2009 Ashes

[Mibbes Aye]

......starts tomorrow at Sophia Gardens, Cardiff :thumbsup: No confirmation of teams yet.

Both sides have a bit of a new look from last time round. For England I think Broad and Swann will play an important role in dictating their chances over the series. Likewise Alastair Cook though I expect him to be the big target for the Aussies.

For Australia I'm looking for big things from Mitchell Johnson, Phil Hughes and Marcus North in particular. It will definitely be a different focus for them not having a strike threat through spin - Nathan Hauritz is much more conservative than Warne or MacGill. Could be an opportunity for Michael Clarke there...

Cannae wait :greengrin

[Hank Schrader]

......starts tomorrow at Sophia Gardens, Cardiff :thumbsup: No confirmation of teams yet.

Both sides have a bit of a new look from last time round. For England I think Broad and Swann will play an important role in dictating their chances over the series. Likewise Alastair Cook though I expect him to be the big target for the Aussies.

For Australia I'm looking for big things from Mitchell Johnson, Phil Hughes and Marcus North in particular. It will definitely be a different focus for them not having a strike threat through spin - Nathan Hauritz is much more conservative than Warne or MacGill. Could be an opportunity for Michael Clarke there...

Cannae wait :greengrin

Cannae wait as well :greengrin

I think Swann has the potential to give the Aussies a really hard time, with the majority of their batsmen being left handers he will enjoy turning the ball away from the bat on more than a few occasions. Not sure if playing two spinners in the first test is the key though, if Onions is jettisoned in favour of Panesar then they are choosing a woefully out of form Monty over Englands leading county wicket taker. Onions will fancy mixing it with the Aussies, word is he gave Justin Langer a torrid time in a county game and would have fancied doing the same to the current Aussie top order.

I am looking forward to seeing Mitchell Johnson and Peter Siddle in action. I like the look of Siddle. He is a wee angry in your face paceman who I think will take a lot of wickets this series.

I am going for a 3-1 or 2-1 Aussie series win. I think Englands batting line up is still very suspect and if the going gets tough, which it at times it will in this series, the could fold like a pack of cards. It is unlikely the Aussie middle order of Ponting, Clarke, Hussey, Haddin, North will do they same. It depends how well Swann bowls I think.

[The_Todd]

For those who are interested, there's a full run down of the rules of cricket here (http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Cricket)

[Mibbes Aye]

For those who are interested, there's a full run down of the rules of cricket here (http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Cricket)

:greengrin


Cannae wait as well :greengrin

I think Swann has the potential to give the Aussies a really hard time, with the majority of their batsmen being left handers he will enjoy turning the ball away from the bat on more than a few occasions. Not sure if playing two spinners in the first test is the key though, if Onions is jettisoned in favour of Panesar then they are choosing a woefully out of form Monty over Englands leading county wicket taker. Onions will fancy mixing it with the Aussies, word is he gave Justin Langer a torrid time in a county game and would have fancied doing the same to the current Aussie top order.

I am looking forward to seeing Mitchell Johnson and Peter Siddle in action. I like the look of Siddle. He is a wee angry in your face paceman who I think will take a lot of wickets this series.

I am going for a 3-1 or 2-1 Aussie series win. I think Englands batting line up is still very suspect and if the going gets tough, which it at times it will in this series, the could fold like a pack of cards. It is unlikely the Aussie middle order of Ponting, Clarke, Hussey, Haddin, North will do they same. It depends how well Swann bowls I think.

:agree: Australia to win the series.

I think you're right to point to that batting depth in the middle for Australia. They're not shy of runs at the top or the bottom either. If it's about taking twenty wickets to win a match though they still seem to have that wee bit more threat than England (and more resilient batsmen).

[bingo70]

:greengrin



:agree: Australia to win the series.

I think you're right to point to that batting depth in the middle for Australia. They're not shy of runs at the top or the bottom either. If it's about taking twenty wickets to win a match though they still seem to have that wee bit more threat than England (and more resilient batsmen).

Don't know much about cricket but think i might tune in to watch this today (bored on a day off), was surprised to see that Australia are 2-1 to win the first test, why are their odds that high? i thought they would have been favourites, are they not the number 1 test team in the world? :confused:

[Killiehibbie]

Don't know much about cricket but think i might tune in to watch this today (bored on a day off), was surprised to see that Australia are 2-1 to win the first test, why are their odds that high? i thought they would have been favourites, are they not the number 1 test team in the world? :confused:
You can get 5/2 Australia. Bookies initially never take any chances with the draw which is as short as 6/5 in places which in turn forces bigger prices on the win. You get all the excitement in 30 sec slot on the news better doing something else on your day off.

[Mibbes Aye]

Don't know much about cricket but think i might tune in to watch this today (bored on a day off), was surprised to see that Australia are 2-1 to win the first test, why are their odds that high? i thought they would have been favourites, are they not the number 1 test team in the world? :confused:

There are a huge number of variables. Always a good chance of a draw and the sense of this series is that it could be a long, drawn-out battle. Australia are missing the vast experience of Brett Lee and the pitch in Cardiff suggests it will suit spin, an area where England look stronger than Australia.

If England win the toss and bat first (which they have) then they can get in a very strong position -build a good first-innings total to ensure they shouldn't lose the match.

Having said all that, they've just lost Strauss and the balance has maybe swung ever so slightly towards Australia. Two wickets on a slow-looking pitch before lunch on day one is good going. This afternoon's session should be interesting.

[--------]

3 for 194 - they're on their way. :agree:

[Hank Schrader]

For those who are interested, there's a full run down of the rules of cricket here (http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Cricket)

:top marks

I love Unclyclopedia, some inspired stuff on there!


3 for 194 - they're on their way. :agree:

If Pietersen and Collingwood hang around and get centuries each it is going to be very difficult for Australia to get anything other than a draw or a loss.

Combine the fact that Australia are batting last on a supposedly turning pitch with England having the better spinning options, Australia could easily end up 1-0 down come Saturday or Sunday.

We are going to find out how much Australia miss their recently retired legends during this series and whether the new boys are up to the challenge of filling the rather large voids.

[Mibbes Aye]

:top marks

I love Unclyclopedia, some inspired stuff on there!



If Pietersen and Collingwood hang around and get centuries each it is going to be very difficult for Australia to get anything other than a draw or a loss.

Combine the fact that Australia are batting last on a supposedly turning pitch with England having the better spinning options, Australia could easily end up 1-0 down come Saturday or Sunday.

We are going to find out how much Australia miss their recently retired legends during this series and whether the new boys are up to the challenge of filling the rather large voids.

:agree: They've got the batting depth. It's how they compensate for the lack of Warne in particular. I think Clark (not playing here of course) has the potential to offer some of the consistency and economy, if not the strike threat, that McGrath offered. This is probably the pitch that will suit their bowlers least though.

Collingwood just gone though......

[Hank Schrader]

:agree: They've got the batting depth. It's how they compensate for the lack of Warne in particular. I think Clark (not playing here of course) has the potential to offer some of the consistency and economy, if not the strike threat, that McGrath offered. This is probably the pitch that will suit their bowlers least though.

Collingwood just gone though......

The game was in danger of getting away from the Aussies a little, that wicket will ease Ponting a little.

Now for Prior, no mug with the bat. Sh*te wicket keeper though!!:greengrin

[Tomsk]

Australia to win, methinks. Prior at 6. Good grief!

Mind you, without Lee the Aussie bowling looks a bit insipid. But another wicket and they're into the tail. Yes, Freddie, you are part of the tail these days. Love it, if he could prove me wrong.

[--------]

5 for 241 - a lot depends on Flintoff and Prior.

Nicely balanced right now.

[Hank Schrader]

I reckon Flintoff will depart quite quickly. Prior may hang around for a while with Broad and Swann who aren't the worst tail enders in the world. Broad is a potential number 7 and there is an argument for him to be above Flintoff in the batting order.

[Mibbes Aye]

5 for 241 - a lot depends on Flintoff and Prior.

Nicely balanced right now.

:agree:

New ball looming as well.

Broad will be hoping to make an impact too. He looks like he's a decent batsman but he's not been tested at this level yet.

[--------]

5 for 296. England on top. Just the start they would have been looking for.

[Mibbes Aye]

5 for 296. England on top. Just the start they would have been looking for.

And 336 for 7 at the close.

An intriguing day's play. For me those two late wickets for Siddle have given Australia the slightest of edges. If they can wrap things up sharpish tomorrow morning they've got an opportunity to fill their boots batting-wise before the pitch really starts offering itself to Panesar and Swann.

EDIT - meant to include that perhaps the most meaningful thing today was Petersen's Achilles playing up. It's difficult to imagine England coming close to winning back the Ashes without him performing for them.

[GhostofBolivar]

5 for 296. England on top. Just the start they would have been looking for.

Telling us the score in the Australian fashion, are we? That a hint as to where your sympathies lie?

[Hank Schrader]

Aussies making a good fist of the reply so far, Ponting looking in fantastic touch.

A few moans on the BBC updates about Panesar. I wouldn't have touched him if I were selecting the English side. Onions would have been a much better option.

[Mibbes Aye]

Solid, professional job by Ponting and Katich today.

Ponting's had the challenge of following some incredibly illustrious previous Australian captains but he's certainly one of their all-time greatest batsmen and doesn't get the recognition he should IMO. This series (potentially this innings :devil:) could see him overtake Allan Border's career runs total, with the highest average outside of Bradman's. And he's got runs against everyone. Might be just beyond him to catch Tendulkar but undoubtedly one of the greats of the game.

[Hank Schrader]

Solid, professional job by Ponting and Katich today.

Ponting's had the challenge of following some incredibly illustrious previous Australian captains but he's certainly one of their all-time greatest batsmen and doesn't get the recognition he should IMO. This series (potentially this innings :devil:) could see him overtake Allan Border's career runs total, with the highest average outside of Bradman's. And he's got runs against everyone. Might be just beyond him to catch Tendulkar but undoubtedly one of the greats of the game.

I think today showed just why Australia will retain the Ashes. A far superior batting line up. I don't think there is too much between the bowling units but the Aussie batsmen, Ponting in particular, are far better than what England have to offer, including Pietersen.

[GhostofBolivar]

Solid day for Australia.

Gives them a good opportunity to kick on tomorrow and then have two days to dismiss England and make any target they're set.

230-3 would have been good for England, but 250 with 1 down mean's it's definitely Australia's day.

[Stonewall]

Really looking forward to today.

I think the odds are just with Australia but England really need to make an early break-through or two.

I don't think there's much between the teams on ability but Australia are mentally tougher than England. Ponting gets a start and makes a ton: Pietersen makes 69, starts show-boating and gets out. Prior gets out in the second last over of the day when well set whilst you never felt that was even a remote posibility with Ponting and Katich.

If the Aussies get ahead you feel that they won't let England back into the game whilst England just seem to lack their bloody minded ruthlessness and are not quite able to take advantage of good positions and shut them out.

[TheEastTerrace]

Anderson with two wickets so far. Punter needs removed pronto though and the key wicket to keeping the Aussies down to 450-500 I think.

[TheEastTerrace]

Ponting out for 150, big breakthrough. England fighting back.

[--------]

Telling us the score in the Australian fashion, are we? That a hint as to where your sympathies lie?



Ah, I wondered who would spot that.

But I assure you that I am as fair-minded and unbiassed about this Ashes series as I've always been in the past. :rolleyes:

I just find it more rational to say that Australia are 4 down for 348. I'm sure Ricky Ponting would agree with Sun Tzu below - first make sure you're not going to lose. THEN go for the jugular. So the number of wickets down right now is the important statistic. That, and the time.

4 for 348 at lunch on the third day? A lot depends on the next couple of sessions....

And these batsmen.

[--------]

4 for 402.

England need wickets, and soon. They don't want to give the Aussies any sort of a decent first-innings lead.

Hmm. 4 for 422.

13 behind with 6 wickets standing.:worried:

[Tomsk]

Really looking forward to today.

I think the odds are just with Australia but England really need to make an early break-through or two.

I don't think there's much between the teams on ability but Australia are mentally tougher than England. Ponting gets a start and makes a ton: Pietersen makes 69, starts show-boating and gets out. Prior gets out in the second last over of the day when well set whilst you never felt that was even a remote posibility with Ponting and Katich.

If the Aussies get ahead you feel that they won't let England back into the game whilst England just seem to lack their bloody minded ruthlessness and are not quite able to take advantage of good positions and shut them out.

I was just about to post something similar.

There is very little between the sides really, but the Australians are so much stronger mentally. They make solid decisions when in the same circumstances the England players make poor ones. And they don't wilt under pressure.

Back in 2005 I thought England were out of sight better than Australia but the Aussies made it competitive through their mental toughness.

Australia to win the series.

[H18sry]

Thats the scores level now, Aussie's to bat on today and maybe 1st session tomorrow get a lead of say 300, then try to skittle the Englanders out in 5 sessions :greengrin

[Hank Schrader]

Thats the scores level now, Aussie's to bat on today and maybe 1st session tomorrow get a lead of say 300, then try to skittle the Englanders out in 5 sessions :greengrin

Unfortunately there is to be a bit of rain around tomorrow so that may scupper that rather wonderful scenario!!

