I think this will be 6 out of the last 7 Tests to end in a draw at Lords (baring a major collapse by SA tomorrow). Would suggest the groundsmen needs a good talking too.You'd have to go some not to prefer Hoggard to MSP at Headingley if you get "typical" Headingley conditions.
100 for Smith. 2nd time in his career he gets a century at Lord's - and in both he had early let-offs.
Robbins must be spitting, wherever he is.
Hoggard is a much better bowler than Harmison, this is regardless of the wicket or the ground. Hoggard must be preffered over Harmison anywhere.Indeed, I would also much rather have Hoggard than Harmison, especially since Hoggard knows the Headingley track well.
Yeah, pretty disappointing.Cannot believe some people booed Graeme Smith when he got his hundred. A considerable amount of boos too.
I wouldn't even boo Symonds if he tonned up. Hell even Brad Williams, who I hate the most, wouldn't get booed by me if he ever did something good in his career.
Nah, if it's a quick & bouncy one, it's Harmison ahead of Hoggard, given that he's in marginally better form atm.Hoggard is a much better bowler than Harmison, this is regardless of the wicket or the ground. Hoggard must be preffered over Harmison anywhere.
Nah, mostly it's just been because of lost play. If SA save this this'll be only the 2nd out of those 6 which wouldn't almost certainly have had a result could lost time be made-up.I think this will be 6 out of the last 7 Tests to end in a draw at Lords (baring a major collapse by SA tomorrow). Would suggest the groundsmen needs a good talking too.
The more the better, if they're all capable of exploiting it, rather than Broad banging it in too short to be any use and MSP getting zero turn and posing zero threat.If you have 'typical' Headingley conditions then theres no need to bring Hoggard in when you have the likes of Anderson / Sidebottom in the team already. 3 of them would be far too alike for my liking.
Wrong. Their Test averages are virtually the same, plus Hoggard hardly bowls when it's not doing much whereas Harmison bowls plenty in all conditions.Hoggard is a much better bowler than Harmison, this is regardless of the wicket or the ground. Hoggard must be preffered over Harmison anywhere.
And does (or did, hopefully) crap in all conditions, and only gets wickets against piss-poor batting.Wrong. Their Test averages are virtually the same, plus Hoggard hardly bowls when it's not doing much whereas Harmison bowls plenty in all conditions.