*Official* Second Test at Lords

[tooextracool]

KP got a good one, got a very fine edge to the keeper who managed to hold on to it which was a bit of a surprise given the day he'd had

Collingwood will be kicking himself - he tamely chipped Clarke to mid-on - but tbf he does score a lot of runs with that shot

Freddie prodding and edging to slip

Prior bowled through the gate by a lovely inswinger, but a loose looking shot

Some uncannily similar dismissals to Cardiff actually, esp when you add Bopara's lbw

Not particularly worried about KP or Collingwood's dismissal tbh. KP got a good ball while Collingwood would have probably hit that ball for 4 9 out of 10 times so I couldnt blame him for trying to hit the part timer over the top.

Freddie poking outside off stump is a technical issue, playing with hard hands has been a hallmark of his career, always been a bit susceptible to the outswinger.

Prior got an excellent delivery, dont want to put too much emphasis on the shot because I dont think anyone expected a ball that was 79 overs old to swing conventionally as much as that one did. Nonetheless, his technique, as I said from the very first time I saw him bat, is circumspect against the swinging ball as he often plays away from his body with limited footwork. Dont be too surprised if we see many inswingers against him this summer.

Not sure what to make of Bopara's dismissal. Any half decent test batsman should be somewhat ready to combat the ball that goes straight on from an outswing bowler. Nonetheless, looking at the seam position of that ball, you would expect it to be an outswinger. So i'll give him the benefit of the doubt, though Im starting to get a little bit worried about his temperament as it seems like he comes in with a pre-defined mindset when in reality he should really play according to the situation and according to how the ball is hitting his bat.

 

[tooextracool]

The fact you think otherwise suggests you live in several imaginary Worlds. So the fact that Anderson bowled one outswinger that hit the middle of the bat is the basis for the entire "Anderson swinging it both ways at 90mph and Hughes was dismantling him through the offside" notion?

I see.

For once, completely AWTA and well said.

 

[tooextracool]

a) Australia really hasn't tried to "bounce out" Strauss. They've left blokes back for the pull and hook, mainly as a reason to make him sit back and think that they're going to try and bounce him out, and then get him pushing at full balls to nick them, or get him LBW when he's only half forward. They just haven't executed well enough.

Indeed, on rewatching the highlights you are right. They did bowl far too wide though and occasionally on the pads both of which are bread and butter strokes for him and really allowed him to get set. IMO you really need to aim to get 5 out of 6 balls an over to Strauss full and just outside the off stump. Even when he just got to 50 when Hilfenhaus pitched the ball in the right areas he looked circumspect.

c) To say that Johnson's ball wasn't a good one is pretty silly. If you think that Cook wasn't late on that, you'd be kidding yourself.

You think he was beaten for pace? That ball was 93mph, yes its fast but Johnson has been bowling in the 90s for most of the test and for most of the series so far. If anything, he was a bit surprised to get a straight ball which kept a bit low on him. Decent delivery, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[tooextracool]

That applies to all batsmen though really. The batsman who it is not a good idea to pitch it up, attack the stumps and look to swing it, and more early doors than ever, is exceptionally rare.

If the ball is swinging yes. Otherwise its a futile exercise to pitch the ball up as Hoggard has so cruelly found out in the past. With Strauss you bowl full irrespective of whether the ball is swinging or not because hes reluctant to drive.

 

[tooextracool]

Australia have been reasonable today. Too many four-balls, especially from Midge, but plenty of wicket-taking deliveries too.

Disagree. With the exception of Hilfenhaus the rest of the attack was poor, even Hauritz looked as poor as he should always be made to look for the few overs that he bowled. Australia were lucky that the good deliveries that they bowled took wickets, which is not always the case.

 

[Top_Cat]

Not sure what to make of Bopara's dismissal. Any half decent test batsman should be somewhat ready to combat the ball that goes straight on from an outswing bowler.

There lies the difference between watching and doing. Labelling someone as an 'outswing bowler' is a bit silly because Hilf can swing the ball both ways, out-swing is just higher percentage bowling. Hilf was trying to draw him out since the ball wasn't swinging that much or consistently.

Was quality bowling and what you have to do on a flat deck; bowl good lines so that if the ball swings, all good but if it doesn't, still a good ball. Not as easy to keep out as you think, especially at 145Km/h+.

 

[Prince EWS]

Hilf can swing the ball both ways

Hmm nah, DWTA. Have heard this throughout his entire career from various people, but I've never actually seen him bowl a genuine innie. He has an off-cutter and a ball he bowls from wide of the crease that angles in more, but he doesn't swing the ball both ways.

 

[Top_Cat]

Hmm nah, DWTA. Have heard this throughout his entire career from various people, but I've never actually seen him bowl a genuine innie. He has an off-cutter and a ball he bowls from wide of the crease that angles in more, but he doesn't swing the ball both ways.

Didn't say he could consistently get it to go. It's more like Glenn McGrath's; only comes out if he's hit his straps that day and doesn't go heaps.

 

[Burgey]

Hmm nah, DWTA. Have heard this throughout his entire career from various people, but I've never actually seen him bowl a genuine innie. He has an off-cutter and a ball he bowls from wide of the crease that angles in more, but he doesn't swing the ball both ways.

Nailed Pietersen with one in Cardiff ittbt. Given not out by Doctrove in a shock to all concerned.

Can't say I've seen him do it regularly though.

 

[pasag]

Hope we don't have a repeat of Melbourne today.

 

[tooextracool]

There lies the difference between watching and doing. Labelling someone as an 'outswing bowler' is a bit silly because Hilf can swing the ball both ways, out-swing is just higher percentage bowling. Hilf was trying to draw him out since the ball wasn't swinging that much or consistently.

