10 Aug 09
Geez, where is Crowley when you want him?
The Aussies thrashed England and no-one is here to take up the slack. I guess hes just gone back to South African cricket....the results just dont warrant any comment.
As for my predictions: 1.Phil Hughes was removed from the team so how could he make 3 centuries. 2. the third test was rained out nearly so there was no chance of an innings victory. (the 4th test was an innings victory though wasn't it)3. Aus 2-1. Still looking good🙂
10 Aug 09
Originally posted by karoly aczelI don't care about who wins the ashes.
Geez, where is Crowley when you want him?
The Aussies thrashed England and no-one is here to take up the slack. I guess hes just gone back to South African cricket....the results just dont warrant any comment.
As for my predictions: 1.Phil Hughes was removed from the team so how could he make 3 centuries. 2. the third test was rained out nearly so ...[text shortened]... victory. (the 4th test was an innings victory though wasn't it)3. Aus 2-1. Still looking good🙂
Australia should have set the series up in the first test, but your captain buggered it up. Now England have a chance of drawing.
Simple, really.
11 Aug 09
Originally posted by CrowleyAgreed.
I don't care about who wins the ashes.
Australia should have set the series up in the first test, but your captain buggered it up. Now England have a chance of drawing.
Simple, really.
I'm not a big fan of Pontings captaincy either. However he aint been that bad this series.
So you really dont care who wins the ashes? I thought I detected a leaning towards England, but perhaps it was just a leaning away from Australia. I find it hard to believe that you dont favour one side over another (however slightly)
I cant think of one sporting match that I've viewed that I haven't leaned toward one team or another. But thats just me.
11 Aug 09
Originally posted by karoly aczelI do lean towards England, yes, but only because I like to root for the underdog.
Agreed.
I'm not a big fan of Pontings captaincy either. However he aint been that bad this series.
So you really dont care who wins the ashes? I thought I detected a leaning towards England, but perhaps it was just a leaning away from Australia. I find it hard to believe that you dont favour one side over another (however slightly)
I cant think of ...[text shortened]... g match that I've viewed that I haven't leaned toward one team or another. But thats just me.
11 Aug 09
Originally posted by HumeABeware the wounded lion. I'm not so sure the Aussies are such strong favourites for the decider. Watson has been lucky. Clarke and North are due to fail. Johnson has been wayward. And the English have shown they can bowl well. Now if only they could bat . Aren't the English making some wholesale changes for the fifth test?
"[b]Flintoff cleared for Ashes finale"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/8192589.stm
Well England need a miracle to take the Ashes, but when better than Freddie's final Test match?
Who ever said there was anything wrong with blind optimism?[/b]
11 Aug 09
Originally posted by karoly aczelI think that after the last episode, they were really taking a hammering from their own fans, and desperate measure were being considered, Harmison i think is being considered (shane warne apparently really rates him)and there was a lot of talk about England number three, who has had an abysmal series, Bopara, being drooped further down the order and a lot of talk of Ramprakash returning, who i think has not played test cricket for some time being called in to boost the middle order, maybe Bell going in at number three.
Beware the wounded lion. I'm not so sure the Aussies are such strong favourites for the decider. Watson has been lucky. Clarke and North are due to fail. Johnson has been wayward. And the English have shown they can bowl well. Now if only they could bat . Aren't the English making some wholesale changes for the fifth test?
12 Aug 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell the English batting line up does look a shambles doesn't it? How about they move Stauss to number 3 ? The batting order would take on a whole new look.(Given they could find a decent openner.How about Boparra? now I'm giving them too many ideas.)
I think that after the last episode, they were really taking a hammering from their own fans, and desperate measure were being considered, Harmison i think is being considered (shane warne apparently really rates him)and there was a lot of talk about England number three, who has had an abysmal series, Bopara, being drooped further down the order and ...[text shortened]... et for some time being called in to boost the middle order, maybe Bell going in at number three.
As for Bell, I really dont know. He looks absolutely crap sometimes but at other times he could serve quite well as an openner.(with a bit of luk)
20 Aug 09
1 edit
Fifth test underway and if England are the underdog , then they are only slightly. Already 1 for 60.
Now some may call me a spoilsport,but I've thought about this for a while. Ie. That there should only be ONE toss for a five match series. Whoever wins the first toss calls for the first match and then the call alternates for the rest of the series. What do the panel think.
I've seen pitches in Adelaide ,for example, where the toss will practically win or at least draw the match for the winner of the toss. The toss can be way to much of an advantage , and when the teams are fairly evenly matched, as are most teams in modern professional cricket, the result shouldn't be decided by the toss🙁
20 Aug 09
Originally posted by FavsUnless the Aussies falter, which is a distinct possibility, it will be a draw.
Cook out for 10, Strauss walks on 55, Bell 41n.o - and the cynic in me predicts an impending batting collapse...... 114-2....
Despite Michael Clarke and countless other media commentators saying that the Aussies wont be playing for a draw, I think they will be. Especially now , given the state of the English innings,pitch,etc.
I am an Aussie fan , but the truth is the truth. The Aussies will bat to retain the ashes, not win the game.😛
20 Aug 09
Originally posted by karoly aczelInteresting idea, but then we take out the 'gamble' element and teams might even put their teams together based on it, ie. have two spinners in because the pitch starts turning on days 4 & 5 and you know you will bowl then.
Fifth test underway and if England are the underdog , then they are only slightly. Already 1 for 60.
Now some may call me a spoilsport,but I've thought about this for a while. Ie. That there should only be ONE toss for a five match series. Whoever wins the first toss calls for the first match and then the call alternates for the rest of the series. Wha ...[text shortened]... are most teams in modern professional cricket, the result shouldn't be decided by the toss🙁
It just won't work.
21 Aug 09
Originally posted by karoly aczelEspecially now given the pitch? Nonsense, you don't draw at the Oval unless there's rain. The pitch is offering exactly th sort of stuff which makes a result inevitable. Besides, the Aussies are going to come out hard for the win every day.
Unless the Aussies falter, which is a distinct possibility, it will be a draw.
Despite Michael Clarke and countless other media commentators saying that the Aussies wont be playing for a draw, I think they will be. Especially now , given the state of the English innings,pitch,etc.
I am an Aussie fan , but the truth is the truth. The Aussies will bat to retain the ashes, not win the game.😛