GDP predictions for Q3 2010

Based upon my study of Real Interest Rates over the past three months (government bond rates minus inflation), I am making a judicious prediction of a number of countries.

Note: GDP measured here is change from the previous quarter in annualised form

Economies that were growing in Q2 and will grow faster in Q3

• Australia: > + 4.9%
• Canada: > +2.0%
• China: Growth (quarterly GDP figures not readily available)
• Euro Zone: > +3.9%
• France: > +2.8%
• Germany: > +9.0%
• Japan: > +1.5%
• South Korea: > +5.2%

Economies that are growing in Q3 at around the same rate as they were in Q2

• Argentina: +12.3% steady
• Britain: +4.7% steady
• Italy: +1.8% steady
• Mexico: +13.5% steady
• New Zealand: 1.5% steady
• Russia: Steady (quarterly GDP figures not readily available)
• Spain: +0.7% steady
• Sweden: +8.0% steady

Economies that were growing in Q2 but will begin to slow down in Q3

• Brazil: < 5.1%
• India: Less growth (quarterly GDP figures not readily available)Poland: Less Growth (quarterly GDP figures not readily available)
• Switzerland: < +3.5%
• Turkey: Less Growth (quarterly GDP figures not readily available)
• USA: < +1.7%

Economies that were contracting in Q2 but will perform better in Q3

• Ireland: > -4.8%

Economies that were contracting in Q2 and will be even worse in Q3

• Greece: < -6.8%
• Iceland: < -11.8%

If these predictions are correct then what we will experience in Q3 will be a broad and strong international recovery, especially in the Euro Zone, while the US grows only slowly.

Deflation

Yew Tork Nimes:

In another sign that the struggling economy continues to slow, consumer prices tumbled by a record amount in October, carried lower by skidding energy and transportation prices, raising the specter of deflation.

A key measure of how much Americans pay for groceries, clothing, entertainment and other goods and services, fell 1 percent in October, according to the Labor Department, the biggest drop in the 61-year history of the consumer price index. Much of the decline could be traced to a sharp drop of 14 percent in the price of gasoline, but the cost of a broad range of goods including clothes, milk and vegetables also fell sharply.

A sustained drop in prices could worsen the slowdown by straining businesses and workers. It could also blunt the impact of interest rate cuts and other actions by the Federal Reserve and force policy makers to use more unconventional tools to revive the economy.

“This month, it’s more than slowing, it’s outright contraction,” said James O’Sullivan, United States economist at UBS. “And yes, if you extrapolate that, it’s deflation.”

Deflation is the natural result of a decline in demand. Since goods and services are no longer being purchased, the value of money rises in comparison, which causes the price of these goods and services to drop.

While the month saw a 1.0% decline, the year on year - ie annual - figures are still positive at 3.7%. This is because inflation in the last 12 months was still going way up, especially when the US Dollar was being sold off. The recent rise in the US Dollar has ensured that imported goods decrease in value, adding more deflationary pressure.

As any long-term reader of my blog knows, I am an "Inflationista". I won't pretend that the current reports clash with my own longer term predictions from 6-12 months ago. But then I didn't foresee a US Dollar bubble forming either, which is responsible for much of the downward pressure on consumer prices in the last few months. In fact, so convinced was I of the inflation position that when Mike Shedlock predicted lower inflation in August, I deliberately bookmarked the page in the hope of debunking him in the near future. Having just read that page, let me quote one of his classic lines:

There is going to be a stunning drop in the CPI coming up that will smack inflationistas square in the face. Unfortunately that wake-up call is highly unlikely to stop silly talk about cost-push inflation.

So give Mish some kudos here, he certainly deserves it.

Having said that, let me now remove my hair shirt and issue my standard warning - as long as the US economy remains vulnerable to capital flight there will always be a serious possibility of a US Dollar collapse, a process that will inevitably produce an inflationary environment. And this will be true even while aggregate demand falls. This is the lesson we have learned from Russia and Asia in the 1990s, who experienced capital flight and who battled economic contraction and inflation at the same time.

But so long as the US Dollar remains at its current level, deflationary conditions will exist.

