-
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*** Australia in England (The Ashes)
- Thread starter James
- Start date
Shane Warne
Banned
Warne twice on Giles, 1st innings.marc71178 said:
Lee to S Jones today
Warne to Trescothick X 2
Warne to Strauss X 2
Lee to Pietersen @ Lords.
Shane Warne
Banned
Snicko didn't react to that either.twctopcat said:
Talk about getting carried away.Shane Warne
Banned
That he's poor yeah.marc71178 said:
Shane Warne
Banned
Yeah, Bell's better than Hayden, Katich and Gilchrist actually.
You are so much more rational than me.
You are so much more rational than me.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Good Lord, what a day. Every day of this series so far has had outstanding cricket with both sides hitting punches and landing a few. It's been far from one-sided and the standard has been high. Amazing stuff.
Australia's bowling in the morning session was excellent. Brett Lee bowled really well to Tresco early on before getting him and the ball to Vaughan was sensational. So was his first-ball to KP.
Warnie was, well, Warnie and he bowled some ripping deliveries to Bell and others. 6-fer was reflective of the way he bowled. Mention must also be made of Gilchrist's keeping; Not one bye for the match and he had some tough takes.
English batting was a disappointing but it was against high-class bowling so they wouldn't be too unhappy. Tresco played a very lazy shot which turned momentum Australia's way until...................
FREDDIE. Who cares that he didn't get a ton? It was just an amazing innings he played. He took England from setting Australia around 230 to win (eminently gettable) to 280 (very, very tough). That's the very definition of a match-winning innings. Botham-like stuff. The difference? He didn't wait for Willis to do the job with the ball.
Australia started off really well and I thought Haydos in particular looked like he was ready to break his low-form streak. But then Flintoff cae on and immediately looked dangerous, getting Langer in his first over. Then he bowled some really testing deliveries to Ponting before getting him with a really vicious away-swinger which Ponting did well to get bat on. Over of the series so far and that's saying something after McGrath's burst in the first Test. Two crucial wickets and momentum swung back England's way. jones bowled fairly pedestrin stuff initially but when he got Hayden and then Martyn went, it all looked a bit grim. Giles, once again, showed his value to the team by inducing two false shots from Kat and Gillie (oh dear....) but when Mick Clarke was batting well and Warnie had decided to put his head down, it looked like they'd really push Australia close.
But then, after lacking spark all match so far, Harmi came on and was immediately threatening. And then, of course, the magnificent slower-ball which knocked over Clarke. The really smart part about that ball wasn't the ball itself but the fact that the previous three balls had pushed Clarke onto the back-foot. They were lightning quick and rapped him on the gloves. The slower-ball was the sucker-punch and I don't think anyone saw it coming considering the aggression shown by Harmi in that over and the other over he bowled.
So yeah, Australia in the second innings didn't play THAT badly but England's bowlers were outstanding. Even the best team in the world couldn't hold them out. I'd say that Martyn's was perhaps the only soft dismissal of the top-6 in the second innings. Just good solid lines, aggression and feeling were what did it for England.
Where England won it; Day one. Scoring 400 in the first day meant they had plenty of time in the rest of the match and put the Aussies right on the back-foot. Flintoff's knock was a great rear-guard but that day really set the tone.
Where Australia will lose it; First innings. Too many soft-dismissals from batsmen who looked set. They needed a 100 lead and instead had a 100 deficit. Fighting an uphill battle from there no matter who you are.
Australia's bowling in the morning session was excellent. Brett Lee bowled really well to Tresco early on before getting him and the ball to Vaughan was sensational. So was his first-ball to KP.
Warnie was, well, Warnie and he bowled some ripping deliveries to Bell and others. 6-fer was reflective of the way he bowled. Mention must also be made of Gilchrist's keeping; Not one bye for the match and he had some tough takes. English batting was a disappointing but it was against high-class bowling so they wouldn't be too unhappy. Tresco played a very lazy shot which turned momentum Australia's way until...................
FREDDIE. Who cares that he didn't get a ton? It was just an amazing innings he played. He took England from setting Australia around 230 to win (eminently gettable) to 280 (very, very tough). That's the very definition of a match-winning innings. Botham-like stuff. The difference? He didn't wait for Willis to do the job with the ball.
Australia started off really well and I thought Haydos in particular looked like he was ready to break his low-form streak. But then Flintoff cae on and immediately looked dangerous, getting Langer in his first over. Then he bowled some really testing deliveries to Ponting before getting him with a really vicious away-swinger which Ponting did well to get bat on. Over of the series so far and that's saying something after McGrath's burst in the first Test. Two crucial wickets and momentum swung back England's way. jones bowled fairly pedestrin stuff initially but when he got Hayden and then Martyn went, it all looked a bit grim. Giles, once again, showed his value to the team by inducing two false shots from Kat and Gillie (oh dear....) but when Mick Clarke was batting well and Warnie had decided to put his head down, it looked like they'd really push Australia close.
But then, after lacking spark all match so far, Harmi came on and was immediately threatening. And then, of course, the magnificent slower-ball which knocked over Clarke. The really smart part about that ball wasn't the ball itself but the fact that the previous three balls had pushed Clarke onto the back-foot. They were lightning quick and rapped him on the gloves. The slower-ball was the sucker-punch and I don't think anyone saw it coming considering the aggression shown by Harmi in that over and the other over he bowled.
So yeah, Australia in the second innings didn't play THAT badly but England's bowlers were outstanding. Even the best team in the world couldn't hold them out. I'd say that Martyn's was perhaps the only soft dismissal of the top-6 in the second innings. Just good solid lines, aggression and feeling were what did it for England.
Where England won it; Day one. Scoring 400 in the first day meant they had plenty of time in the rest of the match and put the Aussies right on the back-foot. Flintoff's knock was a great rear-guard but that day really set the tone.
Where Australia will lose it; First innings. Too many soft-dismissals from batsmen who looked set. They needed a 100 lead and instead had a 100 deficit. Fighting an uphill battle from there no matter who you are.
Craig
World Traveller
As I said this is one hell of a Test series. I would say this more exciting and gripping then Australia's tour of India in 2001 - and that was one heck of a series.
To be perfectly honest when I got one the computer this morning I have expected to see Australia having wrapped up this Test or close to doing so. Well done England.
To be perfectly honest when I got one the computer this morning I have expected to see Australia having wrapped up this Test or close to doing so. Well done England.
Shane Warne
Banned
I would do if Mcgrath was playing.Top_Cat said:
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
McGrath != Australia.
The only reason Kasper and Gillespie have looked poor this Test is because the play of England has MADE them look relatively ordinary. They haven't bowled that badly and against other sides, would have at least bowled reasonably well but England have played them very well. It's what good sides do, y'know?
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Well that's it, really. I'm certain that McGrath couldn't have done anything about Langer's, Ponting's, Hayden's, Katich's and Gilchrist's wickets. And remember Australia bowled really well in the moring but were taken apart in the afternoon by Freddie. If Anything, owing to his consistent line-and-length, McGrath probably would have been MORE of a target for Freddie in his hitting. Certainly happened in the past.