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

[Scaly piscine]

what are peoples opinions on collignwood?

i like him as a person and his fielding is exceptional but he just didn't look the part as an international player.it might just be a survere case of nerves but his technique looked at a bit broken to me,his short backlift and the way his bat is slightly mis-alligned from his pad a lot of the time.

it was a great ball that got him out but he never looked at ease through his 26 ball innings,i didn't see anything that would change his reputation as a one-day specialist.

He played and missed at one Warne delivery early on (which any right hander would have played and missed at) and other than that he looked in control, he hit quite a few decent drives but being early in his innings the timing wasn't quite there.

 

[sqwerty]

I'd leave it for maybe an extra over or two from Tait, depending on how he goes. As long as he looks like taking a wicket with the old ball, keep him on, and then let McGrath and Lee finish the day. Australia really need one more... that will get the tail in and make a sub-350 score fairly likely. 7-320 or so and it's Australia's day, although very marginally.

.............so at 7-319 we're dominating !

 

[Pratters]

How did Anderson, who was slacked off and written off by certain people on the forum, manage to make the English squad (even though not the first XI in the end) for the crucial ashes test?

Never slack of any one arm chair critics!

 

[Pratters]

For a start I'd guess Joyce is ahead of him.

Read previous post.

 

[social]

Did it not hit him on the full though, which then changes the rules?

FOD will undoubtedly be able to quote the rule verbatim, but I think that only applies if you are struck in line with the stumps.

 

[social]

Add in the reaction of Strauss (who didn't turn to watch the ball) and I wonder if he hit the ball or the ground?

It seemed a regulation dismissal and, as such, Warne in particular didnt rant and rave as per usual.

 

[tooextracool]

No, dumb would've been to weaken the batting any further when it is already looking shaky.

dumb would have(and ended up being) picking tait, who struggled to bowl a ball on the stumps all day. too bad the aussie selectors didnt realise that picking an extra right hand batsman in place of a left hander might also have helped, now that simon jones isnt playing.

 

[tooextracool]

Yes, but he doesn't always bat like a batsman, as seen in South Africa, and that's the problem. When he does, he justifies his position with both bat and ball I think, which is all you can ask of an all-rounder. I think he's got unfulfilled potential in both forms, although he's closest to reaching what he's capable of with the ball, and if he can do that with both bat and ball he'll be an all-time great.

it is a strange pattern how every one of his series away from home with the bat have been ordinary since 2003, while every one of his series at home have been extremely good.

 

[tooextracool]

Question for English fans...

If it came down to England setting a target for Australia in the fourth innings, would you prefer that England go for the win or accept the draw and series victory? Say the choice was there between setting an extremely unlikely but plausible 400 in a day and having a shot at bowling Australia out as they went for the target, or batting on and setting Australia 500 in half a day with no chance for victory for either side, what would you prefer?

i dont think that theres much doubt that vaughan will bat as long as possible so that australia have no chance of winning this game, which i fully endorse.
i cant see that happening in this game though.

 

[sqwerty]

FOD will undoubtedly be able to quote the rule verbatim, but I think that only applies if you are struck in line with the stumps.

That's right. If you're struck on the full the umpire must assume the ball is continuing on the same path - (more or less suits the spinners only).

All the other LBW rules still apply so that if you are hit outside the line you are not out.

 

[tooextracool]

Anyone got a clue about how many times a spinner has taken 5 wickets on the first day of test match ?

probably a fair few times. warne took 7/56 against SA in 94 and even harbhajan singh took 5/51 against england in the first test in 2001/02

 

[tooextracool]

Did it not hit him on the full though, which then changes the rules?

no

 

[tooextracool]

Lol shah wont get near the England team...EVER.

even though he was unlucky to never play a test match ever?

 

[tooextracool]

How did Anderson, who was slacked off and written off by certain people on the forum, manage to make the English squad (even though not the first XI in the end) for the crucial ashes test?

Never slack of any one arm chair critics!

Lesson of the day- when it comes to the english selectors nothing is impossible.

 

[vic_orthdox]

On the Collingwood dismissal:

This is actually more of a general problem I have with LBW's. The word is that Collingwood was incorrectly judged LBW because the ball hit him outside off. However, this is only relevant if you're attempting a shot. Colly hid his bat behind his front leg, so imho he wasn't playing a shot. In general, you'll see people given not out in these circumstances so in that sense his dismissal was unfortunate), however I feel it was a correct decision by Koertzen (otoh, that Strauss edge was just beyond silly). What's your opinion?

Really, he only was playing behind his leg because the ball swung so much and so late, and he didn't expect the ball to be on that line. It was a legitimate attempt to play at the ball.

But by buggery, when they replayed it at full tilt, to actually be able to say that it hit him outside the line would have been a massive call. They're very tough calls,when the foot is moving back like that as he is hit with the ball.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

I really dont see how anyone who claims to be a cricket fan can say Collingwood was out. No idea what you've all been smoking!

 

[sqwerty]

I really dont see how anyone who claims to be a cricket fan can say Collingwood was out. No idea what you've all been smoking!

on replay....of course he's not out

Live.....at 90mph......looked pretty close.

Fast inswinging yorker......hit on the full.......ball knocks his foot across in front of the stumps.......pretty hard for the ump to tell if he's been hit in line or not.

who cares......he shouldn't have been picked anyway !

 

[tassietiger]

I really dont see how anyone who claims to be a cricket fan can say Collingwood was out. No idea what you've all been smoking!

I don't reckon he was out, but I'm not complaining. We've had plenty of decisions going against us, and it's nice to get one back. e.g. when Strauss edges it to the keeper, he's given not out, and when Martyn edges it, he's given out (lbw)

 

[Top_Cat]

I really dont see how anyone who claims to be a cricket fan can say Collingwood was out. No idea what you've all been smoking!

It made up for the Strauss non-catch behind.

 

[Pratters]

Lesson of the day- when it comes to the english selectors nothing is impossible.

The same selectors who wisely selected Pieterson over Thorpe. The English selectors are doing quite good actually!