Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 1102 comments are related to the topic:
The Ashes, 1st Test at Cardiff

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 28 of 28  •  Previous | 1 | ... | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 1,102
By:
Injera
When: 11 Jul 15 17:40
England's batting order can cope with early wickets. Australia's can't.

It really is simple as that.

As for the Oz bowling, it's untried in England. They bowled both sides and were punished.

They were arrogant towards Mooen and gave him wickets.

This 'new brand' that all sides are looking to adopt has its flaws. Teams forget it's a 5 day match. This was a flat pitch yet the game is over at 5pm on the 4th day!!!

I can't see a draw. 3-2 either way unless the weather intervenes.
By:
Try My Best
When: 11 Jul 15 18:17
I thought we were very poor all game and a little spineless. If we don't start playing a bit more aggressively and showing more guts and technique out in the middle I think we will get hammered this series. Clarke and Haddin have had  terrible games and Watson should now make way for Marsh. All in all a pathetic start by the aussies.
By:
pxb
When: 11 Jul 15 20:52
With hindsight, Starc was probably carrying some kind of injury from the start. Now looks to be out for the next match. All-in-all, England had the better luck, in particular that Root drop. And Root was the difference, plus Anderson/Broad were not past their best as I expected.

I anticipate the next match to be fairly even and could go either way. Talk of an England whitewash a little premature.
By:
Injera
When: 11 Jul 15 20:59
Starc will be fine. Clarke kept emphasising the point that he bowled quickly in the second dig and batted.

I reckon he thinks Starc is a bit of a drama queen...

Both sides took 20 wickets but England's 5-8 are too powerful at present.
By:
cricketnut2
When: 11 Jul 15 22:26

Jul 11, 2015 -- 8:52PM, pxb wrote:


With hindsight, Starc was probably carrying some kind of injury from the start. Now looks to be out for the next match. All-in-all, England had the better luck, in particular that Root drop. And Root was the difference, plus Anderson/Broad were not past their best as I expected.I anticipate the next match to be fairly even and could go either way. Talk of an England whitewash a little premature.


Your comments are in some ways correct, Starc carrying an injury, with Harris already ruled out is correct, England had the better luck in particular the Root drop, emm the Root drop was not the better luck, Hadden should of caught it, he didn't, thats poor cricket from Australia, it was a dolly, at Test Match Level. Root is the best batsmen England have had in a long long while and when he dropped that catch, I stated on the 1st test thread, he's just dropped the Ashes. If Starc, wasn't fit, he shouldn't of played, which says the reserves are probably not good enough, now thats not bad luck, bad management, whatever. Now there is absolutly no chance of a whitewash, just for the fact, that if England. get on top, whether it be at Football Cricket or any sport, they think, they are the greatest and usually are brought back down to earth very quickly. The trouble is Australia's squad is too old. Hadden is too old 37, which tells you, there is nobody any younger, thats any better

By:
cricketnut2
When: 11 Jul 15 22:31
Johnson is still a good bowler/batter, but overall, there is a lack of real quality in this Australian side, the pitches are going to be tailor made for England and England have a new coach and he's the only Australian thats going to win this summer, UNLESS AUSTRALIA IMPROVE BY 200%
By:
salmon spray
When: 11 Jul 15 22:47
Their tale is now too long by modern standards. They need to replace Watson andHaddin with Marsh Ab
By:
pxb
When: 11 Jul 15 22:57
Of course in a deterministic universe, luck doesn't exist.

We use 'luck' as a shorthand for saying, on another day in similar circumstances, Haddin would have taken a similar catch.

