Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

4th Ashes Test

245678

Comments

  • Covered End
    Covered End Posts: 52,016
    They said at start of play, that no team had managed 300 in the 1st innings this season at Durham.
    Therefore, I'm not surprised & still fancy our chances.
  • greenwichred68
    greenwichred68 Posts: 277
    Why the hell are we playing to negative? Weve retained the ashes and deservedly so,so surely we should go out and enjoy ourselves.to many players think there comfortable in this team.they need a kick up the arse.think root,although he's done great, should bat back at 6.defo not an opener.
  • soapy_jones
    soapy_jones Posts: 21,358
    Shambles
  • Bedsaddick
    Bedsaddick Posts: 24,759
    Our batsman have been woeful .
  • Clem_Snide
    Clem_Snide Posts: 11,741
    Bairstow isn't a test class batsman. Would rather see Taylor there.

    Would personally drop Bairstow, bring back Compton and move Root down the order.

    Also think they have missed a trick in picking Bresnan ahead of Onions here.
  • greenwichred68
    greenwichred68 Posts: 277
    Clem_Snide said:

    Bairstow isn't a test class batsman. Would rather see Taylor there.

    Would personally drop Bairstow, bring back Compton and move Root down the order.

    Also think they have missed a trick in picking Bresnan ahead of Onions here.

    Absolutely
  • Super_horns
    Super_horns Posts: 1,299
    SO much for 5-0 eh....

    Got a bit complacent?
  • Bedsaddick
    Bedsaddick Posts: 24,759
    I wouldn't have Bresnan in the side either but I hope he goes and proves us all wrong .
  • McBobbin
    McBobbin Posts: 12,051
    Bresnan has done ok. It's broad who is a passenger more often than not. We just don't have too many world class options
  • suzisausage
    suzisausage Posts: 11,502
    Bye Swanny

  • Sponsored links:



  • Covered End
    Covered End Posts: 52,016
    edited August 2013
    214-9

    Swann c Lyon b Harris 13
  • BlackForestReds
    BlackForestReds Posts: 17,952
    Super_horns said:

    SO much for 5-0 eh....

    Got a bit complacent?

    No one in the England team/management was talking about winning 5-0, as usual it was the media doing the bragging.

  • LenGlover
    LenGlover Posts: 31,661
    Let's see how Australia do before condemning them too much.

    4 wickets for Lyons this innings so might be a bit in it for Swanny even if some of the Aussie left handers are missing.
  • BlackForestReds
    BlackForestReds Posts: 17,952
    LenGlover said:

    Let's see how Australia do before condemning them too much.

    4 wickets for Lyons this innings so might be a bit in it for Swanny even if some of the Aussie left handers are missing.

    The ball has hardly spun - Lyons has got his wickets by nagging away and batsmen trying to be too clever against him.

  • Super_horns
    Super_horns Posts: 1,299
    BlackForestReds said:

    Super_horns said:

    SO much for 5-0 eh....

    Got a bit complacent?

    No one in the England team/management was talking about winning 5-0, as usual it was the media doing the bragging.

    Very true and TBF the Aussies were predicted to have a decent bowling attack.

  • LenGlover
    LenGlover Posts: 31,661
    BlackForestReds said:

    LenGlover said:

    Let's see how Australia do before condemning them too much.

    4 wickets for Lyons this innings so might be a bit in it for Swanny even if some of the Aussie left handers are missing.

    The ball has hardly spun - Lyons has got his wickets by nagging away and batsmen trying to be too clever against him.

    Ok I've only followed it on Cricinfo so didn't realise that.

    That said maybe the Aussies will do the same.
  • LenGlover
    LenGlover Posts: 31,661
    238-9 at the close.
  • BlackForestReds
    BlackForestReds Posts: 17,952
    The wicket looks to be a bit on the slow side, there has been virtually no spin/seam or swing movement, other than the ball that did for Cook. Australia bowled well and bowled to their field and perhaps got lucky - thin edges did for Root, KP and Trott for example and they were on the right end of a couple of reviews. 238/9 at the close is not good but England have something to defend.
  • kentaddick
    kentaddick Posts: 18,729
    Bairstow is quality in the field though, Collingwood wasn't all that with the bat but eventually ground out hundreds and who can forget jonty rhodes, who had a batting average in the 20s but is still unsurpassed as the best fielder ever.
  • BlackForestReds
    BlackForestReds Posts: 17,952
    He was good, probably the best fielder at backward point ever, but I always thought Jonty Rhodes was a bit of a show off - you could often see him take a step to one side so he could dive the other way and make the dive look just that bit more spectacular - you occasionally see goalkeepers do the same in football. Consequently he spilled a few catches through show boating. The best fielders - Derek Randall, Paul Parker, Colin Bland etc were better than him, and they fielded in the covers, while Mark Waugh was best catcher I saw along with Graham Roope.

  • Sponsored links:



  • nth_london_addick
    nth_london_addick Posts: 35,919
    Aussies will be all out for 194
  • kentaddick
    kentaddick Posts: 18,729
    BlackForestReds said:

    He was good, probably the best fielder at backward point ever, but I always thought Jonty Rhodes was a bit of a show off - you could often see him take a step to one side so he could dive the other way and make the dive look just that bit more spectacular - you occasionally see goalkeepers do the same in football. Consequently he spilled a few catches through show boating. The best fielders - Derek Randall, Paul Parker, Colin Bland etc were better than him, and they fielded in the covers, while Mark Waugh was best catcher I saw along with Graham Roope.

    backward point is a much harder position to field in than in the covers.
  • Callumcafc
    Callumcafc Posts: 63,787
    edited August 2013
    England last two overs of the morning session and add no more runs to overnight score. 238 all out and now I can post again...
  • Covered End
    Covered End Posts: 52,016
    Oz 12-1

    Warner b Broad
  • BlackForestReds
    BlackForestReds Posts: 17,952
    backward point is a much harder position to field in than in the covers.

    Different skills - at BP/gully the ball tens to come at you pretty hard - invariably off the meat of the bat or with a lot of power behind it. I always likened it to being a coconut in a shy. In the covers you generally have a wider area to patrol - from mid-off to point so it requires a bit more athleticism and agility.
  • Covered End
    Covered End Posts: 52,016
    edited August 2013
    12-2

    Khawaja c Prior b Broad 0
  • Callumcafc
    Callumcafc Posts: 63,787
    edited August 2013
    12-2

    Khawaja c Prior b Broad 0 (thought that was lbw, apparently got a knick on way through to Prior) :-)



    ...need to get my eyes tested, no pad anywhere near that.
  • BlackForestReds
    BlackForestReds Posts: 17,952
    Good bowling - fuller length and a bit of seam movement today.

    The pitch looks a tad faster than yesterday.
  • Lincsaddick
    Lincsaddick Posts: 32,357
    Broad is RIGHT on song this morning
  • Lincsaddick
    Lincsaddick Posts: 32,357
    what is the logic of lbw not granted if the ball pitches outside leg stump? ... if the ball is going on to hit the stumps and the pads intervene, the decision should be OUT irrespective of where the ball pitched

Categories

“Marketplace”