*Official* Second Test at Lords

[JBH001]

Anyone reckon England will bat on for another 30 minutes or so?

 

[pasag]

Anyone reckon England will bat on for another 30 minutes or so?

Just another 30 minutes Australia doesn't have to bat, in theory?

Anyways, reckon that match will be all over today. Our batsmen don't really know how to approach this sort of innings.

 

[stephen]

IMO for the next test Australia need to pick this side:

Hughes
Katich
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
North
Haddin
Johnson
Hauritz
Clark
Hilfenhaus

Basically a straight swap Siddle for Clark. I think Siddle has great potential, but he has been wayward and is less likely to "come good" than Johnson (who can be a real threat even when he's poor). I think Johnson is undropable as is Hilfenhaus. Hauritz should stay. He's proven time and time again that he's a genuine wicket taker and is a vital option for Ponting. The batsmen really have secure places IMO.

 

[TT Boy]

Hope not.

Good from an England POV that if they win this test, it won't be due to a KP special. The other batsman have stood up and it is only he and Ravi who haven't looked at the races.

 

[pasag]

^^ don't mind a change or two, but should really wait till the tour match to make a decision, especially with someone like Clark who hasn't done much since his return from injury.

 

[JBH001]

Just another 30 minutes Australia doesn't have to bat, in theory?

Yeah. Still, have a sneaking suspicion Strauss will keep them out there for just a little while longer. Maybe set 550?

Mind you, not saying he should. Reckon, as everyone else does, they should put Australia in now.

Anyways, reckon that match will be all over today. Our batsmen don't really know how to approach this sort of innings.

Good point. Collectively they may be caught in two minds between playing more naturally and aggressively, or just closing up shop from the get go.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Be a shame to drop Siddle. Has had 3-4 catches dropped during this series and hasn't bowled poorly either.

 

[stephen]

Be a shame to drop Siddle. Has had 3-4 catches dropped during this series and hasn't bowled poorly either.

True, but we should pick the team most likely to win us a test.

Siddle has been the unlucky bowler, but he's still been bowling a lot of tripe. We can't afford him and Johnson in the same team at the moment, and Johnson is the superior bowler.

 

[Craig]

I cbf looking back over past pages, but I think Strauss should just declare. No team has never chased 500 and won and for a reason as well. You will give your bowlers a 180 overs to take 10 wickets, if Australia chase down the taget successfully, then well done, they batted very well (or you bowled poorly). I also think Bopara needs to pull his finger out, or he will be in my mind just a pretender at Test level. Cashes in against weaker teams but against the better teams, his absence is notable in terms of performance. Then again maybe number 3 is not his position, but he had his chances and he did not take it. Also Broad should be nowhere near the team,but that won't be happening since it is obvious he is Strauss's girlfriend/bitch/prag etc.

As for the Hauritz catch that was given not out, fair call for mine. It looked out first time, but on the front on angle it was hard to tell and to my eyes it looked like the ball just hit the ground before Hauritz took the catch, but my eyes are flawed just like any human and there is no way be certain in saying that it was out, so fair enough.

 

[alternative]

^^ don't mind a change or two, but should really wait till the tour match to make a decision, especially with someone like Clark who hasn't done much since his return from injury.

With the tour match in mind, is Brett Lee completely gone or is he still with a chance for the next test?

Reckon Siddle has bowled well, so will be a tough decision to take him of the starting xi.

 

[JF.]

Anyone know Bing's status? Will he play in the tour match? Because if he is fit, he simply has to play in the next test - regardless of who he ousts.

We know Johnson won't be dropped, despite his poor form, so Siddle looks like the unlucky candidate.

 

[Athlai]

Drop a batsman. 5 man attack is needed IMO and even a batsman shy they still have the superior batting lineup.

 

[Top_Cat]

Think people are unfairly targeting the bowlers here. England scored 450 on a great pitch against a malfunctioning Johnson and, for their first innings, virtually no Hauritz. In that context, the Aussie bowling did quite well when England were headed for 100+ runs more. In the second dig, the score blew out a bit but that's just what happens when you're well behind in the game, batters are playing with a 200+ run confidence buffer, youve already been flogged bowling tonss of overs less than a day earlier, etc. No surprise SIddle/Hilf ran out of steam, the bowling has been manful.

The batting is the biggest problem here. On a plumb deck in bright sunny conditions, letting England bowl them out for sub-300 was bad enough but to do it with all the reckless shots they did was absolutely unforgiveable. Not to take much away from Anderson's bowling but the others, I doubt they'd dispute they were gifted a couple of poles (albeit, under the pressure of chasing 450).

If there's anyone in this match who need to prove they're worthy of being there, it's the batsmen. Some testicular fortitude would be nice on what is still by all indications a decent pitch. Stand up, FFS and make the English bowlers get you out because there wasn't one in the top 7 who was actually gotten out in the first dig (harsh on Huss I know but it wasn't a great leave).

 

[aussie]

One can never be sure with Watto, everything might look fine with him before the game, but during the game he might just break down, the other thing is there doesn't seem to be any vacant spot available either for him to come into.

and it would be pretty ridiculous to even think of dropping North at this point.

Unfortunately North is the vacant spot. He himself said after the frist test, he know he hasn't cemented his place.

AUS have to decide whether they want 6 bats & 4 fast-bowlers. Or 5 bats, Watto @ , with 5 bowlers. Given the likelihood AUS lose this test, its bowling attacks balance that needs to be sorted out.

I have a feeling that, if Lee is fit for the 3rd test, they might drop Siddle and bring him in his place, that won't be the right decision in my book, but that's what's most likely to happen, because can't see them dropping Johnson, and neither is it likely that they would make their most experienced bowler sit on the fringes once he is fit.

