How is the pitch? The Aussie’s seemed uncomfortable from the little I saw and frankly the bowling was more above average than outstanding.
Every report I have seen (and the Sky Commentators in the UK) has said that the pitch is a good one for batting. As I said earlier, I think Haddin and, in particular, Johnson, have proved that there are runs in the pitch once you’ve seen the new ball off. I would agree that the wickets were not indicative of spectacular bowling. The Aussies were rather careless in 3 or 4 cases.
The trick for England tomorrow, should they get the final two wickets reasonably quickly, is to see that new ball off without getting too bogged down. They have had a tendency to slow the run rate to an absolute crawl at the top of the order on recent occasions - and this will allow the pressure to build a little (maybe Carberry will be a bit different to Compton and Root in partnership with Cook). A gentle 2.8/3 an over and taking no chances would be fine by me.
Has anyone swept the Aussies in a home test series?
Closest I could find was the West Indies winning a 3 test series 2-0 in 1980-81. I think it’s a real possibility at the moment.
We are now in the bounds of the ridiculous.
“Anything you can do we can do worse”
Australia 295
In reply after 39 overs England’s top seven in the order are all back in the shed for 89.
In conditions when 3-300 in a day would be par.
Out of curiosity, what’s the lowest score which has enabled a follow on to be enforced. :eek:
Since the resumption of Test Cricket in 1948 the lowest total where the follow-on was enforced was South Africa v New Zealand @ Johannesburg 1954 where South Africa scored 243 and the Kiwis replied with 79.
There have been only 5 Tests when the follow-on was enforced when the team batting first scored less than 300.
The lowest involving an Ashes Test were Leeds 1956 (Laker’s Test) where Australia followed-on after scoring 143 in reply to England’s 325 and Birmingham 1975 when England followed on after scoring 101 in reply to Australia’s 359.
(CricInfo’s database must be the best sports stats facility going around.)
Well, that went badly. Not seen anything of it yet so don’t know whether it was great Aussie bowling or poor English batting (or both). All I know is that when you go to bed and Australia are batting and you get up and they’re batting again, that is bad. Seems the best England can hope for now is a draw.
[Pirate King]Here we are again![/Pirate King]
Well I listened to an hour or so last night thinking that I could hear England get the last two wickets cheaply (they did) and then get through the first few overs without drama (they did).
I then slept soundly and all was right with the world until I woke up and turned on TMS.
Oh capricious fate, thy name is England cricket! woe and misery!
Makes for an interesting series though.
Capricious indeed.
What a difference a day makes. :smack:
It’s just after lunch on day 3, Australia lead by 325, and are 2/166. Clarke and Warner are in, and are attacking.
This could get very ugly for the Poms.
6/310 as I write, lead is 469 and both Warner and Clarke got their tons. And Swann actually got a couple of b. next to his name, so hopefully they’ll keep picking him in future tests and we can get 12 runs an over from him all tour.
My guess is Johnson and Haddin go all-out and we declare when the lead passes 500. We’ll want 10-12 overs bat them before stumps.
What happened to England batting? I saw it at breakfast yesterday and they were 55/2. When ai checked it at work, they were 91/8. Now, I have seen Waqar, Warne, McGrath, Ambrose etc run through lineup in a few overs and the bowling was off such quality that even an order consisting only of Bradman, Richards and Tendulkar clones would not have survived.
I really doubt Johnson was as good.
I’m not sure what the English batsmen are doing at the moment. The only positive we can take out of this game so far is Stuart Broad’s performance with the bat and ball.
Well I was totally wrong (again), sorry England fans…
England failing to reach 200 in both innings is an absolute disgrace. We were in a good position after restricting Australia to 295 in their 1st innings, on what we were told was a great batting pitch, but threw the game away from there.
Most of the batsmen need to have a long hard look at themselves before the next match.
Was the Australian bowling attack as world-class as the scorecard suggests, or did the English batsmen play silly shots and gift their wicket to the opposition?
Most of Johnson’s wickets came from balls that the batsmen could have just left alone, but he was very fast and very aggressive. England have failed against this kind of bowling often in the last few years, think South Africa.
And remember, bar Bell (ho ho), the batting was mostly crap in the last series.
Siddle and Harris are just like the England quicks, always at you and not giving anything away. Johnson reminds me of Jeff Thomson who also took lots of wickets from crap balls because of his pace.
For anyone interested in an insight into facing fast bowling Adam Zwar (writer of Wilfred) made the fascinating documentary Bodyline which will be available for 6 more days.
Well, there’s Trott off home with a stress-related disorder. Score one for mental disintegration, eh?
If, after Day 1, you’d drawn up plausible worst case possible scenarios for the England tour (so removing the all out for 15 type scenarios and tour bus held hostage and then blown up fantasies), would it not look something like this? Total disintegration with the bat, failure to bowl the opposition out, another massive collapse, stories in the press with us having a moan about the nasty Australians sledging us (however beyond the pale Clarke’s comments were, some of the press reaction in particular has been pretty pearl clutching from journalists who 8-9 years ago were lauding Harmison for *actually *hurting a member of the opposition) and then, the coup de grace, a player forced off tour for mental health reasons. I’d say that the only way is up from here – but that’s not necessarily true – we could bump along the bottom for the duration, like we did under Flintoff.
We were crap in this Test and the Aussies were pretty good. At some point, our batsmen need to come to the party. As don’t ask points out above, the batting was mostly crap in the last series too. If the English bats don’t support the efforts of their bowlers - in the first dig here in particular, they utterly abdicated responsibility - then this tour is going to be long and damn uncomfortable.
This was apparently an issue for some time. I’m sure the poor performance by the rest of the team hasn’t helped him onto an even keel but I don’t think that has caused it.
Oh, and don’t Clarke’s press conference comment look a little bad taste now that this has come to light? The England management have been at pains this morning to deflect criticism away from Clarke, good call as we really don’t want to get dragged into a slanging match over a real mental illness issue. I suspect Clarke won’t feel too good about what he said but the sooner that gets diffused the better for everyone.
As for the “arm-breaking” sledging?..meh, swings and roundabouts. I’ve heard worse and broken bones are an occupational hazard as a fast-bowling tail-ender.
Let’s just hope that Trott gets the support he needs, Clarke introduces a little more class and wit into his repertoire and England regroup for test 2.
I don’t buy the doom-mongers scenarios. Australia were battered in the 2nd test this summer, a scant few months ago and yet have put up a great performance here, one test does not a series make, and there is no better sport than test cricket for drama and intrigue.