As an aside, the huge deflationary drop in October 2008, which the NYT reports as the biggest fall in the 61 year history of the consumer price index, is also a precursor of an upward spike in unemployment levels. In fact, I think that November's unemployment figures will either be a record jump or the worst for a few decades. In 1974-75, for instance, unemployment jumped from 6.0% in October 1974 to 6.6% in November 1974, then to 7.2% in December 1974, then to 8.1% in January 1975 and thence to 9.0% in May 1975. That rise was 300 basis points (6.0% to 9.0%)  in 8 months and probably the fastest ever increase in unemployment in US history since the Depression. I think we can expect similar results in the next few months.

Economic Crises still need price stability

I admit it - I'm not an inflation hawk, I'm an Inflation Mushroom Cloud Layin' (insert crass Oedipal phrase), (insert crass Oedipal phrase)!

I have spent the last few years arguing on this blog of the necessity of controlling inflation over and above what many policy makers would think is reasonable. On my own I developed the theory of Absolute Price Stability, which is the #1 Google search for the phrase, even though others had actually invented the idea long before I did.

To quickly summarise what I have said (in case you haven't been turned off yet by my recent goings-on about it), I believe in the following axioms:

• The value of money is solely due to its ability to determine the cost of goods and services and to be used as a way of exchange. It is a way of measuring the worth of economic activity in a quantifiable manner.
• Over-investment and under-investment bring about economic harm to a society.
• Investment in the wrong place and the failure to invest in the right place also bring economic harm to a society.
• When the value of money changes, the market (as households, businesses, individuals and government) will inevitably make poor decisions in regards to what to buy and sell, and what to invest in and borrow for.
• While the market will always be prone to errors in judgement, ensuring that the value of money remains constant will help minimise this risk.
• In order for the value of money to remain constant, monetary policy should now be focused upon Absolute Price Stability - whereby the value of money is affected neither by inflation nor by deflation.
• In practice, Absolute Price Stability is not about price fixing, but inflation fixing. Monetary policy should always ensure that neither inflation nor deflation permanently affect the value of money over the long term. Short term experiences of inflation and deflation are to be expected, but over the long term, monetary policy should ensure that money's average value remains constant.

At present the economic world is suffering a massive credit crunch. In the past I have argued that inflation will continue to bedevil the world even though a recession takes place. I was wrong. I was predicting a different recession to the one now being experienced. Moreover, the one being experienced now is far more dangerous because it now seems to be an unwinding of the entire financial system that the world has been operating for decades. In this sense, the recession was always going to arrive. Moreover, two of the conditions of the recession that I was predicting (fiscal irresponsibility by the US government and the effects of Peak Oil - see here) are still major threats that need to be taken into consideration.

Absolute Price Stability, however, doesn't just mean no inflation. It also means no deflation. Financial conditions have deteriorated so badly in the last month that the only real result will be deflation.¹ While the stupidity of the Fed between 2002-2005 and the fiscal ineptitude of the White House and Congress between 2001-2008 has allowed inflation to grow, we are now seeing the results of those decisions - essentially what goes up (inflation) must come down (deflation).

If the Consumer Price Index begins to show increased deflation (as I think it will - the September figures are due soon) then the only real solution is for the Fed to begin seigniorage - money creation. This is the emergency solution that Ben Bernanke has written about previously, from which he derives his nickname "Helicopter Ben" - the idea being that deflation can be solved by simply throwing money everywhere.

In theory, a central bank can create and control an infinite amount of money. Bernanke and others in the Fed could, if they choose, create $100 Quadrillion dollars out of thin air. The idea that deflation can't be solved is incorrect.

And this is where Absolute Price Stability comes in. If this sort of policy is introduced, the Fed (and other central banks) could quite easily control deflation by creating money and buying back bonds. This would not be done randomly or stupidly - the last thing we need is a Weimar America - but certainly the sterilizing effect of deflation can be balanced through judicious seigniorage. In fact, some of this money creation could be used in the form of stimulus checks or given to the unemployed - it doesn't have to go towards corporations or financial firms.

