Australia in England

[m_vaughan]

that is true indeed. and as they say..in the end all these balance each other!

 

[themuel1]

it happened the over before feddie was out..cost no runs..


and if we are talking about poor umpiring decsions, how about Pietersen " caught" off the body/elbow and Bell " caught-behind" when he hit his pads..

if pietersen had stayed in the target would have been much larger, as the Aussie have no clue how to get him out ( except when he's slogging with the tailenders)

Agreed. England played better than Australia and think England deserved to win. As Eddie pointed out, Austalia got some lucky decisions aswell.

 

[angryangy]

i think the result is very indicative of the course of the match. between batting first on a nice batting wicket and setting a target around 300 to win, england couldnt really have expected to play signifigantly better, although in my opinion i'd have like to see a little less aggression in the interests of bigger totals and thus a five day game. the english bowlers' homework will probably just be to spend the next couple of days learning how to be rid of tail enders. aus on the other hand could certainly pick up their game with both bat and ball. i think they knew how far they let england get away from them somewhere near the end of their first innings. expect furious determination and tenacity at old trafford. the squad could probably use a bowling tweak, though a strong batting performance would cover the bowlers.

i totally disagree with the bell thing as ive already said. the camera angle from behind shows the bat clearly twisting in his hands as the ball passes. hitting your pads wont do that. faint edge will though.

but its best not to argue the coulda shouldas because it gets complicated, maybe so-and-so wasn't out this time but then maybe he should have been out ten overs earlier and so forth. then if so-and-so was in then maybe he could have done such-and-such and then so-and-so could do this and etc, etc. a dropped catch in the first few overs doesn't just add fifty runs, it changes the shape of the match completely from the match where the catch would have been taken.

 

[jazz]

i totally disagree with the bell thing as ive already said. the camera angle from behind shows the bat clearly twisting in his hands as the ball passes. hitting your pads wont do that. faint edge will though.

yep i agree with i too saw the replay from behind the bast and you could clearly see an edge

 

[ZoraxDoom]

Geez! Its a game! Stuff like this makes cricket fun! No point in arguing about 'but's and 'if's

 

[ZexyZahid]

You guys can rather can talk about the next match which is within four days already.

I think Collingwood should replace Bell. And Symonds needs to get in. If someone if thinks about him at least : And not to forget Hussey also. I would choose Katich and Martyn to get out. It's not they have played that bad. But the thing is that Symonds and Hussey are in form.

I wish Buchanan and the English coach could read this.

 

[m_vaughan]

You guys can rather can talk about the next match which is within four days already.

I think Collingwood should replace Bell. And Symonds needs to get in. If someone if thinks about him at least : And not to forget Hussey also. I would choose Katich and Martyn to get out. It's not they have played that bad. But the thing is that Symonds and Hussey are in form.

I wish Buchanan and the English coach could read this.

I dont really believe in chopping and changing. Yes it is true that Symonds and Hussey are in form, but I think performing in the test match arena is always difficult, and I am not too sure if these two can quite do the job in the five day version of the game. If you remember a certain Mr. Bevan despite doing so very well in the ODIs, dint really feature in the Aussie test side. I see Michael Hussey as a similar case. Whether he will perform or no, well that cannot be said, but I think both Katich and Martyn have done well in the past for Australia and Katich played very well in Lord's too.

As far as England are concerned, Collingwood replacing Bell isnt that bad an idea, as both are similar players imo.

 

[jazz]

i think martyn is ok in his positon, but australia should consider symonds for old trafford mainly he has been playing for his county their he may also know how the pitch may behave thier, also his australias version of andrew flintoff

 

[irottev]

Jesus, what an exciting match. :O

England were lucky to get out of that one with the win. Who would of thought it would become that close.

 

[Briggsey]

Yes it is true that Symonds and Hussey are in form.

