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.

trebellbobaggins wrote:

VTR wrote:Another decent but not telling contribution and partnership. Everyone has got in but no-one has really gone on yet. Ian Bell century again?

Tale of these ashes for eng.

It must be the worse batting I've ever seen in what on the surface would seem a dominant series.

The shoddy reality doesn't match the results at all.

"The shoddy reality" is that we are 3-0 up. You can carp as much as you want about us not batting well, what on earth does that say about the Aussies - given your views about England

The Aussies made had this kind of play off to an art in the early nineties and it laid the foundations for their more swashbuckling dominance

And if you think this the worst batting, then I'd get looking at some old UTube videos. Any England performance from 1988 to 1998 will do  

If you don't score the bowlers just settle in

GSC wrote:If you don't score the bowlers just settle in

Only 4 wickets taken so far today.

banbrotam wrote:

trebellbobaggins wrote:

VTR wrote:Another decent but not telling contribution and partnership. Everyone has got in but no-one has really gone on yet. Ian Bell century again?

Tale of these ashes for eng.

It must be the worse batting I've ever seen in what on the surface would seem a dominant series.

The shoddy reality doesn't match the results at all.

"The shoddy reality" is that we are 3-0 up. You can carp as much as you want about us not batting well, what on earth does that say about the Aussies - given your views about England

The Aussies made had this kind of play off to an art in the early nineties and it laid the foundations for their more swashbuckling dominance

And if you think this the worst batting, then I'd get looking at some old UTube videos. Any England performance from 1988 to 1998 will do  

Christ I don't mean worst like the years of torture that made me this grim, I mean the worst in a seemingly dominant series. The batting just hasn't really been good enough for such dominance.

A strange but decent innings from Pietersen. But he has remained strictly adequate in this series, not a very good series by his very high standards.

Judging by the comments on Cricinfo and the BBC, England should have clearly gone at 5 an over and rack up 400+ in a single day. After all, those people probably know more about cricket than England's captain don't they?

Just ridiculous. It's been a good day for England.

Yeah I don't disagree with that.

Steady was right.  I just wish more of them could convert a start.

Duty281 wrote:

GSC wrote:If you don't score the bowlers just settle in

Only 4 wickets taken so far today.

And only 231 runs on the board with not much batting left. Rain might have to spare us again

I don't mind England batting slowly. Australia have stuck to their plans pretty well , and have a lot of bowlers , so it has never been easy.
Just wish they could have had a partnership going over the hundred to really put Australia on the back foot...a couple of careless strokes have ensured that they keep coming back into it , keeping their bowlers interested...one long partnership and England would have probably been able to plunder in this last session...
Although the light isn't the best so maybe fireworks would still have been unlikely.

Duty281 wrote:Judging by the comments on Cricinfo and the BBC, England should have clearly gone at 5 an over and rack up 400+ in a single day. After all, those people probably know more about cricket than England's captain don't they?

Just ridiculous. It's been a good day for England.

I love intent and positive batting- But please everyone needs to understand the situation at hand!!!

WE have played perfectly- I cant ask for much more tbh. Take the loss out of the equation- cant win anyway!! they scored 500 first innings !!!

Duty281 wrote:Judging by the comments on Cricinfo and the BBC, England should have clearly gone at 5 an over and rack up 400+ in a single day. After all, those people probably know more about cricket than England's captain don't they?

Just ridiculous. It's been a good day for England.

Some muppet messaged cricinfo earlier bleating on that England never scored at 5, 6 or 7 an over in their first innings. I think it was later pointed out that no team had ever actually managed to score at these rates. Utter prat who knows less than nothing about cricket.

mystiroakey wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Judging by the comments on Cricinfo and the BBC, England should have clearly gone at 5 an over and rack up 400+ in a single day. After all, those people probably know more about cricket than England's captain don't they?

Just ridiculous. It's been a good day for England.

I love intent and positive batting- But please everyone needs to understand the situation at hand!!!

WE have played perfectly- I cant ask for much more tbh. Take the loss out of the equation- cant win anyway!! they scored 500 first innings !!!

Exactly. England have batted with a perfect mindset today, and ensured the loss is a very distant prospect, even without any weather interruptions.

And I'm not asking for 5 an over. 3 is considered the norm.

I do enjoy anybody considering upping the rate being considered just a t20 fan.

Woakes hey!!!

nice shot..

Duty281 wrote:Judging by the comments on Cricinfo and the BBC, England should have clearly gone at 5 an over and rack up 400+ in a single day. After all, those people probably know more about cricket than England's captain don't they?

Just ridiculous. It's been a good day for England.

