The Ashes
-
So... anyone think the bullshit about not enforcing the follow on is just crap?
So VVS made mincemeat of you 20 years ago ... in India... on a road ...
... and you're rested ... on a cool evening ... with a pink ball at night ....
Dumb.
As dumb Joe Root electing to bowl.
-
Can someone clarify for me? Why was the first Smith LBW not an umpires call with the pitch of the ball given part of the ball was in line with leg?
Are there different rules for that because it isn't a prediction of the balls path rather a record of it's actual pitch? -
Can someone clarify for me? Why was the first Smith LBW not an umpires call with the pitch of the ball given part of the ball was in line with leg?
Are there different rules for that because it isn't a prediction of the balls path rather a record of it's actual pitch?I think it's the proportion of the ball that is judged to be in line with whatever.
-
So... anyone think the bullshit about not enforcing the follow on is just crap?
So VVS made mincemeat of you 20 years ago ... in India... on a road ...
... and you're rested ... on a cool evening ... with a pink ball at night ....
Dumb.
As dumb Joe Root electing to bowl.
Ha! Was just logging in to post that. Was surprised when Oz didn’t enforce the follow on under lights, and unsurprised to wake up to 53/4.
Maybe one day Oz will get over 2001...
-
The non enforcement of the follow on isn't dumb because the Aussies already have enough runs to win.
Another 50 from here makes the game safe.Best 4th innings there is 233 in 2003 pre ground development.
At this stage oz are miles in front of the test. The follow on thing ain't that relevant in my opinion
-
The problem with enforcing the follow-on is if the other team bats well you find yourself batting last in the most difficult conditions, under all sorts of pressure. In this case it made sense given the new ball under lights, but I can see why teams are more reluctant nowadays given the way pitches can flatten out during the middle stages of a test.
-
Hindsight is a marvellous thing. Smith would obviously regret not enforcing, like Root would regret not batting first.
But that analysis is too simple. England bowled beautifully last night. Only a handful of loose deliveries in 27 overs. If they'd bowled like that on the first morning we'd have a very different game.
Australia could have had England 4-50. Or they could be a bit ragged and let England get to 1-80. On a flattish pitch they set us 150, which we have to chase... under lights.
Root's decision to bowl was negated by his own bowlers, much like Smith's decision to bat was negated by his fragile top order.
First hour is critical. We get through with only 1-2 down then we can push the lead out to 300+, but there's a chance we're skittled quickly and then it's game on.
-
-
-
@catogrande said in The Ashes:
Well this could get interesting. Starc is putting down a couple of crackers each over, and following it with shit.
Lyon is all over left- and right-handers, but nothing is sticking.
Poms could do this... or collapse in a screaming heap.
I'll go for option two please.
In the balance. I'm thinking 60-40 Aus wins. (Maybe 65-35).
Root still there after the evening session. That is yuuge.
Not to follow on is STIILL a shit decision. I have to disagree with you @Siam. Putting yourself at the mercy of Jimmy Anderson with a pink ball in the evening just opened the door. They may get away with it but I still don't see any logic.
-
@catogrande said in The Ashes:
Well this could get interesting. Starc is putting down a couple of crackers each over, and following it with shit.
Lyon is all over left- and right-handers, but nothing is sticking.
Poms could do this... or collapse in a screaming heap.
I'll go for option two please.
In the balance. I'm thinking 60-40 Aus wins. (Maybe 65-35).
Root still there after the evening session. That is yuuge.
Not to follow on is STIILL a shit decision. I have to disagree with you @Siam. Putting yourself at the mercy of Jimmy Anderson with a pink ball in the evening just opened the door. They may get away with it but I still don't see any logic.
Just proves crybaby Smith isn’t as clever as he thinks he is.
Likely to get away with it but at the very least they have given guys like Anderson some confidence that they can knock over the Aussie batsmen -
Just proves crybaby Smith isn’t as clever as he thinks he is.
If he wins, he is.
England have shown a bit more spine, and discipline, with bat and ball in the last 48 hours. If we had enforced the follow on and bowled like this, we'd be 130-odd overs into it, with heightened risk of injury and fatigue to our bowling attack with half a series to play.
Whichever way this match ends up, it's still comforting to know you're a bitter little man when it comes to everything Australian.
-
This match is superbly poised. Was gripping viewing last night. Root is so far ahead of the other English batsmen in technique and he needed a bit of luck. Really hard to predict how today will go - but Root has to bat through or at least bat long enough to get close so the tail can hit out. These chases tend to have a life of their own the closer they get - batsmen get more nervous and so do bowlers.
I'm thinking England will do it but Root edging his first ball today to the keeper may make me change my mind ...
-
-
Aussies in a cake walk. Only Root is any good. I reckon Aussies by 90ish.
I watched most of the night session last night, was good cricket to watch, even with an old ball.
Love day/night tests and the uncertainty that is brought by the newness of the ball at the time the sun goes down.
I'd imagine, I'm not that old, it must be like the old days of uncovered pitches when sometimes teams would reverse batting orders while wicket was still sticky.
-
@catogrande said in The Ashes:
Well this could get interesting. Starc is putting down a couple of crackers each over, and following it with shit.
Lyon is all over left- and right-handers, but nothing is sticking.
Poms could do this... or collapse in a screaming heap.
I'll go for option two please.
In the balance. I'm thinking 60-40 Aus wins. (Maybe 65-35).
.
Sorry I would have Oz at 85% minimum. I'd be very happy to be proved wrong but Aussie need effectively 3 wickets because the rest will contribute about 30 runs.
-
@catogrande said in The Ashes:
Well this could get interesting. Starc is putting down a couple of crackers each over, and following it with shit.
Lyon is all over left- and right-handers, but nothing is sticking.
Poms could do this... or collapse in a screaming heap.
I'll go for option two please.
In the balance. I'm thinking 60-40 Aus wins. (Maybe 65-35).
.
Sorry I would have Oz at 85% minimum. I'd be very happy to be proved wrong but Aussie need effectively 3 wickets because the rest will contribute about 30 runs.
May be a touch of wishful thinking but this c ould go either way.