[TheEastTerrace]

Not looking good for England. Fancy North and Clarke to notch up tonnes. Strauss looks a bit lost TBH, and I think that's what shows how good a captain Vaughan was. Could come up with something a bit different when it's needed.

Aussies to get 200-250 ahead. England will prey for rain.

[Mibbes Aye]

Not looking good for England. Fancy North and Clarke to notch up tonnes. Strauss looks a bit lost TBH, and I think that's what shows how good a captain Vaughan was. Could come up with something a bit different when it's needed.

Aussies to get 200-250 ahead. England will prey for rain.

:agree: And they've got it.

Big psychological impact for the rest of the series after the events of the last three days I suspect. Essentially the English have been put in a position where Australia are saying to them "We're superior".

Good thing about the rain is the chance to hear Michael Kasprowicz sharing some anecdotes about his time in state cricket in Australia etc. TMS have a knack of finding entertaining and insightful ex-players from Oz for the Ashes commentaries :thumbsup:

[Hibbie_Cameron]

I feeling the rain wll save England here. If no rain then i would imagine the Aussies would bat more than half the day before declaring and trying to bowl England out in what would surely be a no lose situation

[GhostofBolivar]

I feeling the rain wll save England here. If no rain then i would imagine the Aussies would bat more than half the day before declaring and trying to bowl England out in what would surely be a no lose situation

England can't afford to lose the first test and go to Lord's one down.

The Australians haven't lost there since 1934.

[H18sry]

England can't afford to lose the first test and go to Lord's one down.

The Australians haven't lost there since 1934.

Thats the declaration 239 ahead with 4 1/2 sessions left go Aussie's :greengrin

[--------]

Forecast not good.

The weather will save the Aussies. :devil:

[blackpoolhibs]

I dot know much about cricket, other than you have to score more runs than the opposition, the aussies seem to be much better batters than england, and their bowlers seem better too. For those reasons i predict a series win for the aussies. And no honours this time for a team who win a competition that only has two teams in it.:grr:

[--------]

The Aussies were handing out a hammering here, mate.

Unfortunately the weather forecast for South Wales tomorrow is for showers, so it's unlikely that we'll see a full day's play.

But if by chance we do, England will need to bat with total concentration and commitment to see out a draw.

I don't say they can't, but they didn't exactly show the capablility to do so in the first innings.

England had to avoid defeat in this match - as Ghost says, the Ausralians have a very good record at Lords. And maybe that's why the match was put to a ground that regularly gets lots and lots of rain....

[Mibbes Aye]

I dot know much about cricket, other than you have to score more runs than the opposition, the aussies seem to be much better batters than england, and their bowlers seem better too. For those reasons i predict a series win for the aussies. And no honours this time for a team who win a competition that only has two teams in it.:grr:

To be entirely accurate, to win you have to bowl the other side out twice and exceed their run total. That's why a team can go out and post a big, big total like the Aussies did with their 674-6 and potentially stand little, some or a huge chance of winning, depending on the circumstances.

Agree with you that we're looking at the Australians probably winning the series, let alone merely retaining the Ashes. They've outbatted and outbowled England and the much-maligned Nathan Hauritz has outperformed Monty and Swann combined, on the spinning front. Cook's been dismissed twice in less than forty balls. This venue, with the teams as they were, was being touted as England's strongest chance for a win. Psychologically it's a massive blow to England IMO.

As pointed out before, they are up against it next time out at Lord's. Still think England might have the capacity to win a match, but regardless of this Test's outcome I think the Australians can win at least two.

[blackpoolhibs]

To be entirely accurate, to win you have to bowl the other side out twice and exceed their run total. That's why a team can go out and post a big, big total like the Aussies did with their 674-6 and potentially stand little, some or a huge chance of winning, depending on the circumstances.

Agree with you that we're looking at the Australians probably winning the series, let alone merely retaining the Ashes. They've outbatted and outbowled England and the much-maligned Nathan Hauritz has outperformed Monty and Swann combined, on the spinning front. Cook's been dismissed twice in less than forty balls. This venue, with the teams as they were, was being touted as England's strongest chance for a win. Psychologically it's a massive blow to England IMO.

As pointed out before, they are up against it next time out at Lord's. Still think England might have the capacity to win a match, but regardless of this Test's outcome I think the Australians can win at least two.

Well it looks like there's only one team capable of doing that.:wink: FWIW i think its so bloody boring, cant wait for the football to start.

[Mibbes Aye]

Well it looks like there's only one team capable of doing that.:wink: FWIW i think its so bloody boring, cant wait for the football to start.

:agree:

I think cricket does come across as boring, until or unless you get drawn into it. If you do, you then start to engage with the complexities of it and it's impossible to put down after that. It's much more subtle than most sports and is as much about individual battles as team ones (and often about individual battles going on and contributing to the team battles). Does it in a way that other team sports just can't match. It's also completely at the mercy of environmental factors - the kind of pitch and the weather have a huge impact.

I got into it while in Australia - knew little about it before and cared less. Over there it is the summer sport and has as much saturation coverage as we give football. In the winter it tends to fragment into rugby league and union and 'soccer' depending to an extent on geography and ethnicity. I got drawn in because there was a huge media debate going on about a player called Dean Jones and whether he should be recalled to the national side. 'Deano' was a bit of a maverick, although undoubtedly talented so it was familiar stuff for a football fan :greengrin

Anyhoo, every day spent not embracing the joy of Test Match cricket (and perhaps more importantly, 'Test Match Special') is a day wasted :agree: :greengrin

[Sir David Gray]

Well it looks like there's only one team capable of doing that.:wink: FWIW i think its so bloody boring, cant wait for the football to start.

:agree: I've tried to get interested in cricket but I just can't.

I've watched it occasionally over the past couple of years and although my understanding has improved slightly, I still find it incredibly monotonous.

I've watched a bit of the Ashes this year and I couldn't really keep it on for any longer than 10 minutes at a time. It can go on for about 10-15 minutes without anything of note actually happening.

Apart from anything else, how could you possibly get excited about holding a 4in urn in the air?

In saying all that, I sincerely hope that Australia does the business. The hysteria that followed the English win in 2005 was ridiculous.

[--------]

Cricket was invented to give Englishmen some faint concept of eternity.

Then the Aussies came along, and cricket became the Englishman's Awful Warning of what Hell will be like - always trying SO hard, sometimes getting a wee smiudgin of success, but always and inevitably doomed to crashing humiliation... :greengrin

Seriously, there is nothing in sport so copmpelling to my mind as the sight of a top-class spin bowler like Warne or Muralitharan (or Lance Gibbs or Derek Underwood or Bishan Bedi in days past) pinning a batsman down and slowly but surely luring him to his doom.

Or a confrontation between a top-class batsman and a top-class pace bowler with neither giving the other any quarter. A few years ago Alan Donald of South Africa reckoned he'd had Mike Atherton of England caught behind the wicket. Atherton looked at the umpire, the umpire gave 'not out', so Atherton stayed put at the wicket.

Donald was a trifle upset by this, and the next hour and a half saw him bowling as fast and as hostile a spell of bowling at Atherton as I've ever seen. And Atherton ducked and weaved like a boxer, took some blows, played some strokes, finished the day still at the wicket. More like warfare than sport in some ways, but totally compelling.

You either like cricket or you don't, I guess. When you like it, it can be the best game in the world.

[GhostofBolivar]

Cricket was invented to give Englishmen some faint concept of eternity.

Then the Aussies came along, and cricket became the Englishman's Awful Warning of what Hell will be like - always trying SO hard, sometimes getting a wee smiudgin of success, but always and inevitably doomed to crashing humiliation... :greengrin

Seriously, there is nothing in sport so copmpelling to my mind as the sight of a top-class spin bowler like Warne or Muralitharan (or Lance Gibbs or Derek Underwood or Bishan Bedi in days past) pinning a batsman down and slowly but surely luring him to his doom.

Or a confrontation between a top-class batsman and a top-class pace bowler with neither giving the other any quarter. A few years ago Alan Donald of South Africa reckoned he'd had Mike Atherton of England caught behind the wicket. Atherton looked at the umpire, the umpire gave 'not out', so Atherton stayed put at the wicket.

Donald was a trifle upset by this, and the next hour and a half saw him bowling as fast and as hostile a spell of bowling at Atherton as I've ever seen. And Atherton ducked and weaved like a boxer, took some blows, played some strokes, finished the day still at the wicket. More like warfare than sport in some ways, but totally compelling.

You either like cricket or you don't, I guess. When you like it, it can be the best game in the world.

I remember that.

Donald was right.

IIRC, it was a classic Mike Atherton dismissal. Early on in his innings - before he'd got his feet moving - he wafted at a shortish delivery outside off stump with his bat about two feet from his body. He either got a faint touch with the outside of the bat or his gloves to the wicketkeeper. I think the umpire was the only one in the ground who didn't think Atherton was out.

That was a tremendous passage of play.

And it's why I don't like T20 and one-day matches. They take that aspect of the game away. Limiting the number of overs someone can bowl and the fielding restrictions are designed to hamstring the bowlers. Their job is not about taking wickets, it's about bowling dot balls. There are no tactics or real captaincy. Field settings are uniform and bowlers don't prey on batsmen's weaknesses. They pitch the ball up every delivery and hope the batsman gets himself out.

The sort of steely determination the Australians bring to Test cricket - which is probably their greatest asset - just doesn't work in an arena like that. Test match cricket is, primarily, an eight-week examination of each player's strengths and weaknesses. It's why it's called Test cricket. Mentality is often far more important than technique. It's why Alan Border was a better batsman than Graeme Hick. Hick probably had more talent and ability, but Border was among the fiercest of competitors and thrived in an environment where Hick was exposed. And that's why it works. Very few sports offer that sort of pressure - where familiarity with the opponent becomes both a strength and a weakness; and where rivalries and grudges are given a chance to develop over a short space of time. I can only think of the playoffs in North American sports - basketball, baseball and hockey - where teams can play up to 7 games against the same opponent within the space of 2 weeks.

T20 isn't about that. It's about big shots. There's nothing wrong with that - Adam Gilchrist's 50-ball hundred in the last Ashes series (isn't it funny how the TV adverts only reference 2005? It's as if 2007 never happened) was truly awesome. But that innings was part of a larger and more complete whole. T20 is a one-trick pony where scoring rate is the only thing that's important. I'm not interested in a form of the game where maiden overs are more prized than 5-fors. Or where strike rate is a better way to gauge a batsman's quality than his average.

[H18sry]

KP gone 34-3 now come on the Aussie's :thumbsup:

[blackpoolhibs]

KP gone 34-3 now come on the Aussie's :thumbsup:

They are so outclassed, christ i think scotland could give the aussies a better game.:greengrin

[Sir David Gray]

They are so outclassed, christ i think scotland could give the aussies a better game.:greengrin

We won't have long to find out. Scotland's apparently playing them in Edinburgh at the end of next month (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_cricket_team_in_England_in_2009#Austral ia_v_Scotland).

[blackpoolhibs]

We won't have long to find out. Scotland's apparently playing them in Edinburgh at the end of next month (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_cricket_team_in_England_in_2009#Austral ia_v_Scotland).

Its squeaky bum time now, 2 wickets to go.:pray::violin:

[Toaods]

Great game - superb resistance from Collingwood and the last 3 - put the big heads, oops, I mean big names to shame.

My one and only bet came up too...Swann to score more than 21.5...:greengrin

[davym7062]

5 days to play a game and still noone wins. what a lot of nade:agree:

[Toaods]

5 days to play a game and still noone wins. what a lot of nade:agree:

nope........nobody 'lost'.

See,you just don't get it........:wink:

[--------]

5 days to play a game and still noone wins. what a lot of nade:agree:


That was the first of five Test Matches.

There's a long way to go still, and the series could go either way.

Like Toaods said - superb resistance from Collingwood and the England lower-order batsmen, some great play from the Australians, and all to play for in the rest of the series.

What more could anyone want?

This is a game for grown-ups, mate. :devil:

[GhostofBolivar]

5 days to play a game and still noone wins. what a lot of nade:agree:

That's no bad thing. In fact, I have often thought that it takes a certain kind of genius to come up with a game that can go on for five days and still end in a draw.

[Hank Schrader]

Or a confrontation between a top-class batsman and a top-class pace bowler with neither giving the other any quarter. A few years ago Alan Donald of South Africa reckoned he'd had Mike Atherton of England caught behind the wicket. Atherton looked at the umpire, the umpire gave 'not out', so Atherton stayed put at the wicket.

Donald was a trifle upset by this, and the next hour and a half saw him bowling as fast and as hostile a spell of bowling at Atherton as I've ever seen. And Atherton ducked and weaved like a boxer, took some blows, played some strokes, finished the day still at the wicket. More like warfare than sport in some ways, but totally compelling.




Allan Donald trying to knock Michael Athertons block off.... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a10FtSaAsQQ)

[--------]

Allan Donald trying to knock Michael Athertons block off.... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a10FtSaAsQQ)

That's the one. The thing about that spell was the way Donald sustained the aggression. It just went on and on and on....

Atherton should have walked, but then we'd have missed some absolutely awesome Test cricket.

And then there was Mr Ambrose at the WACA.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5G4pqb4nns&feature=related

Picture quality not so good, but the quality of the bowling is quite first-class.

