OT - The Ashes

[BroadstairsR 2,202]

1 minute ago, TheGunnShow said:

Even if you decided to absolutely lacerate it?

Yes.

[dylanisabaddog 4,975]

14 hours ago, king canary said:

 

Just to be clear, I also don't think it would be unlucky for Australia if it finishes 2-2 or had finished 3-2 to us. Its largely been a tight series decided on fine margins. Weirdly the most one sided test is the only one without a result.

I disagree on the luck part. The biggest piece of bad luck this series has been Australia losing Nathan Lyon, a world class spinner midway through the first test, thus playing half a match a bowler down and the rest of the series without a key player.

Stuff about conditions and catching isn't luck in my view. We won every single toss until this test- if we were bowling or batting in non ideal conditions in the first couple of days it's because we chose to.

 

I think the toss is ludicrous. It makes a huge difference and that is down to luck. As a bare minimum there should be one toss per series with a 3-2 advantage to the winner. I'd go a step further and give the visiting team 3 choices. In Ashes cricket in particular home advantage is enormous so it would even things up. 

As for injuries in this series, we missed Wood to start with and we've also missed Leach and Archer. If we'd had a fully fit Wood and Archer for the whole series we'd have won comfortably but like football it's now a squad game and you have to live with it. But when it comes to spin bowling in tests Lyon is about as good as it gets. 

Overall this series has been as good as 2005 which was the best I'd seen. Win or lose it's been wonderful stuff. We should remember it with fondness because we're about to lose Broad and Anderson. Wood is injury prone and without those 3 we're going to struggle to bowl anyone out, particularly as I fear we won't see Archer again. 

[Gordon Bennett 789]

1 hour ago, BroadstairsR said:

Yes, but If England can score that amount in just one day this Aussie batting line-up can surely do it with two (or whatever the best part of two is permitted by the weather.) We may even be relying on Joe Root as our front line spinner.

I'll bet the Australians haven't given up. 

I'm sure they haven’t but they're not getting 378!

[Daz Sparks 1,182]

2 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

Perhaps the two left will be more careful with their choice of shots and eke out another twenty or so.

My thoughts as well. I'm not entirely convinced the Aussies aren't capable of chasing the present total down.

[BroadstairsR 2,202]

15 minutes ago, Daz Sparks said:

My thoughts as well. I'm not entirely convinced the Aussies aren't capable of chasing the present total down.

It's the time factor for me. If there was just one day left, then no chance, but if we get the best part of two days play available then they have the quality of batsmen to plod towards that total.

It has become a decent batting wicket, nothing plum bur not a minefield of bounce and swing either.

[Aggy 766]

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

We should remember it with fondness because we're about to lose Broad and Anderson. Wood is injury prone and without those 3 we're going to struggle to bowl anyone out, particularly as I fear we won't see Archer again. 

Will be interesting to see who will come through - quite a lot of “possibles” but not a lot of youngsters banging the door down. Wood is 33 as well, Woakes is 34 and I think you’re probably right re Archer unfortunately. Even Robinson and Stone are 30 this year.

Potts you’d think will get a lot more chances, but nobody else really jumping out. Lots of opportunity that’s for sure!

[Gordon Bennett 789]

Tongue.

[BroadstairsR 2,202]

1 hour ago, Gordon Bennett said:

I'm sure they haven’t but they're not getting 378!

Sorry GB but if runs are enough and time lost to weather is a factor why then has Stokes not declared overnight?

 

[Unhinged Canary 375]

5 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

Sorry GB but if runs are enough and time lost to weather is a factor why then has Stokes not declared overnight?

 

Because you wouldn't have just had that moment with Stuart and Jimmy.

[Ken Hairy 3,781]

1 hour ago, Gordon Bennett said:

I'm sure they haven’t but they're not getting 378!

Wouldn't be a problem if they got 378 all out, they need 384

[Branston Pickle 3,683]

5 minutes ago, Unhinged Canary said:

Because you wouldn't have just had that moment with Stuart and Jimmy.

Should have declared and given them 4 overs last night.  We have a game to win, sentiment can take a back seat - surely the best ‘moment’ will be winning the match, that in intself will create plenty of ‘moments’.

Edited July 30, 2023 by Branston Pickle

[Unhinged Canary 375]

19 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Should have declared and given them 4 overs last night.  We have a game to win, sentiment can take a back seat - surely the best ‘moment’ will be winning the match, that in intself will create plenty of ‘moments’.

It was 10 minutes chief.

We'll be fine.

[Branston Pickle 3,683]

11 minutes ago, Unhinged Canary said:

It was 10 minutes chief.

We'll be fine.

No, it would have been 15 minutes at them yesterday, chief. They’d have 100% not wanted to bat.

[Unhinged Canary 375]

2 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

No, it would have been 15 minutes at them yesterday, chief. They’d have 100% not wanted to bat.

Do you not think that maybe, and hear me out here, they might have been involved in the decision?

