KF on the Ashes (Part 3).

From KF (written before this morning's collapse/ strange selections):

A rain reduced analysis from your humble scribe today to match the 3rd Test itself? Not likely!!! A feeling of what if and what might have been for an improving England against the increasingly perplexing tourists. But, as I said at the conclusion of my 1st Test blurb, all that surely matters is the score and its still looking excellent for England. They would take this score after the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th & 5th Tests and it’s probably a pretty fair reflection of the series so far.

During the 'greatest sporting event' ever in 2005 I felt the Aussies failed to pick their strongest eleven leaving out the likes of Symonds and Hussey when injuries occurred and form declined through the series, especially with their bowlers. Replacements seemed to be hopeful gambles as opposed to bringing in a tried and trusted deputy. I get that same feeling with these tourists. The selection of Watson to open in this match drew comment from our friends in the potting shed. Although performing well enough at Edgbaston, Watson’s technique isn’t what would traditionally be preferred for a Test opener. As most of us are aware, the game has moved on since the days of Boycott so if Watson can average 55 or so at the top of the order like he did at Edgbaston, it doesn’t really matter that his bat comes down squint rather too often. It still leaves a strong whiff of desperation lingering in the air. Is there really not a ready made option for replacement Test opener in the whole of Australia? Phil Jaques springs immediately to mind, though I don’t know that he is yet fully fit. It is similar in the bowling department. The closest bowler to McGrath that Australia have is Stuart Clark. His ability to keep putting the ball in the same, correct place is reminiscent of old pidge. I was surprised during the 3rd Test to find out that Clark was fit, just not selected. It appears that Ponting is a good captain when it’s going his way, but he often gives off bad vibes and seems more desperate when they are not. Then again, it may simply be that the Aussies have set such a high standard in recent years that we expect too much.

I’ve been asked to make more predictions for this series, rather than putting my thoughts into print after the event. I would have thought that my derision of predictions by the likes of Sir Ian Botham would have made it clear that predictions are a mostly a mug's game. If Botham can’t tell what is going to happen, how am I going to do any better? I’ve said before, all I want from commentary is “a fair and unbiased assessment of the game … commented upon where necessary, with some tactical and technical insights by an eloquent commentator”. Where it gets annoying is when these gentlemen start making fanciful predictions (these are predictions too influenced by bias and hope). To predict an exact score or result or whatever edges too close to dumb conceit. I can’t tell the future and haven’t met anyone else who can. Before anyone throws a previous quote about predictions at me, I’ll emphasise I said “If I had to bet” with the emphasis on ‘had’. I don’t have to, and therefore don’t. I see nothing wrong with watching events unfold and enjoying them for what they are. Isn’t that the greatest attraction of sport for the observer?