Especially when you consider whose were the 7 wickets he took in that spell - for ONE run.

[hibbybrian]

That was the first of five Test Matches.

There's a long way to go still, and the series could go either way.

Like Toaods said - superb resistance from Collingwood and the England lower-order batsmen, some great play from the Australians, and all to play for in the rest of the series.

What more could anyone want?

This is a game for grown-ups, mate. :devil:

thought Ponting's comments http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/default.stmabout gamesmanship were a bit out of order

a bit pot kettle black after all :devil:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IDFFmiwCqU :grr:

[TheEastTerrace]

thought Ponting's comments http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/default.stmabout gamesmanship were a bit out of order

a bit pot kettle black after all :devil:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IDFFmiwCqU :grr:

If Punter had been in the same position, he would have done exactly the same. The Aussies are hardly angels when it comes to gamesmanship, they pretty much have sledging down to an art form.

[Sir David Gray]

5 days to play a game and still noone wins. what a lot of nade:agree:

That was my thoughts when I heard it ended in a draw.

It's bad enough playing for 90 minutes and coming out with a draw, without playing for five days!

Especially when I don't see what was equal between England and Australia after the five days that could have allowed for the draw to take place. :confused:

I realise this is only one Test and the Ashes is played over five Tests but is it not possible for every single Test to end in a draw? If so, that would mean that you would play for 25 days (nearly a whole month!) and still end up with a draw! :crazy:

[Mibbes Aye]

That was my thoughts when I heard it ended in a draw.

It's bad enough playing for 90 minutes and coming out with a draw, without playing for five days!

Especially when I don't see what was equal between England and Australia after the five days that could have allowed for the draw to take place. :confused:

I realise this is only one Test and the Ashes is played over five Tests but is it not possible for every single Test to end in a draw? If so, that would mean that you would play for 25 days (nearly a whole month!) and still end up with a draw! :crazy:

It can be hard to talk positively about cricket to someone who isn't like-minded without sounding patronising. I undoubtedly won't succeed :greengrin

The truth is that the beauty of the game rests in its subtleties and in its ambiguities and in its occasional, or even often, lack of resolution.

Taking the time to learn those subtleties and appreciate how they can shape a cricket match (or not) is what makes it so rewarding IMO. It takes acquiring but it more than repays the acquiring. The initial investment of your time and patience getting to grips with the complexities of the game is rewarded immeasurably. On an ongoing basis.

(Point of order - if all five matches are drawn, Australia retain the Ashes :greengrin)

[Sir David Gray]

It can be hard to talk positively about cricket to someone who isn't like-minded without sounding patronising. I undoubtedly won't succeed :greengrin

The truth is that the beauty of the game rests in its subtleties and in its ambiguities and in its occasional, or even often, lack of resolution.

Taking the time to learn those subtleties and appreciate how they can shape a cricket match (or not) is what makes it so rewarding IMO. It takes acquiring but it more than repays the acquiring. The initial investment of your time and patience getting to grips with the complexities of the game is rewarded immeasurably. On an ongoing basis.

(Point of order - if all five matches are drawn, Australia retain the Ashes :greengrin)

I can see how someone might enjoy watching the Twenty20 form of the game but Test cricket just seems extremely boring to me.

In saying that, I can also understand how someone might enjoy playing cricket (Test and Twenty20), the challenge of getting runs and trying to claim a wicket by either bowling or fielding seems quite fun to me.

I just don't think that Test cricket is an appealing prospect as a spectator, although if you are a cricket fan, I can see why you would like the traditional form of the sport.

PS-'Mon the draw! :greengrin

[--------]

thought Ponting's comments http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/default.stmabout gamesmanship were a bit out of order

a bit pot kettle black after all :devil:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IDFFmiwCqU :grr:


If Punter had been in the same position, he would have done exactly the same. The Aussies are hardly angels when it comes to gamesmanship, they pretty much have sledging down to an art form.


'Course he would. This is serious stuff.

FWIW, neither England nor Australia have been guiltless over the years since WG Grace originally set the cat among the pigeons.

All part of the game, and jolly good fun it is too. Ponting says his piece, Flowers says his, everyone gets a wee bit heated, then it's on to Lord's and a whole new ball game.



Quote FalkirkHibee: "I can see how someone might enjoy watching the Twenty20 form of the game but Test cricket just seems extremely boring to me.

In saying that, I can also understand how someone might enjoy playing cricket (Test and Twenty20), the challenge of getting runs and trying to claim a wicket by either bowling or fielding seems quite fun to me.

I just don't think that Test cricket is an appealing prospect as a spectator, although if you are a cricket fan, I can see why you would like the traditional form of the sport."


Years and years ago BBC 2 showed a complete 40-overs game every Sunday afternoon - the John Player League, I think it was. I started watching that and enjoyed it - it was the sort of League where you saw young players, older players, and usually a couple of really good players playing in a limited-innings format where there was always a win-lose result.

Then friends who understood test cricket took me under instruction, and explained what was going on through one particular Ashes Test. That series happened to be a very good one - Illingworth and Ian Chappell were the captains, back around 1972 or so. By the end of the final day of the final test I was hooked.

Of course, it helped that I was watching players like Chappell, Lillee, Underwood, Gower, Gavaskar, Venkat, Hadlee, Botham, Zaheer, Imran, Greenidge, Richards, Lloyd, Holding, Marshall, Garner and so on....

The West Indies in the 1970s and 80s were a particular joy to watch - there weren't many draws around when Big Bird and Whispering Death were bowling and GG and the Great Man batting.

And the TMS crew were very good then - Jim Laker, Richie Benaud, John Arlott and Brian Johnson were wonderful braodcasters. Only Benaud is left now. The present bunch aren't nearly as good.



Arlott had a wonderful warm West Country accent.

I remember one Ashes match when Thommo got Brian Luckhurst in what Arlott described as "a particularly painful place".

(This was with the FIFTH ball of the over, btw. That's important.)

Brian collapsed clutching his groin while Thommo looked on, grinning.

The players gathered round.

Johnson: "I say, are they applying massage out there?" (Giggle.)

Laker: "Can't quite see... They're rubbing something... (Giggle.) He's all right now." (He wasn't.)

Arlott: "Luckhurst is back on his feet, looking rather shaky. He takes guard. Thomson comes in from the Nursery End. And there's ONE BALL LEFT....."

Total collapse of commentary team.

[LiverpoolHibs]

'Course he would. This is serious stuff.

FWIW, neither England nor Australia have been guiltless over the years since WG Grace originally set the cat among the pigeons.

All part of the game, and jolly good fun it is too. Ponting says his piece, Flowers says his, everyone gets a wee bit heated, then it's on to Lord's and a whole new ball game.



Quote FalkirkHibee: "I can see how someone might enjoy watching the Twenty20 form of the game but Test cricket just seems extremely boring to me.

In saying that, I can also understand how someone might enjoy playing cricket (Test and Twenty20), the challenge of getting runs and trying to claim a wicket by either bowling or fielding seems quite fun to me.

I just don't think that Test cricket is an appealing prospect as a spectator, although if you are a cricket fan, I can see why you would like the traditional form of the sport."


Years and years ago BBC 2 showed a complete 40-overs game every Sunday afternoon - the John Player League, I think it was. I started watching that and enjoyed it - it was the sort of League where you saw young players, older players, and usually a couple of really good players playing in a limited-innings format where there was always a win-lose result.

Then friends who understood test cricket took me under instruction, and explained what was going on through one particular Ashes Test. That series happened to be a very good one - Illingworth and Ian Chappell were the captains, back around 1972 or so. By the end of the final day of the final test I was hooked.

Of course, it helped that I was watching players like Chappell, Lillee, Underwood, Gower, Gavaskar, Venkat, Hadlee, Botham, Zaheer, Imran, Greenidge, Richards, Lloyd, Holding, Marshall, Garner and so on....

The West Indies in the 1970s and 80s were a particular joy to watch - there weren't many draws around when Big Bird and Whispering Death were bowling and GG and the Great Man batting.

And the TMS crew were very good then - Jim Laker, Richie Benaud, John Arlott and Brian Johnson were wonderful braodcasters. Only Benaud is left now. The present bunch aren't nearly as good.



Arlott had a wonderful warm West Country accent.

I remember one Ashes match when Thommo got Brian Luckhurst in what Arlott described as "a particularly painful place".

(This was with the FIFTH ball of the over, btw. That's important.)

Brian collapsed clutching his groin while Thommo looked on, grinning.

The players gathered round.

Johnson: "I say, are they applying massage out there?" (Giggle.)

Laker: "Can't quite see... They're rubbing something... (Giggle.) He's all right now." (He wasn't.)

Arlott: "Luckhurst is back on his feet, looking rather shaky. He takes guard. Thomson comes in from the Nursery End. And there's ONE BALL LEFT....."

Total collapse of commentary team.

:greengrin

I stand by this being the greatest bit of radio broadcasting of all time...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k0qZDdfvZk

Good old Johnners. Classic quotes;

"There's Neil Harvey standing at leg slip with his legs wide apart, waiting for a tickle."

And the possibly apochryphal, "The bowler's Holding, the batsman's Willey."

[bawheid]

Great thread this.

I sat on my arse and watched almost every ball of the first test, and I plan to do exactly the same from tomorrow onwards.

Felt Ponting spoiled what was a majestic display with the bat with his whinging and moaning about the 12th man / physio.

Good youtube clips of Donald v Atherton, the underarm ball, and Johnners commentary.

I see today Flintoff has announced his retirement from Test Match cricket following the Ashes. You have to question the timing.

Big match coming up for the England top order. Runs needed. And England haven't beaten the Aussies at Lords since the 1930s!

All set up for another belter. 'Mon the Test Match cricket!

[--------]

:greengrin

I stand by this being the greatest bit of radio broadcasting of all time...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k0qZDdfvZk

Good old Johnners. Classic quotes;

"There's Neil Harvey standing at leg slip with his legs wide apart, waiting for a tickle."


And the possibly apochryphal, "The bowler's Holding, the batsman's Willey."

I dunno about the last one - Johnners sometimes denied it, sometimes seemed to admit he'd said it, but I DO remember one moment in the 1981 Ashes where he announce, "The wicket we've all been waiting for - Lillee, caught Willey, bowled Dilley..." and everyone falling about.

The present lot just cannot reach such heights of erudition.

And then there was the Bearded Wonder - the late lamented Bill Frindall.

"Tell us, Bill - when was the last time a left-handed bespectacled batsman named Kevin was bowled by a right-arm medium pace bowler named Wilfred bowling round the wicket from the Kirkstall lane end when there was an 'R' in the month?"

"That would be the 29th of April 1955, Brian - Kevin Higginbotham playing for Leicestershire was bowled for 25 by Wilfred Mangoldwurzel. He was caught off teh outside edge by the Hon Lionel Snaithe-Wellington fielding at second slip. The umpire was old Grumpy Rumbold."

:devil:

[LiverpoolHibs]

I dunno about the last one - Johnners sometimes denied it, sometimes seemed to admit he'd said it, but I DO remember one moment in the 1981 Ashes where he announce, "The wicket we've all been waiting for - Lillee, caught Willey, bowled Dilley..." and everyone falling about.

The present lot just cannot reach such heights of erudition.

And then there was the Bearded Wonder - the late lamented Bill Frindall.

"Tell us, Bill - when was the last time a left-handed bespectacled batsman named Kevin was bowled by a right-arm medium pace bowler named Wilfred bowling round the wicket from the Kirkstall lane end when there was an 'R' in the month?"

"That would be the 29th of April 1955, Brian - Kevin Higginbotham playing for Leicestershire was bowled for 25 by Wilfred Mangoldwurzel. He was caught off teh outside edge by the Hon Lionel Snaithe-Wellington fielding at second slip. The umpire was old Grumpy Rumbold."

:devil:

They're still good value. I very much enjoyed

On a seperate point I think cricket must be the game with the funniest banter in history, it beats football by a long chalk. My personal top ten favourite sledging moments.

1) Australia vs. Zimbabwe. Glenn McGrath bowling at and unable to dismiss Zimbabwe's number 11 and cult-hero Eddo Brandes:

McGrath: Hey Eddo, why are you so ****ing fat?

Brandes (for it is the famous chicken farmer): Because every time I **** your wife she gives me a biscuit.

Cue everyone on the Australian team bar McGrath breaking down in hysterics.

2) England vs. Australia. Jimmy Ormond is out batting and, somewhat unsurprisingly, receives taunts about his ability as a cricketer.

Mark Waugh: What the **** are you doing out here mate? There's no way you're good enough to play for England.

Ormond: Maybe so, but at least I'm the best player in my own ****ing family.

3) India vs. Australia. Ravi Shastri hits a single to twelfth man Mike Whitney and turns to look for a second.

Whitney: Leave that crease and I'll break your ****ing head!

Shastri: If you could bat as well as you talk you wouldn't be twelfth-****ing-man.

4) Glamorgan vs. Somerset. Gregg Thomas is bowling at Viv Richards and beats the bat a few times in a row.

Thomas: It's red, round and weighs about five ounces in case you were wondering.

[Vivian proceeds to smash the next ball out of the ground]

Richards: You know what it looks like, now go and ****ing find it.