(end pendantry)

Top athletes play with injuries all the time, and it's a question of how much their performance is affected. I'll be more precise and say, Starc's long term injury problem (bone spurs apparently) affected his performance more than I anticipated.

regards
By:
earlycrow
When: 11 Jul 15 23:20

Jul 11, 2015 -- 10:31PM, cricketnut2 wrote:


Johnson is still a good bowler/batter, but overall, there is a lack of real quality in this Australian side, the pitches are going to be tailor made for England and England have a new coach and he's the only Australian thats going to win this summer, UNLESS AUSTRALIA IMPROVE BY 200%


I agree with all you wrote other than Australia needing to improve by 200%, the teams are very close in ability

By:
JustWinBaby
When: 11 Jul 15 23:33
The key issues for Australia:
1. Middle order - Steve Smith's stellar 18 months has papered over the fact that players like Watson, Haddin and to a lesser extent Clarke have not had been performing. That is been exposed now with Smith moving up to 3 which is a bit of double edged sword. I think it is the right move but it now means they don't have anyone from 4-7 who can consistently play long innings. Voges as played a lot of cricket in England but obviously a novice in test cricket.
2. Bowling lacks control - on the English pitches with a slow and dry, this current Australian attack lacks balance. They need someone who can provide more control, bowling wicket to wicket which is why I don't think Australia can actually afford to play both Mitch Johnson and Starc in the same team in this series. Allowing England to score at over 4 RPO's in both innings is unnacceptable. Siddle will provide a lot more control IMO.
3. Watson - what exactly is he in the team for? Pre-series we were told he was ahead of Mitch Marsh for the all rounder spot because of his superior bowling but then he ends up bowling only 13 overs for the entire match??? If that is the case Marsh is more than capable of filling that role and he is a far superior batsman to Watson. I am quite high on Marsh as a batsman and eventually he is going to be batting in the top 4 for the team. Why not give him a chance to play now and get some experience in these conditions.

Haddin is clearly over the hill but very rare for a team to replace a WK mid-series. At a minimum Watson must go for Marsh. IF Starc is not fit for Lords, Siddle should come in. I don't think Australia have become a bad team overnight, think they may have taken England lightly but there were signs against NZ that England were building to this sort of performance so it shouldn't have come at a surprise to them.

Aussies will come back hard but at least they know they have a fight on their hands. England play the conditions better and now they are brimming with confidence.
By:
pxb
When: 11 Jul 15 23:58
Aus favourite for the 2nd Test by a margin.

It looks like Watto is gone and I agree with all the comments about he shouldn't have played the 1st Test.

I doubt Haddin will be dropped, and IMO he doesn't deserve to be, even though his batting has fallen off.

I'd bring in Cummins (to replace Starc), rather than Siddle. Taking early wickets more important than middle order containment IMO.

In an ideal world, Clarke would be dropped, but that isn't going to happen. Although I wouldn't rule out a convenient injury if Eng win the 2nd Test.
By:
posy
When: 12 Jul 15 09:56
I found this match a difficult one to bet on and ended up losing money. Was expecting a lot more volatility in the betting but apart from the first session of the match England were on top. The game really lacked the ups and downs of the matches against NZ and as a result I found myself trading out of what would have been a winning position.Rather a boring match from a betting perspective.
By:
earlycrow
When: 12 Jul 15 13:03
Starc will play
By:
sewter lives again
When: 12 Jul 15 13:56
good job England got it done yesterday as it is still raining in Cardiff and has done virtually all morning
By:
nigelpm1
When: 12 Jul 15 22:27
Turns out we might not have had much play today if any - comfortable in losing a draw bet backed at 36 when the real odds were probably 10/1.
By:
nigelpm1
When: 12 Jul 15 22:36
actually make that 5/1.  Nice to see the BBC/Met Office spot on as well (for a change)
By:
Charkitz
When: 13 Jul 15 00:14
Which shows what a ridiculous decision it was by Cook not to declare late on day 3. He got away with it, but would have been red faced had it gone to 5th day. 350 run lead was always going to be more than enough
By:
Whisperingdeath
When: 13 Jul 15 17:09
Charlitz,

I would call a vote of no confidence if you were my Captain!

Cook does not have a responsibility to Betfair Risk Management Analyst's! The first task is to make the game safe and the second to win it. If the Aussie batsmen had applied themselves to the task they could have taken the game into the fifth day for sure but if they did they would also have had the chance of winning it if it didn't rain. If Cook had declared at 350 lead and Aussies won, I would have been the first to get out my hammer to nail him to the cross.
By:
sewter lives again
When: 13 Jul 15 17:26
I'm with whisperingdeath on this one and i suspect nearly all england fans as well-there is no way he should have declared when only 350 up imo that would have been suicidal WD gives the exact reasons why

there is no way anyone could have realised, from the forecast, how much it was going to rain-in fact if the Aussies had known they would have batted in a completely different way and saved the match (probably easily)

as it was it pissed down virtually all day-Im 3 miles from the ground and I dont think they would have played at all, thankfully the Ashes started on Wednesday as it has rained all day today as well
By:
mafeking
When: 13 Jul 15 18:24
thought they played it perfectly on friday getting a 400+ lead and then bowling first thing on saturday morning when bowling conditions were likely to be the most favourable. it absolutely tipped down on friday night as well

in theory they could have cracks with a new ball first thing, 7 or 8 overs before the close (or longer if claiming the extra half hour) and then another go with a nearly new ball on sunday morning if it hadn't rained
By:
Charkitz
When: 14 Jul 15 01:31
WD I can't agree with that, imo the first task is to win the match, once that becomes an impossibility then worry about saving it (within reason). This opinion formed after watching recent Oz captains such as Taylor, Steve Waugh, Ponting and Clarke have fantastic success with aggressive tactics, in particular aggressive declarations. They NEVER FEARED LOSING!! Hell would have frozen over before they would have considered not declaring in the same situation as Cook was with 10 overs left on day 3.

Doesn't make it right or wrong, just means anyones opinion on this comes down to what they're used to watching I guess. I've seen many a market get caught out by aggressive Oz declarations over the years. On the flip side... I'm sure there's a lot of Aussie punters who have lost money expecting other teams to declare only for them to bat and bat and bat until the game is absoulutely safe.

Either way the market on this match was quite bizarre. $3.50 to chase down 400+ is one of the best value lay bets you're ever likely to see
By:
Whisperingdeath
When: 14 Jul 15 18:01
Charkitz,

With respect all of those Aussie Captains had some damn fine bowlers to back them up. Cook had no such guarantee that Anderson and Broad would not return to bowling filth like they did much of last summer and some of this.

No Warne, no McGrath. These two mop up six wickets in each innings. It's all very well playing aggressive cricket but when you talk the talk you have to walk the walk. Aus previously had the bowlers to do that. This summer they have talked big but ended up being humiliated.  The quality of 5th day pitches has improved enormusly. I am not saying anyone could have scored 412 batting last but I am sure plenty of teams around the world could have made a decent fist of chasing 350.

I doubt any Test Captain and like I said nearly every Betfair risk Analyst would have declared either. I think you are in a minority of 1 on this one.

If you want to look at great declarations Stuart Surridge's Surrey one bowled out the opposition for 33 odd then knocked up 100 for only a couple of wickets and he then declared and bowled the other side out again for about 36, won the game and got maximum points. The other 3 day games that started on that day were all rained off for the following two days and the points Surridge got by declaring so outrageously won Surrey the title. This is more accurate from cricinfo....

Two other extraordinary matches illustrated what a bold captain could do on uncovered pitches. Against Warwickshire at The Oval in 1953 play started 30 minutes late. Warwickshire were quickly hustled out for 45. Surrey raced to 146 with Surridge hitting three sixes himself. Then they routed the visitors in 70 minutes for 52. Surridge claimed the extra half-hour and won in a day by an innings and 49. A year later, on another wet pitch, Worcestershire were dismissed for 25 and 40, losing by an innings and 27 runs in only five hours' play after Surridge had declared at 92 for three. This declaration was apparently regarded as insane by many of the Surrey players but Surridge had rung up for a weather forecast and was determined to finish the game.

One thing you were right about was the market confidence that Aussie could chase down that total. It was actually quite unnerving seeing those prices. I had to bet a lot to make a little and the downside risk was unpleasant. I thought the only way Aus could win was a combination of a Warner assault twinned with a Rogers limpet operation. Smith and Clarke could have turned the pressure onto England. For me it was an Emperors new clothes " moment. I knew they could not win but  at 100-1 it was most disconcerting and as I was over stretched I could not hammer at the free money.
By:
Injera
When: 14 Jul 15 18:09
Totally agree WD. Very unnerving..

