyone say before the series about the Warner against the best swing bowler in the world Jimmy A? It was certainly proved correct. Anderson's skill levels are too high for a bludgeonour like Warner, who wouldn't last long at test level. Australia's cupboard is officially bare.

  • on June 30, 2012, 16:49 GMT

    I am not sure what happened to Callum Ferguson, I remember him having a really good series in England post ashes 2009 where he played some superb knocks coming down the order for Australia, the aussie batting line up looks a bit weak on paper in the absence of Michael Hussey, and they can ill afford to keep on picking Steve Smith who in my opinion, might stake claim to the world's best fielding all rounder. I still can't believe they played him in the Ashes over Nathan Hauritz. Does anyone know what happened to James Hopes? He was useful wit bat and the ball and I am not sure why the Aussies didn't give him a longer run at the international level.

  • MasudRUETeee091040 on June 30, 2012, 16:48 GMT

    He should more serious about running and try to lengthy his innings.

  • landl47 on June 30, 2012, 16:38 GMT

    Warner, like Hughes before him, doesn't play the lifting ball on the off-stump well. Give him some width and he's devastating, but his defence isn't great- he's grown up playing in the shorter formats with no close fielders, so he hasn't got it worked out yet. A potentially excellent batsman, but until he sorts that out he'll always be hit or miss. Smith would be better going down to #7, but if he's not going to bowl then Aus would be better off playing a specialist batsman like Forrest. I really feel Aus would be better served opening with Wade and putting Watson down the order. I don't think Watson can bowl 10 overs and open the batting effectively. Otherwise, use Hussey, Smith and Clarke himself to lessen Watson's workload.

  • NaniIndCri on June 30, 2012, 16:33 GMT

    I cannot believe Aus did not produce a better all-rounder than Smith in all these years. I mean even if you pick someone in random I bet he will do better than Smith. And what is this DHussey experiment again? If Aus really wants to try DHussey then he should give the role of Smith. And replace Smith with a batsman, someone like Callum Ferguson or even a bowler like Pattinson.

  • 5wombats on June 30, 2012, 16:29 GMT

    That excuse about the "wet" ball - sorry, that doesn't wash (...doesn't wash...ha). Truth is, Aus bowlers didn't take wickets and England bowlers did. No good blaming the bowlers - Warner had a bat in his hand - it was his responsibility to go out and get the runs. Anderson wasn't bowling to his normal standard either, he wasn't right, and he still snagged him. And what's this; "but as you get in you get a little bit tired". Jeez, even in Grade cricket all of us used to play longer innings than the one Warner played yesterday!

  • whatawicket on June 30, 2012, 16:24 GMT

    smith would be left out and i suppose MJ in his place, he never bowls thats his problem. his ipl never bowl him or at least iv not seen him. you dont pick a guy because hes a good fielder and does not look comfortable while batting in the uk. maybe pattinson will come in for cummings as i see these 2 alternating between games.

  • R_U_4_REAL_NICK on June 30, 2012, 16:23 GMT

    Now that's more like it Aussie players! Concentrate on YOUR OWN game! I don't think Warner's lazy, I just think he's one-dimensional: block or blast. But boy when he connects... BANG! Don't bother trying to stop the ball - you'll lose your hand! 4 or 6 all the way. I'm not criticising Warner by the way: you need players like this in ODI's/T20's. Look at Sehwag, Gayle... The problem with WI is that they want all 11 players to play like that, and it aint going to work.

  • on June 30, 2012, 16:20 GMT

    why smith and bailey is in . that not good. australia will not able to regain their world cup by this team . need marsh brother.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • on June 30, 2012, 16:20 GMT

    why smith and bailey is in . that not good. australia will not able to regain their world cup by this team . need marsh brother.