5) West Indies vs. Australia. McGrath bowling (he always seems to walk right into them) to Ramnaresh Sarwan.

McGrath: So what does Brian Lara's dick taste like?

Sarwan: I don't know, ask your wife.

6) England vs. Australia. Merv Hughes is bowling to Robin Smith and is beating him all ends up.

Hughes: Hey Robin, you can't ****ing bat!

[Smith smashes the next few balls for four]

Smith: We make a fine pair Merv, I can't ****ing bat and you can't ****ing bowl!

7) England vs. Australia. Ian Botham come out to bat and is greeted by Rod Marsh behind the stumps with the line..

Alright Ian, how's the wife and my kids?

8) Australia vs. S. Africa. Daryl Cullinan is coming out to bat to face Shane Warne who reminds him of a torrid time he gave him in a previous series.

Warne: I've been waiting two years for another chance to get at you.

Cullinan: Yeah? It looks like you spent them eating.

9) England vs. Pakistan. Frank Tyson is bowling and gets an edge which is dropped at first slip by Raman Subba Row.

Subba Row: Sorry Frank, I should have closed my legs!

Tyson: No, your mother should have you *******!

10) England vs. Australia. Phil Tufnell is fielding on the boundary on an Ashes tour in Australia.

Aussie fan: Hey Tufnell, can I borrow your brain? I'm building an idiot!


:greengrin

[lyonhibs]

Some classic quotes there. Here are some more:

You can’t forget Ian Healy’s legendary comment that was picked up by the Channel 9 microphones when Arjuna Ranatunga called for a runner on a particularly hot night during a one dayer in Sydney… “You don’t get a runner for being an overweight, unfit, fat ******!!!”

Merv Hughes & Viv Richards:During a test match in the West Indies, Hughes didn’t
say a word to Viv, but continued to stare at him after deliveries. “This is my island, my culture. Don’t you be staring at me. In my culture we just bowl.” Merv didn’t reply, but after he dismissed him he announced to the batsman: “In my culture we just say ****** off.”

Mark Waugh standing at second slip, the new player (Adam Parore) comes to the crease playing & missing the first ball. Mark - “Ohh, I remember you from a couple years ago in Australia. You were sh*t then, you’re *****ing useless now”.Parore- (Turning around) “Yeah, that’s me & when I was there you were going out with that old, ugly sl*t & now I hear you’ve married her. You dumb c*nt”.

Yet another Australian witticism with this time porky Sri Lankan batsman Arjuna
Ranatunga the victim. Shane Warne, trying to tempt the batsman out of his crease mused what it took to get the plump character to get out of his crease and drive.
Wicketkeeper Ian Healy piped up, “Put a Mars Bar on a good length. That should do it.”


They're still good value. I very much enjoyed

On a seperate point I think cricket must be the game with the funniest banter in history, it beats football by a long chalk. My personal top ten favourite sledging moments.

1) Australia vs. Zimbabwe. Glenn McGrath bowling at and unable to dismiss Zimbabwe's number 11 and cult-hero Eddo Brandes:

McGrath: Hey Eddo, why are you so ****ing fat?

Brandes (for it is the famous chicken farmer): Because every time I **** your wife she gives me a biscuit.

Cue everyone on the Australian team bar McGrath breaking down in hysterics.

2) England vs. Australia. Jimmy Ormond is out batting and, somewhat unsurprisingly, receives taunts about his ability as a cricketer.

Mark Waugh: What the **** are you doing out here mate? There's no way you're good enough to play for England.

Ormond: Maybe so, but at least I'm the best player in my own ****ing family.

3) India vs. Australia. Ravi Shastri hits a single to twelfth man Mike Whitney and turns to look for a second.

Whitney: Leave that crease and I'll break your ****ing head!

Shastri: If you could bat as well as you talk you wouldn't be twelfth-****ing-man.

4) Glamorgan vs. Somerset. Gregg Thomas is bowling at Viv Richards and beats the bat a few times in a row.

Thomas: It's red, round and weighs about five ounces in case you were wondering.

[Vivian proceeds to smash the next ball out of the ground]

Richards: You know what it looks like, now go and ****ing find it.

5) West Indies vs. Australia. McGrath bowling (he always seems to walk right into them) to Ramnaresh Sarwan.

McGrath: So what does Brian Lara's dick taste like?

Sarwan: I don't know, ask your wife.

6) England vs. Australia. Merv Hughes is bowling to Robin Smith and is beating him all ends up.

Hughes: Hey Robin, you can't ****ing bat!

[Smith smashes the next few balls for four]

Smith: We make a fine pair Merv, I can't ****ing bat and you can't ****ing bowl!

7) England vs. Australia. Ian Botham come out to bat and is greeted by Rod Marsh behind the stumps with the line..

Alright Ian, how's the wife and my kids?

8) Australia vs. S. Africa. Daryl Cullinan is coming out to bat to face Shane Warne who reminds him of a torrid time he gave him in a previous series.

Warne: I've been waiting two years for another chance to get at you.

Cullinan: Yeah? It looks like you spent them eating.

9) England vs. Pakistan. Frank Tyson is bowling and gets an edge which is dropped at first slip by Raman Subba Row.

Subba Row: Sorry Frank, I should have closed my legs!

Tyson: No, your mother should have you *******!

10) England vs. Australia. Phil Tufnell is fielding on the boundary on an Ashes tour in Australia.

Aussie fan: Hey Tufnell, can I borrow your brain? I'm building an idiot!


:greengrin

[LiverpoolHibs]

Yet another Australian witticism with this time porky Sri Lankan batsman Arjuna Ranatunga the victim. Shane Warne, trying to tempt the batsman out of his crease mused what it took to get the plump character to get out of his crease and drive. Wicketkeeper Ian Healy piped up, “Put a Mars Bar on a good length. That should do it.”


They must have re-used that one! I heard it was at state level to an overweight no-body batsmen who then replied "**** that, Boonie (David Boon fielding at first slip - not surprisingly) will get to it before it's bounced!"

[GhostofBolivar]

9) England vs. Pakistan. Frank Tyson is bowling and gets an edge which is dropped at first slip by Raman Subba Row.

Subba Row: Sorry Frank, I should have closed my legs!

Tyson: No, your mother should have you *******!


That's wrong. The bowler was Fred Trueman.

[TheEastTerrace]

Right chaps, 2nd Test starts this morning and battle recommences

Flintoff to play so fancy the only change to be Onions to come in for Monters. Lee still not fit for the Aussies so should be unchanged.

Sunny intervals predicted so may be some cloud cover for the bowlers. I'd fancy a bat first up though.

England haven't beaten the Aussies at Lords since 1930s so odds are on an Australia win or draw.

[TheEastTerrace]

England 88-0 so far, solid start by Cook and Strauss. Aggers on Twitter says there's not much in the pitch for bowlers so we could be looking at some big scores again. Johnson is continuing where he left off. 0-47 off 7 overs. Expensive!

A question for everyone? Do you think groundsmen are being 'advised' to prepare more lifeless pitches so Test matches go the distance? The cynic in me suggests that the more TV coverage of 5 day Test matches they can get in, the more sponsorship, ticket sales, advertising, corporate hospitality, etc they can squeeze out. Definitely a case of that happening on England's recent tour to the West Indies. I could have batted on those pitches. :greengrin

[Hank Schrader]

I can't see the coverage at work but is Johnson still releasing the Duke ball out of his hand at a funny angle? They showed this last week on Sky and it seemed to be contributing to his shocking form. The seam was all over the place.

Maybe he isn't as effective without the Kookaburra ball :dunno:

[TheEastTerrace]

I can't see the coverage at work but is Johnson still releasing the Duke ball out of his hand at a funny angle? They showed this last week on Sky and it seemed to be contributing to his shocking form. The seam was all over the place.

Maybe he isn't as effective without the Kookaburra ball :dunno:

At work so can't see any coverage but on Sunday, Sky Sports also showed the graphic of Johnson's deliveries in the 2nd innings. Not one ball would have hit the stumps and he was extremly erractic, which made it all the more confusing as to why Punter continued with him. They were touting him as their main strike bowler before this series. On this form, he'll be the one getting the chop once Lee is fit.

Great session for England though, 125-0 at the moment.

[Tomsk]

I can't see the coverage at work but is Johnson still releasing the Duke ball out of his hand at a funny angle? They showed this last week on Sky and it seemed to be contributing to his shocking form. The seam was all over the place.

Maybe he isn't as effective without the Kookaburra ball :dunno:

Do you know what ball they use in South Africa? He had a good series there over the winter.

This is the first time I've really seen him. His technique is under a bit of stress at the moment. :greengrin

[TheEastTerrace]

Do you know what ball they use in South Africa? He had a good series there over the winter.

This is the first time I've really seen him. His technique is under a bit of stress at the moment. :greengrin

Think SA use Kookaburra as well.

[TheEastTerrace]

England haring along at just over 4 runs per over. Hauritz out with broken finger. 177-0 at the moment. Providing a collapse of epic proportions doesn't happen, they must be looking at 600+ as a target.

[blackpoolhibs]

196 for 1. Here comes the start of the collapse.:wink:

[Tomsk]

England haring along at just over 4 runs per over. Hauritz out with broken finger. 177-0 at the moment. Providing a collapse of epic proportions doesn't happen, they must be looking at 600+ as a target.

320 all out. You watch. Masters of letting good positions slip.

[TheEastTerrace]

320 all out. You watch. Masters of letting good positions slip.

Most definitely possible if Strauss is next man out. I fancy Collingwood to get a score though.

Bopara's failed again. They must be thinking about recalling Bell to bat at no.3 given his recent form with Warwickshire.

[Tomsk]

England are 255/2 at tea.

I can't recall a more inept start from Australia since the days of Kim Hughes. Plenty of time for an England collapse though.

[TheEastTerrace]

Aussies fighting back 333-6.

[Stonewall]

England are 255/2 at tea.

I can't recall a more inept start from Australia since the days of Kim Hughes. Plenty of time for an England collapse though.

334/6 - You've watched England before haven't you.

[--------]

England haring along at just over 4 runs per over. Hauritz out with broken finger. 177-0 at the moment. Providing a collapse of epic proportions doesn't happen, they must be looking at 600+ as a target.


Aussies fighting back 333-6.


Ah - the Curse of Lord Nelson strikes again. Bopara goes at 222, Freddie Floatoff at 333.

All out for 444? :devil:

Now 6 for 342. Someone needs to have a strong word with the England middle order.

6 for 364 at close. A wee bit better. :devil:

[Mibbes Aye]

Not really caught much of today's play and will have to catch up. Looks like a very good start for England and once again their fragility has let them down. Fancy Australia to score runs here. Could be a bit of a repeat of Cardiff but with a more decisive result for the Aussies.

[--------]

Not really caught much of today's play and will have to catch up. Looks like a very good start for England and once again their fragility has let them down. Fancy Australia to score runs here. Could be a bit of a repeat of Cardiff but with a more decisive result for the Aussies.


The start they were given by Strauss and Cook should have led on to a total well over 500 - Strauss should have been able to look forward to declaring sometime tomorrow afternoon around the 600 mark.

Classic mid-order collapse again.

I blame Nelson, myself. :devil:

[--------]

Very good start by England - Aussies 2 for 10 replying to 425 all out....

Is this going to be the end of a long run of results at Lord's?????

[blackpoolhibs]

Very good start by England - Aussies 2 for 10 replying to 425 all out....

Is this going to be the end of a long run of results at Lord's?????

Lets hope not eh.:wink:

[Just Jimmy]

Very good start by England - Aussies 2 for 10 replying to 425 all out....

Is this going to be the end of a long run of results at Lord's?????

I know very little about cricket, however is 425 not a completely garbage total considering Strauss hit 161 himself and the Opening pairing hit 161 and 95 respectively?

after that start should they not have been looking for 600-700?

I'm not a fan but I enjoyed (in a loose sense of the word) watching the highlights of the Cook and Strauss batting last night.

[Tomsk]

England have made a decent show of it this morning after a disastrous first few overs. The tail has brought the score up to respectibility, although given the start the team enjoyed an opportunity to put Australia out of the match has been missed -- again!

Two quick wickets and the Aussies are having to fight for their runs for once with Jimmy Andeson causing the batters (and umpires :wink:) all sorts of problems.

All in all, it makes for a more interesting test match. There is nothing worse than run-saturated test cricket.

As of 10 to 3 Onions hasn't bowled yet. He might like these conditions.

[--------]

I know very little about cricket, however is 425 not a completely garbage total considering Strauss hit 161 himself and the Opening pairing hit 161 and 95 respectively?

after that start should they not have been looking for 600-700?

I'm not a fan but I enjoyed (in a loose sense of the word) watching the highlights of the Cook and Strauss batting last night.


Short answer to your first question - YES.

Second question - YES.

Cook and Strauss gave England the best start imaginable - that was the highest opening partnership against Australia at Lord's EVER - and then the middle-order - Bopara, Collingwood and Pietersen were IMO guilty of throwing away that advantage. They all three were lacking in concentration - Pietersen needs to get over the loss of the captaincy and start working at his batting again - and Prior lost his wicket carelessly to say the least.

Strauss may be defending them in public, but he has to feel a little let down. 425 is a decent lead, but nothing like what it should have been.