I'm saying all this not just to push my idea of Absolute Price Stability (which I think will help solve the current crisis and prevent many from occurring ever again) but also to point out that while I have described myself as the "Inflation Mushroom cloud laying (insert crass Oedipal phrase), (insert crass Oedipal phrase)!", the reality is that I am just as opposed to deflation as inflation. I am not advocating some form of permanent deflation - that would be crazy - but instead the belief that money itself is best used when it retains its value.

Moreover, I believe that such a policy is best practised universally. There is only one country which practices Absolute Price Stability and that is Japan (Mark Thoma confirmed that with me once on a comments thread at Economist's View) - yet Japan is sliding into recession too. The reason is that Japan, despite practising Absolute Price Stability, is strongly connected to the world market - which means that a problem in the world market will also affect Japan. But if all countries practised Absolute Price Stability - and made it into an international treaty - then the world would be far less likely to suffer the sort of upheavals that we are experiencing now.
--------------
1 - Unless the US Dollar crashes of course (see Krugman!). But let's ignore that for a moment.

September 2008 Unemployment

Today's unemployment claims are 497,000, seasonally adjusted. That's only 1000 more than last week but the number is still on the high end. Tomorrow will see the unemployment figures for September.

I won't be blogging tomorrow so my usual live blogging of unemployment data won't happen. Click here to visit the official BLS site, which will release the data at 12.30GMT / 8.30 EDT.

Unemployment in August 2008 was 6.1%. I doubt that the rate dropped last month. My prediction is a figure between 6.4% and 6.8%. Considering the wild ride that the US economy has gone through in the last month, I wouldn't be surprised if the figure ends up high that 6.8%. I also think that it is almost a foregone conclusion that October 2008 figures (this month) will see the rate climb beyond 7.0%.

Predictions from December 2007

I forgot to post this. This was a series of predictions I made in December 2007 at another blogsite:

1. John Edwards will be the Democratic nomination after Democrats tire of Hillary and Obama. He will go on to win the election and be the next president. Hillary or Obama will be VP.

2. Huckabee and Romney will not win nomination. The Ron Paul phenomenon will go nowhere.

3. A recession will hit American and the US unemployment rate will rise above 7%. Dow Jones will go nowhere (neither up nor down)

4. Price of oil will get over $120 per barrel (US Dollars, West Texas Intermediate)

5. Nothing much of significance will occur in Iraq - US Soldiers will still get killed, terrorist bombings will continue, the Iraqi government will continue to fail, same old same old.

#1 you can forget about.
#2 was correct.
#3 is two-thirds right.
#4 Got proved correct very early on.
#5 is spot on.

Problems in GDP methodology

Last quarter's US GDP figures are coming under renewed scrutiny. Like many in the econ-blog community, I downloaded the official release from the BEA (pdf, 628.2kb) and discovered that 2008 Q2 GDP was revised upwards from 1.9% to 3.3%. Oh well, thinks I, another short term prediction failure to add to my growing collection of eggs attached to my face.

But it turns out that I'm not the only one. Wary as I am of subjectivity, some econ-bloggers are saying "It doesn't feel like 3.3% growth". The result has been a critical analysis of the role of the GDP deflator - the arguments being that a rising oil price has actually ended up inflating GDP figures rather than deflating it.

Now this is in the area of complex wonkiness and if you personally find it hard to follow my own economic arguments then I suggest you don't click on this link.

In simple terms, some economists are questioning the way in which GDP figures are created. This is a good thing, but for an self-taught economist like myself I begin to lose the thread on occasion. But if I'm wary of people relying upon subjective experience to determine what is true, I am even more wary of people who begin to question the way in which data is gathered - especially if they have no real idea of how the data was gathered in the first place.

This time, however, the questioning of GDP figures has not come from the tinfoil brigade, but from qualified economists willing to speak their mind. Barry Ritholtz, the econ blogger at "The Big Picture" has, with the help of others, examined every instance since 1959 of an economy that grew between 3.0 and 3.5%. The result was astonishing, since the median figures showed low unemployment, high business and consumer confidence, high industrial production, low consumer price inflation, low producer price inflation - in short, everything that is NOT present in 2008 Q2. Clearly something is wrong and I wouldn't be surprised if the next GDP release sees a revision downwards.

