silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
AussieDominance said:
McGrath's bowled a lot of overs. Maybe give him a rest? Just bat the rest of the day, McGrath can come in fresh tomorrow.
-
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*** 1st Test at The Gabba
- Thread starter James
- Start date
McGrath's bowled a lot of overs. Maybe give him a rest? Just bat the rest of the day, McGrath can come in fresh tomorrow.
SirBloody Idiot
Cricketer Of The Year
They very rarely enforce the follow on after that match in India.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Yup, looks like Aussies will bat again.
FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
Enforcing the follow-on is the sensible move, but Ponting always likes to bat again. The main motivation is presumably that McGrath has just bowled 9 overs in a row and asking him to take the new ball again in 10 minutes is a tad harsh. If Australia do bat again, they will presumably look to bat through to tomorrow and grind England into the dust a bit. A bit of a waste of time, though.
Anyway, what a performance from McGrath. His post-lunch spell was nothing short of magical, and the fact that he's still bowling like that at 36 is a testament to his brilliance. Once again, he not only proves his critics wrong, he makes them look absolutely foolish.
Good performance form Clark too. Certainly the right choice on this surface.
Anyway, what a performance from McGrath. His post-lunch spell was nothing short of magical, and the fact that he's still bowling like that at 36 is a testament to his brilliance. Once again, he not only proves his critics wrong, he makes them look absolutely foolish.
Good performance form Clark too. Certainly the right choice on this surface.
Somerset
Cricketer Of The Year
True - but personally I would have had no hesitation in asking England to bat again, open the bowling innings with Brett Lee and Stuart Clark is necessary. McGrath will obviously get a rest now so that does work in Australia's favour but just seems a bit odd to me. How long will they need to bat for then? An hour before tea today?SirBloody Idiot said:
FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah that's a fair point. McGrath's bowled nearly as many overs as any of the England bowlers did in a 150+ over innings. He's 36 and hasn't played cricket for 11 months. Yet there's concern about Harmison and Flintoff bowling 25 or so over two days. Mind you, it's more justified with Flintoff because of his other workload, but certainly a bowler should be able to bowl 20 overs in a day in a test match without it being a major fitness concern.greg said:
dontcloseyoureyes
BARNES OUT
Ponting is ****ing insane. 450 ahead, I'm pretty sure that'd be close to a world record chase, yet alone needing to set a total. You're just wasting time England need for a draw, and giving them a chance to get some form.
Got to be one of the worst decisions I've ever witnessed in my life. I'd almost shoot the idiot.
Got to be one of the worst decisions I've ever witnessed in my life. I'd almost shoot the idiot.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
That Indian lineup had Sehwag, Sachin, Dravid, Laxman. On home pitches to boot. England haven't got anyone close who can do a 281 and 180 like Laxman and Dravid.
But I can understand why they will bat again, just to give McGrath a break for a bit.
But I can understand why they will bat again, just to give McGrath a break for a bit.
Somerset
Cricketer Of The Year
I would most certainly maintain Clark.Matt79 said:
I think one of Martyn and Clarke will make way in the second test no matter the result for either Watson or MacGill. I hear MacGill took 6/118 today in a domestic four day match so that sends a clear message to the Australian selectors. As I have maintained however, Shane Watson provides more balance to the Australian side and should be given the opportunity to play when fit.
FaaipDeOiad
Hall of Fame Member
Yeah. I usually agree with Ponting about not enforcing the follow-on, as it's relatively rare that you get much of an advantage out of it and batting last is always tough, but in this case with a 450 run lead it's a bit stupid. McGrath can bowl one or two overs and then give the ball to Clark, and Warne has bowled 9 overs for the whole match.Matt79 said:
social
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
As much success as Oz has had over the years and as good a position as they're in in this match, this is why I hate 4 man attacks.FaaipDeOiad said:
You'd think only rain could save Eng but they could strike psychological blows against some batsmen, Harmy could bowl his way into form etc
And all because we've only got 4 bowlers and it's deemed necessary to give them a rest
Perm
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I understand why Australia would want to bat again for an hour or two and score some quick runs to make sure that England don't have a chance of winning but still, what happens if some of the English batsman really get stuck in and they do manage to save the test by batting through two days? It would be quite an acheivement but make Ponting look silly.
dontcloseyoureyes
BARNES OUT
It'd be a sackable offence in my mind if England can save this test and Ponting batted a session or two while 450 runs ahead.Perm said:
I'd almost advocate the death penalty being reinstated for offences such as that.
shortpitched713
International Captain
Wow, what a legend. Might name my first child and/or **** after Glenn McGrath.
SirBloody Idiot
Cricketer Of The Year
Well, we would have had a five man attack, but we had an injury and there's no one else good enough.social said:
shortpitched713
International Captain
In other news, Ponting proves once again that he is an absolute git. With enforcing the follow-on even if everything went wrong and England batted through the day without losing any wickets Aus would still have had two days to take the wickets, and score the runs. Really don't see the need to bat again as England look nowhere near capable of getting 450. Batting now is a lose-lose situation. If they bat for too long, they would have lost valuable time in trying to bowl out the English. If you bat for too short of time before declaring, then there really wasn't any point and you've wasted an innings.