The Ashes Commentary Thread

[BoyBrumby]

Surely the Sky commentators blaming the scoreline at stumps yesterday on England's choice of ball will take some topping.

Probably plays a bit better in the shires than "We've been shyte, really. What do you think, Beefy?"

Gower actually made an interesting point during one of the breaks today tho; we're too reliant on swing. When a new cherry refuses to move off the straight (and the first new ball barely did) our only plan B is to flog Fred into the ground bowling back of a length, especially when our spinners bowl pus.

The trouble is it's rather like diagnosing cancer: we can tell you what's wrong, but curing it will be a bastard.

 

[Jamee999]

Warne is apparently not going to join the commentary until he gets knocked out of his poker tournament. How rubbish is that? I hope they have another Aussie in to cover for him.

$8,500,000 US to 1st, tbf (presuming he's playing the WSOP ME)

McCaffrey is it?

Doesn't do it anymore whatever his name is as I *think* he moved to Setanta

A wise career move.

 

[andruid]

Warne is apparently not going to join the commentary until he gets knocked out of his poker tournament. How rubbish is that? I hope they have another Aussie in to cover for him.

Can so see Rupert Murdoch paying off oppo+the house, to get Warne humiliatingly drubbed out in the next round

Its just the sort of thing Murdoch would do.

 

[Uppercut]

Probably plays a bit better in the shires than "We've been shyte, really. What do you think, Beefy?"

Gower actually made an interesting point during one of the breaks today tho; we're too reliant on swing. When a new cherry refuses to move off the straight (and the first new ball barely did) our only plan B is to flog Fred into the ground bowling back of a length, especially when our spinners bowl pus.

The trouble is it's rather like diagnosing cancer: we can tell you what's wrong, but curing it will be a bastard.

To be fair, not many attacks can do much when there's nothing happening in the air and nothing off the pitch.

 

[BoyBrumby]

To be fair, not many attacks can do much when there's nothing happening in the air and nothing off the pitch.

Hence my hideously inappropriate similie.

Has been a little turn tho, just very slow and Panesar and Swann haven't bowled well enough to utilise it.

Brings back what Langer said in a pre-Ashes forum on Sky. Words to the effect that he, as an Australian, would be very happy if we decided to attack the Aussies with spin. Prescient indeed from the nuggety little cack-hander.

 

[Burgey]

Probably plays a bit better in the shires than "We've been shyte, really. What do you think, Beefy?"

Gower actually made an interesting point during one of the breaks today tho; we're too reliant on swing. When a new cherry refuses to move off the straight (and the first new ball barely did) our only plan B is to flog Fred into the ground bowling back of a length, especially when our spinners bowl pus.

The trouble is it's rather like diagnosing cancer: we can tell you what's wrong, but curing it will be a bastard.

Yeah no doubt mate, but of they are the only two alternatives available to the comms, then they're in the wrong gig.

I think you're right about swing. There's been a love affair with it since 05. It's great to get it, but the ball doesn't swing much in a lot of places around the world. It'sa wonderful weapon to have inthe armoury though.

Always thought meself that seam movement > swing as it's invariably later, though the wickets are so flat these days you'd be loath to rely on that either, unless you're name's Glenn McGrath.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Yeah no doubt mate, but of they are the only two alternatives available to the comms, then they're in the wrong gig.

Amen to that.

Having said that tho, I don't think there's been too many foot-through-the-telly moments of excruitiating cobblers spoken just yet. Biggest criticisms are the lack of an Aussie voice for balance (flat out unprofessional they haven't got a res in whilst Warney's playing snap or whatever) and the constant suggestions that this is the first time they've seen players like North "He looks a well-organised player to me", yes, thank you, Bumble. He's played for five different counties, FFS. Surely it wouldn't be too onerous to have maybe cast an eye over him before as calling cricket is your job?

 

[Uppercut]

Hence my hideously inappropriate similie.

Has been a little turn tho, just very slow and Panesar and Swann haven't bowled well enough to utilise it.

Brings back what Langer said in a pre-Ashes forum on Sky. Words to the effect that he, as an Australian, would be very happy if we decided to attack the Aussies with spin. Prescient indeed from the nuggety little cack-hander.

Yeah, thought of what Langer said myself earlier on. "It would be a huge mistake for England to try to spin Australia out of the Ashes." England clearly have the edge over Australia when it comes to spin, but that's irrelevant if neither set of twirlers is capable of taking any wickets.