One of the more disturbing features of 2008 Q2 was that employment figures fell significantly while GDP supposedly rose significantly. Unemployment in April was 5.0% but then 5.5% in May and 5.5% in June (source). This sharp increase in jobless figures was punctuated even more by July's 5.7% figure. The figure for August is due tonight.

On the more wonky side of things has been an interesting article by Jeremy J. Nalewaik, an economist who works for the Federal Reserve. In that article (written in 2006) he argues very persuasively that Gross Domestic Income (GDI) adjusted by the GDP deflator is a better way of working out the beginnings of recessions that anything based upon GDP data. Indeed, Brian Blackstone at the WSJ used this methodology a few days ago and reported that 2008 Q2 GDI figures were a growth of 1.9%. Moreover, the previous two quarters, 2008 Q1 and 2007 Q4, showed a decline. Thus, according to the Nalewaik model, not only did the US enter a recession in the December quarter of 2007, but also did not experience as much growth as GDP figures indicated in 2008 Q2.

And that makes more sense. It feels like a recession doesn't it?

GDP figures due

It's now 11.47GMT, US GDP figures are out at 12.30GMT. What are my thoughts?

Well, the soon-to-be-revealed release is not a "major" release, but an update. The last "major" release was on July 31, which I blogged about extensively here.

Let me just summarise quickly what happened 1 month ago (apart from the fact that I got the prediction wrong):

Q4 2007 -0.2%
Q1 2008 +0.9%
Q2 2008 +1.9%

Analysts predicted +2.3% Q2 2008, so the result was lower than expected.

These analysts predict the following revisions to the report that will be out within the hour:

Q1 2008 +0.9%
Q2 2008 +2.7% (revised upwards from +1.9% originally)

Well, since I'm new to the game, here are my predictions:

Q4 2007: -0.2% to -0.4% (no change or small revision downwards)
Q1 2008: +0.4% to -0.2% (substantial revision downwards)
Q2 2008: +1.5% to +1.0% (substantial revision downwards)

I use as the basis for this analysis the sudden reduction in M3 during Q2 2008 that I posted about here.

Of course, if Q1 growth was negative then the US will be, according to some theories, in a technical recession, so long as Q4 2007 figures remain negative too.

Now, the last time I predicted GDP rates I got it very wrong, so lets see how much egg I get on my face this time around.

The page to check at 12.30GMT is here. I will publish a direct link to the official release when I update.

Update 12.34GMT
Q4 2007 -0.2% (no change)
Q1 2008 +0.9% (no change)
Q2 2008 +3.3% (big revision upwards)

Direct link to official release (pdf, 628.2 kb)

I would hazard a guess that Q2 2008 GDP has been driven somewhat by the economic stimulus caused by Bernanke's interest rates cuts from Q3 2007 to Q1 2008. The analysts' argument was that exports seem to be driving some growth as well (due to the lower US dollar).

Update 12.39GMT

Bloomberg:
U.S. stock futures climbed after better-than-estimated economic growth bolstered expectations the economy will recover from the collapse of the subprime mortgage market.

American International Group Inc., Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Citigroup Inc. led gains in Dow Jones Industrial Average stocks trading in Europe after the Commerce Department said gross domestic product expanded at a 3.3 percent annual rate in the second quarter, up from a 1.9 percent estimate made last month.

Update 13.11GMT

Q2 2008 percent change from the previous quarter:

Personal consumption +1.7%
Exports +13.2%
Imports -7.6%
Federal Government spending +6.8%
State and Local Government spending +2.2%
Defense +7.4%
Gross private domestic investment -12.0%
Disposable personal income (current dollar measure) +16.1%

It's that last one, disposable personal income, that has me worried. The 16.1% increase is the highest it has been since at least 2005 (according to the official release). In Q1 2008 it was +2.9% and the figures for the previous years are 2007: +5.5%, 2006: +6.4%, 2005: +4.4%. An increase of such magnitude is disturbing.

Although I'm not absolutely certain what the technical definition of "Disposable personal income" is and why it has two measures in the official release (the one I quote is labelled under "current dollar measure"), I would guess that it has something to with cash in people's pockets ready to spend on things, rather than money spent on regular expenses. This means that in Q2 2008 people had a sudden influx of money at the same time as an increase in exports, a double whammy of good news for the economy.