Sidvicous must never ever be dropped unless injured. Those selectors want somebodys shoot em up, if they ever do that.

Haurtiz shouldn't be a shoe in just yet, if Lee is fit although he bowled decently in his half of his spell. Lets not forget AUS have conceded over 400 twice already.

A BIG reason why Haurtiz can't be persisted in a 4-man attack long-term is being proved right now. The pace trio aren't bowling 100% at peak, Hauritz bowled beautifully for a period, then as Collingwood/Prior began to step it up, he was useless. So

 

[pasag]

The batting is the biggest problem here. On a plumb deck in bright sunny conditions, letting England bowl them out for sub-300 was bad enough but to do it with all the reckless shots they did was absolutely unforgiveable. Not to take much away from Anderson's bowling but the others, I doubt they'd dispute they were gifted a couple of poles (albeit, under the pressure of chasing 450).

If there's anyone in this match who need to prove they're worthy of being there, it's the batsmen. Some testicular fortitude would be nice on what is still by all indications a decent pitch. Stand up, FFS and make the English bowlers get you out because there wasn't one in the top 7 who was actually gotten out in the first dig (harsh on Huss I know but it wasn't a great leave).

hear hear

 

[aussie]

hear hear

word out, it was by no means an Ashes 05 scary bowling performance.

 

[howardj]

With inclement weather predicted over the next two days, the folly of England not enforcing the follow on is about to be laid bare. Australia, in my view, will get away with a draw with some help from the weather Gods.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

The batting is the biggest problem here. On a plumb deck in bright sunny conditions, letting England bowl them out for sub-300 was bad enough but to do it with all the reckless shots they did was absolutely unforgiveable. Not to take much away from Anderson's bowling but the others, I doubt they'd dispute they were gifted a couple of poles (albeit, under the pressure of chasing 450).

It's easier to target the bowlers because there's NO reserve batsmen, so the only scope for change is <random batsman> for Watto (inb4 you're gay) or the ****ing hapless Johnson for a reasonably in form Lee or Clark. I know what I'd prefer (bias aside).

 

[JF.]

Think people are unfairly targeting the bowlers here. England scored 450 on a great pitch against a malfunctioning Johnson and, for their first innings, virtually no Hauritz. In that context, the Aussie bowling did quite well when England were headed for 100+ runs more. In the second dig, the score blew out a bit but that's just what happens when you're well behind in the game, batters are playing with a 200+ run confidence buffer, youve already been flogged bowling tonss of overs less than a day earlier, etc. No surprise SIddle/Hilf ran out of steam, the bowling has been manful.

The batting is the biggest problem here. On a plumb deck in bright sunny conditions, letting England bowl them out for sub-300 was bad enough but to do it with all the reckless shots they did was absolutely unforgiveable. Not to take much away from Anderson's bowling but the others, I doubt they'd dispute they were gifted a couple of poles (albeit, under the pressure of chasing 450).

If there's anyone in this match who need to prove they're worthy of being there, it's the batsmen. Some testicular fortitude would be nice on what is still by all indications a decent pitch. Stand up, FFS and make the English bowlers get you out because there wasn't one in the top 7 who was actually gotten out in the first dig (harsh on Huss I know but it wasn't a great leave).

Speaking for myself, the bowlers deserve to be targetted. We have a strong batting line up and it's normal for 1 or 2 of the group to fail. Hughes may appear to have weaknesses but he is young and we can afford to carry him. Even Hussey managed a half century this time around. We aren't all that accustomed to batting under pressure but hopefully will learn. There is enough experience to help the inexperienced there.

The problem lies in a bowling attack that can't bowl the opposition out twice. It was there in the last test and is visible again now. (IMO this has been coming since the 2005 series since we didnt' have depth in our bowling even then but I digress...). We are missing the experience of Lee and Clark - one wonders at the mindset of the selectors in leaving Clark out given the injury to Lee. Ponting's captaincy can also be faulted here. It has been clear for some time that Johnson struggles to control the new ball - so why open with him? Why not combine the cleverness and line and length of Hilfy with the aggression of Siddle, then bring on Johnson when the shine is off the ball?

I like Siddle. He reminds me of Merv Hughes. Bowls with aggression and has heart. He will keep running in all day if asked (anyone remember Hughes on one knee in the 1993 Ashes series?). Hilfy has earned his spot for at least the remaineder of this series. He has bowled with intelligence - line, length, swing at times. I think most of us agree that Hauritz is pretty ordinary but we need a spinner so he's not likely to get dropped any time soon.


So what to do? Replace Siddle or Johnson with Lee (if fit) or Clark? Or drop Hussey (which I can't see happening), move Clarke and North up, and bring in Watson? I prefer the former.

 

[Top_Cat]

It's easier to target the bowlers because there's NO reserve batsmen, so the only scope for change is <random batsman> for Watto (inb4 you're gay) or the ****ing hapless Johnson for a reasonably in form Lee or Clark. I know what I'd prefer (bias aside).

Agreed, the selection of no reserve batsman was always a risk without the line-up being in spanking form.

That said, I dunno if any of them deserve to be dropped. Reckon they just need to ****ing bat, show some grit. If they crumple again, no amount of re-shuffling the bowlers will change that a few of them are only any good when the going is great. They can claim they were facing 450 but equally, the bowlers could claim they'd have been facing 600 if not for Hilf/Siddle.

Incidentally, who would you drop for Watto? If picked, he has to bat top 6 surely. I see no value in batting him below that.