*Official* Third Test at Old Trafford

[BoyBrumby]

Brumbeh - I haven't had a chance to say this yet, but I concede.

Phil Hughes does have a big nose.

It take a big man, etc...

 

[Adders]

The Australians like their chances of trapping Cook LBW by getting one to straighten down the line. They think Watson is one of the most likely to do this so Watson would probably bowl first change, and it wouldn't even surprise me to see him open.

Thats fair enough and you may be right, and say Twatto does knock off Cook early.......he gonna be left on and bowl a heap of overs?? Watson has 1 wicket for the series at an ave of 114, my money is not on him to clean us up in a hurry.

All I'm saying is yes, you do have 6 (7 if Clarke bowls) bowling options........but the bulk of the work is going to be by your front liners. With back to back tests that has to be a massive worry and a consideration with the follow on when they have already spent 120 overs in the field.

 

[benchmark00]

Thats fair enough and you may be right, and say Twatto does knock off Cook early.......he gonna be left on and bowl a heap of overs?? Watson has 1 wicket for the series at an ave of 114, my money is not on him to clean us up in a hurry.

All I'm saying is yes, you do have 6 (7 if Clarke bowls) bowling options........but the bulk of the work is going to be by your front liners. With back to back tests that has to be a massive worry and a consideration with the follow on when they have already spent 120 overs in the field.

So you're saying front line bowlers will bowl the most overs? Shock revelation there.

Watson on average bowls about two thirds of the overs that a specialist bowler bowls. This is a significant amount. Hurricane was pointing out that this allows Clarke to be able rotate the bowlers more. Considering that the pitch should start spinning more, I'd say the most overs will be left to Lyon, and the seamers will be rotated through the other end for a large portion of the innings.

 

[Hurricane]

Not really, if they do bowl again they will be chasing wickets, quick wickets......Harris, Siddle and Starc are the most likely to deliver. Clarke will have to go on the attack and that wont involve Steve Smith or even Watson bowling much.

The Australians like their chances of trapping Cook LBW by getting one to straighten down the line. They think Watson is one of the most likely to do this so Watson would probably bowl first change, and it wouldn't even surprise me to see him open.

And I'll add that if one of the fears is that England may bat for a long time and create stress injuries amongst the Australians for the rest of the series - then if a long partnership develops the Aussies can if necessary fall back on the likes of Smith to just get through some overs and give the other guys a rest. He won't help bowl the English out (probably) but he can help prevent a worst case scenario.

 

[Hurricane]

so you're saying front line bowlers will bowl the most overs? Shock revelation there.

Watson on average bowls about two thirds of the overs that a specialist bowler bowls. This is a significant amount. Hurricane was pointing out that this allows clarke to be able rotate the bowlers more. Considering that the pitch should start spinning more, i'd say the most overs will be left to lyon, and the seamers will be rotated through the other end for a large portion of the innings.

awta

 

[uvelocity]

reckon clarkeh was saving lyon for the second dig, although he will still prefer not to bowl him to pietersen

 

[Adders]

So you're saying front line bowlers will bowl the most overs? Shock revelation there.

Watson on average bowls about two thirds of the overs that a specialist bowler bowls. This is a significant amount. Hurricane was pointing out that this allows Clarke to be able rotate the bowlers more. Considering that the pitch should start spinning more, I'd say the most overs will be left to Lyon, and the seamers will be rotated through the other end for a large portion of the innings.

Not sure why the need to be a smartass but anyway......

Watson has bowled 59 overs for the series, Siddle 115.........I'll let you do the maths but it sure as hell aint two thirds.

I was replying to Hurricane who said......

One thing in Aussies favour if they do bowl again is that they have 5 bowlers plus smith as a part timer.

I don't see how that is any consideration here when if they do enforce the follow on it is going to be all out attack. If Harris pulls up sore is at really an option to have Watson, Warner, Clarke or Smith take up the slack when you are trying to run through a side?

Dress it up whatever way you want, if they get the opportunity and do enforce it, Harris, Starc and Siddle are looking at doing some ****ing hard yards.

 

[Prince EWS]

What Hurricane said is spot on though. He never said enforcing the follow on wasn't going to take a toll on the specialist bowlers; he just said Australia had an advantage a lot of teams wouldn't in that situation.

 

[uvelocity]

need to know where this pitch rates on the benchmark scale

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Spinny road is the bookies' favourite.

 

[Maximas]

Australia can't afford to put their bowlers through the follow on with another test match so close to this one IMO, Clarke just has to hope the weather won't interfere too much, there is nothing he can do about it

 

[benchmark00]

need to know where this pitch rates on the benchmark scale

Probably a 5.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Australia can't afford to put their bowlers through the follow on with another test match so close to this one IMO, Clarke just has to hope the weather won't interfere too much, there is nothing he can do about it

They cross that bridge when they come to it. Unless most are adopting the long term, 10-match Ashes perspective, this really is the sort of situation that makes legends out of losers. Make them follow on and then give it all they have.

 

[Adders]

What Hurricane said is spot on though. He never said enforcing the follow on wasn't going to take a toll on the specialist bowlers; he just said Australia had an advantage a lot of teams wouldn't in that situation.

Not sure how Australia has any such advantage when they have more issues with fast bowers breaking down than any other team. They've already lost Patto......do they want to see Harris on the plane home as well?

And most sides can list a few part timers to chip in, their part timers might be a lot better but they are still just that.........and not who you will be looking too to take 10 wickets as quickly as you possibly can.

Anyway, this really is all probably immaterial...........can't see England not eking out 33 runs with 3 wickets in hand and Prior and Broad at the crease.

 

[Maximas]

can we afford to lose another fast bowler? Well, can we afford to draw this test? The answer is no to both, that is the dilemma, we risk both if we enforce the follow on while we only risk one if we don't, that's why I think we should bat again - like Adders said we will probably be forced to

 

[NUFAN]

I think you've got it the wrong way around. IMO, we can lose another fast bowler and we can't afford to draw.

 

[Maximas]

I think you've got it the wrong way around. IMO, we can lose another fast bowler and we can't afford to draw.

Perhaps, but if we win this test and lose say, Harris, then we have lost our best bowler IMO, which leaves us vulnerable for the next two matches.

 

[Spark]

Lose Harris and we bring in Bird. A blow, but hardly a massive drop-off in quality.

 

[Burgey]

Not sure why the need to be a smartass but anyway......

Watson has bowled 59 overs for the series, Siddle 115.........I'll let you do the maths but it sure as hell aint two thirds.

I was replying to Hurricane who said......



I don't see how that is any consideration here when if they do enforce the follow on it is going to be all out attack. If Harris pulls up sore is at really an option to have Watson, Warner, Clarke or Smith take up the slack when you are trying to run through a side?

Dress it up whatever way you want, if they get the opportunity and do enforce it, Harris, Starc and Siddle are looking at doing some ****ing hard yards.

Back to back tests aren't a factor here. If they don't win this one the Ashes are lost.

 

[NUFAN]

Perhaps, but if we win this test and lose say, Harris, then we have lost our best bowler IMO, which leaves us vulnerable for the next two matches.

I would rather be 2-1 instead of wrapping a quick bowler up in cotton wool and being down 2-0.

You do realize that if we bowl again, the bowlers will actually get more rest before the next Test compared to if we bat a bit and then bowl on the fifth day. I have no idea how many of the 180 overs we are going to get in btw. If it was the full 180, I would definitely bat again..