Just to alert the SD of another sporting event that (gasp) other countries play. Who’d have thought that was possible?
The sporting rivalry that began in 1882 continues with the first Test of the 2010/2011 Ashes series to be held at the 'Gabba in Brisbane starting this morning AEDST.
305 matches; Australia winning 122, England winning 97 with 86 draws.
65 series; Australia winning 31, England winning 29 with 5 drawn
England hold the Ashes, need to be beaten in the five game series to lose them.
Ashes series 1882 to 2099After a period of 8 series in a row being won by Australia from 1989, the Poms finally won the Ashes back in England to delirous scenes in 2005, got seriously thumped in 2006/07, and then won them back again at home in 2009.
England on the ascendency, Australia on the decline but with home advantage, both mid-table in world rankings.
Current series odds Australia paying 1.90, England paying 2.75, drawn 5.25.
6 hours per day, 5 days per Test, 5 Tests per series, going to be a great summer.
Apologies, normal programs resumed in other threads
First game is underway at the ‘Gabbatoir’. England’s lost a quick wicket with Strauss out in the first over but have recovered to 27 for 1 after nine overs.
Personally I think England will find it hard to beat Australia at home. Despite being weakened the Aussies can’t be counted out unitl the bitter end.
England 260 all out
For England: Bell 76, Cook 67, Pietersen 73.
For Aust: Siddle 6-54, Doherty 2-41.
Australia 25/0
For Aust: Watson 9no, Katich 15no
Thoroughly entertaining days play.
Honours to the home side, but the visitors kept coming back. England would have wanted to be still batting and heading towards 350. At 4-197 in the 65th over that was looking quite feasible, but Siddle’s 3rd spell, including a hat trick, tore the heart out of the lower order.
Peter Bell’s record against Australia has been awful. Good to see a bit of why he’s so well regarded in his performances against other countries.
Definitely honours to the Aussies today, a fascinating day. First over wicket and and a hat-trick for the birthday boy hopefully suggests at more excitement to come (for England I hope!)
However, 260 is still enough to make any result possible and with the Aussies batting last on perhaps a frisky pitch it is far too early to tell which way it’ll go.
We did at least show some inclination to bat and we do have Swanny!
The bowlers need to dig us out of a hole now and no mistake.
Siddle’s hat trick was excellent. All 3 deliveries were right on the money and gave Cook, Prior and Broad little chance. The commentators in the UK have suggested that Prior’s wicket was planned as well - knowing that he likes to line up over leg stump early in his innings and thus leave off exposed, Siddle angled the ball in on Prior and ripped him out. Good execution on his part.
Can’t help but feel somewhat disappointed with our bats though - a number of them got a start and threw it away. Collingwood’s foot movement was awful, KP’s wicket was pretty poor too and Strauss played a shot that he usually commands well at an inopportune time.
Can’t help but feel we’re in for another long and disappointing tour. Perhaps my mood will lift at the close of Day 2 but Anderson, Broad, Finn and Swann have a lot to do here to help me out of my despondancy.
Still - at least it’s better than Day 1 last time out, even if only marginally so.
Ouch.
Following from the UK is going to be weird. I’m not in a position to stay up, and I don’t have the discipline to avoid hearing the score until I can read through an over-by-over report and thus get the slowly unfolding experience. So I wake up, find out the headline news (e.g. all out for 260) and then grimly follow the reporting once I get on line. It lends the whole thing an air of tragedy - I know the heroes are ultimately doomed, I just don’t know the exact details.
I didn’t get to see much more than the highlights, nothing much happened in the bit we saw before lunch, as I was at work today. However I saw the end of the England innings and Bell looked in terrific touch. You have to like a guy who is two paces down the wicket to the guy who opened the bowling, and smacks him over cover.
In the same vein Anderson looks like one to watch - reverse sweep, actual paddle sweep, slog sweep and then bowled playing the reverse again. Great fun.
Maryport? Cool - in fact damn cold right about now I would have thought. Just coming into the best part of the year for Cumbrians now - wherever you are in the UK, it’s going to be cold, windy annd wet/snowy. So much like most of the time back home.
I’d like to see two wickets in the first hour tonight, followed by another one before lunch - with one of them being Ponting. I know he’s not in the best of form but he’s too dangerous to have hanging around. 80 or 90-3 at lunch and we’re right back in the game.
This would be the same Mr Boycott who’s Grandmother would have fended off Siddle with a stick of rubarb would it?
