TheJediBrah
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Australia have played like absolute arse and still managed to retain the Ashes. I wouldn't be happy with this as an English supporter at all
Shall we add to this winning all 4 tosses so far; ordering pitches to suit (#spiritofcricket); having nearly all of the best of conditions; and still contriving to actually lose 2 games.Australia have played like absolute arse and still managed to retain the Ashes. I wouldn't be happy with this as an English supporter at all
And Australia should also feel disappointed that they have played good in patches but not consistentlyAustralia have played like absolute arse and still managed to retain the Ashes. I wouldn't be happy with this as an English supporter at all
Absolutely.And Australia should also feel disappointed that they have played good in patches but not consistently
Contrary to the popular belief, repeating the same bollocks over and over again doesn't make it rightAs ive been saying for a while. I don't think the standard of World Test cricket collectively is strong and hasn't been for a while
G00d pointThe way I see it, both teams have worked very hard, and in a way they’re both winners. However in another more accurate way, Australia is the winner.
Sorry about that. Long may it continueContrary to the popular belief, repeating the same bollocks over and over again doesn't make it right
While you around, yeah probablySorry about that. Long may it continue
They couldn't beer to lose that one.
Both iircDid he give an extra run or mistakenly put Stokes on strike?
England needed to knock the aussies over and quite quickly, don't need hindsight to know that. Had England declared under 200 ahead at lunch and had the full two sessions they might have gotten close to bowling aussies out, I certainly doubt but can't say for sure they would have been held up by the aussies more than the weather in the last two daysReading some comments on Stokes declaration here. IMO he significantly hampered England's chances of winning this game with the late declaration and you don't need to be a Bazball denier or Stokes hater to admit that.
Possibility of absolutely no play on Saturday and very little on Sunday were there before the start of the game (and I think Australia also picked a team with an eye on draw) and England had to make all the moves. They should have swung from the hip towards the stumps on day 2 and probably 7 to 8 overs of the same on the start of day 3 to get the lead up to 150 and put Australia in and try to get them out for 300 over the course of the day or bit in the next day and you have a chase of 150 in 25-15 overs on Sunday. Not easy obviously but if there is a team who would thrive in that situation, its England. Its not even hindsight its just seem like the way to win even at the stumps on day 2.
I could probably live with them playing till lunch on day 2 to get the lead up to 200 plus but burning out more than a half a session for Jonny feel good campaign was horrible move given the circumstances. If anything its the opposite of Bazball
got to say the some elements make no real sense, leg byes for lucky deflections, byes I can kind of understand, those two parts of the final were totally wrong though.Yeah I've always been confused why people talk about the deflected boundary, that's always been an accepted part of the game. But the boundary countback rule was extremely stupid and it was only the presumption that it would be never be needed that allowed it to persist.
I'll be disappointed if Australia win the next test purely because it'll be a good indication that not enough beers were consumed after this test.1972 was the last time Australia won the last test in England to retain the ashes/win the ashes
Enjoy mateWhile you around, yeah probably
I'm afraid not. They won the last test to draw the series, but England retained the Ashes that they had won in Australia 18 months previously.1972 was the last time Australia won the last test in England to retain the ashes/win the ashes