But they've got two early Aussie wickets, including Ponting's, and they just have to settle down and make sure they don't let the Aussies off the hook.

But the Australian order doesn't often collapse....


RAIN. :rolleyes:

[blackpoolhibs]

RAIN. :rolleyes:

Game for poofs, i'm sure it would get a lot more interesting if they played on through the rain. There cant be many sports were getting a little wet stops play?:devil:

[Mibbes Aye]

Game for poofs, i'm sure it would get a lot more interesting if they played on through the rain. There cant be many sports were getting a little wet stops play?:devil:

Course there is. :bitchy:

Why do you think competitive swimming is always indoors?

[blackpoolhibs]

Course there is. :bitchy:

Why do you think competitive swimming is always indoors?

:faf::faf::top marks

[Danderhall Hibs]

Game for poofs, i'm sure it would get a lot more interesting if they played on through the rain. There cant be many sports were getting a little wet stops play?:devil:

Tennis is the same - they should get a pair of studs on and carry on.

BTW - England have been impressive this afternoon. I see the Aussies took the light - a wee bit unsporting, maybe they'll have to get off their high horse now.

[Killiehibbie]

Tennis is the same - they should get a pair of studs on and carry on.


I think it's more to do with protecting the playing surface but it is a poofs game cricket that is.

[Just Jimmy]

Course there is. :bitchy:

Why do you think competitive swimming is always indoors?

:top marks

[Just Jimmy]

Short answer to your first question - YES.

Second question - YES.

Cook and Strauss gave England the best start imaginable - that was the highest opening partnership against Australia at Lord's EVER - and then the middle-order - Bopara, Collingwood and Pietersen were IMO guilty of throwing away that advantage. They all three were lacking in concentration - Pietersen needs to get over the loss of the captaincy and start working at his batting again - and Prior lost his wicket carelessly to say the least.

Strauss may be defending them in public, but he has to feel a little let down. 425 is a decent lead, but nothing like what it should have been.

But they've got two early Aussie wickets, including Ponting's, and they just have to settle down and make sure they don't let the Aussies off the hook.

But the Australian order doesn't often collapse....


RAIN. :rolleyes:

Good response thanks.

As I thought then. I reckon England will loose this and Strauss has every right to feel let down here.

I'm a tad worried how into cricket i'm getting lately, I've always rubbished it.

[--------]

Tennis is the same - they should get a pair of studs on and carry on.

BTW - England have been impressive this afternoon. I see the Aussies took the light - a wee bit unsporting, maybe they'll have to get off their high horse now.

Why unsporting - it's all part of the game. It's up to the umpires to decide when the light isn't good enough, no one else. A lot depends on who's bowling at the time - if the bowlers are fast or medium-pace, then the likelihood of the offer being made increases, because obviously it's more difficult to play a fast or medium-paced bowler than a slow bowler, and there's more likelihood of injury to the batsmen (and incidentally, the close fielders too) - and avoiding injury to players is what offering the light is about.

Batsmen in a tight spot like the Aussies are in will always take the light. It's a legitimate part of the game. Not unsporting, and nothing whatsoever to do with high horses. Ashes series are always played in this sort of spirit from both sides - loads of speech-play, loads of sledging, loads of competitive edge on both sides.


Good response thanks.

As I thought then. I reckon England will loose this and Strauss has every right to feel let down here.

I'm a tad worried how into cricket i'm getting lately, I've always rubbished it.

Never predict, mate - England have the Aussies by the short hairs right now.... :devil:

215 all out - the Aussies can now be asked to follow on - go right out and bat again, needing 211 to put England back in.

There's nearly three days left, so England have plenty of time to bowl them out and then to bat again to win the match.

If Strauss makes the Aussies bat again now, the Aussies will need to bat for at least all of today and tomorrow, and make somewhere in the region 0f 520 runs, to have a chance of winning or drawing.

This, you will understand, is a tall order. Only rain or the mother and father of all collapses can save Australia now.


(I notice that Hussey and Clarke were both out at 111. Seems Lord Nelson's determined to take a major role in this game.... :wink: )

[--------]

So England have decided to bat.

Taking a risk on the weather....

Forecast not that good. I think I'd have told Ponting to get his pads on.


Edit: 0 for 57 - going well. Only the rain can save the Aussies now, I'd say.

[--------]

2 for 105 off 25 overs.

Going at more than 4 an over, and now 315 ahead.

Australia will have to break a few records (and the England bowlers bowl like twonks) to save this one now.

Or it'll have to rain for most of the last 2 days....

[--------]

England are BURYING them.

Edit: This is absolutely brilliant. They're going along at 4 an over.

5 for 304 off 70. Wow! :dizzy:

[Mibbes Aye]

Fascinating stuff. You would imagine England won't hang about long tomorrow I'm sure, if indeed they do bat again - if they're serious about trying to win the match they need to give themselves the time to do it on what remains a batting pitch. Australia's first-innings collapse is unlikely to repeat itself - losing five of the top seven for thirty-five runs is surely an aberration.

Credit to England though - they've worked to get themselves into this position. Still find it hard to see past Australia for the series though - either Johnson finds his touch or Clark (or Lee) returns and that would tip things enough in their favour IMO.

[--------]

Fascinating stuff. You would imagine England won't hang about long tomorrow I'm sure, if indeed they do bat again - if they're serious about trying to win the match they need to give themselves the time to do it on what remains a batting pitch. Australia's first-innings collapse is unlikely to repeat itself - losing five of the top seven for thirty-five runs is surely an aberration.

Credit to England though - they've worked to get themselves into this position. Still find it hard to see past Australia for the series though - either Johnson finds his touch or Clark (or Lee) returns and that would tip things enough in their favour IMO.


6 for 311 at close - the lead's 521 already.

Unless the rain comes, I can't see Australia saving this. A rain-affected draw's the best they can hope for, and that's a long shot.

If I were Strauss I'd put them in first thing tomorrow morning and let the pace men have a good go at them fresh. There's no way England can lose this one.

[Mibbes Aye]

6 for 311 at close - the lead's 521 already.

Unless the rain comes, I can't see Australia saving this. A rain-affected draw's the best they can hope for, and that's a long shot.

If I were Strauss I'd put them in first thing tomorrow morning and let the pace men have a good go at them fresh. There's no way England can lose this one.

I think the weather will have the say. Nevertheless, records are there to be broken and in Test cricket they seem to be getting broken exponentially. Six sessions on what remains a good batting track is actually ample time for a team of Australia's calibre to score the necessary runs but it would still be an outstanding feat. I suppose that's the trick in declaring - ensuring there's enough incentive for the Australians to actually go for it.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Why unsporting - it's all part of the game. It's up to the umpires to decide when the light isn't good enough, no one else. A lot depends on who's bowling at the time - if the bowlers are fast or medium-pace, then the likelihood of the offer being made increases, because obviously it's more difficult to play a fast or medium-paced bowler than a slow bowler, and there's more likelihood of injury to the batsmen (and incidentally, the close fielders too) - and avoiding injury to players is what offering the light is about.

Batsmen in a tight spot like the Aussies are in will always take the light. It's a legitimate part of the game. Not unsporting, and nothing whatsoever to do with high horses. Ashes series are always played in this sort of spirit from both sides - loads of speech-play, loads of sledging, loads of competitive edge on both sides.





I know it is - but so is time-wasting. :greengrin

I just thought it was funny that they agreed to play under the lights then when they realised they were toiling started to complain to the umpires about shadows!

[Hibs Class]

I know it is - but so is time-wasting. :greengrin

I just thought it was funny that they agreed to play under the lights then when they realised they were toiling started to complain to the umpires about shadows!

Part of the problem is that in fully floodlit matches a white ball is used so it stands out against the shadow, whilst the red ball being used just now is more easily confused with the shadows. I think a pink ball is being developed for trial in a floodlit test match next year.

[PC Stamp]

Whilst not a huge fan of the vastly overrated English, it's hilarious to see the vastly over hyped Aussies getting absolutely trousered. They arguably outrank even the Americans as the most up themselves arrogant nation when it comes to sport! :faf:

[blackpoolhibs]

Whilst not a huge fan of the vastly overrated English, it's hilarious to see the vastly over hyped Aussies getting absolutely trousered. They arguably outrank even the Americans as the most up themselves arrogant nation when it comes to sport! :faf:

Oh i dont know, the english can give them a good game. In fact the cricketers are just as bad. Those who won the ashes in 2005 are so full of themselves, and talk about it as if it was a regular occurance.:faf: And they were all awarded gongs from the queen, for winning a competition that had 2 teams competing in it.:faf: Come on the aussies.:wink:

[--------]

Oh i dont know, the english can give them a good game. In fact the cricketers are just as bad. Those who won the ashes in 2005 are so full of themselves, and talk about it as if it was a regular occurance.:faf: And they were all awarded gongs from the queen, for winning a competition that had 2 teams competing in it.:faf: Come on the aussies.:wink:


They're sinking without trace right now, mate. :cool2:

Rather pleased for Strauss. He should have had the captaincy before Pietersen last time round, IMO. He comes across as a very decent guy, and hopefully this result will sort a few things out for him vis-a-vis the rest of the team.

[PC Stamp]

Not quite as cut and dried as we thought. The odds still heavily favour England and one more wicket pretty much lets them loose on the tail ... but hats off to Clarke & Haddin for a decent fight. Will become pretty interesting though if those two can make it through to lunch tomorrow.

[Shrekko]

Whilst not a huge fan of the vastly overrated English, it's hilarious to see the vastly over hyped Aussies getting absolutely trousered. They arguably outrank even the Americans as the most up themselves arrogant nation when it comes to sport! :faf:


The Aussie's have always been able to 'walk the walk' to back up their confidence. They have a great attitude IMO- you wouldnt see them parading round on an open top bus after winning their first 2 team competition in donkeys, whereas England have been stuck in a 2005 time-warp for 4 years.

I think it was generally acknowledged that this isnt a great Australian team having just lost a host of world class players in a short space of time but these guys dont make excuses, they come with the right mentality. They are, especially without Brett Lee, a very ordinary side but I wouldnt be totally surprised if they at least made this one very close.

[Tomsk]

It's all over! England win by 115 runs. Flintoff takes five for.

The Aussies will be beeling. It will be interesting to see how they respond. Ponting will be under a tonne of pressure from old players and press. They could implode. I doubt it though. Even without a credible bowling attack they are mentally tough. I expect them to come back.

[--------]

It's all over! England win by 115 runs. Flintoff takes five for.

The Aussies will be beeling. It will be interesting to see how they respond. Ponting will be under a tonne of pressure from old players and press. They could implode. I doubt it though. Even without a credible bowling attack they are mentally tough. I expect them to come back.



So would I, but it may prove harder than they expect.

Most of their batsmen failed twice on a track that looked to favour the bat.

[Part/Time Supporter]

So would I, but it may prove harder than they expect.

Most of their batsmen failed twice on a track that looked to favour the bat.

Phil Hughes should be dropped, but they only took two opening batsmen with them. (???)

Mitchell Johnson should be dropped, but their only alternatives are Lee (who's injured) and Clark (who's just coming back from injury, and is too similar to their other medium pacers).

Unless Pietersen and Flintoff are genuinely injured, they're ****ed.

[Tomsk]

Phil Hughes should be dropped, but they only took two opening batsmen with them. (???)

Mitchell Johnson should be dropped, but their only alternatives are Lee (who's injured) and Clark (who's just coming back from injury, and is too similar to their other medium pacers).

Unless Pietersen and Flintoff are genuinely injured, they're ****ed.

If Lee is fit he will play. But ideally Australia would want to keep Johnson in the team because otherwise their batting is diluted. None of the other all rounders -- Clark, MacDonald or Watson -- can match Johnson's batting. Clark is, or maybe that should be was, a very good bowler but he is no longer young and has had a lot of injuries and break downs.

Of course, the Aussies have been able to run their teams for a long time with only four bowlers because of the control McGrath and Warne gave the side. That luxury they are maybe going to have to let go.

The batting line-up is a major headache for the Aussies. Hughes looks vulnerable at the top of the innings every time he bats and it looks like England have found a way to get him out. Yet, as you say there's nobody else!

I wouldn't be surprised if they drafted someone in.

Never mind. There is still very little between the teams. This series threatens to be as competitive as 2005, but it won't match that epic quality of four years ago.

[hibee62]

A couple of interesting articles about how cricket is expanding in scotland for those that are interested.

http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2520790.0.bowled_over_how_scotland_bec ame_a_nation_of_closet_cricketers.php

http://www.cricketscotland.com/LizSmith

[bawheid]

Ouch!

Bit of a blow for England here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/8162048.stm

[Tomsk]

Does not look good for much play today. As I write, commentators at the ground are reporting a sodden outfield and it is still raining.

Australia have dropped Hughes and promoted Watson. :confused: I am assuming that will mean they are going to tamper with the batting line-up. Hussey to open?

[TheEastTerrace]

Think we're looking at a four day Test match here. Inspection at 12pm but that means that they are not likely to get out before 1pm. Weather prediction is a shocker though, so wouldn't surprise me if it gets rained off today.

As for the teams, Hughes looks like he will be dropped and Hussey moved up the order to open. Watson to come in at 6 and everyone above shuffle up one place. England will be delighted if Johnson plays as well, although Ponting will use him sparingly I suspect.

