*Official* Second Test at Lord's

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Great little evening spell by Siddle by the looks of things. Not great batting yet again, though.

 

[Flametree]

Just read Kimber's article on cricinfo, and was curious about this :

Now even if, as Darren Lehmann has said, Chris Rogers told Watson to review it - that may have happened, even if it didn't look like it when watching the incident happen - none of this changes the fact that Watson clearly wanted to review it.

I found it strange that Lehmann came out and blamed Rogers for the review. As Kimber says in some detail and quite amusingly, it's hard to know why Watson would have thought it was missing, so you'd like to think an experienced cricketer wouldn't even bother asking his partner. Lehmann's defence of Watson just strikes me as odd, as if there's something else going on.

(Incidentally, I can't help wondering what would have happened had Simon Katich been opening with Watson. Easy to imagine him telling Watson to bleep off back to the pavillion and go work on his game in the nets... though then again Katich and Clarke aren't too friendly, Watson and Clarke aren't too friendly, ergo Katich and Watson are best buds???)

 

[Adders]

oh sorry I thought you were mocking the suggestion that 'experts' think it is a good pitch for batting. Evidently not! I agree too, I think on any normal day this is a 400 par wicket. Does enough with the new ball, but after about 10 overs it's excellent for batting.

16 wickets to fall yesterday was just woeful from both batting sides. Look I'd love to be ripping into you Aussies today after possibly your worst day of test cricket in living memory, but fact is I don't feel in a position to because we have been "almost" as bad. I guess I have a little faith that our top order can turn things around though but I'm not sure yours can as they are now.

Can't see any way that England won't be 2-0 up after this test but I'm struggling to glean any bragging rights out of it save for Ian Bell, and I'm even a little disappointed in him that he didn't end up going big (even though he did get a good nut off an unlikely perp)

 

[Ruckus]

16 wickets to fall yesterday was just woeful from both batting sides. Look I'd love to be ripping into you Aussies today after possibly your worst day of test cricket in living memory, but fact is I don't feel in a position to because we have been "almost" as bad. I guess I have a little faith that our top order can turn things around though but I'm not sure yours can as they are now.

Can't see any way that England won't be 2-0 up after this test but I'm struggling to glean any bragging rights out of it save for Ian Bell, and I'm even a little disappointed in him that he didn't end up going big (even though he did get a good nut off an unlikely perp)

yeah we are ****ed. The fact that Eng are three down at the end of yesterday is just a bloody **** tease. Even if they get rolled for 120 or something, I can't see how we are going to chase well over 300. Didn't have much before, but I have zero confidence in our batting now after that travesty.

 

[Adders]

Just read Kimber's article on cricinfo, and was curious about this :

Now even if, as Darren Lehmann has said, Chris Rogers told Watson to review it - that may have happened, even if it didn't look like it when watching the incident happen - none of this changes the fact that Watson clearly wanted to review it.

I found it strange that Lehmann came out and blamed Rogers for the review. As Kimber says in some detail and quite amusingly, it's hard to know why Watson would have thought it was missing, so you'd like to think an experienced cricketer wouldn't even bother asking his partner. Lehmann's defence of Watson just strikes me as odd, as if there's something else going on.

I read that article from Kimber this morning....good piece.

My take on it (and this is only my theory of course) is that Lehman has said that to try and defuse a potential situation in the media and possibly even the changeroom. Rogers has maybe taken a hit because no one is gonna judge him too harshly on it, with Watson DRS history + all the **** that's gone down with him of late, if he was blamed for the referral and the knock on effect of it he'd become public enemy No1.

 

[Days of Grace]

I read that article from Kimber this morning....good piece.

My take on it (and this is only my theory of course) is that Lehman has said that to try and defuse a potential situation in the media and possibly even the changeroom. Rogers has maybe taken a hit because no one is gonna judge him too harshly on it, with Watson DRS history + all the **** that's gone down with him of late, if he was blamed for the referral and the knock on effect of it he'd become public enemy No1.

Well so be it. He deserves it.

I would be fuming if I was Rogers and being lied about just so this **** can feel better about himself.

 

[social]

Just read Kimber's article on cricinfo, and was curious about this :

Now even if, as Darren Lehmann has said, Chris Rogers told Watson to review it - that may have happened, even if it didn't look like it when watching the incident happen - none of this changes the fact that Watson clearly wanted to review it.

I found it strange that Lehmann came out and blamed Rogers for the review. As Kimber says in some detail and quite amusingly, it's hard to know why Watson would have thought it was missing, so you'd like to think an experienced cricketer wouldn't even bother asking his partner. Lehmann's defence of Watson just strikes me as odd, as if there's something else going on.

(Incidentally, I can't help wondering what would have happened had Simon Katich been opening with Watson. Easy to imagine him telling Watson to bleep off back to the pavillion and go work on his game in the nets... though then again Katich and Clarke aren't too friendly, Watson and Clarke aren't too friendly, ergo Katich and Watson are best buds???)

Watson clearly asked Rogers whether he thought it hit him out side off

Begs the question as to why he was trying to hit the ****ing thing through square leg

 

[Ruckus]

updated image of backlash this morning

 

[Adders]

Well so be it. He deserves it.

