5th Test - Oval, Weds 21st August

First topic message reminder :

With England having won the series, I wonder what changes we will see to the teams.

England
The batting, barring Ian Bell, is misfiring. Too many times batsmen are getting in, but getting out for cameo scores. Prior is struggling a little with bat and gloves, but as the new boy and without a big innings, Jonny Bairstow is most at risk.
The wickets have been shared amongst the bowlers. Onions was unlucky to miss out at Chester-le-Street, but having now broken a finger is ruled out for two weeks. Monty's well publicised indiscretion will not endear him to the management and Steven Finn will probably be left to regain form and confidence with Middlesex. On his own ground, Chris Tremlett may get a run out, especially if they feel that Anderson or Broad need a rest.

all in all I suspect that changes are unlikely.


Australia
The good news is that they may have found an opening pair. The bad news is that the middle order is desperately fragile unless skipper Clarke scores runs. Khawaja and Smith are both batting at least two positions too high and unless he is able to bowl, Shane Watson looks a waste of a spot. Possible chances of recalls for Hughes or Cowan at 3 - and consideration has to be given to Faulkner lower down as an all-rounder.
Bowling has stood up well, but in another horses for course selection we may well see Starc replace Bird. Australia will be desperate for Harris to stay fit.




England have not played very well so far, especially the batters, yet are 3-0 up. Australia have shown they can compete but seem unable to win, even against a faltering team. If England can actually play well we could see a real thumping, but the money men at Ca will hope their team can sneak a win to create interest for the return series.

Watson has found his form and Cook has made a massive mistake dropping him when he's finally batting well and on a flat deck.

Watson 150 ...

Never thought I'd see that. Poor over from Broad too.

Now Kerrigan . This could get ugly  

Well played Shane Watson. I can't believe we're seeing his Test best innings.

Azzy Mahmood wrote:Righto, I may have called for 240-3 at tea, but no matter. Australia are looking comfortable here. They might bat for two days then bowl us out twice in three?

They might , but I'd be very disappointed in England's batsmen if they did. Think this game is more likely to be drawn eventually.

And of course if the new ball can take a couple of wickets this evening Australia may not make a monster after all. Though you would fancy them for at least 450 from here.

It's all ifs and buts, but I'd be confident if I was a kangaroo.

Well late enough for me...see if you can bag a wicket or two please...

Goodnight all.

Shane Watson has got a big hundred and successfully reviewed an LBW decision against him. Am I having a nightmare?  

275/3.

Wouldn't be surprised if England lost this Test to be frank, it's been flat from England all day.

Duty281 wrote:275/3.

Wouldn't be surprised if England lost this Test to be frank, it's been flat from England all day.

Yes this game has gone after a very poor day. Think I will just dip in and out of this one from now on, not that bothered if we lose the dead rubber and better things to do than follow the slow march to defeat.

They are overdue a win,

If England want to experiment with players they know they might lose, especially with the state of their batting.

Fair enough except it gives Aussie huge confidence ahead of winning the Ashes back down under.

I'm certain England's batting will lose the series down there.

VTR wrote:

Duty281 wrote:275/3.

Wouldn't be surprised if England lost this Test to be frank, it's been flat from England all day.

Yes this game has gone after a very poor day. Think I will just dip in and out of this one from now on, not that bothered if we lose the dead rubber and better things to do than follow the slow march to defeat.

I admit I've barely followed it. If England no longer give a Poopie then neither do I.

Watson holds out in the deep eventually. Very close to a no-ball that was!.

Peter Siddle out as nightwatchman

msp83 wrote:Watson holds out in the deep eventually. Very close to a no-ball that was!.

Too little too late. If Cook had caught that easy chance we might have had a game. As it is only a high scoring draw or defeat from here, not exactly riveted by either of those options.

England would need a new batting line-up to avoid defeat they way they're playing at the moment.

At least Andy Flower won't be getting harrassed about picking 5 bowlers again for a while.  

England are still in this at stumps, but they'll need to roll Australia out for under 475. Then it's on.