There's a tiny weeny little chance that they and Stokes and whoever else might actually be in a better position to make the decision than you.

I know that's going to be tough for you to understand, but you're just going to have to try.

[Branston Pickle 3,683]

9 minutes ago, Unhinged Canary said:

Do you not think that maybe, and hear me out here, they might have been involved in the decision?

There's a tiny weeny little chance that they and Stokes and whoever else might actually be in a better position to make the decision than you.

I know that's going to be tough for you to understand, but you're just going to have to try.

Wow, you’re not needlessly confrontational, are you?!

Maybe, just maybe, you should just realise that there is an alternative opinion to yours. Many people thought it was worth a pop at them last night. We’ve given them perfect time to prepare to bat today.

But it is what it is.  You can also calm down, it’s only a game.

[Unhinged Canary 375]

8 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Wow, you’re not needlessly confrontational, are you?!

Maybe, just maybe, you should just realise that there is an alternative opinion to yours. Many people thought it was worth a pop at them last night. We’ve given them perfect time to prepare to bat today.

But it is what it is.  You can also calm down, it’s only a game.

It's not my opinion at all. It's the teams.

I believe it's you that thinks they've made the wrong decision.....

[Branston Pickle 3,683]

3 minutes ago, Unhinged Canary said:

It's not my opinion at all. It's the teams.

I believe it's you that thinks they've made the wrong decision.....

Whatever.  You’re not really that good at this ‘discussion’ lark, are you.  

[Branston Pickle 3,683]

Need to break this opening stand - Ali is looking pretty good, getting a bit of drift and spin out of the rough, just need a couple to grip and scoot low as it did for Root.

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,855]

35 minutes ago, Unhinged Canary said:

Do you not think that maybe, and hear me out here, they might have been involved in the decision?

There's a tiny weeny little chance that they and Stokes and whoever else might actually be in a better position to make the decision than you.

I know that's going to be tough for you to understand, but you're just going to have to try.

England haven't made the best decisions when it comes to declarations in this series though. The one in the first innings of the first Test was too early, and the one in the second innings of the fourth Test was too late. It looked that way to many/most observers at the time and I think hindsight proved those observers right. 

[Branston Pickle 3,683]

Just now, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

England haven't made the best decisions when it comes to declarations in this series though. The one in the first innings of the first Test was too early, and the one in the second innings of the fourth Test was too late. It looked that way to many/most observers at the time and I think hindsight proved those observers right. 

….how dare you have a different opinion!!!

[Gordon Bennett 789]

1 hour ago, BroadstairsR said:

Sorry GB but if runs are enough and time lost to weather is a factor why then has Stokes not declared overnight?

 

I'd possibly have had a little go at them last night but I'd suggest 4-4.5 sessions is still enough to get the ten wickets with a better forecast tomorrow. 

That said the Aussies have made a good start, although wee seen that quite a bit in this series. I think its down to the balls, they seem to not do a great deal for the first twenty overs or so. 

[Aggy 766]

2 hours ago, Gordon Bennett said:

Tongue.

Very possibly. Another who has had some pretty bad injury issues but hopefully if he can avoid those. 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

Feels pretty close to even now… never was going to be easy was it?

[BroadstairsR 2,202]

14 minutes ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

Feels pretty close to even now… never was going to be easy was it?

Perhaps we will be relying on the rain this time around.

Without that the Aussies look comfortable as they will have plenty of time. 

[Gordon Bennett 789]

The ball has pretty much done nothing today. The rain therefore has done England a bit of a favour.

Australia have a great platform, could be another humdinging finish tomorrow.

 

[Ken Hairy 3,781]

Been watching the Gaelic Football since the rain delay, no idea what's going on but its bloody exciting 

[Branston Pickle 3,683]

27 minutes ago, Gordon Bennett said:

The ball has pretty much done nothing today. The rain therefore has done England a bit of a favour.

Australia have a great platform, could be another humdinging finish tomorrow.

 

The forecast for today and tomorrow was always a bit iffy, but it really closed in earlier than expected.  Tomorrow’s forecast is actually quite a bit better now, so let’s hope the game gets a result either way.  If they win then we hold our hands up and say fair enough.  I still think a few overs at them last evening was the way to go…. ; )

[BroadstairsR 2,202]

332-4, then they played 20/20 cricket.

Only one result now, weather permitting.

[Gordon Bennett 789]

6 hours ago, Branston Pickle said:

The forecast for today and tomorrow was always a bit iffy, but it really closed in earlier than expected.  Tomorrow’s forecast is actually quite a bit better now, so let’s hope the game gets a result either way.  If they win then we hold our hands up and say fair enough.  I still think a few overs at them last evening was the way to go…. ; )

Looks muggier and cloudier now for tomorrow, should be a bit more bowler friendly and not quite so easy for batting.

Could certainly go either way. If England can take three or four in the morning session its most certainly game on.

[Gordon Bennett 789]

2 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

332-4, then they played 20/20 cricket.

Only one result now, weather permitting.

Your glass is certainly half empty.