***Official*** 2nd Test at Adelaide

[GIMH]

Not bothered by English posters here at all tbf, but some supporters are a lot more ridiculous than this (I mean we're talking about Phil Hughes here; the number of people I've already seen criticising Australia for bowling bouncers at tailenders after they, quote "killed one of their own" is already too many).

More odious though are the English cricket newspaper journos, who are mostly terrible, sanctimonious ****s. Ours are too, of course, with notable exceptions. It's one thing which made the whole kerfuffle over sledging in the last week so grim, as if anyone has any right to a moral high ground in that regard.

Don’t disagree with any of that

 

[CarlsbergXpress]

Wow, the English bowlers finally getting the ball in the right areas and look what happens. More than likely too late to change the result here but at least they looked dangerous. Conditions suited and played a big part obviously.

 

[Cabinet96]

Would say the conditions are the main instigator in such circumstances. It's like when Mesut Özil suddenly gets space and movement ahead of him so starts playing killer passes.

 

[JRC67]

Wow, the English bowlers finally getting the ball in the right areas and look what happens. More than likely too late to change the result here but at least they looked dangerous. Conditions suited and played a big part obviously.

Conditions clearly helped but Woakes and Anderson looked a yard fuller this innings.

Old failings with the top 5 continue to haunt England. The spate of caught and bowled in the middle are symptomatic of a batting side under pressure and not fully following through with shots. Until England sort their top 5 they will continue to struggle in conditions which don't suit their bowling. 4 wickets down for less than 100 is always likely to lead to a defeat.

 

[burr]

Well done England! That was a bit of a scared and gutless choice not putting England back in so well done Jimmy. That was good cricket by England.

 

[TNT]

Well done England! That was a bit of a scared and gutless choice not putting England back in so well done Jimmy. That was good cricket by England.

scared of what, do you know its a game of cricket?.

 

[Gob]

Well done England! That was a bit of a scared and gutless choice not putting England back in so well done Jimmy. That was good cricket by England.

Man how easy cricket is when you are an armchair expert

Opting to face Anderson etc is anything but gutless. Stupid maybe

 

[burr]

Yes, I am absolutely the ultimate arm chair expert and gutless was the wrong word. However I do think it was the easier choice. Nonetheless, great bowling England. They had to use that session and they did.

 

[Cabinet96]

Starc made a good point talking about how there's still two night sessions left. You can't dictate your decision for the rest of the game based on the possibility of gaining an advantage in one session anyway. What if England had batted through and not lost any wickets? They'd be in a great position tomorrow to save the game against tired bowlers. As it is Australia will likely still amass a lead of over 350 and will have three fresh fast bowlers and a top spinner bowling on a 4th and 5th day pitch.

 

[Cabinet96]

In fact it's crazy we even still discuss these things. All test teams have loads of highly qualified data analysts, physical experts, people with heaps of experience of first class cricket who all combined to study all the factors in these things and they all agree on which is the higher percentage strategy 90% of the time. Commentators want them to do it differently because it will increase the chances of a turnaround or the chances of them getting an extra day off, neither of which are incentives for the decision makers on the team.

 

[MW1304]

scared of what, do you know its a game of cricket?.

It's war, I'll have you know.

 

[Adders]

Cab spot on here.......amazed to see so much criticism of the call on here (not so amazed to hear it from some of the Ch 9 muppets)

Yeah it was a fun session from an English pov but tbh, I think we were 2 wickets short to give ourselves even half a chance.

 

[wpdavid]

Cab spot on here.......amazed to see so much criticism of the call on here (not so amazed to hear it from some of the Ch 9 muppets)

Yeah it was a fun session from an English pov but tbh, I think we were 2 wickets short to give ourselves even half a chance.

You'd think so, unless their last 6 go down for something ridiculous tomorrow. And even then they probably have enough anyway.

Perhaps the most dispiriting thing about this test is that we'll be on the wrong end of a right tanking without a significant contribution from Smith or Warner.

 

[GIMH]

I’ll be honest, normally I find the calls for the follow on to be tiresome but I do feel that they should have sent us in. We’d batted like a bag of shite, confidence low. Now we may well go into the fourth innings with our tails up. But this is with the benefit of the hindsight and I didn’t think it was a bad call at the time. Nor a good one.

Game has a similar feel to me to the test at OT in 2008 where we beat New Zealand. Miles behind and then our bowlers pulled one out the hat, but we still had a hefty target to chase down.

 

[Burgey]

Would put money on them to chase down anything less than 320.

You’d lose it though.

This evening exposed the folly of Australia’s excessive short bowling to the tail. Just get them out and you’ve got two set batsmen going into the night session, or your lead is big enough to enforce the follow on.

 

[Burgey]

09 and 10-11 yes. 2013 Ashes his dropping was somewhat harsh as he was from memory the best Aussie bat in the first Test (of the actual bats ie not Ashton Agar)

He was dropped in 09 so Watson could be brought in as cover for Johnson who couldn’t hit the pitch. Two tests after that debut SA tour.

He basically rebuilt his technique while still playing international and FC Cricket. Damn it, he had so much of his career still ahead of him :-(

 

[S.Kennedy]

Cab spot on here.......amazed to see so much criticism of the call on here (not so amazed to hear it from some of the Ch 9 muppets)

Yeah it was a fun session from an English pov but tbh, I think we were 2 wickets short to give ourselves even half a chance.

If they skittle out Australia for fifty or less, then surely Cook or Root, or even one of our second tier batsmen Bairstow/Ali, are overdue a century to build a partnership around. Probably we won't get that far though and Australia will declare around a Cummins century haha.

 

[JRC67]

You’d lose it though.

This evening exposed the folly of Australia’s excessive short bowling to the tail. Just get them out and you’ve got two set batsmen going into the night session, or your lead is big enough to enforce the follow on.

It's pretty easy to get carried away with short pitched bowling and nobody ever got out not playing a bouncer. Australia probably could have had this game all but won today. Would take something extraordinary to lose it from here still.

 

[GIMH]

He was dropped in 09 so Watson could be brought in as cover for Johnson who couldn’t hit the pitch. Two tests after that debut SA tour.

He basically rebuilt his technique while still playing international and FC Cricket. Damn it, he had so much of his career still ahead of him :-(

Aye I remember it well. CW went nuclear at him being dropped for Watson. Watson did okay that series tbf but it was a sign of things to come for Aussie selection over the following year or two really, wasn’t it?

Edit - Watson did okay with the bat, anyway. Was barely decent cover with the ball, remember him bowling some mighty fine pies to Freddie () at Edgbaston

 

[Burgey]

Phil is the saddest of the great “What if’s” of cricket.