• 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* Fourth Test at Trent Bridge

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
What, get squared up by good length balls that do a bit? I can almost guarantee they would.
Think what he means is that England won't continually waft at wide balls

Broad took 8/15 and only bowled a couple of balls that threatened the stumps

Any batsman with half a brain would simply say "thanks very much, tire yourself out Broady"

Pathetic really and little wonder that the bowlers had such a look of disbelief
 

Gob

International Coach
can't believe i'm saying this but Skinny Pete would have been the ideal bowler on this pitch
 

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
One thing's guaranteed - thinking you have to bowl miracle balls and roll them for 59 will see them pile on 300+.

England didn't go out and try to bowl 10 outrageous deliveries to get wickets.
This.

I think what England does so well at their best, is exactly that. This is what England did in the 2010 Ashes, and most part of 2011 when they had their golden run.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
If you listen to Channel 9 commentators, pitch is horrible if England take wickets, pitch is great if Australia take wickets
Not to interrupt the circlejerk, I hate Channel 9 as much as anyone, but they really didn't say that at all. Throughout the whole session they all said conditions were good for bowling but Australia's batting was poor, and it's not a pitch you score under 100 on.
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Think what he means is that England won't continually waft at wide balls

Broad took 8/15 and only bowled a couple of balls that threatened the stumps

Any batsman with half a brain would simply say "thanks very much, tire yourself out Broady"

Pathetic really and little wonder that the bowlers had such a look of disbelief
We didn't waft at many wide balls early.
 

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
Not to interrupt the circlejerk, I hate Channel 9 as much as anyone, but they really didn't say that at all. Throughout the whole session they all said conditions were good for bowling but Australia's batting was poor, and it's not a pitch you score under 100 on.
Ian Healy. And then the others like Slats and Warne chipped in with 'oh you never know unless both sides have batted' and all that
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
Not to interrupt the circlejerk, I hate Channel 9 as much as anyone, but they really didn't say that at all. Throughout the whole session they all said conditions were good for bowling but Australia's batting was poor, and it's not a pitch you score under 100 on.
There were a few leading questions being asked before they blocked that line, though.
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
The sad thing is that the one batsman with a heart in the Australian batting lineup is retiring at the end of the series.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Ian Healy. And then the others like Slats and Warne chipped in with 'oh you never know unless both sides have batted' and all that
I mean, they did say that, but you're completely misrepresenting their meaning. If Warne says "you can never judge a pitch until both teams have batted and bowled on it, but this certainly isn't a pitch you make 50 on", which is more or less what he said, it's pretty disingenuous to read that as him saying the pitch is a minefield and Australia batted fine. Slater said more or less the same thing, that 50 odd certainly wouldn't be enough and Australia batted poorly.
 

Top