BoxRec

it wasnt played much in south africa on sat neither, well not by the aussies. what a turn around that was from the week prior.

and ok then wessels wasnt exactly an aussie was he?

sorry mate is a bug bear of mine, dont mind if you have lineage but there are too many players switiching nationalities in sport for my liking just cos it suits them. England included in some cases just not in pietersons as there is blood ties. Hick is a good example, aint English, never will be english, should have played for Zimbabwe could have been selected to play for them not England..

Pietersen was excellent with the bat, his fielding is normally much better perhaps nerves got the better of him in the field?

I think they should move him up the order to 4 as he seems able to stick around against the Aussies, he could even play as high as 3 if he was a little less extravagant and took a few less chances. If Vaughan wasnt captain he would be out of the side, very poor in this test.

The Aussies were pretty good though, McGrath was at his very best in this match. Over the hill my arse.

The one positive coming out of this is that by the time the next series comes round, Aussie's best players, perhaps Lee and Gilchrist excepted, will definitely be over the hill or retired. None of the younger guys looked totally convincing to me, even Katich and Clarke looked shaky at points despite their runs. Certainly not the solidity of a Waugh coming in at 5 or 6.

By contrast, Jones, Harmison and Flintoff will all still be young enough, Anderson might even have stopped spraying balls to every corner of the globe, Pietersen will be a test thoroughbred, Bell and Strauss will be well bedded in, Jones will be quality, etc etc.

nickd wrote:Pietersen was excellent with the bat, his fielding is normally much better perhaps nerves got the better of him in the field?

I think they should move him up the order to 4 as he seems able to stick around against the Aussies, he could even play as high as 3 if he was a little less extravagant and took a few less chances. If Vaughan wasnt captain he would be out of the side, very poor in this test.

The Aussies were pretty good though, McGrath was at his very best in this match. Over the hill my arse.

The comment on Vaughan, to me is ludicrous. The guy is quality, class is permanent, form is temporary.

Vaughn will make runs but everyone underestimates the drain being captain is on a player.

His average as captain is 36. But I also think batting at 3 doesn't suit him, he's an opener and should be played as one.

Agreed. I'd be interested to see Vaughan and Trescothick swapped.

I'd like to see trescothick get someone to cut the shoe lace that ties his feet together.

vaughan should open

class may well be permanent but he hasnt looked good for over a year and a half now with the bat.

its time he performed Dave and i notice you pick on a fellow yorkshirman to defend fella, there are plenty more worthy of being defended at present.

Fact is Vaughan hasnt scored enough runs of late to warrant a test number 3 slot. If being captain is such a drain then he should hand it someone else though god knows who (this isnt a serious suggestion). We need our best players scoring runs and Vaughan isnt even getitng out to jaffa's.

He is simply closing the face of the bat to early and playing toward mid on. See my rant aobut English batsmen needing to play down the correct line. Its not that difficult and something a "class" bat should be able to do even when out of touch.

plus you cant do that agianst Mcgrath.

Valid points J.

Maybe we should drop him and bring in erm, well there is....erm....

Butcher? Solanki? Maddy? Thorpe? Ramprakash?

You clearly know more about this than me, which is some concession considering your not from the Religious home of cricket but to suggest we drop Vaughan when we've won 14 out of 19 tests with him at the helm is akin to telling Nelson to take a back seat and ask Uncle Albert to sail off for Trafalgar.

The mistake, as Athers pointed out, was picking Bell and not Peiterson versus Bangladesh, because Bell was always gonna get loads, as was Thorpe and Pieterson was always gonna do well in the one-dayers. Leaving them this quandry where they HAD to opt for youth over experience.

Thorpe and Pieterson was clearly the better option.

Thorpey averages 46 versus Australia and I bet there aren't six other batsmen in the world who can claim that?

DP

dunno bout knowing more mate, opinions are opinions buddy, just played a lot of cricket in my time and opener / number 3 was my position, ill bet you a pound to a ton that you can bowl better than me though, i havent got a bloody clue, its more a matter of which pitch its gonna land one that what line

anyway

agree with all you say there mate.

there isnt anyone else NOW, thorpe has retired.