So Australia's day. Splendid innings from Shane Watson. Hopes Faulkner can make an impact with bat and ball and let Watson play pretty much as a batting all-rounder. Let him bat at 3 for a few games at least and see on from there.
I was miffed at England as they didn't pick Steven Finn here but wanted to see how Woakes would go. I had wanted him given an opportunity in ODIs, but wasn't too impressed with him in that format thereafter. He looked a bowler who would be far too dependent on favorable conditions to get wickets. His first day of test cricket did nothing really to change that. He couldn't keep things quiet and offered too many hit me stuff without really looking like a serious wickettaking threat.
I was really surprised to see Kerrigan getting a debut here. He should have some ability to reach this level, but today's performance raises some questions regarding his temperament. He was completely taken in by the big stage, never seemed to overcome his nerves. It is the first day of test cricket, a very demanding and difficult thing, so the criticism has to account for that, but even after a difficult first spell, he just couldn't bring himself out of a difficult face. He may be a lot more talented, but today his bowling looked like that of a club bowler.
Tomorrow should give us some insights regarding his temperament. To be able to bounce back from such a horrific first day in test cricket would take a fine temperament.

And oh, England are pretty much in the game, Australia are never too far away from a collapse it has to be remembered!!.

Duty281 wrote:275/3.

Wouldn't be surprised if England lost this Test to be frank, it's been flat from England all day.

Don't be surprised if Aus find a way to lose this test....or Rain ( or another form of Force Majure) pulls England out. They have a solid luck factor going for them

Luck?

The English, the English, the English are best*,
I wouldn't give tuppence for all the rest!

*Excluding South Africa

saw the highlight package catching some of the game again.....and here are my thoughts on the day
 
1) Broad bolwed with hostility, pace and skill..high quality spell on an unhelpful pitch. He is back to high 80s  as I saw when Ind was in Eng......but was shockingly in 70s.. when in India.
 
Anderson is a wizard....with new and old ball....and Swann built pressure even on D1.
 
2) Life would be so much simpler If Eng picked their fastest weapon Finn..but they are hit by "paralysis by overanalysis", too-smart, too-cute syndromes..... so they  pick a seamer for his batting and a spinner for the pitch....and boy oh boy-- Kerrigan..what to say ?
 
even if he didn't have nerves..I don't see how he can be successful.....his action is too flawed for a SLA.
 
he doesn't pivot and rotate his body to give a rip in his delivery stride like most SLA s would...or jump as some would.....instead paradoxically his delivery finishes with his shoulder pointing inwards towards fine leg and chest closing...as opposed to conventionally pointing towards first slip and chest opening-up.
 
and then his arm coming from a low side-on from an overall listless action.
 
I just don'tn see how he can turn the ball with that angle of shoulder in his delivery stride and from that  action. He is just a slow loopy bowler at best and flat dart thrower at  worst......and not a spinner.
 
Woakes ain't bad......if he bats better than Bresnan.....he is no less a bowler than Bresnan....he will learn more guiles when continually exposed to more comptitive international environment.
He has atleast speed.
 
3) Aus can still find a way to lose and Eng might still find god of rains ( or other catostrophese such as war, earthquakes, riots or fire) to save them...such is their luck
 
4) From Aus POV they have run close in 3 out of 4 tests inspite of losing 3 out of 4 tosses.
 
Can they turn it around here?...we will have to see if they don't blow this up.
they are begining to have  settled looking  Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and probably Smith at 5 now.
 
they just need to find a No. 6...they are trying Faulkner here but I believe Faulkner will evetually be fighting for a full time seamers slot....batting at nos 8
and someone like Maxwell or Moises might come in the running for No.6
 
PS*
--Finally teams are figuring the usage of DRS for LBWs and thankfully hotspot wasn't called today
 
--I get a feeling siddle will get a 50 tomm

First up I only saw about the first half an hour of play today. However, it seems the two debutants are being criticised which I find hard to understand. They need time to bed in and going by all pitch reports it was always going to be very good to bat on today. So good that even Broad, Swann and Anderson couldn't capture a hatfull of wickets on that pitch so that tells us it is a pretty unresponsive pitch at the mo. One day on a cracking batting wicket is hardly enough to judge the debutant bowlers.

Agree one day is too little a time to pass judgment on a player. I don't think though that someone making a debut is a good enough reason to save them from all criticism. The wicket by no means was a road though it is more towards the flatter side. Kerrigan showed some awful signs of nerve and bowled a fair bit of rubbish that had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the pitch. Woakes also offered too many hit me stuff and didn't look particularly threatening. Anderson, Swann and Broad bowled very well and managed to find some life from a track that had nothing particularly special for the bowler.

msp83 wrote: Woakes also offered too many hit me stuff and didn't look particularly  threatening.

Before lunch (in his first 5 overs) definitely, but after lunch he was very economical and, with a bit of luck, could have had a wicket or two.

But surely if, as you say Broad, Anderson and Swann bowled very well how come they only took four wickets even with all their experience? Woakes and Kerrigan never took any wickets but that is only one less than what Swann and Broad took yet they get lambasted whilst the others bowled very well? Not having a go msp83 or anything, please understand that, but it all seems a bit too black and white to me.

CaledonianCraig wrote:But surely if, as you say Broad, Anderson and Swann bowled very well how come they only took four wickets even with all their experience? Woakes and Kerrigan never took any wickets but that is only one less than what Swann and Broad took yet they get lambasted whilst the others bowled very well? Not having a go msp83 or anything, please understand that, but it all seems a bit too black and white to me.

Particularly given that (in Woakes case), he didn't get to bowl with the new ball.

Just watched the highlights and Kerrigan bowled some utter filth. Not saying he can't bowl or should never play again. But his bowling performance today was as bad as I have seen at Test level for a long time.

Hopefully he can turn things around.

Woakes just looked too hittable and unless the ball is moving around, at the moment I can't see him troubling too many top level bats.

Thought Woakes was a little unlucky today to be honest, beat the edge a few times, had a genuine edge drop just short and was on the receiving end of a successful review by an Aussie which don't happen often! Another day he could've had 2/3 wickets.

Kerrigan just couldn't handle the nerves. He's so much better than what he showed today. Hope for his sake it was just a blip, but I fear for him.

Interested to see how Woakes bats

Remember as well that the likes of Woakes and Kerrigan are evidently the pick of younger players coming through and the likes of Swann and Anderson aren't getting any younger so options have to be looked at.

I was surprised to see Woakes bowling mid 80's, thought he was slower than that. TBH the pitch was an absolute road as well, not many bowlers on debut especially seamers are gonna get much out of that with an old ball.

No idea why Woakes is in the team tbh, 100% not upto the standard.

England aren't out of this one yet, but they need a near perfect test from here.

With wet weather about tomorrow morning and the ball relatively new it will hopefully swing for Anderson and Broad and we can then hopefully mop up the rest of the Aussie line-up cheaply. The Aussies have decent bats almost all of the way down, but if Anderson or Broad can get on song then they won't be able to keep them out.

We need to get Australia out for no more than 400 - which should be around and about lunch time. For me, England would then need to bat into Day 4, scoring big runs and allowing the pitch to break up. A lead of over 100 would be necessary to negate batting 4th. Second time round we'd have to be much better with the ball, hopefully on a deck offering assistance.

A lot has to go right for England, starting tomorrow morning. But if we could dig our way out of this, what a message it would send ahead of the return series.

NickisBHAFC wrote:No idea why Woakes is in the team tbh, 100% not upto the standard.

Don't know what you're basing this on.
After his initial spell he kept things pretty tight and could have had a wicket or two. It's not like the other seamers are pulling up trees on this pitch is it?

Hoggy_Bear wrote:

NickisBHAFC wrote:No idea why Woakes is in the team tbh, 100% not upto the standard.

Don't know what you're basing this on.
After his initial spell he kept things pretty tight and could have had a wicket or two. It's not like the other seamers are pulling up trees on this pitch is it?

Spot on.  

Lets just wait and see what the rest of the test serves up before damning both debutants.

Few points:

1. Don't understand why Bairstow wasn't given the nod. He's had a couple of starts, looked good in the last test and just played a poor shot. Deserved one last chance. Remember Cook against Pakistan i believe? last chance saloon, one knock and he went down under and went on a prolific run scoring period. Not saying Bairstow would do the same, but at least give the guy the final test.

2. Woakes was a poor call. I think he's good when there's a seaming pitch but apart from that he's not good enough for the test arena yet.

3. On Kerrigan, yes he's bowled well this year and is one for the future, but what about Tredwell? is he injured or something? because for me he's a superb bowler who's outbowled Swann in the ODI arena anyway. I'd like to see him given a go tbh.

Liam wrote:Few points:

1. Don't understand why Bairstow wasn't given the nod. He's had a couple of starts, looked good in the last test and just played a poor shot. Deserved one last chance. Remember Cook against Pakistan i believe? last chance saloon, one knock and he went down under and went on a prolific run scoring period. Not saying Bairstow would do the same, but at least give the guy the final test.

2. Woakes was a poor call. I think he's good when there's a seaming pitch but apart from that he's not good enough for the test arena yet.

3. On Kerrigan, yes he's bowled well this year and is one for the future, but what about Tredwell? is he injured or something? because for me he's a superb bowler who's outbowled Swann in the ODI arena anyway. I'd like to see him given a go tbh.

Tredwell's first class record is fairly poor, I know he hadn't taken a first class wicket in the season at the Champions Trophy. Not an option for Tests at all

Just reading Lehman's quotes about Broad. Hilarious.  

He doesn't advocate walking, but thinks Broad should have walked. Mentalist. Classic play from the Mourinho playbook of taking the pressure of your team/distracting from how Poopie they've been.

As for today's play, I was actually really impressed with how Anderson, Broad and Swann bowled. Anderson was back to near his best, Broad deserved more than his one wicket as he bowled quick and was hostile and Swann kept it very tight on an unpresponsive day 1 pitch. Couldn't really have asked for any more.

Woakes got tidier as the day wore on but from what I've seen so far he's not really third seamer quality. More a fourth seamer in a 5 bowler attack. Will be interesting to see how he bats. Showed some potential though, will be nice to see how he goes second innings.

As for Kerrigan, it couldn't really have gone much worse for the poor lad! Watson got after him early and he never recovered. He'll bounce back, he's got class as his FC record proves. It's a shame Kegs ODI bowling isn't great as he is someone who could do with some exposure to the international scene in the shorter form. No point if his bowling isn't up to it in that format though. I hope England stick with him and show some faith and take him as the second spinner this winter.

If Monty Panesar manages to get himself back mentaly ready, then he should certainly be the 2nd spinner for Australia. Panesar has a proven record and is a match-winner in spinning conditions, and on a good spinner's track that turns and offers bounce, he could be a touch better than Swanny who himself is absolute class on any track.

As for criticism of the 2 debutants, as I said, making a debut is not a good enough reason to save anyone from any criticism. Kerrigan's performance yesterday was way below international standards, and that had nothing to do with the pitch. Debutant or not, test cricket is a demand game, and you have to be up for it, otherwise you will get rightly criticized. Kerrigan might emerge out of this terrible experience a better player, and as he won international selection, he has to be better than the village bowler version who turned up yesterday. But test cricket is as much about temperament as it is about skill. Kerrigan would have got the latter, it remains to be seen how strong a temperament he has got. The only reason he shouldn't be given up on, is that the young man was playing his first test, and came up against a well set attacking player on a first day track. He does deserve all the criticism he is getting, the only thing is that he shouldn't be written off on the basis of this one day of test cricket.

As for Woakes, so much can't be explained away on the basis of first day nerves argument, as he has already tasted international cricket at the limited over levels. Before someone tells me tests and limited over cricket are different, let me say I do understand that, but the point is that the kind of pressure that international cricket, in whatever formats would bring, is massive. Woakes is said to be a better 4 day bowler than a one day one, so thinks from that point of view should have been less difficult for him. But the matter of concern as far as Woakes is concerned is thaqt the questionmarks on him are similar to those that came up about him as a limited over bowler. The lack of effectiveness when there are no helpful conditions available. Like in the ODIs, he proved not so difficult to get away. He seems to have improved his pace a bit, and that is a good sign that the lad is working on his game and trying to improve his skill set. But I can't really see him fitting in easily as England's 3rd seamer. Don't think his skill levels are anywhere close to that of Steven Finn, Chris Tremlett or even Tim Bresnan for that matter. Would still like to keep a close watch on him, as if he could prove a good bet with the bat at 6, then he could be a very handy 4th seamer.

msp...
Woakes is a good bowler......from what I saw of him yesterday....
high arm action......lands the ball on the seam at good pace......he is a good seamer who will trouble every batsmen when the pitches assist seam. For unhelpful pitches and higher standard of batsmen that he will run into in internationals...he has to develop his skills such as variations in speed, yorkers, cross-seam.....learn a bit of reverse.
If he can deliver 35ish average with the bat....he will be a great assest...Eng must give him a lot of exposure in ODis and as many chances as they can in tests.

Kerrigan......I already wrote......he is shocking.

KP_fan wrote:msp...
Woakes is a good bowler......from what I saw of him yesterday....
high arm action......lands the ball on the seam at good pace......he is a good seamer who will trouble every batsmen when the pitches assist seam. For unhelpful pitches and higher standard of batsmen that he will run into in internationals...he has to develop his skills such as variations in speed, yorkers, cross-seam.....learn a bit of reverse.
If he can deliver 35ish average with the bat....he will be a great assest...Eng must give him a lot of exposure in ODis and as many chances as they can in tests.

Kerrigan......I already wrote......he is shocking.

KPF, agree a lot on Woakes. The best thing about his bowling yesterday is that he seems to have added a yard of pace. He can work on his skill sets as you said and evolve into a useful all-rounder for England. What I am saying is that I don't think he has place in a 4 man attack. I think Anderson, Broad, Finn and Swann are England's best bet in a 4 man attack. The troubled number 6 spot is what Woakes has to go for. If his batting is good enough to hold on to that place, then his bowling is good enough to make him the 4th seamer in the attack. Think it has to be one of Ben Stokes or Woakes who should take up that position. As Bairstow hasn't quite taken his chance, think England should expose these 2 in that number 6 position and see if they could take up the responsibility.

Bear this in mind.....

For some time into his England career (a heck of a lot more than just one match) Jimmy Anderson was pretty ineffective as a bowler at test level and many times he was called to be axed by the media and fans alike. A glowing example why we should no be making knee-jerk reactions on one day of cricket on an excellent batting strip.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Bear this in mind.....

For some time into his England career (a heck of a lot more than just one match) Jimmy Anderson was pretty ineffective as a bowler at test level and many times he was called to be axed by the media and fans alike. A glowing example why we should no be making knee-jerk reactions on one day of cricket on an excellent batting strip.

Exactly, Jimmy had a chastening start to his Test career. Broad was averaging well over 40 early on in his career. Flintoff took about 3 years to do anything effective. The list is be endless, I think we have got a bit too used to instant successes particularly on the batting side where recently most players come in and make a hundred in their first few matches.

We haven't even seen Woakes bat yet - he is an all-rounder so needs to be judged on that as well

Craig

One of the issues with Anderson earlier in his career was that he and the coaches didn't quite understand his strengths, and they tried to get him to bowl as a more hostile fast medium guy rather than just letting him bowl his natural length and look for movement.

Not sure Woakes has quite strong enough fundamentals to be a front line Test bowler across a range of conditions. From what I've seen he's not quite as good as Bresnan, but better than Bopara at this level - he will be relying on his batting to keep him in the side, as if he proves good enough to bat at 6 he could have a role as a 4th seamer / batting all rounder similar to Watson for Aus.

Kerrigan? Well his FC record and form certainly suggest he is better than we saw yesterday, but it will be a big challenge for him to bounce back today and in the 2nd innings here.

And despite that and Watson's fantastic innings, we are not out of this game - a couple of early wickets could see the Aussies out for 400 - 450, which is far from disasterous.

dummy_half wrote:Craig

One of the issues with Anderson earlier in his career was that he and the coaches didn't quite understand his strengths, and they tried to get him to bowl as a more hostile fast medium guy rather than just letting him bowl his natural length and look for movement.

Not sure Woakes has quite strong enough fundamentals to be a front line Test bowler across a range of conditions. From what I've seen he's not quite as good as Bresnan, but better than Bopara at this level - he will be relying on his batting to keep him in the side, as if he proves good enough to bat at 6 he could have a role as a 4th seamer / batting all rounder similar to Watson for Aus.

Kerrigan? Well his FC record and form certainly suggest he is better than we saw yesterday, but it will be a big challenge for him to bounce back today and in the 2nd innings here.

And despite that and Watson's fantastic innings, we are not out of this game - a couple of early wickets could see the Aussies out for 400 - 450, which is far from disasterous.

All fair points. The debutants should be given a fair crack of the whip though rather than one day on an excellent batting wicket is the point I am trying to make. Of course England aren't out of this so today could be the pivotal day of the test.

I suppose we are hoping for something like this:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/64042.html

dummy_half wrote:Craig


Not sure Woakes has quite strong enough fundamentals to be a front line Test bowler across a range of conditions. From what I've seen he's not quite as good as Bresnan, but better than Bopara at this level - he will be relying on his batting to keep him in the side, as if he proves good enough to bat at 6 he could have a role as a 4th seamer / batting all rounder similar to Watson for Aus.

Kerrigan? Well his FC record and form certainly suggest he is better than we saw yesterday, but it will be a big challenge for him to bounce back today and in the 2nd innings here.

Woakes is no less than Bresnan....his upside is higher IMO.......faster in speed, higher arm action which will get him more bounce.....juts lacking in exposure and backing of team management that Bresnan has had.

Kerrigan.....just ain't cut out for this level technically too flawed as a spinner.

Anything under 400 makes it a game, anything more than 450 and this is a draw or Australian win.