But the reason why it has me worried is that such an increase in disposable income is probably due to the stimulus checks mailed out during Q2 to boost the economy that were approved by Congress and Bush. Such a massive increase cannot be repeated in Q3 2008 unless congress decides to throw more money around before the end of September. In the short term this means that the boost will be limited to Q2, which means that Q3 will have less pleasant GDP figures. In the long term it means, simply, that the government will eventually have to pay it back.

Both fiscal and monetary policy has long and short term effects. A fiscal stimulus like the one experienced in Q2 2008 acts to boost GDP in that quarter, but will also have a contractionary effect later on, say in Q1 2009 onwards.

As for its effects on unemployment, I would probably say that August and September figures are likely to hover between 5.6 - 5.8%. Inflation will continue on its merry way in that period also (5%+ for both months).

US GDP probably declined in Q2

US GDP figures are due to be released at 12.30 UTC 31-July-2008. I'm willing to go out on a limb and predict that the Q2 2008 (April-June) saw the economy contract.

The reasons for my opinion are:

1. The housing market has continued to decline markedly (see here).
   
2. A number of banks have failed (see here).
3. Mortgage rates are rising, even though the Federal Reserve has slashed interest rates (see here).
4. Economic activity in Q4 2007 and Q1 2008 were low - around 0.9% growth each - and were probably stimulated by Ben Bernanke's interest rate slashes (see here). A fiscal stimulus plan has only just been passed in congress. In between the monetary stimulus and fiscal stimulus is Q2 2008.
5. Unemployment in Q2 2008 has increased markedly from 5.0% in April to 5.5% in May and June (see here).
   
6. The Philadelphia Fed state coincident index - a measure of economic activity based on state economic output - has cliff dived (see here), thus giving very clear evidence of a national recession.

Actually, it is the coincident index which is probably the best measure - the others are merely anecdotal and are more like possible indicators. Previous attempts to predict the future on my behalf have been based mainly on the anecdotal ones and the coincident index shows quite clearly that economic activity in Q3 and Q4 2007 (the two quarters I wrongly predicted economic decline) were not declining in any massive way. Of course there was a biggish market slump and collapse of the dollar around August-September 2007 but that was not felt in GDP figures at the time.

The unemployment figures for Q2 2008 are also indicative. The rate bumped up 50 basis points in one month. That's a big jump and indicates some major economic problem.

Update 12:41 UTC:
GDP grew in Q2 by 1.9%. I may have some egg on my face for this prediction... however revised figures showed that the US economy contracted during Q4 2007. Moreover, had I been reading around market predictions I would have discovered that analysts predicted a 2.3% Q2 growth, which means that today's news is quite bearish. I'm reading the official BEA release at the moment, which can be downloaded directly from here (pdf 328kb).

Update 12:55 UTC:
One of the more spectacular revisions is in Q1 2007, which was originally published as 0.6% growth but is now 0.1%. Q2, however, has been pushed up from 3.8% to 4.8%. All in all, 2007 GDP figures show that the US economy grew by 2.0% that year, down from 2.2% in previous estimates. (BTW - lags in GDP estimates are common, and sometimes recessions don't become statistically correct until later. There's every chance that today's figures will be revised upwards or downwards 1 month from now when the next GDP release will occur).

Update 13:04 UTC:
Bloomberg is reporting that the Q4 2007 figures indicate that a recession is probably in progress.

Update 13:12 UTC:
I have a feeling that Q2 2008 GDP figures will be revised downwards in the next three months. Tanta at Calculated Risk has a post up about how weekly unemployment claims have hit a 5 year high. This may be a correct prediction after all. Back in January I said this: GDP data often gets revised and I think that in the months to come, we'll see that Q4 2007 actually saw an economic decline.

AAAAAAAAA

A blog post with every single category marked (I'm doing this for scribefire)

Bear Market

From the department of inevitability:

The Dow sank into a bear market on Wednesday as U.S. stocks fell on growing concerns about the toll that record oil prices are taking on the economy and corporate profits.

After flirting with bear market status for several sessions, the Dow closed 20 percent below its October peak as it was no longer able to withstand the avalanche of warnings about banking losses, surging inflation fears and weakening consumer confidence.