But there will be, Joyce is looking good at Essex for starters. but thats for the future not this series. Id also like a a look at Garath Keedy frm lancs at international level, one thing i like spinners to be able to do is spin it otherwise whats the point?

like the idea of switchig tres and vaughan around as well whomever posted that.

tres just doesnt look like an opener to me, he doesnt have the patience.

Funny old game is cricket with it's multitude of little nuances that help make it what it is. No wonder the Americans will never ever get it

erm, can someone please explain the LBW rule in plain English

If the ball hits you pad first and would have gone on to hit the stumps, your out lbw.

That the essence of it, its far more complex than that.

But cricket is a game where two teams play. They toss for who gets to choose who goes in, the team that wins can send the other in or go in themselves, if they send the other team in they they go out and try to get the team that are in, out. When they have got all the players who were in out then the team that was in go out and the team that was out go in. The the team that was in but is now out try and get the team that was out and is now in, out. The team with the most runs when both teams are out wins, or the team with the most runs when the overs are over wins.

DavidPayne wrote:If the ball hits you pad first and would have gone on to hit the stumps, your out lbw.

That the essence of it, its far more complex than that.

But cricket is a game where two teams play. They toss for who gets to choose who goes in, the team that wins can send the other in or go in themselves, if they send the other team in they they go out and try to get the team that are in, out. When they have got all the players who were in out then the team that was in go out and the team that was out go in. The the team that was in but is now out try and get the team that was out and is now in, out. The team with the most runs when both teams are out wins, or the team with the most runs when the overs are over wins.

Thanks. I'm from Oz so I think I understand most facets of the game. Except for the pissy little nuances of the LBW rule of course. Nobody understands the LBW rule fully :x

You guys may not be aware that Harold Larwood migrated here after WW2? and settled in Queensland I believe (northern Oz, warm tropical climate). Made a ton of friends and was a popular fellow, which is a bit unusual considering the importance of the Ashes series in his day and Harold's role in the Bodyline series. Old coal miner from way back was Harold and died here 10 years ago

DavidPayne wrote:If the ball hits your pad first and would have gone on to hit the stumps, you're out lbw.

Even the full explaination isn't too difficult.
A batsman can try to hit the ball, or just leave it alone and watch it fly by.

If a batsman tries to hit a legal delivery, the statement quoted above true, but remember the following:
The ball must not pitch outside the line of leg stump (unless bowling around the wicket)
The ball must hit the batman while the ball is directly IN FRONT of the the stumps.

However, if a batsman was just leaving the ball and not playing a shot, it's slightly different.
The ball doesn't have to hit the batman while the ball is directly IN FRONT of the the stumps, it just has to be travelling in a line where it would have gone on to hit the stumps.

Sorry boys, had to do it

Q. What do Geraint Jones and Michael Jackson have in common?
A. They both wear gloves for no apparent reason
Q. What is the height of optimism?
A. An English batsman applying sunscreen.
Q. What does Ashley Giles put in his hands to make sure the next ball almost always takes a wicket?
A. A bat.
Q. What would Glen McGrath be if he was an Englishman?
A. An all-rounder.
Q. What advantage do Kevin Pieterson, Andrew Strauss and Geraint Jones have over the rest of their team-mates?
A. At least they can say they're not really English.
Q. What is the English version of a hat-trick?
A. Three runs in three balls.
Q. What do you call an Englishman with 100 runs against his name?
A. A bowler.
Q. What is the most proficient form of footwork displayed by English batsmen?
A. The walk back to the pavilion.
Q. Who has the easiest job in the English squad?
A. The guy who removes the red ball marks from the bats.
Q. Why is Andrew Flintoff the unluckiest English player?
A. Because he was born in England.
Q. What does "Ashes" stand for?
A. Another Sad Horrific English Series.
Q. What's the English version of LBW?
A. Lost, Beaten, Walloped.
Q. Who spends the most time on the crease of anyone in the English team?
A. The person who ironed the cricket whites

Liam Williams wrote:I have a confidence in the top order to do the business.Hopefully they will.

