View Full Version : The Ashes 3rd Test: Old Trafford, 11th-15th August
1-1 in the Ashes with this, a pivotal second test in two back-to-back next up.
England have the momentum after the amazing 2nd test. Fred is in form, Gilo got some wickets, KP doing his stuff, even Bell and Hoggie did something! In fact, only really Mikey vaughan and Brockett Vs. spin we need worry about?
If a team has one the first tests in back to back ones, they rarely ever lose (in fact stats may show they never do, or even always win) the second.
BUT the pitch will spin and the Ozzies have Warne.
What do we need to do between now and then? Practice some more with merlin the machine, and try and get mikey in some kind of form, or tell him not to get out stupidly if he does get set (first innings at Edgbaston)! In fact, he got two centuries here last year, didn't he?
Last year's match there Vs. Windies:
http://live.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2004/WI_IN_ENG/SCORECARDS/WI_ENG_T3_12-16AUG2004.html
The corresponding Ashes match of 8 years ago:
http://live.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1997/AUS_IN_ENG/SCORECARDS/AUS_ENG_T3_03-07JUL1997.html
So, last year no-one got many wickets from spin, and the pitch seemed decent enough to bat on. England gave away a first i8nnings lead, but were strong untile the end. Against the Ozzies 8 years ago, we started well enough, our pace attack blew away the Ozzies. But then Warne struck, and in the second innings our pacers/Croft couldn't hack it, and Australia finished us off with Warne and McGrath.
So, ourt attack is far stronger. There batting is weaker. Our batting is stronger. But Warne is as potent as always, and he himself says the ground is special to him.
I suspect the toss would be good to win - bat first before Warne can do much. Our pace attack, and Gilo should eb able to pose the Ozzies problems too though.
I open it to the floor for some more insightful and varied statements than i can make...
d80s0q
I'm still a bit concerned about Vaughan's batting, I think in am correct in saying that his last three dismisses he was bowled in them all. He just isn't staying long enough at the crease to try and get into form.
The bowling looks OK, but I can't but help wondering what kind of a pitch Old Trafford will produce, will is suit Giles spin bowling ?
Is McGrath definitely out of this one, does anyone know how he is doing or rather how he isn't doing ;)
Vaughan is a concern - he appears to be miss judging the length of the ball and has expected the ball to bounce higher than it did, twice out jumping in his crease, not sure if it's a nervous act or something he does when he starts his innings.
Pidge is a doubt for the final test to be honest, I wouldn't expect him back at all in the series, certainly not until the final one anyway. He is doing gentle excercise but certainly not enough at the moment to "test" how the healing is going.
Word is that Gillespie might be dropped along with Katich and Maccer and possibly Tait coming in for the next Test. Not sure myself.
From what I have hear about Tait is that he is very fast perhaps as quick as Brett Lee but he is also goes for a few runs so it could be a massive gamble if Australia were to replace Gillespie for him.
By the way, nice website you have there :)
.... Inside knowledge perhaps? :suspect: :suspect: :suspect:
As said in the other thread, aside from Vaughan's batting, Bell is of concern. Although he did go out to a dubious decision, with Colly in form, you have to wonder if he is under threat. Colly would also give us an additional bowler to launch into the attack. One of the things that worked well at Edgbaston was being able to vary the attack.
Hoggie needs to work on his bowling, far too wayward and seemed little threat. Hopefully the press will lay into the King of Spain as it seemed to pay off as he responded to his critics.
McGrath being out is important, and I think that Dizzy is on the way out. You also have to wonder whether they will stick with Hayden after his poor showing so far.
From what I have hear about Tait is that he is very fast perhaps as quick as Brett Lee but he is also goes for a few runs so it could be a massive gamble if Australia were to replace Gillespie for him.
By the way, nice website you have there :)
Thanks Alan, I've tried to be as impartial as possible !! Today was hard !!! lol
Tait is fast, very fast and is the long term replacement for Australia. He has an unusual action, slinging if you will and isvery awkward to play if he is on form. It would be a massive gamble.
There is also rumblings that Shane Watson may be called in as cover for McGrath but I'm not sure.
My idea on The Ashes is quite controversial. The Aussies have won every series since 1989. Let them have the trophy. The actual Ashes trophy, not a replica - the original.
I know the MCC says they are "too fragile" to travel - but the Aussies have won them fair and square for the last 17 years ; it might actually give our guys something to play for. A little extra pride to swell their performance.
Controversial - but there you go.
I agree and I am sure we have had this debate on here before, the winners of the series should get the actual ashes not the replica. This whole 'they are too fragile travel' line is just an excuse, albeit a poor one..
Adam Thirnis
07-08-2005, 22:20
England's batting is suspect.
Trescothick, Pietersen and Flintoff are okay but Vaughan is woefully out of form. Strauss and unfortunately Bell have built reputations against weaker opposition but frankly I can't see them getting runs this series - Strauss showed he hasn't a clue about Warne and Bell just isn't up to the job. Vaughan hasn't been the same player since he stopped opening.
It's a shame Butcher is injured and Thorpe retired. Ideally the top 6 should be Trescothick, Vaughan, Thorpe, Butcher, Pietersen, Flintoff.
I would like to throw Owais Shah's name into the ring .
The question is: do you stick with a winning side?
The way the first two tests have gone (i.e. not making it to the final day), I would be seriously considering putting in some attacking players. Bell may well have to be sacrificed for Collingwood as there has been need for attacking play.
The question is: do you stick with a winning side?
The way the first two tests have gone (i.e. not making it to the final day), I would be seriously considering putting in some attacking players. Bell may well have to be sacrificed for Collingwood as there has been need for attacking play.
I'd say that you stick with a winning side when the entire side is part of the winning - otherwise you replace dead wood to make the side even better. Yes England won - but it was very close and let's face it the entire team didn't do the winning - a few select players did that.
Also in this case I wouldn't not make changes based on the winning per se because it was not a resounding win.
I wonder who Warne's 600th victim will be! A true milestone coming up!
There's no way Bell will be dropped, at least for the next test anyway. The selectors like him and hes improved in every innings so far. His performance in the first test was poor and he was unlucky in both innings of the second, the only way he'll improve is to keep playing against the best.
Collingwood will only get to play on Thursday is if one of the bowlers are dropped and I cant really see that happening. I expect an unchanged side to be named, but Bell, S Jones and Hoggard all need to put in good performances to guarantee their places for the forth test
Heard this morning from the england camp [on BBC 5 live] that the same 11 will definately start. Pity as i dont have much confidence in G. Jones [surely Chris Reid deserves a go?]
Collingwood shoudl also be in there - in great nick with the bat and can fill in a few overs too. i would have him in for bell like a shot.
Collingwood reminds me of a right hand version of Neil Fairbrother, great in the field classed as a one day specialist. Fairbrother should have played more tests imo.
http://content.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/12803.html
Didn't realise Fairbrother's test ave was that low.
Is Flintoff's shoulder definitely ok?
I would say the Ozzies playing Tait is a good idea. I mean, he may go for runs, but either gillespie/Kasper just can't take wickets or look consistently threatening. They will go for runs too, but never look like taking wickets.
I think Bell should stay - he was looking good in the second innings, really good. A big reason for keeping him is that if he can do it against the Ozzies, he'll be set for his career.
The only problem with Strauss (Saffies poor team? Second in the world untila round a year ago...) is that it means Vaughan ahs had to move to number 3, a position he should eb ideally suited to but just can't quite seem to get it working. Ho hum, his Captaincy is too good for it to be a major issue...
d80s0q
']Is Flintoff's shoulder definitely ok?
Yeah.
d80s0q
Stone Cold
08-08-2005, 10:25
I think the Aussies should give Tait a go...you'll never know how good he'll be at this level if you don't play him.
If I was an Aussie selector I'd be very worried going into the next test with Gillespie AND Kasprowicz. I think they could go for a hell of a lot of runs at the moment, especially with England on a high.