Was quality bowling and what you have to do on a flat deck; bowl good lines so that if the ball swings, all good but if it doesn't, still a good ball. Not as easy to keep out as you think, especially at 145Km/h+.

If Hilf can swing the ball both ways, Im yet to see it. The ball that got Bopara just went straight on, maybe hit the seam but it was meant to be an outswinger, you can clearly tell from the direction of the seam. To me anyone who bowls a particular type of delivery far more often than another type is considered to be that type of bowler. Much like McGrath is a 'seam' bowler rather than swing bowler because he was primarily a seamer not because he couldnt get the ball to swing ever.

Regarding the delivery, Im not saying it wasnt good bowling. Hilf has been a class above everyone else so far this series, but the point Im making though is that as a batsman you have to be incredibly dim to not be expecting a bowler who bowls primarily outswingers to not get one to nip back off the seam at some point.

 

[Burgey]

Hope we don't have a repeat of Melbourne today.

It's on the cards imo.

Spearhead bowling poorly; well-set batsman at one end; useful tailenders at the other and we're a bowler short.

All-out 390 then

 

[Top_Cat]

Regarding the delivery, Im not saying it wasnt good bowling. Hilf has been a class above everyone else so far this series, but the point Im making though is that as a batsman you have to be incredibly dim to not be expecting a bowler who bowls primarily outswingers to not get one to nip back off the seam at some point.

Again, there's a massive difference between knowing it's coming and actually playing it. I'd be pretty confident in saying Bopara knew it was coming. Still had to cope with it. I don't care how good you are, facing someone even bowling dead straight at 145Km/h is tough. Pressure plays its part too. What seems obvious from the sidelines isn't so when you're the one on the receiving end.

 

[tooextracool]

Again, there's a massive difference between knowing it's coming and actually playing it. I'd be pretty confident in saying Bopara knew it was coming. Still had to cope with it. I don't care how good you are, facing someone even bowling dead straight at 145Km/h is tough. Pressure plays its part too. What seems obvious from the sidelines isn't so when you're the one on the receiving end.

Given the position that he got himself into, I very much doubt he saw it coming. He was really in position to play the outswinger. It may well be that he saw the seam position early and thought it was going to go away and Im prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt on that.

Im not sure what you mean when you say "even facing someone dead straight at 145km/h is tough". Yes its tough, but you'd expect test quality players to be able to face it. There is no excuse for getting out to a dead straight ball at 145 km/h if they were expecting it, it is a mistake on the batter's part if he gets out to it.

 

[DaRick]

I was disappointed in most of our bowling attack. Siddle was inconsistent, Johnson was mostly horrible (except towards the end), whilst Hauritz/North bowled competently without really looking like breaking through. Hilfenhaus was good, though. Consistent, got the old ball to swing somewhat (that ball to dismiss Flintoff was a textbook outswinger) and looked like the only Test-class bowler out there.

Nevertheless, I wonder whether England missed an opportunity to take the ascendancy. From 0/196 to 6/364. 364 is still a good score, but this is a fairly flat wicket (although maybe not as much so as Cardiff).

 

[JBH001]

Well, England lost their way a little didnt they? I dont see how 450 or so can be regarded as a good score on this pitch, because (unless rain intervenes) there will still be plenty of time for Australia to bat, and score 700, with 3 - 4 sessions left to play. All this fast scoring means that old first innings scores of 400 are no longer 'safe'.

But speaking of rain, what is it looking like? If there is likely to be no play during the morning session, I may as well head off after dinner to the internet cafe and spend a pleasant few hours killing people with my AK-47 (or my M4 - A1 Colt Carbine).

 

[biased indian]

hopefully with lot of rain intervals and the coditions make its a hard pitch to bat on and we have a good test match with a result....england should score a minumum of 420+ from here on

 

[wfdu_ben91]

The fact you think otherwise suggests you live in several imaginary Worlds. So the fact that Anderson bowled one outswinger that hit the middle of the bat is the basis for the entire "Anderson swinging it both ways at 90mph and Hughes was dismantling him through the offside" notion?

I see.

No, if you actually watched Hughes bat, you'd see that Anderson was setting up Hughes perfectly with a few inswingers before bowling an outswinger that Hughes crashed through cover. Similar to what Hilfenhaus was doing to Pietersen and Bopara, except Anderson was bowling 5mph quicker. Hughes also coverdrove a massive inswinger that was going to hit offstump through cover aswell acouple of times but only resulted in 1 boundry because England put fielders out there. Hughes did the same thing to Steyn in South Africa, great player of swing bowling. Gotta give credit when it's due.

 

[JBH001]

Weather forecast is not, to say the least, all that flash.

BBC Weather | London

 

[pup11]

Amazing day of test cricket yesterday, England were in total control after the huge 1st wicket partnership between Cook and Strauss, but from there on, Australian bowlers came back pretty strongly in the last session.

Though, with Strauss still batting, and England already having 360 odd on the board, England are in a better position, but if Australian bowlers can wipe out the English tail quickly this morning, then they could change the momentum of the game in their favour, but given the track-record of the Australian bowlers recently against the tail-end batsmen, I'm not really getting my hopes up.

Unlike the Cardiff test though, this time around none on the English batsmen can really be accused of throwing their wickets, all the wickets apart from Collingwood's feel to some very good balls, though the only problem for Australia was, that these good wicket taking balls, were very few and far between.

Was also impressed with Nathan Hauritz, when he was struck by the ball, I thought that was the end of the game for him, but he showed some character coming back on the field on the last session, hopefully he would be okay to bowl today.