• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*Official* Second Test at Lords

zaremba

zaremba

Cricketer Of The Year
Freddie 95.1 mph to dismiss the batsman formerly known as Mr Cricket.

Gutted that he's going when I see that kind of thing. So unlike Botham, who was struggling to hit 59.1mph by about 1986 and yet kept playing until the 1990s
 
Woodster

Woodster

International Captain
Richard said:
Much as we've bowled refreshingly decently today (though certainly not outstandingly - only Ponting was genuinely got out, the rest it was all bad batting to varying extents), I just can't see the point in confidently proclaiming your certainty of bowling well and blundering straight on then finding it doesn't happen, if you've the alternative of not doing.

If England bowl well in Australia's second dig, they'll win follow-on or no follow-on. If they bowl badly, they'll (probably) lose if they enforce and (probably) draw if they don't. It's just a case of insuring for the eventuality of bowling badly while not making any effect on the outcome if you bowl well.

As I say - not enforcing is a win-win situation. You just have nothing to lose by batting again, you have something to lose by enforcing the follow-on.

As for Strauss backing his bowlers, so much of that is about his own demeneur. As long as he says the right things and keeps the right body-language, he can put it accross as a positive to take whatever option he chooses.
Click to expand...
Regards Strauss, he can put it across as a positive either way, but actions certainly speak louder than words. Back his bowlers to rattle through Australia a second time, ok it may not be as successful the second time round, but if we bowl anything like, and that is what he has to be thinking, we should be in a pretty good position.

Don't believe it's as cut and dried or as straightforward as to say we bowl badly while enforcing the follow-on we probably lose, we bowl badly without enforcing, and we probably draw. That's far too simplistic, I understand where you're coming from but so much can happen to disprove that theory. To be fair I'm sure you probably expected Australia to pass our total of around 400, but it has never looked like happening. You play the percentages, I've no problem with that, I just think we have to do what's best to win the game, not enasure we don't lose it, and enforcing the follow-on, imo, gives us the best chance, in the right conditions.
 
four_or_six

four_or_six

Cricketer Of The Year
Richard said:
Thinking about this again, isn't it just fantastic that England can bat, from three downwards, pretty damn poorly, and bowl no more than decently, but still have Australia completely on the rack... at Lord's.

In so many ways this was so unlikely. Which is why it's so important that we get the job finished and don't let them back into it.

There are precious few people who will remember England beating Australia at Lord's once. There is no-one who will remember them doing it more than once. England have a phenomenal opportunity to do something impossibly rare.

And it's so bloody annoying that we didn't get that bloody 650 score that we absolutely should've got from 196 for 0. If we'd done that we could've been on for an innings-and-300-run victory. That'd feel like it did when Man Utd beat Arsenal 6-1 in 2000/01.
Click to expand...
That's a good point... I really must phone my Grandad if it looks like we might win, see if he can remember the last time.
 
zaremba

zaremba

Cricketer Of The Year
four_or_six said:
What makes a face punchable anyway? I've never understood that.
Click to expand...
I've thought of starting a thread on why I'd like to punch Peter Siddle's face. But I realise it won't improve Anglo-Crim relations here, nor do CW any favours, nor reflect well on me. So I won't.
 
Son Of Coco

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Hmmm, interesting night's cricket. Australia and England seem to have done a complete switch after the First Test. Then Australia decide to raise them one really poor performance..
 
J

Jakester1288

International Regular
What time did they start play again after the second rain delay? I went to bed at 1am-ish because it was raining, now I'm not sure if I should have stayed up or went to bed. Leaning towards going to bed was the right option.

Was Hussey in good knick after the second delay?
 
NUFAN

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
LOL at all of the "this pitch is a road" comments during the first day when Australia was bowling poorly.

We are in deep merde.
 
Bahnz

Bahnz

Hall of Fame Member
Hmmm...$3.50 for a draw isn't too bad considering it's forecast to rain for the next two days.
 
marc71178

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
GeraintIsMyHero said:
£60, dammit, paying £70 for edgbaston, and the train is dearer as well, and probably the beers. BUT it is Saturday at Edgbaston so it should be pretty ****ing special, watching us go to the brink of 2-0
Click to expand...
My Headingley tickets were £50 each, Day 4 to clinch it 3-0?

Of course I'm going up on the Saturday for a Monday game so suspect the beer money will be a bit more than the ticket price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top