I would say the Ozzies playing Tait is a good idea. I mean, he may go for runs, but either gillespie/Kasper just can't take wickets or look consistently threatening. They will go for runs too, but never look like taking wickets.
d80s0q
The faster they are, the quicker they go. Brett Lee went for over 5 an over the first innings, even though he managed to pull it back in the second.
I'd pick someone with control anyday over pace.
poissony
08-08-2005, 11:16
By the way, nice website you have there :)
Taking it OT slightly, I agree it is a good site Warney. Especially since I've now found out that the Bodyline TV series is out on R4 DVD. I remember waching this as a kid and thinking how great it was. Just ordered it :thumbs:
As for the next test, I don't think England will change it.
I think they should change it though with Collingwood coming in for Bell. I also think that Jones has been very poor as a keeper for the first 2 tests and I'd be tempted to bring Read in.
Hoggard does need to improve but I'd still have him in the team and the same applies for Simon Jones because (as the C4 commentary team explained) he's picked to bowl with the old ball as he gets it to reverse swing which he did well in the 1st innings.
I was going to say that the Aussies wouldn't drop Gillespie (someone whose got over 250 test wickets for them I think) but the Aussie selectors can be very ruthless (Langer for Michael Slater for instance) and I think they'll pick the best side they can.
mattwakeman
08-08-2005, 11:22
The faster they are, the quicker they go. Brett Lee went for over 5 an over the first innings, even though he managed to pull it back in the second.
I'd pick someone with control anyday over pace.
Totally agree which is why McGrath is the best quick bowler in the world. Its not how fast they get there, its where they land.
Also I'm glad that England have chosen an unchanged side even though Collingwood has been in great form. Show faith in the 11 because team spirit should never be underestimated and you can't tell me that those 11 players don't feel as though they would run through brick walls for each other at the moment.
As it stands both sides batting is struggling and the first middle order that really fronts up should win the game. Now just have to sweat on McGraths injury and hope that Old Trafford is fast and bouncy and not slow and spinny.
Taking it OT slightly, I agree it is a good site Warney. Especially since I've now found out that the Bodyline TV series is out on R4 DVD. I remember waching this as a kid and thinking how great it was. Just ordered it :thumbs:
Thanks poissony - yes the dvd has been available since June 16th. I didn't think it was the done thing to advertise it on here ! It is a great mini series although historcally inaccurate in parts !!!
MaxNutter
08-08-2005, 11:31
I agree and I am sure we have had this debate on here before, the winners of the series should get the actual ashes not the replica. This whole 'they are too fragile travel' line is just an excuse, albeit a poor one..
the Ashes aren't the MCC's to give away though, are they?
I was going to say that the Aussies wouldn't drop Gillespie (someone whose got over 250 test wickets for them I think) but the Aussie selectors can be very ruthless (Langer for Michael Slater for instance) and I think they'll pick the best side they can.
The Aussie selectors can be ruthless but there were a lot of things in the backroom regarding Langer coming in for Slats and it wasn't jsut batting related. Anyway, I digress! One thing Australia are is consistent in terms of selection and to change two players will be a massive and bold move. If they do go with 6 bat and 5 bowl it would be the first time since the West Indies tour in 2003 I think - I could be wrong.
poissony
08-08-2005, 11:57
Thanks poissony - yes the dvd has been available since June 16th. I didn't think it was the done thing to advertise it on here ! It is a great mini series although historcally inaccurate in parts !!!
Ah well I haven't ordered it from your site so I don't think the advertising part comes into it.
mattwakeman
08-08-2005, 12:03
Thanks poissony - yes the dvd has been available since June 16th. I didn't think it was the done thing to advertise it on here ! It is a great mini series although historcally inaccurate in parts !!!
Now it may be just me because it is a loooooong time since I saw 'Bodyline' but I seem to recall it consisting mainly of evil mustache twisting Englishmen who tie Mrs. Bradman to train tracks whilst plotting how and why they should stop The Don from being allowed to score 476 runs every inning...or am I thinking of something else....
I keed....
The faster they are, the quicker they go. Brett Lee went for over 5 an over the first innings, even though he managed to pull it back in the second.
I'd pick someone with control anyday over pace.
but the point is Gillespie and Kasper aren't very controlled at the minute, are they? Granted Gillespie probably was the cheapest bolwerr, but also very insipid. Kasper most definitely went for runs tho!
d80s0q
talking about "bodyline" at al - do you think HArmy and Fred went on a bit too long bouncing the tailenders on the last day rather than bowler to get their wickets?
Fair does Brett Lee bowls his share and we ceratinly returned the favour to Langer and Hayden but the number he [Lee] got at a stage when the match was slipping away mystified me abit..,..
as for the fast vs accurate debate: it was a dilemma [other politics apart] that we paksters faced with Akhtar and Sami and have finally favoured the fast-med but more accurate bowlers....
talking about "bodyline" at al - do you think HArmy and Fred went on a bit too long bouncing the tailenders on the last day rather than bowler to get their wickets?
Fair does Brett Lee bowls his share and we ceratinly returned the favour to Langer and Hayden but the number he [Lee] got at a stage when the match was slipping away mystified me abit..,..
as for the fast vs accurate debate: it was a dilemma [other politics apart] that we paksters faced with Akhtar and Sami and have finally favoured the fast-med but more accurate bowlers....
I think they were hoping for a wicket whilst they were taking evasive action, or to pepper them with short pitch deliveries and then go for the yorker
the Ashes aren't the MCC's to give away though, are they?
No they are owned by the Darnley's and were presented to the MCC for safekeeping. The ashes were presented to him and as such is a personal item that Lord's loan ! It would be up to the Darnley estate to allow passage from one country to the other and I don't think they are too keen.
mattwakeman
08-08-2005, 13:08
talking about "bodyline" at al - do you think HArmy and Fred went on a bit too long bouncing the tailenders on the last day rather than bowler to get their wickets?
Yes I damn well do! I thought they tried just to blow the tail away rather than just chipping away at off stump and waiting for the mistake that was bound to come. But it is easy to sit in the living room and complain. Hell if I'd have been out there I don't think that I would have been able to run in a straight line let alone think about where to try and land the ball!
But how impressive is this though: 'England's thrilling victory in the second Test was watched by a record audience on Channel 4. On the third day, as 4.1 million viewers tuned in to see Andrew Flintoff take the home side to the brink, the best Saturday ratings for the channel since it was set up 22 years ago.'
Full story at: http://content.cricinfo.com/engvaus/content/story/215423.html
Couple of things from this, 1) Just shows what kind of audience an England success and a great test match can draw in to watch and 2) How clever does the decision by the ECB to sell exclusive rights to Sky look now? Yes they may have got more money up front but Test Cricket is, today, both back and in some cases FRONT page news! Would there be all this coverage in the press if it wasn't available on terrestrial?
I think it was a short-sighted move by the ECB which limits young children (those without Sky anways) from being drawn in, excited and inspired to play the game. And all for a few £...
MaxNutter
08-08-2005, 13:17
No they are owned by the Darnley's and were presented to the MCC for safekeeping. The ashes were presented to him and as such is a personal item that Lord's loan ! It would be up to the Darnley estate to allow passage from one country to the other and I don't think they are too keen.
that's what i thought ... plus there's the matter of what those 'ashes' consist of anyway ...
How clever does the decision by the ECB to sell exclusive rights to Sky look now? Yes they may have got more money up front but Test Cricket is, today, both back and in some cases FRONT page news! Would there be all this coverage in the press if it wasn't available on terrestrial?
1.Sky are exellent at their cricket coverage, would sky show the celebrations after the event live ? Yes they would.
2. Would terrestrial tv show live uninterupted coverage of overseas tour before sky started ? No they wouldn't.
3. Would terrestrial tv go to the horse racing just as Graham Gooch was about to reach his record breacking 300 runs ? Damn yes !!!
