• 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

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Good luck explaining that one.
Easy. The arguement againts Ponting was that because the pitch was flat he shouldn't have bowled first & because of what happened to McGrath.

AUS had just bowled ENG out for 2 sub 200 totals at Lord's. Ponting was in his rights to think old Ashes wounds had been exposed again & stick ENG in. ENG should be given credit for how they played on that first day, since after AUS only lost by 3 runs - Ponting deserves no blame. Plus if you want to get even more technical, Kasprowicz wasn't out.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Ha oh yea he was. Either way Ponting deserved no blame, he was in rights to stick ENG. Nobody would have expected ENG to respond so well after that first test batting performance. The argument held no substance then nor now in hindsight.
 

Jamee999

Hall of Fame Member
There are very few circumstances in modern Test cricket where bowling first is right, and Edgbaston '05 was in no way one of them.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
There are very few circumstances in modern Test cricket where bowling first is right, and Edgbaston '05 was in no way one of them.
Even if Ponting had batted first, i wouldn't have prevented AUS batsmen from being exposed techinically to the conventional & reverse swing - which was the REAL reason why AUS lost that test & the Ashes - not Ponting's decison to field first. Which was not a tactical blunder as people have been lead to believe.

I blame Boycott for starting this fallacy.
 

grecian

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Even if Ponting had batted first, i wouldn't have prevented AUS batsmen from being exposed techinically to the conventional & reverse swing - which was the REAL reason why AUS lost that test & the Ashes - not Ponting's decison to field first. Which was not a tactical blunder as people have been lead to believe.

I blame Boycott for starting this fallacy.
Take it elsewhere, we're about to win this Ashes. Oh and Yeah Boyks is the only man who thought that decision was wrong:blink:
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
He was the main culprit in over-exaggerating that scenario. He was going on & on after that test about how Ponting was a bone-head etc & how that decision "change to course of that Ashes BS".
 

Jakester1288

International Regular
I'm kind of happy I went to bed last night just when Ponting came to the crease.

I too thought that England would win (weather permitting) if they won the toss and batted, I hope we can win or draw it from here.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Could've quoted any of the 3 parts of that post, all ridiculous.
I hate post like this. What the use having a cricket debate if you have no intention of responding, but instead chose to make stupid statements like this?. I already given valid reason why Ponting had no fault @ Edgbaston, so unless you intend to try to disapprove it - dont say anything.
 

JBH001

International Regular
Damn Sky Sports arent showing the highlights. Thought they were showing a 1/2 hr truncated version at least, even if not an hour long package, but instead they switched to English league, of all things, at the last minute. Stupid idiots!

Edit: @ Aussie, mate you may think you have given valid reasons. But no one else does. And no need to hijack the thread in any case.
 
Last edited:

Top