I dunno, they spend a fair bit of time guffawing at each others' terrible jokes.commentators should be banned from discussing over rates, declarations and bat size.
because it's all they ever discuss
Number 5 is too high for Anderson and especially Ronchi IMO in seam-oriented conditions, I don't think their techniques would be up to it. Maybe add Neesham to the list too, though you could say the same about him.So names for number five, I have:
Young, Munro, Anderson, Ronchi, Popli, Bruce
It's not clear-cut - any could make a case and I don't know who I'd choose. I do like the idea though of having someone quite tight at number 5, in between Taylor attacking at 4 and CDG/Neesham biffing at six.
Edit: Or what Flem said, move Watling to 6
I doubt they'll give themselves more than 20 minutes tonight & they might not even bother with that if they think the light might be dubious.What are they saying about the declaration, for those of us at work?
I'd be happy with a 380ish lead, which might not take too long at this rate ...
I get the feeling this is a well-worn line in these parts.hopefully we see a good BJ finish
I think they'll pull out before that, but let's see.hopefully we see a good BJ finish
given watling doesn't play many odis it's actually pretty rareI get the feeling this is a well-worn line in these parts.
Haha, good point.given watling doesn't play many odis it's actually pretty rare