I was talking to a mate today saying Eng And Oz were evens at 90-1. He was staggered and asked if I had layed Oz..


I didn't (Sad) because eventually 400 will be chased more regularly. Just not sure when! It was a featherbed of a pitch and it was day 4 not 5 with no Swann or other top class tweaker.

Batsmen, whilst more aggresive and able to score more quickly have lost the art to bat for long periods. Australia's capitulation was pretty poor.
By:
pxb
When: 14 Jul 15 23:35
When I was aggresively laying Aus day 4, it was with an eye on the day 5 weather. In fact, I was more confident that there wouldn't be enough overs day 5 for a result (or at least look like it in the morning), than I was Aus would get bowled out day 4.

The latter eventuated, but I would have made money had there been a draw.

I recall Aus started the chase sub 4, which was just too short even without the prospect of weather day 5.

I'd be interested to see if there is a trend to bigger 4th inn totals. I suspect there is but not as large as some may think. And to counter that, games are moving ahead faster than in the past. All in all, I think draws are becoming less frequent, which Crunchies stats seem to bear out.
By:
mafeking
When: 14 Jul 15 23:50
there may be a trend to be bigger 4th inns totals but gut feeling is teams are still starting far too short in such chases. for example england were something like 5/4 to get 350 in about 110 overs at headingley last year and 6/4 to get 320 at lords against india

there have only been 9 successful 350+ chases in test history 4 of which have been in the last 10 years. in the vast majority of cases teams still fall well short
By:
Whisperingdeath
When: 15 Jul 15 19:58
Nice stats maf!

But when you have your money down and you are thinking will they make history and wipe me out in the process it is extremely unnerving.  Really dumb when you think about it. I hate it when people say " free money " ( ignoring myself just recently! ) but laying the chase of 350+ is free money I guess. It's just like you have to be a memeber of Lloyds to have enough money to wager almost risk free.

If you are of the inclination I would be interested in seconnd innings totals in recent times comparison. I always thought the country and pitch were crucial like the Windies pitches of the 70's and 80's. I think Lords could provide a big 4th innings if the sun shone on days 4 and 5. I remember Sehwag smashing it to all parts and basically winning a game in the last session of day 4. I am not sure but he got about 80 odd and the back of the time / overs pressure was over. They knocked off 250 odd runs the next day. Warner scares me. He averages more in the second innings!

Anyway I think you are right teams are way to short chasing. If only I could have enough money at that stage of the game...it will never happen!

pxb,

The weather did for me or rather it didn't. I thought the pitch was relatively placid and Aus would make it into day 5 so after laying Aus started buying the draw. After the third morning capitulation I had to back England heavily. I am glad it came off for you. Despite being the bleedin' obvious thing to day it takes large cajones.
By:
mafeking
When: 15 Jul 15 20:17
WD, i was at cardiff and didn't think for a second england wouldn't win even approaching lunch. often in these sort of chases teams put together a decent partnership for one of the first few wickets and look like they might be in with a shout before collapsing in a heap. just a question of being patient

the case you refer to is when india chased down 380 against england in 2008. as you say sehwag smashed it everywhere before sachin finished it off with 100 0n day 5. warner tends to do very well in the 3rd inns coming when they have a lead. he did that several times in 2013/14

when i get time i'll have a look at all the targets set between 350 and 450 in recent years
By:
cricketnut2
When: 15 Jul 15 22:22
Looking forward to this next Test Match. A different venue, a different pitch, a different Australian wicketkeeper/batsman, I expect he may be rather good, most Aussies are. Hopefully England can keep its real high intensity. I think it may be quite a close game, the Lords Test Matches, usually goes into the Final Session, before a positive result is known, but with quicker scoring rates, it may be Day 5, session 1, its decided. Lets hope for another win for England, but it may well be a very close finish.
Page 28 of 28  •  Previous | 1 | ... | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com