Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Haddin and Hussey were done in by swing. Watson, Ponting, Clarke weren't.
Not to say it wasn't goof bowling mind.
-
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* Fifth Test at The Oval
- Thread starter GIMH
- Start date
Not to say it wasn't goof bowling mind.
Pratters
Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Fair enough. I saw the fall of wickets just once.
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
North by umpiring.
You could say Ponting and Clarke, both due to the uneven pace of the pitch.
zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
Goof bowling or not, I'd say that Clarke was done in by swing (not saying it wasn't a goof shot, mind you). The outswing just took the ball an extra few inches away from him, and he had to stretch for it.
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Well firslty Ponting was not wrong to bowl first @ Edgbaston in 05. That whole thing has always been blown out of proportion.
This time around, ATS i would have to say no. AUS selectors can't be blamed for not picking Haurtiz, only way he could have played is if Watson could have ben entrusted to bowl long spells. But even so i personally would have still kept 4 seamers, just replacing Lee for Clark.
Right now things are obviously evenly balanced, AUS seamers can easily run through ENG in the morning of course.
tooextracool
International Coach
Good luck explaining that one.
Daryl Harper
School Boy/Girl Captain
tooextracool
International Coach
Think Australia can count themselves to be extremely unfortunate having lost the toss, although they did shoot themselves in the foot by not picking Hauritz on this pitch. It's all fine going into Headingley without a spinner but at the Oval it was going to be a gamble and they obviously messed up.
At the end of the day, regardless of whomever wins this series, its fair to say that both teams have been pretty much evenly matched, with Australia probably being the better team overall, but England being better suited to the conditions.
At the end of the day, regardless of whomever wins this series, its fair to say that both teams have been pretty much evenly matched, with Australia probably being the better team overall, but England being better suited to the conditions.
Scaly piscine
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Evenly balanced, obviously...
Of course the selectors can be blamed for not picking Hauritz.
It was obvious The Oval was on course for the usual fair, a flat pitch with a bit of bounce in it. Only til like just over a week ago did the curator know England needed a win in that Test. You obviously can't doctor the pitch so the main way of creating a result pitch given the weather was to let it bake in the sun (which was what happened) - creating a crumbler.
four_or_six
Cricketer Of The Year
I don't understand why Hauritz could only play if Watson is able to bowl long spells. Most sides play a spinner just fine with a four-man attack. And it's not as if Hauritz didn't play well in the first few matches.
kingkallis
International Coach
subshakerz
Hall of Fame Member
Major misreading of the pitch IMO by Ponting. Its funny, last year in India Ponting copped criticism for employing his spinners to better his overrate. Now it will be his decision to not play a spinner that can do him in.
kingkallis
International Coach
Yeah right!
Maybe thats why Aussies made that theory of bookie contacting them and they avoided blah blah blah...
In reality they did take money!