[Tomsk]

Think we're looking at a four day Test match here. Inspection at 12pm but that means that they are not likely to get out before 1pm. Weather prediction is a shocker though, so wouldn't surprise me if it gets rained off today.

As for the teams, Hughes looks like he will be dropped and Hussey moved up the order to open. Watson to come in at 6 and everyone above shuffle up one place. England will be delighted if Johnson plays as well, although Ponting will use him sparingly I suspect.

Question: is Watson being brought in to shore up the batting or the bowling? :wink:

[TheEastTerrace]

Question: is Watson being brought in to shore up the batting or the bowling? :wink:

I would suggest it could be a bit of both. Reports were that he had a good game against Northants and he's handy with the ball. I think Siddle will be promoted to open the bowling with Hilfenhaus, with Watson and Hauritz in support. They can always turn to Katich or Clarke for a bit of spin.

The Aussies did themselves no favours by bringing only two openers.

[Hank Schrader]

Watson I am sure will open the batting for Australia, he has done so for Queensland in the past.

[Tomsk]

Watson I am sure will open the batting for Australia, he has done so for Queensland in the past.

With a top score of about 15 and average of about 3.

[Mibbes Aye]

With a top score of about 15 and average of about 3.

Watson's intriguing IMO. He's a relatively decent opener in the one-day game and although that's a different approach, were he to find some success in this series at the top of the order then it has the potential to completely change Australia's selection strategy. He's as injury-prone as they come though.

[Hibbie_Cameron]

The weather and the late injury to Hadden hand further advantage to England, everything just seems to be going wrong for the Aussies so far

[Mibbes Aye]

The weather and the late injury to Hadden hand further advantage to England, everything just seems to be going wrong for the Aussies so far

Would have to disagree. Australia scored at over four an over this evening, in no part due to some very slack English bowling. I know the weather forecast isn't great for the closing days but it's decent for tomorrow, where if the match isn't decided, at least one outcome could be ruled out.

Good day for Australia today, even if it was limited to one session. And a very good day for Shane Watson (and arguably more so for Ponting and the selectors). If, for the sake of argument, he had been dismissed early it would have had a big impact on proceedings in this match and the series and very much led to intense questioning of their credibility.

Losing Haddin is a blow though - he's come in and replaced a very good keeper and a rather unique batsman, yet done it calmly and confidently and shown a fair bit talent. Don't know an awful lot about Manou, but the Aussies seem to have a conveyor belt of unflustered, hard-grafting keepers so we'll see I suppose.

[Hank Schrader]

With a top score of about 15 and average of about 3.

Made not a bad fist of it....but he must have still been asleep this morning facing that first ball!!! :greengrin

[LiverpoolHibs]

Australia crumble to 203-8. Quite literally the perfect morning for England.

[Houchy]

Trying to get into it but don't understand it to be honest. I thought the idea was to twat the ball as hard as you could, and get more runs than the other team, however, how come 1 team can end up with more points but it's still a draw???

And don't get me started on the declaration thing... "yeah, we've got enough points now, we'll call it a day"... WHY??? Why not keep playing to try and get more runs?

[Mibbes Aye]

Trying to get into it but don't understand it to be honest. I thought the idea was to twat the ball as hard as you could, and get more runs than the other team, however, how come 1 team can end up with more points but it's still a draw???

And don't get me started on the declaration thing... "yeah, we've got enough points now, we'll call it a day"... WHY??? Why not keep playing to try and get more runs?

To win you have to completely bowl your opponents out twice as well as scoring more runs.

So you could score as many runs as you like but if you don't have the ability (or the time) to take twenty wickets (i.e. have your opponents all out in both their innings) then the game will be a draw.

It means that timing becomes crucial. Likewise using the declaration. You want to give yourself enough time to let your bowlers take wickets. You might also want to declare on a score which gives your opponents a chance - if they're playing to win they'll take more risks than if they're seeing out a draw which means more opportunities for you to take wickets.

That's simplifying it a bit - the state of the pitch for example adds a whole extra dimension to any decision-making, as do a bunch of other things. Cricket is routinely described as boring by those who don't like it but in reality there are a huge number of different things going on at any one time.

[PC Stamp]

I can see England winning this one now if the weather holds. 113 ahead after the first innings with 30 or so overs to bowl at the Aussies tonight. The ball appears to be moving so if England can get two or three wickets down tonight then they are in a great position with a day left and good weather forecast.

[Houchy]

To win you have to completely bowl your opponents out twice as well as scoring more runs.

So you could score as many runs as you like but if you don't have the ability (or the time) to take twenty wickets (i.e. have your opponents all out in both their innings) then the game will be a draw.

It means that timing becomes crucial. Likewise using the declaration. You want to give yourself enough time to let your bowlers take wickets. You might also want to declare on a score which gives your opponents a chance - if they're playing to win they'll take more risks than if they're seeing out a draw which means more opportunities for you to take wickets.

That's simplifying it a bit - the state of the pitch for example adds a whole extra dimension to any decision-making, as do a bunch of other things. Cricket is routinely described as boring by those who don't like it but in reality there are a huge number of different things going on at any one time.

Ah, ok, think i'm getting there.

Surely then, if you declare, with 2 or 3 players still to bat , you can't get all your players bowled out and therefore can't lose?

[Mibbes Aye]

Ah, ok, think i'm getting there.

Surely then, if you declare, with 2 or 3 players still to bat , you can't get all your players bowled out and therefore can't lose?

:greengrin Sorry, I've misled you.

I didn't word my explanation well enough - if you declare it is treated the same as being bowled out, from the point of view of your opponents.

Say Australia batted first and declared at 400-5. England then came in and scored 550 all out. If England then bowled Australia out for less than 150 they would win the match. If they bowled Australia out but Australia scored more than 150 second time around, England would still be able to win the match by overtaking Australia's run total.

Generally speaking, teams declare in their first innings because they have built up a big total and want to let their bowlers at the opposition. A declaration in the second-innings is more common though, to free up time for your bowlers to try and win the match.

[Hibs Class]

England win the toss, choose to bat and are 23 for 2 inside the first hour. Flintoff missing this one as well.

[Hibs Class]

Now 42 for 4 - looks like England decided to save Flintoff for the decider!

[Hibs Class]

72 for 6 at lunch - tremendous first session for the Aussies.

[Barney McGrew]

Now seven down, and they've not hit a ton yet.

They'll be praying for rain already.

[Barney McGrew]

Harmison away too.

98-8 :greengrin

[Barney McGrew]

All out for 102

:tee hee:

[Danderhall Hibs]

All out for 102

:tee hee:

Ronnie Irani on TalkSport this morning:


Whoever wins the toss will go into bat and will be looking to score 450-500.

They're still looking then...

[Hibs Class]

This post is taken from the BBc blog on the match:

"I was going to eat up the miles in the gym this afternoon whilst watching England bat themselves into a good solid position (this is in aid of getting fit and trim for my upcoming nuptials). All of a sudden, I have lost the enthusiasm and as a result I will still appear chunky in my wedding photos. Thanks for ruining my life England"

[anon1]

WHY THE **** was Boparar kept on at number 3!?? Is 3 tests of pure ****eness at no. 3 not enough for Andrew 'cautious' Strauss to decide he doesn't warrant his place there!? No Sidebottom at Headingly too.

England deserve all they get in this match. NOTHING!

[Mibbes Aye]

WHY THE **** was Boparar kept on at number 3!?? Is 3 tests of pure ****eness at no. 3 not enough for Andrew 'cautious' Strauss to decide he doesn't warrant his place there!? No Sidebottom at Headingly too.

England deserve all they get in this match. NOTHING!

Was surprised at his initial inclusion at three. The Australians historically had a habit of bringing batsmen in lower down the order and letting them work their way up. Seems to work on the whole.

Watson just gone but only after grabbing another half-century. He's done well with his chance. Great day for Australia, scoring at nearly five an over at the moment but aided by some woefully short English bowling that's getting pulled all over the place.

Be interesting to see if Hussey plays himself in now - he's probably underperformed so far by his standards.

[anon1]

Yeah, absolutely. I'm actually surprised that Australia haven't included both Hussey Brothers. David is proven at first class level & scores serious runs for Notts all the time. He was also in the Australia WC 20/20 side of course and did well from what I recall.

[hibbysam]

England eventually realising that to take wickets at headingly the ball needs to be pitched up, 151-4 now as well as the huge wicket of ponting., game on i say.:agree::agree:

[Mibbes Aye]

Yeah, absolutely. I'm actually surprised that Australia haven't included both Hussey Brothers. David is proven at first class level & scores serious runs for Notts all the time. He was also in the Australia WC 20/20 side of course and did well from what I recall.

He's certainly got a great record with Notts. Wonder if a Trent Bridge Test would have brought him more into the reckoning :devil:

He's not that young for a debutant but that doesn't seem to have been an issue for the Aussie selectors in recent times.

It'll be interesting to see what happens as a result of Watson making a decent fist of opening. I think Hughes is too good a player not to come back from the disappointment of his two Tests over here and in the wings, David Warner is making a name for himself as a batsman as explosive as the likes of Gilchrist was. Simon Katich has improved considerably over recent years and Phil Jaques looked an outstanding talent before injury saw him lose his place.

There's a lot of talent there just competing for two spots and as has always been the case, there'll be a few Australians who could have comfortably been Test regulars who won't because of the competition.

[Sergey]

I liked this play on words, taken from the BBC report on the days play.


The omens that batting might be a struggle came as early as the first ball, when Hilfenhaus swung a ball into Andrew Strauss's pads only to find umpire Billy Bowden reluctant to uphold an lbw appeal that had everything going for it.

That was a shocker of a decision. As plumb an lbw as you'll ever see.

[heretoday]

196-4 Australia closed on. If the sun comes out early doors they'll get a big score.

If it's dull I don't expect them to get that much of a lead and if England get their act together (which they surely will) someone could stick in and get a big one.

Great game!

[Mibbes Aye]

Clark's figures at lunch today:

6.5-3-7-3

:top marks

[--------]

England eventually realising that to take wickets at headingly the ball needs to be pitched up, 151-4 now as well as the huge wicket of ponting., game on i say.:agree::agree:


Really?

4 for 297 already....

That's the hundred up before lunch.

Without loss.

OOOOHHHH DEARRRRR. :devil:

[--------]

4 for 300 now..... :devil:

Clarke's gone - 5 for 302.

[--------]

6 for 370 - Haddin the man out.

Looks like a first-innings lead of 300 plus for the Aussies.


OOOOOOHHHHHH DEAAARRRRRRRRR!!!! :devil:

[--------]

All out 445.

A lead of 343.

Three days and one session to go.

Tufnell - "Tough couple of days at the office for England... Big knock for Bopara coming up..."

Wonderful opportunity for them to become heroes. :devil:

[ancienthibby]

All out 445.

A lead of 343.

Three days and one session to go.

Tufnell - "Tough couple of days at the office for England... Big knock for Bopara coming up..."

Wonderful opportunity for them to become heroes. :devil:

So the Sassenachs are going to lose the last two Tests against the Aussies??

Wonderful, just wonderful!!:devil::devil:

[--------]

So the Sassenachs are going to lose the last two Tests against the Aussies??

Wonderful, just wonderful!!:devil::devil:


Just caught the news.

Mr Kevin Gearey not quite as bumptious as he was last week. :devil:

[--------]

.... and from the looks of things he ain't going to re-inflate any time soon.

:devil:

[Mikey]

They're dropping like flies.

Bopara's been Australia's man of the series :greengrin

[ancienthibby]

They're dropping like flies.

Bopara's been Australia's man of the series :greengrin

74-4 :greengrin:greengrin:greengrin

[--------]

74-4 :greengrin:greengrin:greengrin



"I assure you, this ship is definitely unsinkable." (Captain Smith of 'Titanic', 11.00pm, 14th April 1912)

Blug, blug, blug...... :faf:

[ancienthibby]

"I assure you, this ship is definitely unsinkable." (Captain Smith of 'Titanic', 11.00pm, 14th April 1912)

Blug, blug, blug...... :faf:

78-5

Ma sides are sair!!

Can some kind Aussie no end this agony!

Will they all be out before close?? - There should be no GBH on the Sabbath day!!:devil::devil::devil:

[Mibbes Aye]

Looks like Mitchell Johnson's back :greengrin

The way things are going Brett Lee could miss out on the Oval- if Ponting wants a full-time spinner then two of the pace attack from this Test would have to drop down and that would be harsh.

Good to see Johnson bowling well though - potential to be a genuine all-rounder there.

[--------]

78-5

Ma sides are sair!!

Can some kind Aussie no end this agony!

Will they all be out before close?? - There should be no GBH on the Sabbath day!!:devil::devil::devil:


Looks like Mitchell Johnson's back :greengrin

The way things are going Brett Lee could miss out on the Oval- if Ponting wants a full-time spinner then two of the pace attack from this Test would have to drop down and that would be harsh.

Good to see Johnson bowling well though - potential to be a genuine all-rounder there.



Are they doing this deliberately?

"Well, guys, it was a bit boring last time, winning so easily, so let's give them a start and THEN hammer them...."

:faf:

[--------]

Stumps.

England 261 behind.

5 wickets down, second innings.

"England can win without Float-off," said Onions....