I would be fuming if I was Rogers and being lied about just so this **** can feel better about himself.

I'm not saying that is the case, all I know is that all of us in here last night were convinced Twatto was going to go for it when he walked up to Rogers before they'd even spoke. We were of the belief last night that it was his call and it sounds like Kimber isn't buying Lehmans explanation either.

If it's true it is **** for Rogers, but one of Lehmans biggest challenges is to bring this team together......having Twatto even further on the outer isn't going to help anything, unless they cut him loose totally.

 

[Cooky Monster]

16 wickets to fall yesterday was just woeful from both batting sides. Look I'd love to be ripping into you Aussies today after possibly your worst day of test cricket in living memory, but fact is I don't feel in a position to because we have been "almost" as bad. I guess I have a little faith that our top order can turn things around though but I'm not sure yours can as they are now.

Can't see any way that England won't be 2-0 up after this test but I'm struggling to glean any bragging rights out of it save for Ian Bell, and I'm even a little disappointed in him that he didn't end up going big (even though he did get a good nut off an unlikely perp)

Its obviously bad but its not even close to Boxing day 2010 at the MCG, it can't really ever get worse than that, can it?

 

[Riggins]

i see everyone has been told to wear the baggygreen

blaming the lack of the white floppy for clarke not taking that catch.

 

[Adders]

Its obviously bad but its not even close to Boxing day 2010 at the MCG, it can't really ever get worse than that, can it?

As a day of total domination then you're right, 26/12/10 was it.

Somehow yesterday just felt even worse for them, I think in that boxing day test they were undone by some terrific bowling on a very green wicket.......yesterday was all self inflicted. You just don't get better days and conditions for batting than yesterday.

England haven't won this test, we've had it handed to us gift wrapped on a platter.

 

[Cooky Monster]

IMO Trott is just slowly getting to where he should be as a test batsman - he's very good but over-achieved massively in his first few years in tests

 

[Cooky Monster]

As a day of total domination then you're right, 26/12/10 was it.

Somehow yesterday just felt even worse for them, I think in that boxing day test they were undone by some terrific bowling on a very green wicket.......yesterday was all self inflicted. You just don't get better days and conditions for batting than yesterday.

England haven't won this test, we've had it handed to us gift wrapped on a platter.

That day in Melbourne was a dream with it being 1-1 and everything on the line, even if we **** this match up you just get the feeling we will still win the series comfortably.

I get what your saying though and totally agree, it was about as feeble as it gets for them.

 

[Ruckus]

Could do with some over-achievement from our batsmen tbh. It's getting ridiculous how poorly they are performing, despite the fact most of them actually have a good deal of talent. I mean look at their batting averages: Watson - 35, Hughes - 33, Khawaja - 28, Smith - 31. That's even worse than Bangladesh. Even if you take into account all of the technical problems etc., I refuse to believe those players are of that standard, but I have no idea why they aren't performing better either. They need to grow a pair and show some application.

 

[Cooky Monster]

Could do with some over-achievement from our batsmen tbh. It's getting ridiculous how poorly they are performing, despite the fact most of them actually have a good deal of talent. I mean look at their batting averages: Watson - 35, Hughes - 33, Khawaja - 28, Smith - 31. That's even worse than Bangladesh. Even if you take into account all of the technical problems etc., I refuse to believe those players are of that standard, but I have no idea why they aren't performing better either. They need to grow a pair and show some application.

A lot of it is in the head, you can have all the talent in the world, if you haven't got it between the ears then you will never succeed, Lehmanns biggest challenge is to sort the mental side out, Siddle looks the only properly mentally strong player in your team.

 

[Arachnodouche]

How is Phil Hughes a Test batsman? I understand flailing at balls with no footwork, lots of guys have succeeded fairly consistently at that but Hughes doing it seems like a wicket every single time. I thought he had come of age at TB, playing close to his body for the most part and looking compact enough while doing it. Just another false flag.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Could do with some over-achievement from our batsmen tbh. It's getting ridiculous how poorly they are performing, despite the fact most of them actually have a good deal of talent. I mean look at their batting averages: Watson - 35, Hughes - 33, Khawaja - 28, Smith - 31. That's even worse than Bangladesh. Even if you take into account all of the technical problems etc., I refuse to believe those players are of that standard, but I have no idea why they aren't performing better either. They need to grow a pair and show some application.

I don't think there's a bowling attack in world cricket that wouldn't fancy their chances of getting them bowled out for under 150 at least once in every five innings or so. And I'm including the minnows too. Your batsmen are technically average AND self destructive. Terrible combination.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Yeah I agree, was a horrible shot to play just because he had been bogged down for a little bit. He's had two years to learn how to rotate the strike to avoid getting himself in situations like that and what has he done? **** all it seems.

Probably climbed up the COD rankings a bit tbf

 

[Spikey]

Yeah I agree, was a horrible shot to play just because he had been bogged down for a little bit. He's had two years to learn how to rotate the strike to avoid getting himself in situations like that and what has he done? **** all it seems.

well yeah, it was blatantly obvious watching him in the shield he's made no real attempt to change his game. at least smith and hughes have done that