On the contrary! Symonds is in form yes, Hussey though failed to reach double figures in his last CC game for Durham and hasnt had a big score for a while now. Cant see either of them getting in though, Clarke is in form now and they wont drop Katich as he is capable of hanging around when others are falling while Symonds and Hussey are more attacking in their approach. As far as England are concerned, dont think anyone will come in even though Collingwood is pushing Bell hard.

 

[PhilC]

How pathetic. We've had one of the best tests ever with packed stadium every day, and we have some net junkies bitching on about LBW whatnots and was or wasn't edges.

Geez, just enjoy great sport for once. Even if Australia had won, I'd still regard it as one of the greatest games ever and not cry about Pieterson being given caught etc.

Get over it kids.

 

[Sureshot]

EVER?

Bowls far too many sh*t balls in between the good ones, much like Lee

I meant today, i may be biassed but i'm not blind.

One of the most amazing matches ever!An amzing performance by the Aussies,just shows what champions they are,and how weak the poms are.


Who said he was the second best ever!Show me the fool,who ever considered uttering such a stupid thing.

t'was me, but my words were mixed up. I meant McGrath is the best pacer Ever, and that harmison is the 2nd best pacer now. Although Flintoff must be up there as he is consistent.

lbw is different though, it is a prediction and the umpire must be certain, so it is open to the umpires interpretation of events, whereas a catch is a very specific occurence. what i mean is there is a difference between "bad luck, that was/wasnt out" and "bad luck you nearly got him".

An umpire has to be 100% sure and remember Lee was bowling around the wicket so the umpire had to consider the Angle as well and swing maybe. Oh well both teams had decisions go against them.

i think the result is very indicative of the course of the match. between batting first on a nice batting wicket and setting a target around 300 to win, england couldnt really have expected to play signifigantly better, although in my opinion i'd have like to see a little less aggression in the interests of bigger totals and thus a five day game. the english bowlers' homework will probably just be to spend the next couple of days learning how to be rid of tail enders. aus on the other hand could certainly pick up their game with both bat and ball. i think they knew how far they let england get away from them somewhere near the end of their first innings. expect furious determination and tenacity at old trafford. the squad could probably use a bowling tweak, though a strong batting performance would cover the bowlers.

i totally disagree with the bell thing as ive already said. the camera angle from behind shows the bat clearly twisting in his hands as the ball passes. hitting your pads wont do that. faint edge will though.

but its best not to argue the coulda shouldas because it gets complicated, maybe so-and-so wasn't out this time but then maybe he should have been out ten overs earlier and so forth. then if so-and-so was in then maybe he could have done such-and-such and then so-and-so could do this and etc, etc. a dropped catch in the first few overs doesn't just add fifty runs, it changes the shape of the match completely from the match where the catch would have been taken.

Well said.

One more, England won't drop Bell as it's knowledge that you don't change a winning team.

 

[FreddieFan]

Can't wait for the fourth test. If it's a typical Old Trafford wicket, it's probably going to be the most crucial toss of the series - England have to win it and bat first. We can't afford to have Shane Warne bowling on it fourth innings.

As for the umpiring descisions, ok, maybe Kasper wan't out. But both sides had descisions they weren't happy with, and it's all part of the game. If I can quote Mike Atherton for a minute (from his autobiography) - "A batsman must learn to accept his fate - the unplayable delivery, the brilliant catch, a spiteful pitch, a poor descision."

Also, I was sitting next to an Aussie at Edgbaston today, and we had a nice chat while waiting for the presentation. While obviously dissapointed, he was happy that he had witnessed a brilliant match, and was pleased that his team almost had the nerve to get out of the huge hole they had dug themselves into. He also was really looking forard to the rest of the now wide-open series - if Australia had gone 2-0 up it would have been game over, but this keeps some intrest in it.

Also, I'd like to put in a word here about the amazing decency of the game - can you imagine two passionate football fans enjoying a pleasant chat after such a tight finish?

 

[Sureshot]

you mean third test

Rivalry in cricket isn't as rife as football most of the time anyway.

 

[barmyarmy]

Without being over-marxist, cricket is a very middle-class sport in England.