Very easy game from behind a laptop , Duty  

There are some right clowns airing their ignorance on those platforms...

VTR wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Judging by the comments on Cricinfo and the BBC, England should have clearly gone at 5 an over and rack up 400+ in a single day. After all, those people probably know more about cricket than England's captain don't they?

Just ridiculous. It's been a good day for England.

Some muppet messaged cricinfo earlier bleating on that England never scored at 5, 6 or 7 an over in their first innings. I think it was later pointed out that no team had ever actually managed to score at these rates. Utter prat who knows less than nothing about cricket.

 

Just found that comment on Cricinfo:

"When was the last time they (England) scored at 4/5 or even 6 runs an over in their first innings?"

Back to your T20, Jacob!

When was the last time any team did?

jeas even 4 an over is as rare as 4 leaf clovers.

alfie wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Judging by the comments on Cricinfo and the BBC, England should have clearly gone at 5 an over and rack up 400+ in a single day. After all, those people probably know more about cricket than England's captain don't they?

Just ridiculous. It's been a good day for England.

Very easy game from behind a laptop , Duty  

There are some right clowns airing their ignorance on those platforms...

7 runs off that last over; that should please 'em!

Harris having fun with the bouncer...Woakes handling it all pretty well. Has played some nice shots.

mystiroakey wrote:When was the last time any team did?

jeas even 4 an over is as rare as 4 leaf clovers.

There was a later comment that basically said no-one ever had. The clown who asked that question is probably sat there wondering why there's been no "DLF Maximums"

Some of us felt Kerrigan bowled atrociously, some of us felt England's top order batting has been poor in this series, some of us felt England could have gone about this innings with a bit more intent.
There are strong rational cases for all that, I am a bit surprised at the kind of reactions that these entirely reasonable arguments have brought about!.

msp83 wrote:Some of us felt Kerrigan bowled atrociously, some of us felt England's top order batting has been poor in this series, some of us felt England could have gone about this innings with a bit more intent.
There are strong rational cases for all that, I am a bit surprised at the kind of reactions that these entirely reasonable arguments have brought about!.

England are 242/4. What's wrong with that?

msp83 wrote:Some of us felt Kerrigan bowled atrociously, some of us felt England's top order batting has been poor in this series, some of us felt England could have gone about this innings with a bit more intent.
There are strong rational cases for all that, I am a bit surprised at the kind of reactions that these entirely reasonable arguments have brought about!.

Go back to T20 MSP

Crowd seems to be enjoying it all. If Test Matches were all biff and charge they would soon get as formulaic as limited overs games , and we would need to invent some quirky rule changes to keep them interesting  

To be honest when I planned to watch right through tonight , I was kind of hoping for a Pietersen Special...but I was quite ready for an attritional day like this...have found it all quite absorbing.

Light may hold out for the last eight overs ?

VTR wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:When was the last time any team did?

jeas even 4 an over is as rare as 4 leaf clovers.

There was a later comment that basically said no-one ever had. The clown who asked that question is probably sat there wondering why there's been no "DLF Maximums"

It doesn't surprise me tbh.

Here was the actual reply (referring to first innings scoring rates). Jacob on cricinfo wins the muppet of the day award.

"Sorry Jacob, no one has ever scored 6 an over in a Test innings," points out Rayner, equally politely, "only five times has 5+ an over been scored."

Duty281 wrote:

msp83 wrote:Some of us felt Kerrigan bowled atrociously, some of us felt England's top order batting has been poor in this series, some of us felt England could have gone about this innings with a bit more intent.
There are strong rational cases for all that, I am a bit surprised at the kind of reactions that these entirely reasonable arguments have brought about!.

England are 242/4. What's wrong with that?

Australia scored 492 and England couldn't even bowl them out. What indeed is wrong with that?

VTR wrote:Here was the actual reply (referring to first innings scoring rates). Jacob on cricinfo wins the muppet of the day award.

"Sorry Jacob, no one has ever scored 6 an over in a Test innings," points out Rayner, equally politely, "only five times has 5+ an over been scored."

ok got ya,

If only there was a scoring rate between digging in and slogging.

GSC wrote:

msp83 wrote:Some of us felt Kerrigan bowled atrociously, some of us felt England's top order batting has been poor in this series, some of us felt England could have gone about this innings with a bit more intent.
There are strong rational cases for all that, I am a bit surprised at the kind of reactions that these entirely reasonable arguments have brought about!.

Go back to T20 MSP

May be we aren't even qualified to go there. Should we go for the Martin Crowe Super Max stuff?

GSC wrote:If only there was a scoring rate between digging in and slogging.

Could have been nice. But that doesn't seem to exist!.

Maybe we should invent our own game MSP.

