Going to be a struggle for England to force a victory from here - the only comfort is that the Australians really do have a recent history of collapsing horribly, so there’s a fair chance they could be all gone below 350, giving England the chance of matching first innings scores.
Is it my imagination or are England trying to turn cricket into something akin to American football? Guys just wander on and off the field, at will, uninjured to be replaced, not by the twelfth man, but some specialist fieldsman brought in for the job. Today the commentary team surmised that Swann was about to bowl because, “he often goes off to the dressing room before a spell.” He has just finished bowling now and surprise, surprise off he goes again.
I’m sure if the laws allowed it they would just have the bowlers watch play from the pavilion, substituted by fielding specialists, to only come on to bowl their spell.
Australia solidly placed here. Clarke looks great when he is scoring big. Now it will be interesting to see how they fare in bowling. Spinner Lyon will be crucial for them.
watched some of the yesterday’s highlights, what an incompetent decision by the 3rd umpire on Khawaja’s review.
Phil Hughes must be gutted to have been dropped for this match.
Re: England’s fielding habits - they’ve been doing it for years. Why hasn’t the law changed to prevent them from doing it? Oz were having a moan about it in 2005 - and then Ponting blew his top when he got run out by Gary Pratt, when Simon Jones was off (unfortunately for Ponting, he picked the wrong moment - Jones never played international cricket again from the point he went off, as he was genuinely injured). I’d agree it’s, at best, sharp practice - but something needs to be done by lawmakers to shut it down, otherwise it will continue to be done.
Oz are in one hell of a position here. Big England batting performance required to try and usher this game towards a draw.
I was just about to say that England have been fighting back nicely since lunch. Bell played beautifully at times, so that’s a big wicket for Australia. Those two looked set to go on and get big hundreds. England still have plenty of batting to come and it looks like they’re going to need every one of those players.
KP has just gone, plumb LBW, and he’s wasted a review. Whilst I can see why - he is an important batsman, and he’s in and set - I still don’t like to see teams chancing a review in the hope that the umpire got it wrong. Sadly, the way the rules are set up, you can’t really blame the players for trying.
I know that hotspot can be affected by certain external factors such as hot weather, but I was convinced that KP got a feather of an inside edge on the ball that dismissed him. Very surprising to me that none of the commentators and more importantly, the third umpire noticed it.
I have traitorously backed England at $21 in the belief that I am getting 20/1 about Australia collapsing in the second innings. They must be more likely than that to score less than 120.
There may well be plenty of breaks in the play tomorrow, looking at the forecast. Sensible batting should see England save the test match. I hope.
Play to start at 11:30 today but I don’t expect enough play for Australia to force a result.
To be fair to England, 350+ on a 3rd day pitch here is none too shabby. Certainly looking at Australia’s second knock we can see how the par score is reducing. I suspect that England have done enough to close this out now.
Shame that we probably won’t see a result here to retain the Ashes but such is test cricket (and of course…I may well be speaking too soon!)
Weather permitting it looks like it might get to be a really tight result.
First session down and England’s three best back in the shed.
Not many runs on the board which doesn’t matter as far as the score goes but doe impact the mindset of the batsman. I’d have been tempted to and try and put the ball into some of those puddles of water over the boundary.
There’s some bounce and turn for the spinners, the odd shooter for the seamers.
Was disappointed that Cook burned a review on his palpable LBW. . I think KP was a tough but correct call. The sound had the character of an edge, as distinct from Khawaja’s.
Gee, I hope England don’t fall victim to yet another crap decision from the umpires with no reviews left.
Ah well, there we go. Not the best way to retain the ashes but the good work was done in the first two tests.
I do think that the Aussies should’ve been much bolder. They were always going to be up against the weather and a quick thrash yesterday to get a 250 lead and early declaration was the best option for a victory.
I don’t think, to be honest, there was ever much chance of Australia winning once England got past the follow on target, since so much of this last day has been lost to rain.
England’s out of form top order has been exposed again in this game. Australia will be hopeful of continuing strongly and drawing the series.
The right hand giveth and the left hand taketh away. Australia had a huge slice of luck with the toss and the condition, what with having first go on a lovely track in belting hot sunlight and then much more mediocre weather when it came to England’s turn, so it evens up when the weather over-compensates.
Weather turned the whole rubber around back in 1936-37 when Australia were 2-0 down and seven for 180-odd on a perfect track, and then heavy rain turned their losing score into an invaluable 200-9. England declared at 32-7 in the hope of some cheap wickets, but Australia sent in their tail-enders to open and lost a couple of inconsequential ones before bad light stopped play. Next day the pitch rolled out a beauty and Bradman made about a million runs for an unbeatable lead, and the trend continued through the last two matches. Well, no repeat of the miracle this time.
England batting first, and making slow progress in that way that they’ve tended to do. Durham - who have batted first in every Championship game played this season - have yet to get over 280 in their first innings. But Yorkshire successfully chased 330 to win (with Joe Root getting a ton).
Liking the look of Bird, and all the Australian bowlers are keeping it tight and not giving the easy hit balls that could speed England along.
Can someone explain this umpiring decision?
I was under the impression that umpires give you out, but not determine the method. In other words the umpire raises his finger for out. Not out by stumping or out by caught.
So why was it not out?
This is my understanding of the dismissal:
- England appeal. The appeal covers any type of dismissal.
- Tony Hill believes Rogers hit the ball and gives him out caught.
- When Rogers calls for a review, Hill conveys to the third umpire what method of dismissal he based his decision on.
- The third umpire overturns the caught decision as he didn’t hit it.
- He then checks for LBW. The Hawk-Eye call is boderline so the field umpire’s decision stands which is not out LBW.
It sounds as though the ICC is considering changes that would avoid this situation.
I don’t have a problem with the Rogers decision. I’m not sure what the alternative could be without creating as many problems as it solves. The third umpire asks the field umpire to reconsider LBW with the knowledge that the batsman didn’t hit the ball? Assume Hawk-Eye is 100% correct for all LBW decisions?
The problem with DRS is the same as without DRS - it’s not infallible. It does narrow the margins for error, however. (It also largely does away with accusations of umpire bias.) I think there needs to be an acceptance that very close calls are still going to be a gamble.
Wicketkeeper Leslie Ames once appealed twice off the same ball against Don Bradman (of all people). He’d taken a clean catch but also took the bails off and appealed to the square-leg umpire (whose decision it is for a stumping), then on being turned down appealed to the bowler’s umpire (whose decision it is for a catch), who gave Bradman out. Ames said in his autobiography Close of Play that there was some chat about it in the papers, but none from anyone who was involved, least of all Bradman. Not quite the same situation though.
Anyway, Australia need 299 to win after Anderson, who went the longest time before notching his first 0 in Tests, continues to make up for his slow start. But if Harris has been hooping the new ball around this morning, what price the England quicks?
Great start from Australia, but it’s gone a little off the rails.