4. Viva La $KY !!!!!
5. No Mark Nicholas sounding as though he's about to come whenever Freddie's about.
Brett Lee admitted to hospital with a knee infection, and a doubt for Thursday:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/4133096.stm
mattwakeman
08-08-2005, 18:32
1.Sky are exellent at their cricket coverage, would sky show the celebrations after the event live ? Yes they would.
2. Would terrestrial tv show live uninterupted coverage of overseas tour before sky started ? No they wouldn't.
3. Would terrestrial tv go to the horse racing just as Graham Gooch was about to reach his record breacking 300 runs ? Damn yes !!!
4. Viva La $KY !!!!!
Does everybody have Sky? No they don't.
Terrestrial reaches millions more people than Sky does or probably ever will. And for a national team playing one of our national sports it is shortsighted in the extreme to reduce the potential audience.
I do have a sneaky feeling that when the Sky contract ends digital tv will have penetrated enough homes to make it likely that the BBC will come back in for it.
Also breaking news is that Brett Lee in hospital with an infected knee. Have to wait and see just how bad it is.
Brett Lee admitted to hospital with a knee infection, and a doubt for Thursday:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/4133096.stm Should not smile, but with McGrath out as well, any chance the Pie Man could take a tumble as well? :D
McGrath was looking pretty good in the gym according to the sports report on Central, Sarah-Jane said he might be fit to play Thursday.
mattwakeman
08-08-2005, 19:29
McGrath was looking pretty good in the gym according to the sports report on Central, Sarah-Jane said he might be fit to play Thursday.
The big diff though is the distance between gym work and actually bowling. Even lifting weights is going to use different muscles and place different stresses on his ankle.
AND, if Lee is a risk then do the Aussies really want to walk into a game where they have not one but two bowlers who could break down? There is no way that I would take that gamble if I was picking a side. Of course, Lee could be fine and then you are only taking a risk on one but it should make the next 48 hours a lot of fun.
Poor Aussies eh, never rains till it pours eh :nuts:
Should not smile, but with McGrath out as well, any chance the Pie Man could take a tumble as well? :D
:D
I am more surprised that it is his knee that is giving him bother. Didn't he get hit on his gloves, one of the Sky commentators said he would be lucky to get away without some kind of break.
Isn't it nice to see Australia with a few problems ;)
I haven't heard anything yet about Lee. Did he get a nasty knock on his knee during the test ? I thought he did but I can't remember.
McGrath was in the pool yesterday and walking freely but as MattW said above, there's a big difference between weights and jogging.
Lee still has 3 days to recover in time for the Test match so we will see. Typical though !!!!
he got smacked in the knee by a ball that went down leg and got himi behind the pads; wouldn;t cause an infection though... :suspect:
he got smacked in the knee by a ball that went down leg and got himi behind the pads; wouldn;t cause an infection though... :suspect:
it could be a build up of fluid from the knock though. Just my thought.
If McGrath is fit enough to play on Thursday, then he really made a meal of it last Thursday. I've had numerous ankle injuries playing football including breaking it and then finding out that I'd broken it previously. Tearing ankle ligaments is far more painful than a break and takes a lot longer to heal in my experience. If he plays and goes over on it again, he could be out for a couple of months and have a longstanding weakness.
Read in the paper that some bloke put £15k on England to win in the bookies before the 2nd test and walked away with £82,500 for his troubles. Must have been a nervy Sunday though!
which [being a pedantic medic] would be an effusion and likely referred to as inflammation by the media and not infection...unless his physion injected him with a dirty needle or something :eek:
that being said joint infections can be nasty so banter apart hope it isnt otherwise winning with the aussie bowlers droppign by the wayside one by one is a little hollow, surely?
If McGrath is fit enough to play on Thursday, then he really made a meal of it last Thursday. .
reminds me if david graveney's interview this morning.
asked about Fred's shoulder he said:
it's fine; it wan't nearly as bad as he was making out
It was bad enough that he missed a Test Match ;)
Hopefully that punter would have laid it off at some point, he won a grand on the greyhounds as well when he was placing the bet.
he got smacked in the knee by a ball that went down leg and got himi behind the pads; wouldn;t cause an infection though... :suspect:
Apparently he could have picked this injury up during the first test at Lords:
http://content.cricinfo.com/australia/content/story/215445.html
adding that the injury to Lee's left knee may have been related to a cut he sustained while fielding during last month's first Test at Lord's.
Does everybody have Sky? No they don't.
Terrestrial reaches millions more people than Sky does or probably ever will. And for a national team playing one of our national sports it is shortsighted in the extreme to reduce the potential audience.
But remember when we are playing New Zealand away and none of the press are intrested. How much do we or have we seen ??? Nothing apart from the coverage of sky.
I dont think they should back down now due to our current success. The 92 world cup was superb the first world cup to be covered in full by this county by Sky. What do you remember about the 87 world cup/
mattwakeman
08-08-2005, 22:33
I can see where you're coming from mate and a lot of people complain about Sky having coverage of England when they are on tour as though these games were covered by terrestrial which they are not and never have been.
And for away tours having a dedicated sports channel to cover them makes sense becuase of lack of interest in the general public and difference in hours means that only the faithful are going to follow it anyway.
But none of these things apply when it is a home series. I really believe that the level of coverage and the general interest in what happened at the weekend was because people were able to switch on and watch. Normal people who maybe don't have Sky Sports, who maybe never get to watch a cricket game and wouldn't think too. But how many people's interest has been piqued by what they saw.
I agree that Sky gives great coverage for people who know exactly what they want but I am more interested in getting as many people as possible to be excited by cricket and that can only happen if they have access to it.
But as I said I really do think that after the next contract BBC will have many more digital channels open to them and they will compete to get it back to the (more) mainstream. I just think that it is a shortsighted move by the ECB when they should be looking to get as much covereage to as many people as they can. But hey, football sold its soul to Sky and it seems to be doing alright...right...?
If McGrath is fit enough to play on Thursday, then he really made a meal of it last Thursday. I've had numerous ankle injuries playing football including breaking it and then finding out that I'd broken it previously. Tearing ankle ligaments is far more painful than a break and takes a lot longer to heal in my experience. If he plays and goes over on it again, he could be out for a couple of months and have a longstanding weakness.
I did my ankle ligaments last year playing football, and I was out 12 weeks with it, and I didn't even tear them!
Cricket Australia’s National Selection Panel (NSP) has called New South Welshman, Stuart Clark, into the Australian Test squad as cover for fast bowlers Glenn McGrath and Brett Lee who are both under fitness clouds.
Clark is currently in England where he is playing county cricket for Middlesex and will join the Australian squad in Manchester today (England time).
The 29-year-old, right-hand pace bowler took 40 wickets at 25.98 in the 2004-05 Pura Cup season which included taking 5 for 10 against Victoria. He took 5 for 61 in his most recent match for Middlesex against Warwickshire.
“We consider Stuart to be a similar style bowler to Glenn McGrath. He is already in England and showing some good form, so we have selected him to provide some cover for the current injuries,” said Trevor Hohns, Chairman of Selectors.
Glenn McGrath continues to be monitored after tearing the lateral ligament in his right ankle on the first morning of the second Test at Egbaston whilst Brett Lee is currently in hospital being treated for an infected knee.
Isn't it strange to see the Aussies dropping like flies, it's usually the England players that get injured
Forget all that, I'm more interested in whose going to be Warne's 600th wicket. I want him to get someone with a class ball worthy of his 600 wickets. Better than what he bowled to Gatting and Strauss put together.
cheeseypuffs
09-08-2005, 14:37
Forget all that, I'm more interested in whose going to be Warne's 600th wicket. I want him to get someone with a class ball worthy of his 600 wickets. Better than what he bowled to Gatting and Strauss put together.
