***Official*** Australia in England (The Ashes)

[marc71178]

true but i'll back bing to come good for the rest of the match he has bowled pretty well in every innings except the 1st innings at edgbagston so i expect some improvements

I don't know what you've been watching, but I'd say his good bowling has been much more the exception rather than the norm.

Lords aside, he's not been that good really IMO.

 

[greg]

i beg to differ, Lara for me regardless of Vaughan's wonderful elegant technique & yes that 166 was good but i rate the 186 at the SCG a bit higher.....

Topped for me by his two 190s against India in 2002 - especially the second one at the Oval.

 

[marc71178]

Yeah I know. Read between the lines. We need to win the last two, even if we win this one, we still need to win the last one, because if we don't it could still be a chance of 2-2.

It speaks volumes that Aussies appear to be genuinely worried about not winning the series.

IMO good for all cricket.

 

[marc71178]

Also, Flintoff at 24 didnt even have a run-up and 2 years ago in Aus, Harmison couldnt hit the cut portion.

At similar ages, Tait is light years ahead of where they were and look at them now.

IIRC the Harmison 2 years ago is being blown out of all proportion because of *that* warm up game when he hit his head against an advertising hoarding.

And people moaned when Tait's record last summer is mentioned...

 

[greg]

Back on the "is 229-4 a good score or not?" topic, it should be noted that at Edgbaston this score would be some way north of 250 - the outfield was very slow yesterday, whether that will remain the case...

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I don't know what you've been watching, but I'd say his good bowling has been much more the exception rather than the norm.

Lords aside, he's not been that good really IMO.

Lee's largely been good. He's had one shocker at Edgbaston, and also had a poor spell after lunch on day 4 at Old Trafford and had a poor day yesterday. Aside from that, he's been good... which basically means he's been up and down, but good more often than not. He was good at Lords, good in the second innings at Edgbaston, and good at Old Trafford, and he's taken a fair number of wickets when nobody else has been able to pick them up. I'd say overall it's been a moderate return to test cricket, certainly good enough to get him a further run in the Australian summer, provided he doesn't go to pieces before the series is up.

 

[andyc]

Watching the SBS highlights, Tait did look to bowl quite well in his second spell.

 

[Pratters]

So, with McGrath injured and Gillespie woefully out of form, which person would you have put into the side as the 5th bowler and who would he have replaced?

MacGill/Gillespie

 

[marc71178]

In my estimation, he is the only bowler that can reach mid 90s, swing a new red ball, and reverse later.

All that after only 14 overs of his Test career (!)

 

[social]

Back on the "is 229-4 a good score or not?" topic, it should be noted that at Edgbaston this score would be some way north of 250 - the outfield was very slow yesterday, whether that will remain the case...

Edgbaston had 60 yard boundaries.

Schoolgirl matches are played on bigger fields.

 

[marc71178]

This is what has impressed me most about Pietersen thus far.

Indeed - just hope he knuckles down like he did yesterday early on today.

Even better, hope he can get Flintoff to bat in a similar manner.

We've seen once already this series how when those 2 get in and settled they can really score quickly (wasn't it 100 stand in just over an hour?)

 

[social]

All that after only 14 overs of his Test career (!)

To anyone that has followed Tait's career, yesterday was not a surprise.

High pace, swing, inaccuracy, wickets.

It's why he has a career strike-rate of 40 but an era of 3.6.

 

[Pratters]

All that after only 14 overs of his Test career (!)

90 mph and swing can be estimated/derived by watching a bowler in first class cricket as well.

 

[greg]

Edgbaston had 60 yard boundaries.

Schoolgirl matches are played on bigger fields.

Yes and my point is that 407 was more than sufficient, even there.

 

[marc71178]

Only idiots would be saying England aren't playing well.

Yes, but unfortunately a few members of the forum (although not surprisingly it's the newer members) are refusing to accept that's it's anything other than a big conspiracy.

 

[marc71178]

MacGill/Gillespie

So you'd either have put a second spinner on a wicket not really renowned for taking turn or you'd have played a bowler who's so out of form it's a crying shame if he doesn't get another chance to finish his career on a high note to match the rest of his career?

And who would you have replaced from a batting line-up that is currently struggling for runs?

 

[social]

Indeed - just hope he knuckles down like he did yesterday early on today.

Even better, hope he can get Flintoff to bat in a similar manner.

We've seen once already this series how when those 2 get in and settled they can really score quickly (wasn't it 100 stand in just over an hour?)

I dont think its rocket science to suggest that Aus has to break this partnership early or they'll quickly (very) take the game away.

 

[andyc]

I dont think its rocket science to suggest that Aus has to break this partnership early or they'll quickly (very) take the game away.

Definetely. Either Lee and Tait to open or Warne and Tait, is my guess. Would have been Lee over Tait but he's not done to well, obviously. If the Aussies get a wicket in the first 10 overs or so then they're very much ahead. If England can get to lunch with losing, at most, one wicket, then good luck Australia.

 

[social]

IIRC the Harmison 2 years ago is being blown out of all proportion because of *that* warm up game when he hit his head against an advertising hoarding.

And people moaned when Tait's record last summer is mentioned...

Talking about comparable stages of careers.

Tait is very talented but also very raw and only 22.

BTW, it wasnt one incident with Harmy, it was a significant proportion of the tour.

 

[Pratters]

So you'd either have put a second spinner on a wicket not really renowned for taking turn or you'd have played a bowler who's so out of form it's a crying shame if he doesn't get another chance to finish his career on a high note to match the rest of his career?

Warne has been pretty successful here and has dismissed the claims of the track not supporting turn.

A 5th bowler is not a bad option because it gives the others an option of rest and gives them the chance to come back with full force. Having a Ponting or some one else takes the pressure off in most cases (luckily it resulted in a wicket yesterday). Even an out of form Gillespie or an underrated MacGill is better than Ponting as a 5th bowler option.

And who would you have replaced from a batting line-up that is currently struggling for runs?

One of the people you think are struggling and less likely to get runs in the 4th test.