:devil:

[Mibbes Aye]

Are they doing this deliberately?

"Well, guys, it was a bit boring last time, winning so easily, so let's give them a start and THEN hammer them...."

:faf:

:greengrin

It's the beauty of a five-match series I suppose - it allows for every facet to potentially show itself.

England aren't awful as such - they have a few decent players and a few promising ones - but are woefully inconsistent and seem to lack a mental toughness.

Australia have been rebuilding from losing key players - not just any old players but literally some of the greatest the game has known - but also have a depth of talent that maybe isn't as great as their predecessors but who all know fine well that they have to fight like mad for their place otherwise they risk losing it.

Of the Aussie XI at Headingley probably only Ponting, Clarke and Haddin could consider themselves bulletproof for selection for the first Test back home against the Windies. Johnson's probably done enough as has North and I think Katich would be justifiably disappointed to lose out, but the other batsmen couldn't be entirely confident and there are far more bowlers in contention than places.

[Aubenas]

Reasons are obvious: contract your test players out of county cricket but let them play in 20/20 circuses where they either get injured or become sloggers. Then ask them to become mentally tough enough to concentrate in a 5 day Test Match.

P*** up, brewery and organise comes to mind.

[--------]

Reasons are obvious: contract your test players out of county cricket but let them play in 20/20 circuses where they either get injured or become sloggers. Then ask them to become mentally tough enough to concentrate in a 5 day Test Match.

P*** up, brewery and organise comes to mind.


Just watched the highlights, and I'd say you're absolutely on the button.

Benaud: "Bowling is a matter of line and length." So Anderson and Co spray it all over the place and the Aussies take advantage.

Then Strauss and Cook reach 58 without loss, and Strauss (the captain, no less) basically gives away the store. They were moaning about Bopara's wicket, but there was little or no deflection, and the inside edge was about as fine as could be; the other dismissals were comedy cuts.

For years now questions have been raised about the effects of limited overs matches on Test cricketers. The funny thing is, other countries' players play ODI's and 20-20's and still manage to remember that it's different in a Test.

Benaud: "Bowling is a matter of line and length."

So very true, Richie. So very true. Unless you're an Englishman. :faf:

[Mibbes Aye]

Just watched the highlights, and I'd say you're absolutely on the button.

Benaud: "Bowling is a matter of line and length." So Anderson and Co spray it all over the place and the Aussies take advantage.

Then Strauss and Cook reach 58 without loss, and Strauss (the captain, no less) basically gives away the store. They were moaning about Bopara's wicket, but there was little or no deflection, and the inside edge was about as fine as could be; the other dismissals were comedy cuts.

For years now questions have been raised about the effects of limited overs matches on Test cricketers. The funny thing is, other countries' players play ODI's and 20-20's and still manage to remember that it's different in a Test.

Benaud: "Bowling is a matter of line and length."

So very true, Richie. So very true. Unless you're an Englishman. :faf:

Didn't realise Richie Benaud was on the C5 highlights. Will give it a watch on their online thingie :thumbsup:

Man's a genuine legend.

[Mibbes Aye]

Just watched the highlights from the 1st innings - Stuart Clark was bowling sublimely. Replacing Glenn McGrath is impossible but he comes as close as anyone normal could be expected to.

Line, length and then just enough deviation :agree:. Lovely stuff.

EDIT - I had listened to a large part of Ponting's innings but having just watched the highlights it does nothing but reinforce the sense that his batting can be beautiful. The attack he's facing is competent if not overly dangerous but his timing and range are outstanding and his pull shot is a masterclass.

[--------]

Just watched the highlights from the 1st innings - Stuart Clark was bowling sublimely. Replacing Glenn McGrath is impossible but he comes as close as anyone normal could be expected to.

Line, length and then just enough deviation :agree:. Lovely stuff.

EDIT - I had listened to a large part of Ponting's innings but having just watched the highlights it does nothing but reinforce the sense that his batting can be beautiful. The attack he's facing is competent if not overly dangerous but his timing and range are outstanding and his pull shot is a masterclass.


Clark is a very impressive bowler, but tonight Benaud was saying that Johnson is now just coming back to his best form. 'Not there yet' was the old boy's comment, which suggests that Australia will finally have a proper attack just in time for the (probably) deciding Oval Test.

Bowling's basically so simple, as you say: keep line and length, and get the ball moving in the air, off the pitch, use the seam. Do that consistently, and you get wickets. You don't have to be devious or clever. Harmison's a mess, sadly, and Anderson needs to sort out whatever's gone wrong with his action. Oh for the days of Chris Old, Bob Willis and Geoff Arnold, with Phil Edmondes and Derek Underwood as the spinners.

And I agree, Ricky Ponting's one of those batsmen who raise batting to the level of an art-form. But I think he can pack his pads away for the rest of this match. he won't need them again until the Oval.

[--------]

8-244.

Well, at least the deficit's down to double figures now.

Just as well some of the bowlers are better batsmen than the batsmen....

Broad and Swann put on 108 for the 8th wicket? Shurely shome mishtake.... :devil:

[--------]

All out 259.

If it hadn't been for Broad and Swann, it would have been much, much worse.

Batsmen 3,4, and 5 for England all scored in single figures in each innings - first time ever in a test match and a pretty pathetic statistic.

Flintoff and Panesar back for the Oval - have to be.

[heretoday]

I'm sure Monty will be back as the Oval takes spin. The Aussies will have their man back too but who do they leave out? Probably Clark as he only came in for this test and looked a bit laboured at times.

I have a funny feeling England are going to win the Ashes. They will have to summon up the blood but they have the talent.

[Mibbes Aye]

I'm sure Monty will be back as the Oval takes spin. The Aussies will have their man back too but who do they leave out? Probably Clark as he only came in for this test and looked a bit laboured at times.

I have a funny feeling England are going to win the Ashes. They will have to summon up the blood but they have the talent.

Think you will be right about Clark. I've got a lot of time for him but Hilfenhaus and Siddle have done little enough wrong, in fact I believe they are the only two bowlers from either side averaging below thirty at the moment. Johnson seems to have found his way again and it's hard to see Hauritz not getting the nod.

It's obviously not beyond England - the Oval can sometimes reward certain bowlers very heavily and who knows, Onions might suddenly discover he's writing his name into the history books.....

Throw in that Flintoff may return and the possibility of a pretty decent bat coming in for Bopara (Rob Key seems to be getting touted) and it's not outwith the realms of possibility. At the same time, Anderson looks like he's carrying an injury and as a bowling unit overall England just aren't performing well. Whereas of the Australian top seven, only Hussey is averaging under forty.

Given that England need the win rather than the draw my money would be nearer Australia at the moment. It's one match though and the pitch and the team selection will be crucial. Interesting piece on one site (might have been Cricinfo), highlighting that trying to prepare a dry and bare wicket would offer the best chance of a result, but given that Hauritz outbowled Swann and Monty combined in Cardiff, it might be the wrong result for England.

[--------]

Think you will be right about Clark. I've got a lot of time for him but Hilfenhaus and Siddle have done little enough wrong, in fact I believe they are the only two bowlers from either side averaging below thirty at the moment. Johnson seems to have found his way again and it's hard to see Hauritz not getting the nod.

It's obviously not beyond England - the Oval can sometimes reward certain bowlers very heavily and who knows, Onions might suddenly discover he's writing his name into the history books.....

Throw in that Flintoff may return and the possibility of a pretty decent bat coming in for Bopara (Rob Key seems to be getting touted) and it's not outwith the realms of possibility. At the same time, Anderson looks like he's carrying an injury and as a bowling unit overall England just aren't performing well. Whereas of the Australian top seven, only Hussey is averaging under forty.

Given that England need the win rather than the draw my money would be nearer Australia at the moment. It's one match though and the pitch and the team selection will be crucial. Interesting piece on one site (might have been Cricinfo), highlighting that trying to prepare a dry and bare wicket would offer the best chance of a result, but given that Hauritz outbowled Swann and Monty combined in Cardiff, it might be the wrong result for England.



Alec Stewart was interviewed on TMS after the match today and was asked by Jon Agnew about this very topic.

AS replied that as captain he had only once asked a groundsman to prepare a specific type of wicket for an England Test - the one-off Test against Sri Lanka in 1998 - qt the Oval.

He asked for a dry, bare wicket. He got it.

That's the match in which Murali took 16 wickets for 220 runs (average 13.75!). Sri Lanka won by 10 wickets.

:devil:

[Hibbyradge]

Given that our dislike of England isn't racist and is confined to our direct sporting rivalry at football and rugby, why do we want them to lose at cricket too?

[heretoday]

Given that our dislike of England isn't racist and is confined to our direct sporting rivalry at football and rugby, why do we want them to lose at cricket too?

Aye there's the rub! England encompasses the UK of course - Mike Denness blah, blah.....

That's what I like about cricket. There is a certain ambiguity about it.

And the slowness of the game itself allows for philosophical whimsy, reading books, doing crosswords, drinking, eating, wandering about etc.

But nothing in sport can compare with the sight of a bowler like Michael Holding or Thommo in full flow, or Shane Warne setting them up and knocking them down. Or Lara on the front foot driving another boundary.

My old dad used to say it was the best game in the world.

Mind you, he played for Elgin City so perhaps his judgement can be called into question!

[GhostofBolivar]

All out 259.

If it hadn't been for Broad and Swann, it would have been much, much worse.

Batsmen 3,4, and 5 for England all scored in single figures in each innings - first time ever in a test match and a pretty pathetic statistic.

Flintoff and Panesar back for the Oval - have to be.

Flintoff may not make it and Panesar... Well. Shane Warne keeps saying he's played 30 tests, but it's one test 30 times. I dunno if he's a matchwinner.

[--------]

Given that our dislike of England isn't racist and is confined to our direct sporting rivalry at football and rugby, why do we want them to lose at cricket too?


When I first watched test cricket, I supported England/MCC regardless of who they were playing.

That, of course was in the days of Brian Johnson, John Arlott, Jim Laker and the like - gentlemen all.

Then the TCCB sold the TV rights to SKY and Channel 4, now Channel 5, and twerps like Mark Nicholas appeared on the scene.

The coverage and commentary changed from being measured, knowledgeable, and balanced, to being partisan and at times totally uniformative - the 'highlights' programmes for this series have been risible in their banality. Thank God for Richie Benaud - the last of the real commentators.

Sadly, even the BBC and TMS are being affected - I listened to the lunchtime discussion on TMS yesterday, and one of the Englishmen in the discussion actually said that Broad and Swann's wee flourish - too little, far too late - demonstrated 'parity' between the sides. The one Aussie on air exploded, "Have you seen the match stats?" and then pointed out quite rightly that B & S would have been extremely unlikely to have batted with such freedom if the match hadn't been already well done-and-dusted long before their arrival at the crease.

The way that the ECB have been using 'Jerusalem' to start each day's play, while showing that trailer of Floatoff allegedly rapping the ball off Australian face-guards, the encouragement of the crowd to abuse Ponting and other Australian batsmen, the hooray-Henries prematurely celebrating another 2005, aqll the bollox that went on in 2005 about the last Ashes win - which led directly to the total debacle in Australia in the following series - I just don't like it and won't support it.

Once upon a time cricket was presented in a calmer, more civilised way than football or rugby. The orcs have taken over, unfortunately, and I can't and won't support them.

Best case scenario, IMO, would be for Floatoff to pass a fitness test - just - on the morning of the first day, then break down in his second over having been hit for 18 off 8 balls, then take no further part in the match.

Great all-rounder - aye, right. Great all-rounder means Sobers, Botham, Imran, Kapil Dev or Hadlee. Floatoff's not fit to polish any one of those guys' Oliver Cromwell.

And when I think of Bedi, or Lance Gibbs, or Derek Underwood, or Shane Warne, or Murali....

Bring back Bob Key and Ashley Giles is what I say. :devil:

[heretoday]

When I first watched test cricket, I supported England/MCC regardless of who they were playing.

That, of course was in the days of Brian Johnson, John Arlott, Jim Laker and the like - gentlemen all.

Then the TCCB sold the TV rights to SKY and Channel 4, now Channel 5, and twerps like Mark Nicholas appeared on the scene.

The coverage and commentary changed from being measured, knowledgeable, and balanced, to being partisan and at times totally uniformative - the 'highlights' programmes for this series have been risible in their banality. Thank God for Richie Benaud - the last of the real commentators.

Sadly, even the BBC and TMS are being affected - I listened to the lunchtime discussion on TMS yesterday, and one of the Englishmen in the discussion actually said that Broad and Swann's wee flourish - too little, far too late - demonstrated 'parity' between the sides. The one Aussie on air exploded, "Have you seen the match stats?" and then pointed out quite rightly that B & S would have been extremely unlikely to have batted with such freedom if the match hadn't been already well done-and-dusted long before their arrival at the crease.

The way that the ECB have been using 'Jerusalem' to start each day's play, while showing that trailer of Floatoff allegedly rapping the ball off Australian face-guards, the encouragement of the crowd to abuse Ponting and other Australian batsmen, the hooray-Henries prematurely celebrating another 2005, aqll the bollox that went on in 2005 about the last Ashes win - which led directly to the total debacle in Australia in the following series - I just don't like it and won't support it.