  • R_U_4_REAL_NICK on June 30, 2012, 16:23 GMT

    Now that's more like it Aussie players! Concentrate on YOUR OWN game! I don't think Warner's lazy, I just think he's one-dimensional: block or blast. But boy when he connects... BANG! Don't bother trying to stop the ball - you'll lose your hand! 4 or 6 all the way. I'm not criticising Warner by the way: you need players like this in ODI's/T20's. Look at Sehwag, Gayle... The problem with WI is that they want all 11 players to play like that, and it aint going to work.

  • whatawicket on June 30, 2012, 16:24 GMT

    smith would be left out and i suppose MJ in his place, he never bowls thats his problem. his ipl never bowl him or at least iv not seen him. you dont pick a guy because hes a good fielder and does not look comfortable while batting in the uk. maybe pattinson will come in for cummings as i see these 2 alternating between games.

  • 5wombats on June 30, 2012, 16:29 GMT

    That excuse about the "wet" ball - sorry, that doesn't wash (...doesn't wash...ha). Truth is, Aus bowlers didn't take wickets and England bowlers did. No good blaming the bowlers - Warner had a bat in his hand - it was his responsibility to go out and get the runs. Anderson wasn't bowling to his normal standard either, he wasn't right, and he still snagged him. And what's this; "but as you get in you get a little bit tired". Jeez, even in Grade cricket all of us used to play longer innings than the one Warner played yesterday!

  • NaniIndCri on June 30, 2012, 16:33 GMT

    I cannot believe Aus did not produce a better all-rounder than Smith in all these years. I mean even if you pick someone in random I bet he will do better than Smith. And what is this DHussey experiment again? If Aus really wants to try DHussey then he should give the role of Smith. And replace Smith with a batsman, someone like Callum Ferguson or even a bowler like Pattinson.

  • landl47 on June 30, 2012, 16:38 GMT

    Warner, like Hughes before him, doesn't play the lifting ball on the off-stump well. Give him some width and he's devastating, but his defence isn't great- he's grown up playing in the shorter formats with no close fielders, so he hasn't got it worked out yet. A potentially excellent batsman, but until he sorts that out he'll always be hit or miss. Smith would be better going down to #7, but if he's not going to bowl then Aus would be better off playing a specialist batsman like Forrest. I really feel Aus would be better served opening with Wade and putting Watson down the order. I don't think Watson can bowl 10 overs and open the batting effectively. Otherwise, use Hussey, Smith and Clarke himself to lessen Watson's workload.

  • MasudRUETeee091040 on June 30, 2012, 16:48 GMT

    He should more serious about running and try to lengthy his innings.

  • on June 30, 2012, 16:49 GMT

    I am not sure what happened to Callum Ferguson, I remember him having a really good series in England post ashes 2009 where he played some superb knocks coming down the order for Australia, the aussie batting line up looks a bit weak on paper in the absence of Michael Hussey, and they can ill afford to keep on picking Steve Smith who in my opinion, might stake claim to the world's best fielding all rounder. I still can't believe they played him in the Ashes over Nathan Hauritz. Does anyone know what happened to James Hopes? He was useful wit bat and the ball and I am not sure why the Aussies didn't give him a longer run at the international level.

  • Front-Foot-Lunge on June 30, 2012, 16:50 GMT

    What did everyone say before the series about the Warner against the best swing bowler in the world Jimmy A? It was certainly proved correct. Anderson's skill levels are too high for a bludgeonour like Warner, who wouldn't last long at test level. Australia's cupboard is officially bare.

  • Partyman on June 30, 2012, 17:22 GMT

    Don't kid yourself pal, you are not good enoughto play Anderson. You are another hype created by the media on the back of flat track bullying in IPL and you are going to struggle against good sides like England. Look what happened to Gayle - he got found out by a good bowling side despite his heroics in puppet show called IPL. Its a shame that a side once boasted the likes of Hayden, Langer, Waugh twins, Gilchrist, D Martyn and S Warne to name a few can only field the likes of Warner, Bailey, X Doherty and S Smith today!! Despite the hammering the Aussies handed out to us, series in series out during the 90s, we held them in high regard and felt awe of them. But this Aussie side only inspires irritation and certain sense of cringe.