I want him to get it in the fifth test, after England have safely secured the Ashes ;)
Forget all that, I'm more interested in whose going to be Warne's 600th wicket. I want him to get someone with a class ball worthy of his 600 wickets. Better than what he bowled to Gatting and Strauss put together.
On the subject of Warne. hasn't he already said that he wants Pieterson to be his 600th victim?
On the subject of Warne. hasn't he already said that he wants Pieterson to be his 600th victim?
Yes he's been calling Pietersen "600" all season. It's an "in" joke between them at Hampshire.
On the subject of Warne. hasn't he already said that he wants Pieterson to be his 600th victim?
Yeah, he did do, but he said in the Times yesterday he doesn't really care who it is. in fact, he's more confident of getting Brockett who he's toyed with thus far...
d80s0q
Lee says he'll play !! From the SMH this morning.
Australia vice-captain Adam Gilchrist says injured paceman Brett Lee is confident of being fit for the third Ashes Test which starts at Old Trafford on Thursday.
Lee, who has been hospitalised with a knee infection, is in doubt to play by the tourists who have called up uncapped seamer Stuart Clark as cover.
With Glenn McGrath also sidelined from the second Test after stepping on a cricket ball, the forecast was gloomy for Australia.
But, with Lee expected to be discharged on Wednesday, Gilchrist has been amazed by the progress he has made.
"He's going well," Gilchrist told the BBC.
"I know it sounds dramatic - a knee infection, in hospital, on a drip - but I went to visit him in hospital and he was in good spirits.
"The improvement in just 24 hours has been amazing. I don't know what the experts have said but, just talking to Brett, he's certain he'll be turning out on Thursday."
Gilchrist also had good news about McGrath, who was thought to have no chance of playing in Manchester.
"He made an amazing recovery over the following 48 hours," said Gilchrist.
"He's improving at a good rate and he's definitely not 100 per cent out of the game. He's certainly working hard to be part of the game."
The Beeb are reporting it now as well. I doubt McGrath will be able to play. Ligament damage and trauma can take a while to overcome, but then again I never had a dedicated physio to look after me!
Aussies might rest one of Lee/McGrath regardless as the wicket tends to favour spin bowling. Interesting to note that the groundsmen have prepared a hard, fast wicket which will only favour spin bowling towards the end of the game. Will the Aussies make another mistake, and have one spinner too many in their team?
Article here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/4137208.stm) .
walked past Matthew Hayden on the ay home from work yesterday. Strange looking bloke, looks like he's made of plastic with stick on eyes.
Was tempted to say something, like, well played in the first innings, keep it up, but bottled out :D
The Beeb are reporting it now as well. I doubt McGrath will be able to play. Ligament damage and trauma can take a while to overcome, but then again I never had a dedicated physio to look after me!
Aussies might rest one of Lee/McGrath regardless as the wicket tends to favour spin bowling. Interesting to note that the groundsmen have prepared a hard, fast wicket which will only favour spin bowling towards the end of the game. Will the Aussies make another mistake, and have one spinner too many in their team?
Article here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/4137208.stm) .
I'm hoping its our turn to win the toss, so we can bat first. If Punter wins it, no sillyness this time - bat first, get a score on a batting pitch and hand it to Warney on the 4th/5th day when it turns. Can we get (keep?) some luck?
d80s0q
yeah i hate tests like this where effectively it can be won or lost at the toss; even the groundsman reckons the team batting first will have the major advantage.
join us in the raindance for a draw then...
Glenn McGrath is bowling in the nets at Old Trafford - that is one hell of a turn around, no one thought it would be possible to move from gentle swimming on Sunday to bowling in the nets today. Not sure how he looks but the fact he is bowling means he will be available for the 4th test.
Sky have just said that Glen McGrath will be looked at again in the morning with a view to playing tomorrow.
Meanwhile England might give Chris Tremlett his debut in place of Hoggard depending on what the pitch looks like:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/4137528.stm
poissony
10-08-2005, 16:51
Has anyone seen Tremlett play? I gather he's quick and tall, does he have good control?
cheeseypuffs
10-08-2005, 17:29
Tremlett is certainly quicker than Hoggard, he is very tall and can be a right handful as, due to his height he can get a pretty wicked bounce from a good length. He is also pretty handy with the bat.
Has anyone seen Tremlett play? I gather he's quick and tall, does he have good control?
He did Ok in the recent one day games although I think he went for quite a few runs. I think it would be a gamble to be honest and would rather stick with Hoggard regardless of the pitch conditions.
Has anyone seen Tremlett play? I gather he's quick and tall, does he have good control?
Deffo can do, good temperament too. In the ODI at Chester-Le-Street he opened with Gough and his first two overs went for a fair few. He then got it together and finished his first spell with some tight bowling.
d80s0q
Arthur Fowler
11-08-2005, 08:30
So only about an hour to go before the start of the 3rd test. :clap:
Brett Lee is back from his knee injury and Glen McGrath is having a last minute fitness test. Looks like the Aussies might be back to full strength :(
Predictions for this test?
I'll go for an Australian win I'm afraid. Really hope I'm wrong though.
I'll go out on a limb and predict that it will last through until Monday - mad eh!
Got my tickets for Saturday this morning :clap:
Problem is i bought them from some dodgy website and they say they are for the members area, do you think i will be ok seeing im not a member?
Forcast for Saturday's weather is crap though :(
It may go to monday, but only because of the weather
I predict the winner will be whoever wins the toss and bats first....
England won the toss and wil bat
mattwakeman
11-08-2005, 09:06
Damage to McGrath couldn't have been that serious then could it?!
*Looks for McGrath voodoo doll...again*
spearce8
11-08-2005, 09:07
Looks like the Aussies might be back to full strength :(?
There are :(
Predictions for this test?!
Australia
mattwakeman
11-08-2005, 09:16
Prediction: If we get off to a good start then I think we are even money and if a player (or three ;) ) can get a century then it is ours to win.
IF McGrath gets straight back into rythmn then we may have a problem (Houston) but if anything was to go awry with his ankle (*Voodoo doll shook ominously) then we are straight back into the boxseat.
I still feel hopeful, we just have to not let the sight of McGrath make us feel all nervous or anything like that.
Come on England
Well I trust that if McGrath breaks down he won't be allowed a runner or a substitute fielder.
Well I trust that if McGrath breaks down he won't be allowed a runner or a substitute fielder.
They'll be allowed a sub fielder and probably a runner if he can physically bat but not run.
Amazing recovery, surely he can't be 100% fit though.
I just hope he brakes down, that will really put the aussies under the strain.
What i don't understand is why batters aren't more agressive with him. He does the same thing ball after ball, get down the wicket to him and smash a few cross batted shots into the pavillion, he might have to changesomething then instead of just been able to bowl the same line and length all the time
mattwakeman
11-08-2005, 09:24
Well I trust that if McGrath breaks down he won't be allowed a runner or a substitute fielder.
Which is why I'm quite surprised that he is playing. I would have to be near 100% sure that he will be ok. If he is not then I really think we stand a great chance of winning.
They'll be allowed a sub fielder and probably a runner if he can physically bat but not run.
Well they certainly shouldn;t be allowed to do that if the laws of the game are applied correctly
. Substitutes and runners
(a) If the umpires are satisfied that a player has been injured or become ill after the nomination of the players, they shall allow that player to have
(i) a substitute acting instead of him in the field.
(ii) a runner when batting.
Any injury or illness that occurs at any time after the nomination of the players until the conclusion of the match shall be allowable, irrespective of whether play is in progress or not.
(b) The umpires shall have discretion, for other wholly acceptable reasons, to allow a substitute for a fielder, or a runner for a batsman, at the start of the match or at any subsequent time.
