Not necessarily even, but not much of an upper hand for the reason that you just mentioned. If Pietersen lays into the bowling successfully they could get very close to Australia's score without too much difficulty. Now that Giles is out, there isn't really anyone to hold up one end while Pietersen does that, hence the advantage is significantly greater.tooextracool said:
dont see any reason how reverse is going to help him on this wicket. the length to bowl is short or short of a length, bowl full and you'll just be carted all over the park.vic_orthdox said:
The pitch isn't quite a minefield though... I think we'll have to wait and see firstly how the weather is and secondly whether the pitch takes turn later. With the clouds over obviously Lee and McGrath will become even more dangerous as they'll be swinging it, and you'd think chasing anything in excess of 300 on a wicket with variable bounce as well as swing against bowlers of their class would be impossible. If it stays good and England can get reasonably close and then bowl Australia out for under 250 though, they can definately still win it. The test is extremely like to be short in length, which is helpful too.Scaly piscine said:
i think the only chance we had of being close to even at the end of the day was if jones was still at the crease. there really was very very little chance of winning this game unless we got some sort of lead, because the fact is that mcgrath will destroy england on a wicket that is getting worse and the game will be over tomorrow.Adamc said:
That's true, but being able to reverse it and throw the odd ball up there can't hurt. We saw that in Lee's last couple of overs, where he'd bowl a couple of wicked bouncers and sometimes get them to stay low or move a huge amount back in, and then throw up a reversing yorker. Certainly makes him that much harder to play under the circumstances.tooextracool said:
are you serious?FaaipDeOiad said:
i actually got my hopes up when i saw gillespie in the starting XI today. alas no matter how much tripe gillespie served up at the other end, mcgrath made up for it.age_master said:
Yeah, I think he bowled quite well... as I said, much better than he has been. He wasn't as good as McGrath and Lee obviously, but he bowled enough good balls that I'm happy enough to have him in the team.tooextracool said:
Yeh instead of bell. But his replacement in peitersen is doing quite well.aussie said:
It would send weird signals if Bell was considered a no brainer for selection before he test and a poor inning means he is out of favour. There were talks of how it was a positive sign to give confidence to Bell by saying his spot was secure before the test. Now strangely the talk of removing him starts coming up in whispers. It would have been exactly like that for Pieterson if he had failed to make an impact.King_Ponting said:
do they ever play any different?social said:
jones yes, freddie....err nopskov said:
classic ball that, got nearly every ball to go away from the right hander and then from nowhere got one to come back.Somerset said:
Well, the best thing to happen under Ponting has been Australia developing a different gear for when they are in trouble... and they've used it all the time under his captaincy except when a test immediately follows an ODI series, like in Sri Lanka, New Zealand and here. I'm sure that's not the only reason for it, but it certainly seems to contribute. Australia are definately a better fighting team now than they were under Steve Waugh though, who was guilty of going too hard sometimes, and his team along with him.tooextracool said:
personally, i cant see any reason why people wouldnt.tassietiger said:
