Cricket
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 787 comments are related to the topic:
England v Australia.
England v Australia.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 787
|
By:
It was so close to bowling Green...I wonder if JB was slightly distracted, expecting it to clatter the stumps.
|
|
By:
Poor from YJB. Really did not have his eyes and feet lined up. Body position was awful. Damned shame for Moen.
|
|
By:
Lets not forget that England were 176 for 5 so a long way to go. Of course England nearly always get as many runs from 6-10 as from 1-5 so Aus may not be so lucky.
|
|
By:
Fair play Cookie knows his markets, said the game was 50:50 when odds on here and 365 were exactly even
|
|
By:
dodgy wicket keeper and no spinner
anderson no good in this weather lay england |
|
By:
No excuse for Broad bowling no balls,he will cost us the ashes if he is unable to sort it out!
|
|
By:
310-5, and warner, marnus and smith contributed only 25 runs, reckon its another aussie whitewash
|
|
By:
ps, the most stupid decleration ever, yet they wont criticise stokes , this is the 1st test gods sake, ok if eng leading series 3-0 , but ive heard no one ridicule this decision
|
|
By:
Please please stop reverse sweeping
|
|
By:
it seems a feature of modern test cricket that the middle order get the runs. I know that Khawaja is an opener but he has batted much better since the big names got out. Sixth wicket for England 121 runs, Australia 91 and counting.
|
|
By:
Well done boys. Happy with that
|
|
By:
Great stuff Usman. To bat all day is a fine performance
|
|
By:
yes superb performance, proper test cricket
 |
|
By:
I agree, the irony about the declaration is that Bazball had already worked - Aus were passive with their field positions right from the first over, scared of England getting a flyer. Some comms have suggested well it's the Ashes, maybe England could've reined it in a little, and it's true - they could've milked the bowling with minimal risk for 4 an over, declared an hour before the end of play today, 600+ ahead, put the maximum number of overs into the Aus bowlers at the start of the series, forced them to bat on a wearing pitch with dodgy overheads tomorrow etc. But no, we had to have 4 overs at Aus for the sake of 'sporting theatre'. I realise that to bring about a change in mindset you need a chippy captain like Stokes, but you have to wonder how many of these decisions are driven by ego. Does he really need to prove time after time that he's not scared of the opposition or what old players think? He blew a series victory in New Zealand in the same fashion and just shrugged and said, well we're entertainers so these things happen. Will be a frustrating series if he'd rather look hard than do what the opposition would enjoy least.
|
|
By:
great post ,
|
|
By:
i recall the great bill shankleys quote, " listen when were 4-0 up with 5 mins up then we can relax a bit " , something to that effect
|
|
By:
england might well win this test with ease, but wont alter my opinion of this decision, and i posted it up few mins after the dec , and fo"b, agree with your ego description, i would say that stokes is a lucky captain/player rather than a great .
|
|
By:
I would say it is slightly disrespectful as well when you are playing the worlds no 1 side. I think the Pomms are getting slightly carried away with themselves.
|
|
By:
yes, in most of their latest winning tests they have also been in positions they could have easily lost as well.
|
|
By:
This test shows we ain't playing mugs now
Australia are world test winners and number 1 as pointed out above And I think their bowling is better than ours as well judged on this innings |
|
By:
|
|
By:
I agree about Marnus and Smith but not Warner
Warner seems finished for me and Broad definitely has his number, even if Broad doesn't get him he'll tie himself up mentally facing Broad and get out to the guy at the other end. We lack stamina bowling wise though, 40 year old, 36 year old, 32 year old 4th seamer and a spinner that'ss come out of retirement two weeks ago Our bowling unit is almost on zimmer frames |
|
By:
|
|
By:
Moen has 197 Test wickets. More than Emburey, Edmonds, Giles, Tufnelll, Panesar, Titmus, Verity, Lock and the great Jim Laker
Just saying! |
|
By:
Feel sorry for Foakes.
Catches win matches! Tbf it was a tough call with who to drop if Foakes played. Bairstow is looking like an amateur atm. Feet, gloves and eyes are all wrong. So obvious. Same with the declaration. It was wrong. It was a mistake but in this Captain I trust. He has licence. |
|
By:
I'm with Kumar and Taylor, this pitch is a pudding and I do not for a minute think it has helped us.
If wickets are frequent because of seam and/or swing, the side scoring at a daft rate might end up in a decent spot. However, there's no discernible advantage to scoring quickly (and arguably a disadvantage, with the inherent added risk) if the opposition can bat an infinite number of overs. |
|
By:
Obviously, this match could be in a drastically different position had JB taken his chances but our bowlers look extremely ineffective. (and I'm a huge Robinson fan, never mind Jimmy & Broad)
|
|
By:
You part of the battle is wear and tear. Australia bowled 78 overs, hardly taxing on mind, body or soul or indeed sloes!
Any spinner would want to bowl on this surface even if it is a bit slow. |
|
By:
I didn't love the declaration, but I didn't hate it. Much like you, WD, I have utmost faith in what Stokes has done and he's free to do as he sees fit.
He's fairly new and perhaps in time he'll view some of his decisions in the first year as not optimal. I *far far* rather us die trying than the insipid, "not-losing", cricket (that, ironically resulted in an awful lot of losing) that we'd been employing previously. |
|
By:
Frankly, to go from 1 in 17 victories, to 11 in 13, with essentially the same lineup, is disgusting. Absolute filth.
I do not understand a single soul who does not recognise this, and thus go with whatever those who brought about the change think. Whether you like it or not, they clearly flipping know what they are doing. |
|
By:
And to naysay about the fact we 'gave away' one of the two we didn't win, is beyond hilariously whiffing the point.
|
|
By:
Yes exactly!
and lest we forget 30/3 and 40/4 |
|
By:
ReportAptdemon • June 18, 2023 12:17 PM BST
Frankly, to go from 1 in 17 victories, to 11 in 13, with essentially the same lineup, is disgusting. Absolute filth. I do not understand a single soul who does not recognise this, and thus go with whatever those who brought about the change think. Whether you like it or not, they clearly flipping know what they are doing. Think the England dressing room had got very political, and the rotation policy was crazy when they were leaving out players that would have clearly suited the tracks. An example is looking back Stuart Broad was left out of some tests and his future in the side questioned. To put this into context he is the second highest English wicket taker of all time. He was also left out of a fair few Ashes games and he is the highest wicket taker in Ashes history for England. To be leaving him out of Ashes tests in my mind was ridiculous. You can play the odd good game and get ridiculous figures but to be top of the tree over all time is no fluke. There's something about broad in the Ashes and he just gets himself pumped and can run through a batting lineup, although admittedly sometimes he can have a test where the batsmen get on top of Jim. |
|
By:
Have you ever seen a field like that!
Excellent from Stokes but in reality Khawaja was tired and not thinking straight! Still excellent thinking! |
|
By:
Have you ever seen a field like that!
Excellent from Stokes but in reality Khawaja was tired and not thinking straight! Still excellent thinking! |
|
By:
Punter was on the ball though. Only 5 singles from his partnership with Cummins. He called it
|
|
By:
Great fight ack by England when the odds and conditions were against them. England do have problems with their bowling and the Battle if Wounded Funger.
|
|
By:
Every single draw back is under water...and there's been £23million matched on the draw
 |
|
By:
I don't know the cahoonas required to back a draw when we're playing, at any price, never mind at sub 4/1.
|