(c) A player wishing to change his shirt, boots, etc. must leave the field to do so. No substitute shall be allowed for him.
a) is the crucial bit because McGrath was clearly carrying an injury into the game so if it goes again they should not be allowed to replace him. It won;t happen of course because part (c) is broken all the time
Arthur Fowler
11-08-2005, 09:30
Here we go!
not the best of start by the sounds of it on the radio, McGrath straight on the money
Arthur Fowler
11-08-2005, 09:48
Plenty of early runs, but also plenty of half-chances. Both batsmen looking a little uncomfortable.
A dropped catch from Gilchrist to save Tresco's behind :D
tresco's just been dropped by gilchrist
Well they certainly shouldn;t be allowed to do that if the laws of the game are applied correctly
I disagree, he has recovered from the injury enough and is obviously fit enough to bowl so if he goes over on it during the game he should be allowed a runner The break down still occured on the pitch . No different from someone who has back trouble or similar ailment and then has a recurence during the game.
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 10:00
a) is the crucial bit because McGrath was clearly carrying an injury into the game so if it goes again they should not be allowed to replace him. It won;t happen of course because part (c) is broken all the time
And they will no doubt say he's picked up a slightly different injury anyway :oh-hum:
Hopefully Banger will make Gilchrist pay for that drop, it would be a big psychological blow if he can.
I think the longer McGrath goes without taking wickets, the more he'll feel his injury. He'll bowl all day if the wickets are tumbling, but if the boundaries start flowing he'll be thinking more about any slight pain.
mattwakeman
11-08-2005, 10:03
I think the longer McGrath goes without taking wickets, the more he'll feel his injury. He'll bowl all day if the wickets are tumbling, but if the boundaries start flowing he'll be thinking more about any slight pain.
Totally agree. Absolute shocker of a drop, wonder what would have been said if that had been Jonesy?!
Just gotta see out the early spell and let the runs add up almost by themselves. Test cricket boys, 5 days.
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 10:06
I disagree, he has recovered from the injury enough and is obviously fit enough to bowl so if he goes over on it during the game he should be allowed a runner The break down still occured on the pitch . No different from someone who has back trouble or similar ailment and then has a recurence during the game.
Well, I counter your disagreement, he is only able to bowl because he has had a cortisone injection. Therefore, he is receiving treatment for a current injury, ie the original injury has not cleared up. Any flare up is a not a new injury, but the original one getting worse.
Well, I counter your disagreement, he is only able to bowl because he has had a cortisone injection. Therefore, he is receiving treatment for a current injury, ie the original injury has not cleared up. Any flare up is a not a new injury, but the original one getting worse.
:thumbs:
I was going to say something very similar. No need now
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 10:10
Note: Athers and Slater also in agreement re. substitution ;)
Strauss gone to Lee :( 26-1
First wicket down :(
Lee blows away Strauss' stumps :cry:
Vaughan better play well, but it wouldn't surprise me if he follows him back to the paviliion soon after
:thumbs:
I was going to say something very similar. No need now
I just feel if he has been passed fit to play then he is fit and any breakdown later is irrelevant. His ankle might be more prone now to injury due to some weakness there but it shouldn't bar you from playing in the off chance it will go. it might reoccur 3 months down the line , do you say then he shouldn't be allowed a runner cause he knew he had a weak ankle.
This may be open to abuse due to substitute rules but thats another issue
3 Months doen the line is very differnt to being passed fit on the morning of the match after an injury that normally takes at least 6 weeks to heal. I suspect he wasn't as bad as the aussies made out but they cliimed he had done his ligaments which would never heal that quickly so it is clearly a current injury especially if he had a cortisone injection as mentioned before.
3 Months doen the line is very differnt to being passed fit on the morning of the match .
He has been passed fit. Simple as that , he is bowling as if he is fit. It's no different. He could go through test with not a hint of a problem only for it to reoccur in 2 months time. Still should be allowed a runner if it happens in game.
i think what you are really getting at , is that he may fein injury , well that is a different matter
Vaughan is sounding like he is in good touch (no TV coverage for me in work cos I can't find a Male to Male aerial cable to hook up the TV card to the exernal aerial :cry: )
Vaughan is sounding like he is in good touch (no TV coverage for me in work cos I can't find a Male to Male aerial cable to hook up the TV card to the exernal aerial :cry: )
poor baby, only another 3 hours and you'll be home to watch it you slacker ;)
England looking in control at the moment, scoring rate very healthy and a very good batting wicket. what a superb toss to win. Unless they don't perform England should cruise this with the way the wicket has been prepared. Vaughan looks a different player today.
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 11:25
He has been passed fit. Simple as that , he is bowling as if he is fit. It's no different. He could go through test with not a hint of a problem only for it to reoccur in 2 months time. Still should be allowed a runner if it happens in game.
i think what you are really getting at , is that he may fein injury , well that is a different matter
Surely you can see that being passed fit by the Aussie medical team is not proof that he is completely recovered! Why would he have a pain killing injection if he were over it FFS? Imagine it were Ponting with the ankle injury, Aussies say he's alright, but after fielding, say 5 overs he says he's hurt and goes off and 12th man comes on, then later he bats with a runner. Are you saying you'd have no problem with that?
England looking in control at the moment, scoring rate very healthy and a very good batting wicket. what a superb toss to win. Unless they don't perform England should cruise this with the way the wicket has been prepared. Vaughan looks a different player today.
Stop trying to jinx him ;)
93 for one at lunch :thumbs:
I think most people would have took that at the start of play, lets just hope they don't do their current trick of loosing wickets straight after a break
mattwakeman
11-08-2005, 11:41
Nice smooth end to a session which was more than a little fraught at the beginning. Stunning first over from McGrath and will Tresco be able to really punish a shocker of a drop from Gilchirst?
Have to be happy with how they have gone on so far and MUST look to bat all day. Even if it is 300 at the end of play if they are still in then that is fine. If one (or pleeeease both) of this can get a century then we can really look to push on.
After all of the B'ham fireworks, welcome back to real test cricket!
I enjoyed Mark Nicholas' little slip when recalling Brett Lee's catch to get rid of Vaughan at Edgbaston 'Bloody good... sorry really good catch'
Good morning for the boys, we rid the opening session pretty well.. overcame a good spell by Mcgrath who was once again on the button.
Stop trying to jinx him ;)
Have to try something, Matt's out with the McGrath voodoo doll :lol:
Surely you can see that being passed fit by the Aussie medical team is not proof that he is completely recovered! Why would he have a pain killing injection if he were over it FFS? Imagine it were Ponting with the ankle injury, Aussies say he's alright, but after fielding, say 5 overs he says he's hurt and goes off and 12th man comes on, then later he bats with a runner. Are you saying you'd have no problem with that?
As an Aussie I have to say if mcGrath is given a runner it would be wrong. You can only have a runner if you've suffered an injury during that game, you can't carry it over ! He won't be given a runner unless he suffers a different injury.
He has been passed fit. Simple as that , he is bowling as if he is fit. It's no different. He could go through test with not a hint of a problem only for it to reoccur in 2 months time. Still should be allowed a runner if it happens in game.
I don't think he is/should be eligable for a runner. I recall a match between Australia and Pakistan when Inzy came into the match declared fit after a back injury only to get it again during his innings and he asked for a runner [not from the start i might add]. The aussies kicked up a huge fuss about it and the match stopped for a while due to their complaining before Bucknor allowed him a runner.
Something about recurrence of the same injury implies he may have had it all along or something like that :shrug:
lostboy182
11-08-2005, 12:11
The Aussie selectors can be ruthless but there were a lot of things in the backroom regarding Langer coming in for Slats and it wasn't jsut batting related. Anyway, I digress! One thing Australia are is consistent in terms of selection and to change two players will be a massive and bold move. If they do go with 6 bat and 5 bowl it would be the first time since the West Indies tour in 2003 I think - I could be wrong.
http://www.cricket-online.com/news.php?sid=4625
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/enoughrope/transcripts/s1323968.htm
Very strong and insightful stuff, particularly when Slater's career went downhill, and his own "friends" turned on him.