The batting team bats until its run rate falls below 6

GSC wrote:Maybe we should invent our own game MSP.

The batting team bats until its run rate falls below 6

Excellent idea!.

One before the close and Australia might fancy a flurry

I will admit. If I had been watching this from the start I may have been closer to GSC's POV!!

Fact is though its more about wickets.. we took 9 first two days, they have only taken 4 on the third. That is above Ozzies par because the pitch will have deteriorated a bit.

msp83 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

msp83 wrote:Some of us felt Kerrigan bowled atrociously, some of us felt England's top order batting has been poor in this series, some of us felt England could have gone about this innings with a bit more intent.
There are strong rational cases for all that, I am a bit surprised at the kind of reactions that these entirely reasonable arguments have brought about!.

England are 242/4. What's wrong with that?

Australia scored 492 and England couldn't even bowl them out. What indeed is wrong with that?

Um..nothing. I'm arguing that the rate is irrelevant, for England at least.

After a positive start, Chris Woakes is also back to playing Propper Test Cricket!.

Halfway.

246/4 ...

Will be some weary bowlers in the morning...

Last ball...247/4  

215/4. Fantastic day for England. The 3 nil has been secured by batting the day, and batting sensibly.

See? That was batting sensibly. Something Australia haven't managed to do very often this series. Probably why England are 3-0 up.

So that ends the day's play. England 247-4 46 away from the follow-on. The game is crying out for some magic from someone. Kevin Pietersen is already back in the hut, Matt Prior and the England lower order can still produce some positive intent if Prior manages to find some form. Perhaps a Ryan Harris or a Peter Siddle or a Mitchell Starc will have to step up otherwise. Or else, I hope the rest of the game gets rained out.

this is all about annoying and frustrating Aus msp.

Try and bat the rest of the test out will destroy the bowlers confidence

GSC wrote:Maybe we should invent our own game MSP.

The batting team bats until its run rate falls below 6

I think we should hit a home run or we are out of here. Every ball.

mystiroakey wrote:this is all about annoying and frustrating Aus msp.

Try and bat the rest of the test out will destroy the bowlers confidence

Such an approach would make sense when the track is demanding, when you are fighting for the series win, when you are into the 2nd innings trying to save a game........ Otherwise, starting off your first innings with such an approach is dud rather than good.

I just hope for some quality cricket tomorrow and I really want to see whether Chris Woakes is up to it with the bat. He's not a 3rd seamer, but could be a very good 4th quick. But his batting has to be good enough for that and I do hope he comes to the party. Some early good signs, I just hope he builds on that and earns for himself a few chances in that number 6 position.

Well the theory for me is based on the up and coming series in aus. If we didn't have them back to back I wouldn't have said what I said.

So the BBC have now got Aussie down as having the momentum for the return series. The Shane warne school of thinking.

--the ball is turning and bouncing, littl bit for the seamers with the new ball......and Eng with their charecteristic attritional, disciplined cricket have kept Aus at bay...so far.

--the problem with a low scoring rate like this.....is that the lead isn't wiped out quickly and a few quick wickets can bring Aus back in the game quikly.

--Unles Eng do multiple suicides, with their batting depth, they should be able to avoid follow-on.

and then Aus will have bat depending on how much the weather permits . Ideally they would like to have a lead of 350+ and 110overs to have a crack.

BUT if they are squeezed for time such they may bat as little as 10 to 15 overs in second inning. and set 250 in 4th inning with anywhere between 80 to 90 overs will keep both parties interested and a great game of cricket.

GSC wrote:If you don't score the bowlers just settle in

Basically, they've got a hatful and then can only take 4 wickets in a day and a bit. And that's their bowlers "settling in"!!!

I honestly think in today's helter skelter society and 20/20 cricket, people have forgotten what Test Cricket is

Great performance from England, so far in this test, where if you lose the toss you're doomed

trebellbobaggins wrote:So the BBC have now got Aussie down as having the momentum for the return series.  The Shane warne school of thinking.

According to Jim Maxwell, the Aussies have played "all the cricket" since Old Trafford  This is why England are still 1-0 up during that sequence!!

And of course we saw that at the end of the 4th Day at Durham  

To talk about momentum at such length regarding a series that is to be played in 3 months from now under different conditions is a bit too premature for me. I am not saying Australia wouldn't be affected by the losses here and England wouldn't be a more confident outfit. But I don't think there is a momentum based case for England to have them playing the way they did today. If anything, England's defensive approach would only give the Australians that little bit of satisfaction that on the back of one good batting performance, they could force England so much to the backfoot. Don't think this one day's approach would make a world of difference 3 months down the line.