superkingdave
Hall of Fame Member
Willis and Botham seem to think 6 an overs from Collingwood was worth persisting with over Tremlett!
Then maybe Harmison should be bowling instead of Collingwood, Giles isn't letting them back in. He's 5-1-14-0 economy 2.80.chipmonk said:he would have done even better if australia are down 5 wickets when he comes on.
Hardly worth getting out of bed for.chipmonk said:I think Aussie will score 265-275 .... will that be enough for messers peterson/flintoff?
255 would have to see England as favourites, really. Symonds finally taking on Giles, a lot more of that needed.Neil Pickup said:I think we're looking around 255 as a score which would set the run chase as evenly-poised - fingers crossed Giles can get through 10 for 35 and maybe a couple of scalps to boot to strangle the accumulation and prevent too much of a slog-out at the end.
Another intriguingly poised game - hope the rest of the summer's as close.
Amen to that.Neil Pickup said:Another intriguingly poised game - hope the rest of the summer's as close.
seconded. as long as we win it, that isBarney Rubble said:Amen to that.
I agree that Giles has bowled economically ..... but my point is Trasco had a rare opportunity where Australia were on the defensive with 2 new batsman.... he should have attacked more and perhaps got a few more wickets .....Gloucefan said:Then maybe Harmison should be bowling instead of Collingwood, Giles isn't letting them back in. He's 5-1-14-0 economy 2.80.
Right.chipmonk said:Great Tresco brings tremlett after Giles and Collingwood has given the aussie batsman sufficient Orientation.
You are a racist, buddy.......luckyeddie said:Right.
So you would have gone for the kill and bowled your four main-line seamers out within 40 overs, eh?
I think when your head flapped up and down your brain fell out
/Blooming Canadians
//I watch too much South Park
///It's all true
Granted I don't agree with his tactic, it isn't that silly. Going for the attack may have worked. Whilst I think bringing on Giles was the right move, it wouldn't have been that 'out there'.luckyeddie said:Right.
So you would have gone for the kill and bowled your four main-line seamers out within 40 overs, eh?
I think when your head flapped up and down your brain fell out
Geez .... calm down mate ! its only a game no need to slag off me .... my point was harmison or flintoff could have 2- 3 wickets by now ..... but its only a hypothetical .... anyways I prefer south park to "family guy" !luckyeddie said:Right.
So you would have gone for the kill and bowled your four main-line seamers out within 40 overs, eh?
I think when your head flapped up and down your brain fell out
/Blooming Canadians
//I watch too much South Park
///It's all true