3rd Test at Headingley, Leeds

[OverratedSanity]

Incredible to think stokes was 7(80) at one stage. Basically a run a ball 130 since then with the majority coming with the tail and him turning down easy singles to retain the strike.

Masterpiece of mental strength to have the belief to not throw it away like that at the beginning and then sheer genius to actually get the runs.

 

[TheJediBrah]

TJB in peak TJB mode I see

I choose to take this as a compliment.

Yes GIMH I am on fire

 

[Lillian Thomson]

The non LBW was actually a very poor shot with 2 needed. But I probably won’t offer him any advice.

 

[Spikey]

i forgot nathan lyon can be a pretty huge ****. at least it was him and not sweet boy Patty

 

[TheJediBrah]

Incredible to think stokes was 7(80) at one stage. Basically a run a ball 130 since then with the majority coming with the tail and him turning down easy singles to retain the strike.

Masterpiece of mental strength to have the belief to not throw it away like that at the beginning and then sheer genius to actually get the runs.

And all that after bowling so many ****ing overs with no rest in between innings. Drug test him IMO. Must be on Compound V (props if anyone gets the reference).

 

[quincywagstaff]

Didn't seem important at the time but Harris throwing from third man to the bowler's end when a half-decent throw would've seen Stokes run out at the keeper's end was a bafflingly costly error.

 

[Maximas]

The non LBW was actually a very poor shot with 2 needed. But I probably won’t offer him any advice.

Everyone talking about the Aus choke - well if the finger goes up I'd have called that a pretty decent choke on his behalf

 

[TheJediBrah]

Didn't seem important at the time but Harris throwing from third man to the bowler's end when a half-decent throw would've seen Stokes run out at the keeper's end was a bafflingly costly error.

That's the one you single out? I mean you're correct but there were plenty worse

 

[OverratedSanity]

That's the one you single out? I mean you're correct but there were plenty worse

I mean, in the end, it's just as costly as the ones in that Lyon over.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Any theories as to why the Aussie quicks were looking so toothless? Was it just the wicket being flat and slow? They were exhausted? No swing? Why wasn't there any swing?

in b4 because no sandpaper

 

[Maximas]

Anyone still watching GEM?

 

[quincywagstaff]

Missed Starc's ability to clean up tailenders in the end as much as anything.

 

[ajdude]

Anyone still watching GEM?

nah, what’s on?

 

[Spark]

Any theories as to why the Aussie quicks were looking so toothless? Was it just the wicket being flat and slow? They were exhausted? No swing? Why wasn't there any swing?

in b4 because no sandpaper

All of the above but I think it was mostly mental by the end. Just didn't bowl well at Leach at all.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Missed Starc's ability to clean up tailenders in the end as much as anything.

Probably would've lost quicker.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Stokes was swinging the thing both ways around corners though. Our blokes were just gun barrel straight and didn't look like posing any threat at all. In hindsight would almost have gone Lyon and Labuschagne at the end.

 

[cnerd123]

Probably would've lost quicker.

wouldn't have bowled England out for 67 to start with

 

[quincywagstaff]

Any theories as to why the Aussie quicks were looking so toothless? Was it just the wicket being flat and slow? They were exhausted? No swing? Why wasn't there any swing?

in b4 because no sandpaper

Probably unprepared for how quickly it turned from a reasonably comfortable 70 run win to Stokes being a hit or two away from victory. I think they just mentally relaxed and thought he couldn't keep hitting as cleanly as he did.

 

[TheJediBrah]

If Starc plays Roy probably makes quick 50s in each innings and England make 200 rather than 67 in the first

 

[OverratedSanity]

wouldn't have bowled England out for 67 to start with

**** me I actually forgot this happened in this match. Lolstralia.