-
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* First Test (Edgbaston, Birmingham) 16–20 June
- Thread starter Magrat Garlick
- Start date
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
It really isn't though
G. S. Kohli
International Vice-Captain
SA vs Aus at Sydney 2005
SA 451/9 declared & 194/6 declared
Aus 359 & 288/2
Aus won by 8 wkts
===
G. Smith SA captain
SA 451/9 declared & 194/6 declared
Aus 359 & 288/2
Aus won by 8 wkts
===
G. Smith SA captain
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
You reckon the collective of Duckett, Crawley, Pope and Brook are better against the moving ball than the collective of Warner, Khawaja, Marnus, Smith and Head? I've got a bridge over here to sell you, shaped like a coat hanger and only been in use since 1932.
There's a reason they prepped a flat deck - if your only MO is hitting through the first line because your defensive technique is junk, you really don't want to be batting on a seaming deck against Cummins, Haze and Boland. They'd struggle to make a hundred.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
The eclair was my best work in quite a while.
Spark
Global Moderator
Green really needs to work on countering that tactic where bowlers jump wider on the crease at delivery. Got him out twice here, has got him out a bunch in Australia, and honestly it felt like it was the only way the bowlers could draw a false shot from him - but a very reliable way. It's going to happen a lot if he doesn't sharpen up against it, bowlers will know he can be lured into playing at balls he shouldn't.
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yesssss. Do you get elocution languages and a free plum for your voice when you take over the England captaincy? the man is an antipodean recidivist thug and he's trying to talk like an Oxford Don. Or sledger.
F R A U D
R
A
U
D
Phoney
RossTaylorsBox
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yeah, killing the joke in less than an hour, surely a new record
morgieb
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah this kind of deck was actually good for England - flat but slow. Add that they got the best of the weather conditions (it seemed cloudier on the days Australia batted) and won the toss and then not winning this Test isn’t ideal. I certainly don’t think they’ll get belted 4-0 or whatever but England needed this Test win far more than we did.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Pope is actually pretty good against swing and seam to be fair to him. Definitely better than Warner and Head against it IMO. Putrid against spin though and doesn't handle bounce particularly well either.
I think their best bet would be to prepare more typical modern English wickets - sure take the grass off the top but there's no need to completely dry it out underfoot like they did for this Test. That'd help Anderson and Robinson more than the Australian bowlers without totally neutering their aggressive batting approach, and it'd also reduce the serious risk of bringing Lyon well into the game later on (he'd have taken a proper bag on Day 5 if he was bowling IMO).
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Yeah that's my thing.
social
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Bad loss for England as Australia snatched a victory from the jaws of defeat & now head to their favourite ground in the UK
England also has selection problems (e.g. wicket keeper and spinner) which could be delayed if they had won
Very different after losing but I still can’t see them making significant changes at this stage unless down to injury or load management
England also has selection problems (e.g. wicket keeper and spinner) which could be delayed if they had won
Very different after losing but I still can’t see them making significant changes at this stage unless down to injury or load management
social
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The most important stat to come out during the first test
Australia > Kiwis > soap dodgers
Australia > Kiwis > soap dodgers
duffer
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
What's the issue here?
RossTaylorsBox
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
John Ruddick is also a joke though, so you're not that good.
Spark
Global Moderator
I didn't even realise he'd said this haha because the "three #11s" thing had been a line on here back in the India series. He's actually quite right but it's still funny that two of those #11s made like 40 runs between them in that last innings.
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That's as close as England will get to a win. Aus will only get better as they both acclimatize and adapt to the slog fest approach of their opponents.
Aus were chronically under done and their best two batsmen contributed nothing, yet they still won. You could see how rusty Cummins was first dig but once he started getting better, England predictably couldn't handle him. Add to that Haze hadn't played in six months and the deck was completely unsuited to Boland. England couldn't dismiss Cummins and Lyon on a wearing deck with a new or an old ball. They were done in by their limited attack and the Aus approach to wear them down by batting time and being patient. Who'd have thought?
Aus have had their first look at biff ball, and they've stared it down. England lost because they played without regard to the conditions or their opponents. That and the fact they just aren't as good as Australia, bar about three proven players - Root, Stokes and Broad. And Stokes is pretty crocked with his knee. This isn't a half strength Pakistan or a Boult-less NZ they're playing ffs. Aus basically have them covered across all conditions and in all facets of the game, except run rate. And we all saw how really important that was, didn't we?
People on here are moaning about England's missed chances as though Aus played at 100%. They dropped four catches in the first innings themselves. Aus were at about 65-70% at best. England went with a flat deck because they know their batting can't handle sideways movement at all, but their bowlers are ineffective without something in the deck to help them, Broad excepted. Aus have a world class spinner, England have a cardboard cut out of one. The only way England can bat is to go as hard as they can on flat pitches because apart from Root they lack the technique or temperament to grind out a tough lest knock against a good attack. They won a good toss, had the best of the conditions, puffed out their chests and played like idiots. Because that's all they have, all they know and all they're capable of.
The gap between these sides isn't tiny like people are suggesting, it's a yawning chasm. It was made closer here by virtue of the deck, Australia being rusty and two of the best players in the world missing out at once. The series is as done now as it was when I called this six months ago. The result here flattered England. They are going to get steam rolled, because apart from lack of ability, for all the plaudits the wondrous new approach gets, it's actually incredibly one dimensional and extremely limited.
4-0 Aus with the rain saving a whitewash. You all should have got on months ago.
Aus were chronically under done and their best two batsmen contributed nothing, yet they still won. You could see how rusty Cummins was first dig but once he started getting better, England predictably couldn't handle him. Add to that Haze hadn't played in six months and the deck was completely unsuited to Boland. England couldn't dismiss Cummins and Lyon on a wearing deck with a new or an old ball. They were done in by their limited attack and the Aus approach to wear them down by batting time and being patient. Who'd have thought?
Aus have had their first look at biff ball, and they've stared it down. England lost because they played without regard to the conditions or their opponents. That and the fact they just aren't as good as Australia, bar about three proven players - Root, Stokes and Broad. And Stokes is pretty crocked with his knee. This isn't a half strength Pakistan or a Boult-less NZ they're playing ffs. Aus basically have them covered across all conditions and in all facets of the game, except run rate. And we all saw how really important that was, didn't we?
People on here are moaning about England's missed chances as though Aus played at 100%. They dropped four catches in the first innings themselves. Aus were at about 65-70% at best. England went with a flat deck because they know their batting can't handle sideways movement at all, but their bowlers are ineffective without something in the deck to help them, Broad excepted. Aus have a world class spinner, England have a cardboard cut out of one. The only way England can bat is to go as hard as they can on flat pitches because apart from Root they lack the technique or temperament to grind out a tough lest knock against a good attack. They won a good toss, had the best of the conditions, puffed out their chests and played like idiots. Because that's all they have, all they know and all they're capable of.
The gap between these sides isn't tiny like people are suggesting, it's a yawning chasm. It was made closer here by virtue of the deck, Australia being rusty and two of the best players in the world missing out at once. The series is as done now as it was when I called this six months ago. The result here flattered England. They are going to get steam rolled, because apart from lack of ability, for all the plaudits the wondrous new approach gets, it's actually incredibly one dimensional and extremely limited.
4-0 Aus with the rain saving a whitewash. You all should have got on months ago.
Smith is a great player, other than him I definitely don't see Australia doing well on slow seaming decks (remember 8-15?).
England batters should be better prepared theoretically due to more familiarity with conditions.