ANDREW DENTON: Something else that struck me, Michael. I asked before
about it being a lonely game. Shane Warne, in his autobiography, talks
about a game between Victoria and NSW where he and Darren Berry
started sledging you when you were batting. Do you remember what they
said?
MICHAEL SLATER: They just started doing this tick, tock, tick, tock,
tick, tock...
ANDREW DENTON: Taking it turns - tick, tock.
MICHAEL SLATER: Yeah, yeah. This went on for overs. And I knew what
they were getting at. They just thought I was a time bomb waiting to
explode.
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 12:28
OMG! life no.3 for Vaughan
Tresco notches up his 50 - lets hope he makes it to 100 and punishes Gilchrist for his mistake :D
Ben [Little Funk]
11-08-2005, 12:28
Bloody hell this is awesome :notworthy
Firstly vaughan dropped by Gilchrist
Next ball, McGrath takes out his stumps, but it was a no-ball :clap: :clap:
:lol: :lol: :lol: - Vaughan is just getting insanely lucky
It's coming home, it's coming home, it's coming, Ashes coming home.....well on this luck it is :D
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 12:30
That over could really take the wind out of McGraths sails (hopefully)
mattwakeman
11-08-2005, 12:35
Catches win matches...as well as not bowling no balls :)
Got to make the most of this and hopefully cheeseypuffs is right and the Aussies will start to get a bit impatient.
As an Aussie I have to say if mcGrath is given a runner it would be wrong. You can only have a runner if you've suffered an injury during that game,
But as you can see he can bowl, so he is fit.
So if he asks for a runner it's because he has had a reoccurnce in same area or a new injury alltogether which he suffered DURING the game . Probably same reason why umpires let Inzy have a runner. Just becuase someone has had an ailment doesn't mean they can't have it re-occuring.
Aggravating an old injury during a game still allows you to ask for a runner.
Stone Cold
11-08-2005, 12:38
How Gillespie gets the nod ahead of Kasprowicz, I will never know.
I can see 2-1 to England coming.... :)
It's coming home, it's coming home, it's coming, Ashes coming home.....:D
they never left ;)
Congrats to Warne on his 600th wicket. KP can breathe a sigh of relief. Treso out.
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 13:29
Banger was a tad unlucky then, surprised Gilchrist held it ;)
Greemie666
11-08-2005, 13:34
600 wickets, no reason why he won't go on to 7 or 800.
mattwakeman
11-08-2005, 13:50
Congrats to the fat, blonde, beach bum. One in a million that guy.
Nice and slow England, a great start this and when you see Katich coming on to bowl you know things are going well.
What score should England be looking on this wicket? 450? 500?
Oh don't tempt fate... at the moment, I would love to see Vaughan make a century.. after that, I'd like to see the top batsmen make a good few runs, thus allowing the freedom for Flintoff to 'play'!
Superb so far from England - might get a team batting through the whole day :eek:
mattwakeman
11-08-2005, 14:14
I would be happy with 400+ at the moment. It is doing enough to suggest that come the 4th inning you wouldn't want to be chasing more than about 250.
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 14:14
Would've been nice for Vaughan to go to tea with a ton, but I hope he gets there soon afterwards. Pietersen must be looking forward to coming in with 200+ runs on the board, instead of in the middle of a collapse ;)
i'd be more than happy with 250 for 2 at the end of play, i think they would have taken that at the start. I reckon they will have more than that though (england that is) :thumbs:
you at home yet john :oh-hum: :D
Well done Vaughn. Amazingly that is the first century of the series.
mattwakeman
11-08-2005, 14:47
Well played Vaughan. Yes its a batting wicket but you still have to get them and I'm sure he was feeling the pressure.
You can see that the Aussies are beginning to try and bore out the batters now and McGrath is beginning to look a little tired already.
Good stuff. Now just keep batting them into the ground :)
Unless he does something very special, I expect this will be Gillespie's last game of the series.
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 15:29
You could've said that for the Edgbaston test too! I think they're short of backup TBH
4th dropped catch of the day :clap: :clap:
Arthur Fowler
11-08-2005, 15:40
Vaughan smashing Gillespie around the ground :clap:
Vaughan is absolutely punishing the Aussies for their mistakes :lol:
The 3 little pigs
11-08-2005, 15:45
Bell is doing a good job of dropping anchor & letting Vaughan do the strokes.
Arthur Fowler
11-08-2005, 15:57
Vaughan out, but not before a very handsome score. Well played Michael.
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 15:57
Well picked out by Vaughan :( Good knock though.
How often does that happen to England? **** part time bowler comes in and takes out a top England batsman :cry:
Brilliant innings from Vaughan though :thumbs:
damn, wanted Vaughan to make a double hundred, he's been so close before.
I just hope it doesn't end 5 wickets down at the end
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 16:06
damn, wanted Vaughan to make a double hundred, he's been so close before.
Don't worry, he's got another go in this match ;) Good to see him back on form though :notworthy
Don't worry, he's got another go in this match ;) Good to see him back on form though :notworthy
It certainly is. He won't need to bat agin this match mate, 600+ for england, 350 after both innings by the aussies.
My god, im not pessamistic for once
Where did that century from Vaughan come from. The first hundred of the series and it comes from someone who has been badly out of form. Good stuff :clap:
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 16:23
You know what they say about form and class Alan...
Listened to it on TMS all the way back from Blackpool. When I said to the Girlfriend I was booking this week off I didn't mean to spend Wednesday night In smellpool !!!
Oh well Im back & can do what I please tomorrow !!!!!
TMS is still pretty good . aggers is sooooo easy on the ear. ;)
Gotta say how pleased I am for Bell. Massive pressure as he went out to bat.
Sledging from the Aussies at the moment. "thats a warning" was shouted at Peiterson for backing up. Got to find one way to get him out.
And a half century for Bell, throughly deserved. A gutsy innings from a star of the future.
And that's 50 for Bell, invaluable experience for the young batsman :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:
Sloppy wicket given away by KP before - should have used some thought and just navigated us to the close of play and attacked tomorrow instead. Now risking going 5 down before the Close :(
EDIT: Nightwatchman blown away - what the **** where we thinking of sending in poor Hoggard against Lee with the new ball? :brickwall
At least Hoggard will not hang around tomorrow but 5 wickets down looks worse than 4 wickets.
Pisces Iscariot
11-08-2005, 17:03
EDIT: Nightwatchman blown away - what the **** where we thinking of sending in poor Hoggard against Lee with the new ball? :brickwall
Better Hoggard than Flintoff.
Better Hoggard than Flintoff.
But a top line batsman like Flintoff would stand a better chance keeping it out than a tailender like Hoggard.
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 17:05
Better Hoggard than Flintoff.
Exactly, that's part of the reason for using a nightwatchman.
mattwakeman
11-08-2005, 17:06
Certainly would have taken that at the start of play but what on earth was KP thinking of??? 2nd delivery with the new ball at HEAD-height.
Hoggy did what he was supposed too and as long as they get off to a good start tomorrow then 600 is still on. The really good thing is just how tired McGrath looked in his last over. Really looked as though he was feeling it. And what about Michael Clark as well? Sure he should be fit to bat but if he has a bad back then a few short pitched deliveries aimed at his throat should be interesting.
Good stuff that :)
Better Hoggard than Flintoff.
With 15/20 mins of the day left, Flintoff should have been heading out there. 5 mins or so, then I'd have sent Hoggy out but that was too long IMO for a nightwatchman.
Pisces Iscariot
11-08-2005, 17:20
With 15/20 mins of the day left, Flintoff should have been heading out there. 5 mins or so, then I'd have sent Hoggy out but that was too long IMO for a nightwatchman.
Why? If Hoggard hadn't lasted until the end of play then I'd see you point but he did so he served his purpose. Whenever Hoggard came in he was going to go for a low tally so it made little difference whether it was now or later but by coming in tonight it made sure that Flintoff wasn't caught cold. Any psychological gain Australia may claim will be rectified if/when Freddie smashes a 4 or 6 early tomorrow.