Merrill Lynch struck a negative chord early in the session when it downgraded General Motors, saying the automaker will need $15 billion to shore up liquidity. Merrill added that bankruptcy is "not impossible" for GM if the auto market continues to slump, sending GM's shares down more than 15 percent.

I have been attempting to predict a bear market for a long time as some of you remember. The last time I spoke about it I actually predicted that it would happen within days - and that was back in March and I obviously got it wrong.

This, of course, reminds me of the limitations I have in predicting things economic - I know that they will happen, but I can't tell exactly when.

Similarly, around the same time (perhaps I'm dumb in March), I attempted to predict the US unemployment rate. At the time, unemployment was 4.9% and I was flirting with the idea of it going up to 5.3% or even blasting a massive hole up to 5.8%. In reality, the rate dropped to 4.8%. Of course, the fact that it has since jumped to 5.5% proves my basic thesis - unemployment is increasing - while showing again that specific predictions are not my forte.

This has been a very bad week for the US Economy, but Thursday has June's unemployment report. Given the employment situation I think it entirely possible that 6.0% will be reached. Given my propensity to get short term predictions wrong, it'll probably drop down to 5.3%.

New Tag Category

It will be called "failed predictions" for obvious reasons. Thus you can keep up with my failures as well as, well, other things...

A "Bear Market" will be announced within days

What was the result of Helicopter Ben's interest rate cut and the demise of Bear Stearns? Well, he announced it on a Sunday, so no results from the market yet.

Here in the Asia-Pacific, however, the reaction was overwhelmingly negative. The Australian Sharemarket (ASX 200) dropped by 2.3%, which was pretty good compared to the 4.01% drop in Hong Kong and the 3.71% drop in Japan.

All this means, of course, that the chances of a drop in the sharemarket on Wall Street are quite high. And if the shares fall far enough, a "bear market" may be declared - maybe not on Monday but probably some day this week.

A "bear market" is when a sharemarket index has dropped by 20% from its previous high. My preferred index is the Wilshire 5000, which peaked last year at 15,806.69. It closed last Friday at 12,992.93. In order for a bear market to be declared in the Wilshire 5000, the index has to drop below 12,645.35. In order for that to happen in the next few days of trading, Friday's close has to decline by a mere 2.68%. Considering the falls today in Tokyo and Hong Kong, such a one day decline is very possible - if not before the end of the week.

The Wilshire, of course, pretty much follows the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the S&P 500 in terms of peaks and troughs. Bear markets will be declared there as well.

Yes, that's a prediction.

What will the unemployment rate be?

Friday 7th March is the release date for US unemployment figures. At the moment it is 4.9%.

The question is no longer whether unemployment is going up - the question is what will it go up to? As I pointed out the other day, unemployment rates rocket up very quickly when a recession starts, but take a while to come back down.

So whether this recession is a mild one or a bad one, we can expect a rather significant jump. A 30 basis point jump was experienced between November and December, with the rate going from 4.7% to 5.0%, before falling back 10 basis points to where it was in January.

Looking at the historical data, a one-month increase of around 60 basis points seems to be a significant jump. Certainly there were bigger ones, but 60 seems to be a good figure that is neither crazy nor optimistic. That means that an unemployment figure of around 5.5% would be my guess, though anything between 5.3 and 5.6% would be possible.

Further examination of historical data suggests that the worst result after 4.9% unemployment is 5.2%. Bloomberg is reporting that experts are predicting 5.0%.

Anything above 5.6% would be rather horrible. There was a 90 basis jump between December 1974 and January 1975 (7.2% to 8.1%) but that was some months after a recession began and after a few months of increasing unemployment. Would such a jump be possible today? If the February figures replicate the 1974 experience, unemployment would jump from 4.9% to 5.8%. Not impossible, but then, this recession will certainly be the worst in 25 years.

Update (0730 New York Time):
I've been considering a nightmare result - say 5.8% or more - and what effect it would have upon the markets. If it happens (namely the largest one month jump in unemployment in US economic history), I would expect the market to tank very badly very quickly, followed by Bernanke suddenly cutting rates again, followed by a market revival, followed by a severe tanking of the US Dollar that would push Gold past $1000 per ounce and Oil past $108 per barrel. Yes, that's a prediction - but only if the jump in unemployment rate exceeds historical benchmarks.

