Australia in England

[squiz]

You sure you want to go on record saying England are playing with only 9 players even after you lost the ashes? :

We've only been playing with 4 players

 

[dazza76]

The decisions cost Australia the match!

England have outplayed them in previous tests but not in this one.

What planet are you from?
England made Australia follow for the first time in nearly 20 years and bowled them out twice (with a bowler down in there second innings) twice in the game and rapped up the win inside four days.
That is not outplayed?

 

[brad352]

There are a million and one possible permutations that determain a result in a test match, for example had Geraint Jones not missed several catches and stumpings through the match England would have likely only been chasing an handful rather than 129.

Well don't play a hack of a keeper and that won't happen, not a good comparison

 

[dazza76]

Well don't play a hack of a keeper and that won't happen, not a good comparison

I think our hack of a keeper is on a par with your hack of a pace bowling attack (Lee apart of course)
I think its pefectly legitamate comparison. some are looking to blame a few dodgy decisions for Australia's defeat well the crap keeping of Jones probably ensured your defeat was not more severe.
It's swings and roundabouts.

 

[brad352]

I think its pefectly legitamate comparison. some are looking to blame a few dodgy decisions for Australia's defeat well the crap keeping of Jones probably ensured your defeat was not more severe.
It's swings and roundabouts.

How? The umpires are supposed to have no influence on a match, whereas the reason you pick players to beat the opposition. Someone in your team performing poorly has no relation to an impartial party affecting play. Also, the fast bowlers you refer to all have superb records, something you can't say about Jones.

 

[langerrox]

dazza, i bet you if ponting was out lbw on 1 and made 200 you would be whinging and blaming the umpires, im talking about trevor the 37 year old, thats so low, 129 is a handful for your one man team

seeing freddy is with the umpires its all clear sailing for england

 

[Annihilation66]

What planet are you from?
England made Australia follow for the first time in nearly 20 years and bowled them out twice (with a bowler down in there second innings) twice in the game and rapped up the win inside four days.
That is not outplayed?

POinting is in good touch as he proved in the second innings but was given unfairly out in the first along with martyn. that put pressure on the rest of the batsman and provided a collapse. THATS WHY AUSTRALIA HAD TO FOLLOW ON. NOT bacause of England outplayed them like the previous tests.

As long as the decisions are made correctly Australia will regain the ashes.

 

[langerrox]

POinting is in good touch as he proved in the second innings but was given unfairly out in the first along with martyn. that put pressure on the rest of the batsman and provided a collapse. THATS WHY AUSTRALIA HAD TO FOLLOW ON. NOT bacause of England outplayed them like the previous tests.

As long as the decisions are made correctly Australia will regain the ashes.

exaclty, the umpiring decisions put pressure on the others and made them collaspe. the umpires have favoured england behond belief any commentator/player knows that but that cant comment.

 

[brad352]

NOT bacause of England outplayed them like the previous tests.

As long as the decisions are made correctly Australia will regain the ashes.

They did outplay us for most of the game

 

[squiz]

POinting is in good touch as he proved in the second innings but was given unfairly out in the first along with martyn. that put pressure on the rest of the batsman and provided a collapse. THATS WHY AUSTRALIA HAD TO FOLLOW ON. NOT bacause of England outplayed them like the previous tests.

As long as the decisions are made correctly Australia will regain the ashes.

His name is Ponting...not Pointing

 

[dazza76]

How? The umpires are supposed to have no influence on a match, whereas the reason you pick players to beat the opposition. Someone in your team performing poorly has no relation to an impartial party affecting play. Also, the fast bowlers you refer to all have superb records, something you can't say about Jones.

Of course umpires have influence on a match. they make decisions what they believe are right not in the interest of effecting a result in favour of one team or another.
Some people posting have said the umpires cost Australia the game. that is a pure guess on there part nobody knows for sure had those decisions not been made that Australia would have won.
The scenario could have been different had the umpires got it right but on the other hand had Jones taken the catches and stumping and Strauss, Bell and Pieterson not missed pretty easy chances, had Simon Jones bowled in the 2nd innings then it could have been different again and been an even more convinicing win for England.
No umpire makes decisions for the sake of making them and i dont understand why anybody would claim the umpires cost Australia a win.
Regarding the fast bowlers you say have had good records well i would not disagree but in this series Kasper and Gillespie's performances have been pretty poor just like Geraint Jones's behind the wicket.

 

[langerrox]

hey, i dont think his first language is english

Of course umpires have influence on a match. they make decisions what they believe are right not in the interest of effecting a result in favour of one team or another.
Some people posting have said the umpires cost Australia the game. that is a pure guess on there part nobody knows for sure had those decisions not been made that Australia would have won.
The scenario could have been different had the umpires got it right but on the other hand had Jones taken the catches and stumping and Strauss, Bell and Pieterson not missed pretty easy chances, had Simon Jones bowled in the 2nd innings then it could have been different again and been an even more convinicing win for England.
No umpire makes decisions for the sake of making them and i dont understand why anybody would claim the umpires cost Australia a win.
Regarding the fast bowlers you say have had good records well i would not disagree but in this series Kasper and Gillespie's performances have been pretty poor just like Geraint Jones's behind the wicket.

flintoff was out on 8 he made 102, more than the jones stumping you talking about, australians are making opps while englands keeper are spiling them, australia have had decisions go agaisnt them strongly which cost them the match.

 

[jazz]

His name is Ponting...not Pointing

actually his name is Ricky his surname is Ponting

 

[squiz]

Regarding the fast bowlers you say have had good records well i would not disagree but in this series Kasper and Gillespie's performances have been pretty poor just like Geraint Jones's behind the wicket.

And they were dropped. Kasprowicz has been bowling pretty well though, but has been extremely unlucky with a lot of dropped catches and bad umpiring decisions going his way

 

[Annihilation66]

lol spelling erors POnting then.

Brad i know why you think they outplayed you like in the other tests but they didnt this time. The pressure on Australia was undeserved because of some harsh and some extremely poor umpiring decisions. i think 5 went against them in the game.

I pointed out the extra pressure earlier also Flintoff and Jones being proven out and getting a huge partnership after helped England get a huge target. If they were given out they would have been out for around 300