I see the point that an experienced top line batsman should have been able to cope for such a short time but why risk it?
cheeseypuffs
11-08-2005, 17:21
It was only about 10 minutes wasn't it? Just seems longer when Hoggy is out there ;)
What a great day for England ;)
Arthur Fowler
11-08-2005, 18:01
Indeed, would have been very happy with this at start of play :clap:
450 is the min required. But I have a feeling that however good the pitch is, when Aus bat they will be pretty tired in their minds & collapse like a pack of cards.
At the moment we are doing to Aus what they usually do to us, our bowling attack is no longer friendly. We have bowlers who want the blood of Australian batsmen. I think they know this as well.
No Slater,Taylor,Boon,Waugh Bros,Elliott,Border even Blewet !!!! the Aussie batsmen who used to plunder our Bowlers for fun are no longer there. This is a new era in Eng v Aus. The teams are looking pretty even. The long reign of Aussie domination could be over soon, if not this series maybe the next one.
I think we will win this test, I cant see us losing it which still even at least going to Trent Bridge will have our boys spirits pretty high indeed.
Again we need a min of 450 , the only way they could possibly beat us is by scoring 500+ if that happens then the draw would probably be favourite.
Poor shot selection from KP.. would have been much better for him to knuckle down for the evening and come back tomoro to start again..
There were 2 men back for the shot.. I know he's a positive player, but sometimes you gotta show you can use your brain.
Congrats to Vaughan and Bell - I was more impressed with Bell's innings of the two. Certainly makes day two interesting!!!
mattwakeman
11-08-2005, 19:10
450 is the min required. But I have a feeling that however good the pitch is, when Aus bat they will be pretty tired in their minds & collapse like a pack of cards.
At the moment we are doing to Aus what they usually do to us, our bowling attack is no longer friendly. We have bowlers who want the blood of Australian batsmen. I think they know this as well.
No Slater,Taylor,Boon,Waugh Bros,Elliott,Border even Blewet !!!! the Aussie batsmen who used to plunder our Bowlers for fun are no longer there. This is a new era in Eng v Aus. The teams are looking pretty even. The long reign of Aussie domination could be over soon, if not this series maybe the next one.
Just talking with my brother about this. I actually think we now have a really good chance of winning this Ashes but even if we don't we are merely putting it on hold.
If they are not careful I think the Aussies could end up doing a minor imitation of the Windies when they lost Curtley and Courtney and found the cupboard bare and suddenly everybody elses eyes lit up as they began to look for some major payback.
The Aussies won't go as far down because their domestic scene is much more organised than the chaotic island system but this really could be the changing of the tide. We have a young hungry team with a bowling attack that is packed with aggression and I would back this team even when they have to go off down under.
So make the most of having the best two bowlers in the world Aussies because there's not long left for either of them. The future is bright, with any luck the future is England.
So make the most of having the best two bowlers in the world Aussies because there's not long left for either of them. The future is bright, with any luck the future is England.
When McGrath and Warne do call it a day they don't have much in the way of replacements and certainly do not have any bowlers of the calibre of those two. So I except all opposition batsman will be quite pleased when these two greats say goodbye to the game.
Adam Thirnis
11-08-2005, 20:43
Poor shot selection from KP.. would have been much better for him to knuckle down for the evening and come back tomoro to start again..
There were 2 men back for the shot.. I know he's a positive player, but sometimes you gotta show you can use your brain.
Agreed. Giving his wicket away like that was unforgivable. But then I suppose that's just the way he is...
charlie angel
11-08-2005, 20:57
Shame that KP hung himself out to dry when he could've settled in for a big innings, but other than that, top work from the chaps - great to see the skipper tuck some runs away, and an overall solid feel to the batting. Another 100-150 runs tomorrow & it'll be peachy :)
The first hour or so tomorrow is going to be very important, if Freddie and Bell can knuckle down then we might have a chance of getting near to 450, if they get out cheaply then Australia will believe they have a chance of getting through the rest of our line up quite quickly without much damage.
A great day's play marred by the sloppy dismissals of Mikey and KP latish on.
Great 166, superb 59* from Bell and still some batting to come.
Less than 450 would be a disaster from here, 500 would be great and now more would be a bonus. But probably not needed...
Our bolwing attack is all-round stronger than theirs. We can bowl good bowlers at both ends at all times - they couldn't today. Plus they have been as circumspect battinga s we have, plus they have given many wickets away as we did again today.
I feel we will have a first innings lead if we top 450. The more we get, the better it'll be for a potential result as opposed to a draw.
d80s0q
Adam Thirnis
11-08-2005, 21:20
The first hour or so tomorrow is going to be very important, if Freddie and Bell can knuckle down then we might have a chance of getting near to 450, if they get out cheaply then Australia will believe they have a chance of getting through the rest of our line up quite quickly without much damage.
450 will only be par from this position - they'll be hoping to push on over 500.
We let them off the hook alittle at edgbaston when we only got 407.. we should have got 500 there too, and look how close they took us in the end.
We need to put them under real pressure.. so we need 500 min.
It's time Mr Jones got us some Test runs.. and not Simon
Pietersen needs a good slap for being an arrogant SOB with his dismissal at the end of the day - what a waste.
Hope i'm proved wrong but i think Bell has had his knock today. I dont mind his crawling back into his shell while Fred smashes at the other end but i assume he'll go quickly in the morning, joined swiftly by Jones....
How bad were the aussies in the field today - forget england they were almost as bad as us paksters!
How bad were the aussies in the field today - forget england they were almost as bad as us paksters!
Very poor, missed catches, over throws - and all round sloppy performance which in the long run might prove costly, we hope ;)
I think there's grounds for optimism. I'd certainly have taken 341-5 (inc Hoggard) at the beginning of the day and we don't have to bat last against Warne. If we can keep them out in the field for a good length of time tomorrow, then we should be able to tire them out a bit and bowl at them when we're fresh both tomorrow and Saturday morning.
Or we could just collapse for the addition of 50 odd runs
450 would be a good score, 500 really would be great. That would put teh aussies on teh back foot!!!!
Had tickets what a great day of cricket :clap: Shame about the 2 soft dismissals but cant complain after so many missed opportunities from the aussies.
I think there's grounds for optimism. I'd certainly have taken 341-5 (inc Hoggard) at the beginning of the day and we don't have to bat last against Warne. If we can keep them out in the field for a good length of time tomorrow, then we should be able to tire them out a bit and bowl at them when we're fresh both tomorrow and Saturday morning.
Or we could just collapse for the addition of 50 odd runs
we could collapse for the addition of 1 more run. But on our Great batting display of yesterday why should we ?
KP did play a bad shot, we still had a fantastic day with the bat. Hoggard is one of the wickets so really I look at it saying it's nearer 4 than 5 wickets :n0rty:
England to score 480. :)
cheeseypuffs
12-08-2005, 09:41
I can forgive KP for that bad shot selection, I think it was more a case of it being the new ball and coming onto him a bit quicker than the old one had been. As long as he learns from it and makes a shed load more in the second innings ;)
We can take a lot of positives from this innings, Vaughan back to form, Bell in the runs and also Lee's pace and reverse swing has made him the most dangerous bowler so far, and we have two bowlers who are up their in speed terms and all our bowlers are better exponents of reverse swing :n0rty:
:( - sounded like a poor decision from Bucknor
Now lets see if Jones can prove his worth with the bat
Replays didnt show too much. Snickometer showed nothing at all.
Need 50 at least from these 2.
I'm hoping we can still get to 450. Bell was unlucky and KP shouldn't have given his wicket yesterday
mattwakeman
12-08-2005, 10:01
Bell unlucky AGAIN grrrr. Would be happy to get to 450 now and see what how the Aussies can handle the short stuff. Turning into a really good game now.
