*Official* England in Australia (2 T20 & 7 ODIs)

[pup11]

Wow... that knock from Trott has to be one of the most brainless one's I have seen in long time, its was like as if he was having an extended net session out there and he was almost oblivious about what was happening around him in the game.

 

[morgieb]

It'll take a mammoth effort, this pitch is flat.

Didn't look so flat given the way England batted. Admittedly the only batsman that stayed out there played the game like a test match, but restricting them to 214 means that the game could be in play, particularly given that there's cloud around where I live.

 

[Spark]

Two runouts, two mindless c&b's, long hops smashed to/near fieldsmen... not really the product of unplayable bowling.

We did really well, but England the major architects of their own demise.

Bizarre innings from Trott. They'd be screwed without it, but, y'know... at least try to up the tempo towards the end?

 

[pup11]

Don't think the wicket is exactly flat, its got bit of extra bounce in it and its also likely to turn in the second half of the game.
Also Australia isn't the greatest of chasing sides, so if England take a few early wickets then this target could prove to be a tricky one.

 

[NUFAN]

Wow... that knock from Trott has to be one of the most brainless one's I have seen in long time, its was like as if he was having an extended net session out there and he was almost oblivious about what was happening around him in the game.

It was Kallis-esque.

Early Kallis, I should say.

 

[Noble One]

Hard to call the innings played by Trott a good or bad knock.

Yes he was the only batsman to survive, but he wasted a good 25-30 runs by slapping short balls to point, or dabbing balls to the covers. Risk free runs he missed out on.

 

[TumTum]

At least Clarke shows some intent in trying to increase his SR, that was awful from Trott.

 

[Spark]

Don't think the wicket is exactly flat, its got bit of extra bounce in it and its also likely to turn in the second half of the game.
Also Australia isn't the greatest of chasing sides, so if England take a few early wickets then this target could prove to be a tricky one.

Frankly when their only spinner is Yardy it'll have to be a raging turner for it to make much difference.

 

[BoyBrumby]

"Australia need these two to get them off to a flier"

Really, Nass? Really? 40/0 from 10 looks fine to me.

 

[morgieb]

Australia really only needs to not lose wickets and they're home. And if they negate Shahzad and Tremlett, I think they are.

 

[morgieb]

And Watto goes. Tremlett's crucial to England's hopes you'd think.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Watto not at the races today. Top nut from Tremmers tho, tbf.

 

[Spark]

Silly pair of shots from Watson, very loose.

 

[pup11]

Watto still batting as if he is 160 no.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Man, that's some serious swing from Shazzer there. Moved miles into the right-hander.

 

[NUFAN]

England all out now.

Is 215 defendable? With a decent bowling lineup it probably is, but England have 1 guy who isn't much chop at OD cricket (Tremlett), 2 batting all-rounders (Wright, Yardy) and a rookie (Woakes).

And Watto goes. Tremlett's crucial to England's hopes you'd think.

you only think this now that he has taken a wicket. YOU would think Shahzad is crucial to England's chances..

 

[wpdavid]

Australia really only needs to not lose wickets and they're home. And if they negate Shahzad and Tremlett, I think they are.

Spot on. Nice to get rid of Watson cheaply, but we need so much more before this even approaches being a competitive game.

At least I didn't get up early enough to catch our village-green batting. 3rd game on the trot when they've been at best unimpressive and at worst ****ing amateur. And please don't quote 294 at me unless you're pointing out that the openers were dead lucky to get as far as they did and the middle order was too feeble to capitalise. That strikes me as an accurate enough perspective on our performance in the 50-over matches. Quite why they bat so absysmally in this form of the game is anyone's guess. Anyone still think that my prediction of 6-1 or 7-0 after the first game is particularly outrageous?

 

[BoyBrumby]

Spot on. Nice to get rid of Watson cheaply, but we need so much more before this even approaches being a competitive game.

At least I didn't get up early enough to catch our village-green batting. 3rd game on the trot when they've been at best unimpressive and at worst ****ing amateur. And please don't quote 294 at me unless you're pointing out that the openers were dead lucky to get as far as they did and the middle order was too feeble to capitalise. That strikes me as an accurate enough perspective on our performance in the 50-over matches. Quite why they bat so absysmally in this form of the game is anyone's guess. Anyone still think that my prediction of 6-1 or 7-0 after the first game is particularly outrageous?

Be lucky to get 0, etc...

How was that a wide, btw? Bounced over leg stump, FFS. Not the bowler's fault Marsh shuffled over to off.

 

[wpdavid]

Man, that's some serious swing from Shazzer there. Moved miles into the right-hander.

btw your comments before the previous game about Prior opening are looking pretty spot on mate. That's two innings amounting to six deliveries and zero runs if my maths is up to scratch this morning.

 

[Bun]

Marshy goneeeeee