Kevin wrote:Bloody addictive, my best was 210-7 last night

I just retained the Ashes for the Aussies.

248 - 6 off 12.3 overs.

Its the spinners that are the problem for me, Shane Warne gets me all the time so I had to change alliance.

Have you tried the Knockout torunament, I can get to the semis as England, Austrailia, New Zealand and the West Indies but can never go further.

stujones wrote:

Kevin wrote:Bloody addictive, my best was 210-7 last night

I just retained the Ashes for the Aussies.

248 - 6 off 12.3 overs.

Its the spinners that are the problem for me, Shane Warne gets me all the time so I had to change alliance.

Have you tried the Knockout torunament, I can get to the semis as England, Austrailia, New Zealand and the West Indies but can never go further.

Just won the ashes for England

Australia = 252 for 8 off 15

England = 257 for 9 off 13.4

looks like you are our best bet Stu

Coconut wrote:The one positive coming out of this is that by the time the next series comes round, Aussie's best players, perhaps Lee and Gilchrist excepted, will definitely be over the hill or retired. None of the younger guys looked totally convincing to me, even Katich and Clarke looked shaky at points despite their runs. Certainly not the solidity of a Waugh coming in at 5 or 6.

By contrast, Jones, Harmison and Flintoff will all still be young enough, Anderson might even have stopped spraying balls to every corner of the globe, Pietersen will be a test thoroughbred, Bell and Strauss will be well bedded in, Jones will be quality, etc etc.

There are a lot of young players waiting for there chance, Shaun Tate is as quick as Lee and there is also the left handed Nicolson. There are a hell of a lot of batters in the state teams here that could easily step up too.

England have named an unchanged side for the second test. Good move as some confidence needs to be shown by the selectors in the English guys. Although it may be a damned if you do and damned if you don't type scenario

McGrath's at it again in the press, making bold and (maybe not so) wild predictions about the next test

yip thats Mcgraths job though mate, he is kinda like a polite David cmpese, the guy you love to hate you know. I pay it little credence but when you have just bowled your team to victory you are allowed a little mouthing off.


new test in a few days lets see if we make a better fist of it

J wrote:yip thats Mcgraths job though mate, he is kinda like a polite David cmpese, the guy you love to hate you know. I pay it little credence but when you have just bowled your team to victory you are allowed a little mouthing off.


new test in a few days lets see if we make a better fist of it

You guys have a good record at Edgabaston so we'll be expecting nothing less, this time round

Someone may want to consider taking gamesmanship to new levels and texting Warne continuously with lovey dovey messages during the match

haha perhaps someone could pretend to be a (female) nurse - and that might put him off his err stroke

gotta love warney blokes a genius. and like most genius they are flawed but who cares! I wish he was english tho.

I still think ashley giles is a complete twat have you seenhom moaning on in the press, yeah right course Bonker wants the aussies to win, shut up you prize tit Ashley!. Anyone that bowls in sun glasses is a complete plonker anyway.

hehe Simon Jones isn't too impressed with the press over there either

they should concentrate on playing cricket not what the press is saying. Im sorry but the shamless gutless batting performance is worthy of criticism, they dropped 7 catches what do they want ...oh unlucky that, for fucks sake what do they want you to say, aaaah well you did your best, even when they didnt and played to a level above village cricket in terms of batting and fielding?

also if you dont want to be criticsed in the press one assumes it might be an idea to keep your mouth shut in regard to the age of the oppo's bowling? If they are so past it then Warne and Mcgrath shouldnt have been able to roll em over like that, you cant have it both ways.

petulant at best this and rather worrying, should be water of a ducks back to an extent and concentrate on getting to the nitty gritty of improving your game before the next test. This is what should be known as Clive Woodward syndrome, they want to use the press to turn up the heat but cant handle it when they become the subjects of that heat.

still lets hope the talking stops and the action starts on Thurs cos they didnt do themselves justice in the first test.