Absolutely delighted and had to share it with you guys! I received an invitation to join the MCG in Melbourne and by rights the MCC and Lord's. Been on the waiting list for years and years !!!! Well 13 !!! Sorry slightly off topic, just pleased!
Nice one Warner :)
Mickey Clarke still in the team hotel by the way.
Wow. Gongrats on getting the invite. 13 years is a loooooong time to be waiting!
cheeseypuffs
12-08-2005, 10:30
Absolutely delighted and had to share it with you guys! I received an invitation to join the MCG in Melbourne and by rights the MCC and Lord's. Been on the waiting list for years and years !!!! Well 13 !!! Sorry slightly off topic, just pleased!
OMG That is seriously good news mate, well done :thumbs: Sounds like it's easier to get into the MCG than MCC, so it's a good backdoor in ;)
Raining in Manchester SHOCK !!!!!!!!!!
mattwakeman
12-08-2005, 10:40
Congrats Warney. Now just score some extra tickets for all your new found friends ;)
Arthur Fowler
12-08-2005, 10:41
Does it look like a long rain break (no TV for me today :( )?
Congratulations Warney - good news indeed :clap:
No mate should be back on soon.
Thanks guys, I guess it means I'll have to get one of those MCC blazers, you know the ones, very quiet pattern, fit in anywhere kind !!!!!
Arthur Fowler
12-08-2005, 10:59
No mate should be back on soon.
Thanks. I can see the score ticking along now. :)
These 2 are taking the game away from them again :)
Need 50 at least from these 2.
:clap:
Greemie666
12-08-2005, 11:01
400 up.
Go England!
Brett Lee is getting a pounding :lol:
cheeseypuffs
12-08-2005, 11:03
This is good stuff. Very sensible, quality batting
All too easy for England at the moment, 500 by tea if this continues.
Greemie666
12-08-2005, 11:05
Freddy opening up now, 550 by tea then declare.
cheeseypuffs
12-08-2005, 11:11
I don't think a declaration would be wise unless the runrate slows dramatically, best to get the runs while they're on offer. The Aussies are just as capable of making batting look easy on a fairly flat pitch, a lot of runs to chase would put a lot more pressure on them
500 would be plenty but I would bat up to 4.30 if we can.
cheeseypuffs
12-08-2005, 11:20
Looking at the fielders, it would be better to wait until the outfield is dry before we have to field on it!
cheeseypuffs
12-08-2005, 11:24
Flintoff out :(
Pitch is flat, rain around, A draw would be a good bet just now
only played 4 sessions anything could happen yet.
Another wicket lost before the end of a session - its something that needs to be really looked at :(
Gillespie gets a wicket. CH4 commentators suggesting he should retire.
England should get 450
cheeseypuffs
12-08-2005, 11:35
A bit of wag from the tail would be nice now. We're either going to get 435 or 500+
Pathetic last two overs. 500 should have been an easy target 30 minutes ago. Looks like it's 450 and out. Still, a very good innings from England, and the majority would have taken 450 in a day and a half. Should have been much better though.
mattwakeman
12-08-2005, 11:37
Brainless by Flintoff, really brainless and it led to Jones' wicket...unless...unless it is all part of England's master plan which is to give Dizzy just enough wickets so he won't be dropped and they can continue to score at 7 an over off him!
Really shoddy batting coupled with a trash decision by Bucknor means that 450 looks odds on which is a shame really. Having said that the weather report is not that great so I would like to see the England attack have a real go now.
But that is at least 3 wickets which have just been given away which is something they will have to address. Make the opposition get you out and when you have knocked them down leave stud marks not just on their back but all over their throat as well...
Giles goes. 450 please ....
TigaSefi
12-08-2005, 12:19
aye 12 runs please.... no rush. and ruddy block Warne's balls ;)
This'll be over in 2-3 mins
poissony
12-08-2005, 12:23
I don't think it was brainless by Flintoff at all. He was in, he had 46 runs to his name, he tried to score runs off Warne and got out.
The way KP got out was far worse as he hadn't played himself in and fell in to the trap the Aussies set him. However, whilst it was disappointing that's the way he plays and he's bound to get out like that from time to time and at least he got out like that with 300 runs on the board and not when England were struggling at 30-3.
I agree about making the opposition get you out but with both KP and Flintoff you have to accept that they will get out from time to time trying to dominate attacks by scoring risky runs. Some times it comes off, some times it doesn't, fortunately so far more often than not it has come off.
444 all out. England should have been looking at 500+ but too many cheap wickets. Lets hope they don't have to pay for those rushes of blood.
444 All Out..
Poor total really fro mwhere we were.. KP and Fred chucked their wickets away when there really was no need. 500+ was there for the taking.
I agree about making the opposition get you out but with both KP and Flintoff you have to accept that they will get out from time to time trying to dominate attacks by scoring risky runs. Some times it comes off, some times it doesn't, fortunately so far more often than not it has come off.
Agree to an extent but the timing of both of their dismissals were poor - if both of them had stayed in for another 10 mins each, then England would be 500 for 6/7 at the moment IMO. But now we've stumbled to 444 all out due to getting into that One Day mode instead of seeing a bigger picture.
mattwakeman
12-08-2005, 12:31
7 minutes before lunch? I agree that attacking play is always risky but TMS were right. If both Jones and Freddy were still in then they could just start again and cruise along. Instead there has just been a tumble of wickets.
But hey, live by the sword and thats how you'll die.
cheeseypuffs
12-08-2005, 12:42
I agree about making the opposition get you out but with both KP and Flintoff you have to accept that they will get out from time to time trying to dominate attacks by scoring risky runs. Some times it comes off, some times it doesn't, fortunately so far more often than not it has come off.
Exactly, everyone loves it when they send them for six, but if it goes slightly wrong, that's what happens. Still think it's a pretty good total, and Hayden was a bit lucky there...
Last 4 wickets in 24 balls. Tut tut.
Exactly, everyone loves it when they send them for six, but if it goes slightly wrong, that's what happens. Still think it's a pretty good total, and Hayden was a bit lucky there...
Everyones an expert after the event :)
Doom merchants will be arriving in droves like they do each test match.
cheeseypuffs
12-08-2005, 12:54
If anyone is upset with England's total and needs cheering up:
G D McGrath 25.0 6 86 0
TigaSefi
12-08-2005, 12:55
I reckon Austalia will get to 350 by 6pm if the weather holds up.
I bet you £10 to charity they dont !!!!
TigaSefi
12-08-2005, 13:02
I bet you £10 to charity they dont !!!!
:lol: Unfortunately I am not a betting man ;)
very funny with the old guy playing hide & seek with Langer behind the sightscreen :)
Flintoff receiving treatment for his back according to the BBC Sport web feed? :(
TigaSefi
12-08-2005, 13:39
50 in 77 balls = shocking bowling.
cheeseypuffs
12-08-2005, 13:51
Fantastic catch. Pleased for Bell in this match :notworthy
mattwakeman
12-08-2005, 13:53
8 more to get since apparetnly Clark is still in bed resting his back!
Come on England
cheeseypuffs
12-08-2005, 13:55
You know he'll bat if needed though. Would probably make 3 figures too :(
mattwakeman
12-08-2005, 14:05
Be interested to see how he would handle the short ball is all...;)
cheeseypuffs
12-08-2005, 14:07
Be interested to see how he would handle the short ball is all...;)
I think you meant short balls ;)
cheeseypuffs
12-08-2005, 14:32
:clap: Ponting out. First ball after tea
Simplier catch for Bell there..
Good start to the last session, Ponting on his way back to the shed.
mattwakeman
12-08-2005, 14:34
Great start! :)
Typical England - break through once and then break through very soon after again!!! :clap:
That'll teach me for not watching as soon as they come back out!!!
Great start though, a couple more before the end of the day would be nice.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.