Ryan Harris is out

Posted by
< 1 minute read

As in ‘out of the warm-up match against Essex due to a recurrence of his long-standing knee problems’. Not as in ‘dismissed’ or in that other sense.

“My body itself feels really good,” said Harris last week. ‘Good’ for Ryan Harris apparently means ‘at least a few days away from injury’. To call him injury-prone is misleading. He’s fitness prone. Injured is the norm.

So as it stands, Australia are already struggling to cobble together a side for the first Test. They’re dropping like flies. Harris is, admittedly, the first of those flies, but more will undoubtedly follow. Darren Lehmann is running scared to the extent that Brad Haddin’s being rested from this match lest he break a fingernail.

England, meanwhile, go from strength to strength. Only a few days ago, they were in Spain, a country that doesn’t even play cricket in any meaningful sense. Now they’re in England, the country which gave birth to the game.


Mike Gatting wasn't receiving the King Cricket email when he dropped that ludicrously easy chance against India in 1993.


Why risk it when it's so easy to sign up?


  1. In other news, England name Adil Rashid in first Test squad.

    That’s the same Adil Rashid who they didn’t take on their pre-Ashes trip to Spain.

  2. I’ll get back to the subject for you, KC. Extend the following sequence:


    With such a steep line between the two, cricket wise, surely the only possible candidate for the next spot is Cricketland, on the planet of Cricket. Here cricket is played 37 hours a day, six hundred days a small-moon-crossing-big-moon. It’s their main method of procreation, like in Yorkshire.

    This is worrying. Australia might have their injury concerns, but who is going to play for England if the entire squad has disappeared into space?

    1. “It’s their main method of procreation, like in Yorkshire.”

      Suddenly a lot of things make sense to me.

    2. Surly Geoffrey, like Ganton Cake, cheesy on top, a fruit cake underneath and guaranteed to endlessly repeat. I will chip in to transport him to Cricketland.

  3. Australia seem set to play Mitch Marsh instead of Watson. Please, please let this happen.

    1. We need someone to persuade Watson there is a ghost in his Cardiff hotel bedroom. That should be enough for him to say he is unable to play.

    2. I’d much rather Australia play Marsh than Watson. Watson, for all his flaws with the bat, is a very valuable support bowler, someone who can provide economy via unerring line and length and just enough movement. Which is precisely, as KC has mentioned a few times, what he, Harris, Lyon and Siddle did to great effect in the last Ashes. Marsh, on the other hand, is a medium-pacer who bowls like he thinks he’s Morne Morkel. And I’m not convinced he’s anything special as a batsman.

      Of course, Hazlewood, Lyon, Starc and Johnson might well blow England away for so few that the fifth bowler wouldn’t have mattered anyway, but if that ends up being the case, chances are the number six batsman won’t matter much either.

      Now if there’s some way to get Smith and Hazlewood to decide not to play…

    3. Dan M
      Watson can provide economy via unerring line and length and just enough movement for 2.3 overs before his hamstring, calf, glute or intercostal gives way. M.Marsh is something special as a batsman, and will hold his place as that if given the chance, not pretending to have a second string to cover mediocre returns with the bat like Watto has for years.

    4. Watson is not a terrifying bowler.

      But he is a useful bowler. Sometimes you need a useful bowler.

      My hope is that they play Marsh, and as a result of this, Smith ends up bowling more legspin to fill in the overs.

      This may or may not take wickets but it will be inherently funny.

    5. Have to say Mitch M is very straight up and down compared to Watson. In places like New Zealand or England I would rather have Watson at the moment. I don’t doubt Mitch will get there eventually, and he can then fill the role of ‘lumbering brute’ that makes every team complete.

  4. The Ank.Spon. joke is tradition. You cannot go around messing with it, creating a Knee.Rest equivalent. This ruins the cosmic order. Or something.

  5. Momentum is an irrepressible force. In Sydney 2011, RH pulled up lame on his run-in and we gave them “a hell of a beating.” This is fate and gives me a solid straw to grasp and diverts me from my fuming avatar…

    1. Not just any J Morgan, THE J Morgan.

      Cricket-loving Irish pop band? That’d be U22-2 wouldn’t it?

    2. Z(u,0,λ)= Z0 F(w)λ n(w)+1 {1- exp (- bu/[λ n(w)F(w)])}

      Bert – please explain.

  6. For Australia to win Harris must play.
    You need one of the bowlers to work their guts out all day. The logical like for like in this case is Siddle. Sadly the same policy that will see Watson dropped will see Hazelwood selected.

    1. Can Australia not get by without a frontline workhorse, bearing in mind pretty much everyone in the side bowls ‘a bit’.

    2. A couple of days earlier, I would have defended Hazlewood, but he seems to be being taken for a ride a bit by the Essex tail.

    3. Not having a workhorse bowler is a massive risk if the wicket turns out to be a flat track. If you fail to take early wickets you end up conceding a lot of runs with part time bowlers until the new ball arrives.

Comments are closed.