Well he’s escaped to the Durham dales now and I’m in the far south-east but there’s no escape for any of us…it is bloody freezing everywhere.
And actually, somehow I always think that makes cricket better.
We are dark and freezing but across the globe we have the glorious game bathed in sunshine. It makes it awkward to watch but strangely comforting.
Stephen Fry said he always got rather annoyed at people thinking of cricket only in terms of village greens and church steeples. I think he is right. That is a spiritual home but so is the beach, the steel band, palm tree and the mosque
So anyway, enough rambling. Anderson with vicious swing and Swann with cheeky turn to skittle 'em out for 250…hurrah!
And yes, that very same Boycott, the one who’s granny can catch 'em in her pinny.
An interesting first day, well done the birthday boy with his hat trick. SOme random points…
I hate the reverse sweep, a foolishly low-percentage shot which has no place in test cricket (and precious little place in the lesser forms of the game). But that’s just me I guess.
Best description in the press thus far: “– Alastair Cook batting in a style reminiscent of an arthritic housemaid thrashing at the scullery mice with a yard broom –” from the Guardian’s review of the first day’s coverage.
As a junior coach, you see kids playing the reverse sweep because it’s high risk, whether they get runs or get out doesn’t seem to be an issue.
Last time the Poms were here, maybe in a ODI, Paul Nixon their keeper played the reverse sweep repeatedly during a couple of overs, and he’d scored two singles to third man.
Ian Chappell was commentating and suggested that if he’d played simple, conventional cut shorts he’d have scored 10 times as many runs with 1/10th the risk.
The Aussies are going to need to score 350 to keep their noses in front. Batting last on what looks likely a wearing pitch, you wouldn’t want to have to bat out the last day or chase 250.
I agree, from an aesthetic point of view I’ll take a late cut over a reverse sweep any day.
And isn’t it fun to extrapolate from limited information?
All we have seen from one day is a sprinkling of decent batting, some ill-advised shots. One brilliant bowling spell amongst otherwise indifferent form and no real clue as to the upcoming nature of the pitch.
260 seems low but I honestly haven’t a clue which way this is going.
260 still looks short at the minute, but by less than might have been the case at lunch today. An entire day has gone by and England are, in my view, pretty much in the same situation as yesterday - i.e. needing quick wickets tomorrow morning, preferably getting the danger man (now Hussey rather than Ponting) sooner rather than later.
We’re still not in an ideal situation by any stretch but, if we can get the wicket and hold the lead to under 40, the game is going to be very finely balanced at that point. Australia still have had the best of it though - good innings by Hussey today - feeding of some pretty woeful length, from Swann in particular, but you’ve still got to put them away, so credit where due.
Looking like this is going to be a closely fought series on the evidence so far. Our bowlers have done well to keep Australia in check when defending such a low total, there was a real danger they would run away with the game. Good to see Finn pick up a couple of early wickets and get going. He’s made a good start to his England career, but prior to this series he’s been bowling against poor batting teams, and hasn’t been seriously tested.
England’s fragility with the bat isn’t a suprise, but it seems Australia’s line up isn’t any more secure right now.
Australia 220/5
Aust: Hussey 81 no, Haddin 22no, Katich 50
Eng: Anderson 2-40, Finn 2-61
Bad light/rain ended play at 4:20.
Play to restart early tomorrow.
A solid days cricket. England bowling was better than Australia’s and hence the runs didn’t come. Katich and Clark both fell pushing harder to score than they were being allowed. If Straus hadn’t persisted with this new frangled theory of playing with a deep point, conceding a single, they’d bhave been stronger placed IMHO. One more wicket in the afternoon session would have put the Poms ahead, as it was honours remain favouring the home side.
Australia were scoring at 2.75 runs per over, compared to England’s 3.4. That the most disciplined we’ve seen Anderson bowl in Australia. In the past, if the ball hasn’t been swinging he tried to bowl too fast and short and gets belted.
Hussey, for a player on the cusp of being dropped played. First glance at his scorechart would suggest that England bowled too short to him. I don’t agree. It was good batting overcoming good tight bowling.
England are going to need to break this partnership early, elsewise it will likely burn them. Both Hussey and Haddin can score quickly and both can bat well with the tail.
The early start could play into our hands, if the weather is right. Anderson with a swinging ball could realistically leave Australia facing a defecit.
On the other hand, I wouldn’t be that suprised if it all went to pants tomorrow, and Australia posted nearly 400. Hey ho.