*Official* Fourth Test at Chester-le-Street

[benchmark00]

****ing ranga.

 

[Spark]

Heh

 

[Cooky Monster]

Declare.

 

[Maximas]

that'l do

 

[Scaly piscine]

Sorry but we're supposed to give the Ashes runners-up credit for this ****ing ****efest?

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Haha what a **** shot.

 

[Cabinet96]

Meh, don't care about that. Least he didn't fend it to cover like he did at Trent Bridge.

 

[benchmark00]

Australia wouldn't want to get a wicket in the next four mins.

 

[NUFAN]

That's a poor one, but that's how he plays, cliche cliche.

If we bowl 88 overs, does that mean we wouldn't have to bat tonight if we take the 10th wicket?

 

[Cabinet96]

That's a poor one, but that's how he plays, cliche cliche.

If we bowl 88 overs, does that mean we wouldn't have to bat tonight if we take the 10th wicket?

Yup

 

[91Jmay]

Aha terrible display. Can't blame Swann it was the right way to go.

 

[benchmark00]

Actually if I were Cook I'd consider declaring.

 

[ajdude]

ffs england sending in nightwatchmen, grow a pair

 

[Scaly piscine]

That's a poor one, but that's how he plays, cliche cliche.

If we bowl 88 overs, does that mean we wouldn't have to bat tonight if we take the 10th wicket?

87.1 overs would do I presume.

 

[wpdavid]

England fans in never crediting the opposition bowling side shocker.

OK, this has been a world class performance by your boys and any side in the the history of the game would be grateful to reach the dizzy heights of 214 for 9.


More realistically, Aus have bowled professionally in blameless conditions where a serious test line-up would have finished the day at 280 for 4. England of course have simply continued doing what they've done for most of the last 20 months, which is why some of us are utterly contemptuous of the lazy ****s. I'd be slightly more convinced about Australia's brilliance if our batters hadn't done exactly the same against New Zealand both home and away earlier this year.

 

[Burgey]

Lovely old style ground this. Can't wait for the first test of the return series to be played at Merrylands Oval.

 

[Cabinet96]

This is why I was nervous about us batting first. I understand they sort of had to do it, but it never seems to work out for us. The talk is always "good pitch, Cook and Trott to bat for two days" but it just doesn't happen. The only time I can think about us doing it in the last couple of years was at Wellington when Compton (remember him?) and Trott did it.

 

[NUFAN]

87.1 overs would do I presume.

Yeah true actually, so its enough now, good.

 

[Burgey]

OK, this has been a world class performance by your boys and any side in the the history of the game would be grateful to reach the dizzy heights of 214 for 9.


More realistically, Aus have bowled professionally in blameless conditions where a serious test line-up would have finished the day at 280 for 4. England of course have simply continued doing what they've done for most of the last 20 months, which is why some of us are utterly contemptuous of the lazy ****s. I'd be slightly more convinced about Australia's brilliance if our batters hadn't done exactly the same against New Zealand both home and away earlier this year.

Or if you knew anything about the bowlers playing for Australia in the series and their test and FC records over the same period.

 

[91Jmay]

OK, this has been a world class performance by your boys and any side in the the history of the game would be grateful to reach the dizzy heights of 214 for 9.


More realistically, Aus have bowled professionally in blameless conditions where a serious test line-up would have finished the day at 280 for 4. England of course have simply continued doing what they've done for most of the last 20 months, which is why some of us are utterly contemptuous of the lazy ****s. I'd be slightly more convinced about Australia's brilliance if our batters hadn't done exactly the same against New Zealand both home and away earlier this year.

Don't really get Burgey's point. Is it a great Australian bowling performance (which I think he is suggesting?) or is it England's batting line-up poor like he infers with the 80 years unbeaten stuff?