Update 2 (1543 New York Time):
Yes, and the rate is:

4.8%

Yeah yeah yeah. False prophet me.

Update 3 (1625 New York Time)
Brad De Long says it all:

Given the way I teach intermediate macroeconomics, I could not have asked for economic new better fitted to the course than this morning's BLS employment report.

It was pedagogically perfect.

Of course, it was also really bad news. The arrival of 1/100 of a Great Depression, as I said toward the end of the class...

Steve Harmison

is gone and he ain't coming back.

6-1-4

One thing I've noticed about the England Cricket team these days is their selection of 6 batsmen, 1 wicket keeper and 4 bowlers in their lineup. In the past, England would often go into a match with 5 bowlers - one of which would be the designated "all rounder".

With the advent of Adam Gilchrist as an all-rounder (wicket-keeper/batsman) teams are now thinking of picking wicketkeepers whose keeping skills are only moderate, but whose batting shows promise. Matt Prior is the current England wicket-keeper, who boasts over 6000 first class runs at over 38 and 267 dismissals in 111 games. He debuted against the West Indies this northern hemisphere summer and his batting form has been good.

At some point, however, average wicketkeepers with average batting skills may not be exactly what the team requires. Australian cricket got lumped with Wayne Phillips back in the 1980s. That guy was Rod Marsh's replacement and he never had the skill to replace him. He was originally selected as a batsman so obviously when Marsh retired the selectors thought it would be a good thing for Phillips to replace him (Phillips was South Australia's wicket keeper). Unfortunately neither his batting nor his wicket-keeping were of top standard after he started being the regular wicket-keeper, especially in a batting lineup that was increasingly fragile. He probably bore more than the regular amount of pressure from fans and selectors during that period, and was eventually dropped.

England, however, seem to be functioning quite well with 4 bowlers at present (Collingwood could never be considered a bowler). With 3 successful pacemen (Harmison, Sidebottom and Hoggard) and 1 spinner (Panesar), it is increasingly obvious that England's bowling stocks are getting better. If Flintoff makes a return, it would be better if he replaced a bowler rather than a batter (Harmison is looking quite out of form these days).

England will win the Ashes back in 2008 - that is my prediction.

The Woolmer death

I have the notoriety of being the first blogger to officially declare interest in the death of Bob Woolmer - ie he was murdered.

Now, it seems, the guy died of a heart attack because he was unhealthy. Well, burn me in hell for that incorrect prediction.

Now, everyone's favourite English cricketer to never play test cricket or captain England has written an article about the whole affair. It's all very sad too.

My 15 minutes of fame...

Omar Waraich at the Guardian says this:

On the blogs, suspicions that Woolmer may have been murdered by a betting syndicate were first advanced by One Salient Oversight. "I think Bob Woolmer was murdered by someone in the illegal betting community, who lost out big when Pakistan lost," he surmised.

Surprised? Certainly. The only thing I'm worried about is how he was able to find this out. Does he visit my blog? Did any of you readers tell someone?

Police 'suspect Woolmer was murdered'

Click here for the ABC news report.

I predicted this the other day. Spooky... and sad.

Woolmer Murdered?

The time is 7.33am Monday 19th March 2007. I think Bob Woolmer was murdered by someone in the illegal betting community, who lost out big when Pakistan lost.

Not unlike that Soccer player being gunned down so many years ago when he scored an own goal at the Football World Cup.

I don't think it was suicide either.

8.08am After thinking further I think it was probably a very rich mafia-type person who bet against Ireland winning - you know, one of these 30-1 on offers, a safe bet in other words. He/They probably thought they could get an easy few hundred thousand by making a large bet on a sure result. Who were they? Probably an organised crime group in Jamaica.

The idea is that his food, brought up by room service, was poisoned. Woolmer was found unconcious and there was evidence of vomiting. He could have overdosed on something I suppose but if so it was accidental - to commit suicide in such a yucky fashion is hard for suicidal people to do, especially on their first attempt. If it was suicide he would probably have also waited a longer time.