Once upon a time cricket was presented in a calmer, more civilised way than football or rugby. The orcs have taken over, unfortunately, and I can't and won't support them.

Best case scenario, IMO, would be for Floatoff to pass a fitness test - just - on the morning of the first day, then break down in his second over having been hit for 18 off 8 balls, then take no further part in the match.

Great all-rounder - aye, right. Great all-rounder means Sobers, Botham, Imran, Kapil Dev or Hadlee. Floatoff's not fit to polish any one of those guys' Oliver Cromwell.

And when I think of Bedi, or Lance Gibbs, or Derek Underwood, or Shane Warne, or Murali....

Bring back Bob Key and Ashley Giles is what I say. :devil:

There's a lot to take in here. I agree with your central point about the ruination of cricket since it's fallen into the hands of the Philistines but I have to say that times change and good old cricket has had to change too. You cannot get away from that.

You mention Sobers - well one of the bad sights of this recent era was him, Botham, Richards et al drooling over a big pile of 20/20 cash in front of the world's press. I thought:"This is it. If Sobers has surrendered then there is no hope."

Yesterday, Botham made a crass remark about the tailenders averages being better than the top bats. He is silly sometimes with, I think, a lot of chippyness about the powers-that-be or his own demons, whatever.

Mind you, England could do with him next week, or his fellow commentator Gower. What a batsman he was!

[--------]

There's a lot to take in here. I agree with your central point about the ruination of cricket since it's fallen into the hands of the Philistines but I have to say that times change and good old cricket has had to change too. You cannot get away from that.

You mention Sobers - well one of the bad sights of this recent era was him, Botham, Richards et al drooling over a big pile of 20/20 cash in front of the world's press. I thought:"This is it. If Sobers has surrendered then there is no hope."

Yesterday, Botham made a crass remark about the tailenders averages being better than the top bats. He is silly sometimes with, I think, a lot of chippyness about the powers-that-be or his own demons, whatever.

Mind you, England could do with him next week, or his fellow commentator Gower. What a batsman he was!


Yup. That rather upset me, too. Although when one considers how little Sobers and Richards made from the game, despite their towering talents, it may be understandable.

I don't mind folks playing 20/20 and ODI's and so one, really. I got hooked on the game watching the old 40-over John Player League on Sunday afternoons on BBC2 with my dad. Then the 1972 Ashes Series (and a very patient, knowledgeable friend explaining things to me) converted me to Test cricket, and I've never looked back.

But I DON'T see that the game has to be presented in such a crass and obnoxious way. Bad enough the way this series has been sold - some of the comments from certain sources during past series against the Windies, India, Pakistan, Sri lanka (are you catching my drift?) have been less than palatable - nothing you can actually complain about, but just not quite 'right', if you know what I mean.

Mind you, when you think of some of the jolly japes people like WG Grace got up to in the 1880's and 1890's, I suppose the game's actually returning to its roots....

[PC Stamp]

Given that our dislike of England isn't racist and is confined to our direct sporting rivalry at football and rugby, why do we want them to lose at cricket too?

Cos many of our ancestors got sent to Australia int' old days for being naughty? :wink:

[--------]

Cos many of our ancestors got sent to Australia int' old days for being naughty? :wink:


If you read a good account of the early MCC tours of Australia - especially the Grace tours, you begin to wonder whether they actually sent the honest men out to the colonies and kept the crooks at home.

In 1873-74 (Grace's first tour) Harry Jupp (who was listed to open the batting with Grace) nearly missed the boat having slept in having got drunk the night before. Between Melbourne and Adelaide (a sea-crossing) he got at the brandy a second time, went into a spectacular fit of the DT's, and had to be incarcerated in a 'padded room' when they got ashore. Young boys, he claimed, were dancing on his head.

An England opening batsman lodged in a rubber room and wearing a strait-waistcoat, fantasising about young boys.... :rolleyes:

On the same tour, Grace's brother Fred first went AWOL in Tasmania (allegedly chasing skirt), then fell out big time with the Australian press, accusing them of ignorance of the game - 'no judges of cricket'. This was after he had been involved in a monumental bust up with an umpire over whether a ball had gone for 4. He claimed (falsely, lying in his teeth) that he'd fielded it. Everyone else in the ground but himself and W G knew very well he'd done no such thing.

W G Grace himself disputed umpires' decisions and bent the rules as far as he possibly could without breaking them (just). And on ALL his tours there were repeated suspicions of financial irregularities - the good doctor wasn't above laying bets with the local bookies regarding the outcome of matches he himself was playing in, or pocketing 'expenses' (he was an amateur and a 'gentleman', remember) to which he was only very dubiously entitled.

Not that he'd ever have thrown a match - maybe. But he'd certainly have dropped a couple of catches deliberately, or got himself out unnecessarily on purpose after the game was won, if it won him a wager.... :devil:

On a later tour, Grace contracted for 14 matches at a set fee; then at the end of the tour set up an unscheduled 15th match with a local promoter - and guess who got the lion's share of the profits? :cool2:

His arrogance on the first tour in 73-74 was one of the main reason that England-Australia cricket matches have been such ill-tempered and bad-spirited affairs ever since.

Another brother, Gilbert, also a cricketer, later did 28 days hard labour for theft, and was packed off as a remittance-man to Calgary.

Have you read Simon Rae's autobiography of The Doctor? Cracking read. :aok:

[heretoday]

I bow to your erudition Sir!

There is nothing like the game of cricket to be sure.

[heretoday]

To be sure!

[--------]

I bow to your erudition Sir!

There is nothing like the game of cricket to be sure.


I just amuses me when folks who don't know the game imagine it's played by wimps and chinless wonders muttering things like "Oh, I say!" and "That's not cricket, sir!"

I can JUST remember when the MCC decided to do away with the distinction between 'players' and 'gentlemen' (or 'professionals' and 'amateurs') on the team lists. It was a bit like Roogby League and 'Ruggah' - you had the 'toffs' who didn't take wages (but were reimbursed their 'expenses' - usually a lot more generously than the professionals were paid), and the working chaps who played cricket for a living and were patronised by the 'toffs'. But unlike Ruggah and Roogby League, the toffs and the working chaps were all on the same pitch (though they didn't share dressing-rooms, of course....)

There was Public School and 'Varsity' cricket ('play, play up, play up and play the game...') on the one hand, and the Lancashire League and the like on the other. And then the County committees....

And the ever-present shifty wee men who'd happily take your money and give you odds on Truman taking 5 wickets in an afternoon, or Hobbs still being in at stumps.

But the penny dropped on me a long time ago that anyone who's prepared to stand up in front of 20,000 spectators or more and let Fred Truman or Michael Holding or Jeff Thompson or Glenn McGrath (or Marshall, Holding, Garner and Croft all in the one stiffin team) heave a cricket ball at him at 95 miles an hour six times in 5 minutes ain't no wimp....

You HAVE heard of the great Australian female fast bowler, of course?

Lilian Thompson. :devil:

[heretoday]

I just amuses me when folks who don't know the game imagine it's played by wimps and chinless wonders muttering things like "Oh, I say!" and "That's not cricket, sir!"

I can JUST remember when the MCC decided to do away with the distinction between 'players' and 'gentlemen' (or 'professionals' and 'amateurs') on the team lists. It was a bit like Roogby League and 'Ruggah' - you had the 'toffs' who didn't take wages (but were reimbursed their 'expenses' - usually a lot more generously than the professionals were paid), and the working chaps who played cricket for a living and were patronised by the 'toffs'. But unlike Ruggah and Roogby League, the toffs and the working chaps were all on the same pitch (though they didn't share dressing-rooms, of course....)

There was Public School and 'Varsity' cricket ('play, play up, play up and play the game...') on the one hand, and the Lancashire League and the like on the other. And then the County committees....

And the ever-present shifty wee men who'd happily take your money and give you odds on Truman taking 5 wickets in an afternoon, or Hobbs still being in at stumps.

But the penny dropped on me a long time ago that anyone who's prepared to stand up in front of 20,000 spectators or more and let Fred Truman or Michael Holding or Jeff Thompson or Glenn McGrath (or Marshall, Holding, Garner and Croft all in the one stiffin team) heave a cricket ball at him at 95 miles an hour six times in 5 minutes ain't no wimp....

You HAVE heard of the great Australian female fast bowler, of course?

Lilian Thompson. :devil:

Excellent post which more or less sums it all up. I wouldn't like to face Lilian Thompson when she's got a bit of a dander up!

Funny you mention the "wimp" factor. Lots of people in this country consider Baseball to be just "Like Rounders".

Well I dunno but when I played Rounders at my posh school there wasn't a six foot ten bloke called Randy slinging a hard ball at over 90 MPH at my head!

I guess that's why they wear helmets!

[--------]

Excellent post which more or less sums it all up. I wouldn't like to face Lilian Thompson when she's got a bit of a dander up!

Funny you mention the "wimp" factor. Lots of people in this country consider Baseball to be just "Like Rounders".

Well I dunno but when I played Rounders at my posh school there wasn't a six foot ten bloke called Randy slinging a hard ball at over 90 MPH at my head!

I guess that's why they wear helmets!


Clive Lloyd walking out at Lords in the first WC Final with Lilian in full flow, Fredericks, Kalli and Greenidge gone, score 3 for 50.

Is he bothered? Not really.

IIRC he was wearing a sunhat and whistling a happy tune.

Puts on 149 with Kanhai, own score 102 from 108 balls. Twelve 4's, two 6's.

THAT was intestinal fortitude IMO.


But what I'd REALLY like to see is one of those people (even now) trying to tell Merv Hughes he's a poof. :devil:

[JimBHibees]

Given that our dislike of England isn't racist and is confined to our direct sporting rivalry at football and rugby, why do we want them to lose at cricket too?

Much prefer England to beat the Aussies at cricket to be honest. Cant stand the arrogance of guys like Ponting, Warne, McGrath et al, ad love to see them gubbed. Cant see England winning the last test but genuinely hope they do.

[JimBHibees]

I just amuses me when folks who don't know the game imagine it's played by wimps and chinless wonders muttering things like "Oh, I say!" and "That's not cricket, sir!"

I can JUST remember when the MCC decided to do away with the distinction between 'players' and 'gentlemen' (or 'professionals' and 'amateurs') on the team lists. It was a bit like Roogby League and 'Ruggah' - you had the 'toffs' who didn't take wages (but were reimbursed their 'expenses' - usually a lot more generously than the professionals were paid), and the working chaps who played cricket for a living and were patronised by the 'toffs'. But unlike Ruggah and Roogby League, the toffs and the working chaps were all on the same pitch (though they didn't share dressing-rooms, of course....)

There was Public School and 'Varsity' cricket ('play, play up, play up and play the game...') on the one hand, and the Lancashire League and the like on the other. And then the County committees....

And the ever-present shifty wee men who'd happily take your money and give you odds on Truman taking 5 wickets in an afternoon, or Hobbs still being in at stumps.

But the penny dropped on me a long time ago that anyone who's prepared to stand up in front of 20,000 spectators or more and let Fred Truman or Michael Holding or Jeff Thompson or Glenn McGrath (or Marshall, Holding, Garner and Croft all in the one stiffin team) heave a cricket ball at him at 95 miles an hour six times in 5 minutes ain't no wimp....

You HAVE heard of the great Australian female fast bowler, of course?

Lilian Thompson. :devil:

During the Ashes series on Sky, they had an excellent review of the series Lillee and Thompson demolished England in Australia. Some of the footage was absolutely brutal with none of the helmets and padding they wear now. David Lloyd got a ferocious ball straight into his inadequate light plastic box, which split due to the ferocity of the bowl and dug into his leg, causing a deep wound.

They mentioned that there were so many English batsmen injured that Mike Denness called home for a replacement in the form of the ever so posh Colin Cowdrey, future Lord Cowdrey. Cowdrey was 'frightfully delighted' to help out. His first game he comes out and introduces himself to Jeff Thompson, 'Mr Thompson, I presume'. Thompson laughs and bellows, 'thats not going to ffing help you, Fatty'. :greengrin

[--------]

During the Ashes series on Sky, they had an excellent review of the series Lillee and Thompson demolished England in Australia. Some of the footage was absolutely brutal with none of the helmets and padding they wear now. David Lloyd got a ferocious ball straight into his inadequate light plastic box, which split due to the ferocity of the bowl and dug into his leg, causing a deep wound.

They mentioned that there were so many English batsmen injured that Mike Denness called home for a replacement in the form of the ever so posh Colin Cowdrey, future Lord Cowdrey. Cowdrey was 'frightfully delighted' to help out. His first game he comes out and introduces himself to Jeff Thompson, 'Mr Thompson, I presume'. Thompson laughs and bellows, 'thats not going to ffing help you, Fatty'. :greengrin


Ah, Thommo and his old-world demon-bowler charm. :faf:

IIRC 'Fatty' didn't last long, either....

Puts me in mind of the way Fred Truman once introduced himself to a visiting team at Headingley.

He stuck his head round the dressing-room door, glowered at the assembled company, and announced, "I need nine wickets today, so you buggers better start drawing straws to see which one of you I don't get." And disappeared.

(He didn't get the nine, but he got a few. :devil: )

[Mibbes Aye]

Sounds like a fantastic catch from Katich off Bell - could the momentum change? :greengrin