In any case, I think England will fairly get away with this one. The pitch won't deteriorate as much as expected, and rain will come. They'll save the match with four wickets down, and we'll all turn our eyes to Lord's and another horribly flat pitch. Ashes cricket at the Swalex stadium will thereafter be a distant memory forever. Hopefully.

 

[zaremba]

Yeah, thought of what Langer said myself earlier on. "It would be a huge mistake for England to try to spin Australia out of the Ashes." England clearly have the edge over Australia when it comes to spin, but that's irrelevant if neither set of twirlers is capable of taking any wickets.

I heard a pundit before the Test (I forget who) saying that we should play 2 spinners because that's the one department where we have the edge over Australia. Huh? What sort of logic is that? It's not as though each bowling attack plays the other; the bowling attacks play against opposing batting line-ups. And with regard to selecting bowlers, the question is not whether our spinners are better than Australia's; it's whether our spinners are better than our available quick bowlers whom they would be displacing.

 

[Burgey]

Amen to that.

Having said that tho, I don't think there's been too many foot-through-the-telly moments of excruitiating cobblers spoken just yet. Biggest criticisms are the lack of an Aussie voice for balance (flat out unprofessional they haven't got a res in whilst Warney's playing snap or whatever) and the constant suggestions that this is the first time they've seen players like North "He looks a well-organised player to me", yes, thank you, Bumble. He's played for five different counties, FFS. Surely it wouldn't be too onerous to have maybe cast an eye over him before as calling cricket is your job?

Yeah, this is a real problem for me with Aussie commetators as well. They just seem so secure in their jobs that they don't need to research their subject at all. Really poor imo.

 

[Pothas]

Amen to that.

Having said that tho, I don't think there's been too many foot-through-the-telly moments of excruitiating cobblers spoken just yet. Biggest criticisms are the lack of an Aussie voice for balance (flat out unprofessional they haven't got a res in whilst Warney's playing snap or whatever) and the constant suggestions that this is the first time they've seen players like North "He looks a well-organised player to me", yes, thank you, Bumble. He's played for five different counties, FFS. Surely it wouldn't be too onerous to have maybe cast an eye over him before as calling cricket is your job?

That is one of the best things about TMS, always has a commentator from the touring nation and they are normally pretty good. Really enjoy Ian Chappell's commentary.

 

[Uppercut]

I've been pretty impressed with the commentators so far. Plenty of good, interesting analysis. Except for Bumble, who just looks for people he thinks are dressed funny in the crowd when he's on third man.

Michael Holding is probably my favourite commentator around now too. Intelligent, opinionated and has the ***iest voice.

 

[Burgey]

One moment from last night I thought quite funny and worthy of note was Nasser's "Ponting - there you go, gets to 150 and gets out".

Yeah Nass, sucks to be him, eh?

 

[Redbacks]

Where is the analyser this series?

 

[BoyBrumby]

One moment from last night I thought quite funny and worthy of note was Nasser's "Ponting - there you go, gets to 150 and gets out".

Yeah Nass, sucks to be him, eh?

Was clearly being ironic, in Nasser's defence.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Really do miss that touch of token Australian. The other annoying thing is how every time you have new commentators talking about Mitchell Johnson, they keep on talking about the same thing over and over. The guy has proven that he can take wickets without swinging it back in. Sick of people harping on it.

 

[fredfertang]

Disappointed Vaughan isn't commentating - was convinced he would be - had to pay up on a few ill-advised wagers to that effect yesterday

 

[chalky]

Where is the analyser this series?

That was channel 4 coverage mate they lost rights after the 2005 series.

IMO channel 4's coverage, especially the 2005 series, was the pinnacle of cricket presentation that I have seen. Sky although not bad are no where near for me.

 

[Richard]

Surely the Sky commentators blaming the scoreline at stumps yesterday on England's choice of ball will take some topping.

I take it you're not a bowler then?

 

[Richard]

Really do miss that touch of token Australian. The other annoying thing is how every time you have new commentators talking about Mitchell Johnson, they keep on talking about the same thing over and over. The guy has proven that he can take wickets without swinging it back in. Sick of people harping on it.

He's also proven that he's useful sans-inswinger and deadly with it.

What is annoying - as I mentioned in the in-match thread - is people commenting, puzzled, on the fact that the off-cutter is his stock-ball. A little bit of research would've discovered that. I've known it for over a year now.