The Ashes - official thread

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

First topic message reminder :

Seeing as this starts next week, I'll kick it off - the Aussies have selected their 17 man squad


Australia's Ashes squad: Tim Paine (c), Cameron Bancroft, Pat Cummins, Marcus Harris, Josh Hazlewood, Travis Head, Usman Khawaja, Marnus Labuschagne, Nathan Lyon, Mitchell Marsh, Michael Neser, James Pattinson, Peter Siddle, Steven Smith, Mitchell Starc, Matthew Wade, David Warner.

Main takeaway there is no specialist spinner selected behind Lyon, with Neser included suggests they don't anticipate many, if any, spinning wickets...

[king_carlos]

Excellent innings by Burns. He now needs to do what England batsman have rarely done recently and go big. He's done well to get here against an excellent opening pair from Australia, if he can see off the second new ball against them then he will set the strong lower order up to make this a commanding total.

Exactly, Carlos. So important to go big. A commanding total could well be on but if Burns and another go quickly now, we could even be struggling for parity.

There's always that worry of a few quick wickets from this England line-up.

It feels a long time ago that young fella with the silly hair cut was a wicket keeper, eh guildford!

[alfie]

Keeping them waiting for the new ball...not a bad ploy. Batsmen can sometimes lose a bit of focus against part time filth when they're thinking ahead to the pace ordeal to come...

But not for long : Cummins back.

[Duty281]

Lyon's bowled much better than his figures suggest, but oh well that's the way the game can go.

New ball time. Soon! These next 40 minutes are absolutely pivotal to the destiny of the test.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

You know, I didn't realise you could take a new ball mid-over

[alfie]

Excellent innings by Burns. He now needs to do what England batsman have rarely done recently and go big. He's done well to get here against an excellent opening pair from Australia, if he can see off the second new ball against them then he will set the strong lower order up to make this a commanding total.

Exactly, Carlos. So important to go big. A commanding total could well be on but if Burns and another go quickly now, we could even be struggling for parity.

I am sure Burns has heard the Stewart mantra

He'd love to get through tonight and come back out in the morning. Agree one could easily bring two or three ; so vigilance is essential !

[Duty281]

Should have reviewed the one against Burns six hours ago which was absolutely plumb, not that total waste of a referral!

[alfie]

Poor review then...ball was clearly pitching outside leg. Odd , as Paine has seemed reluctant to go fishing today...

The control the Aussie bowlers have exerted has kept them in the game. If England had scored at their normal rate they'd be in front by now. Good old fashioned Test Cricket , eh ?

[guildfordbat]

Excellent innings by Burns. He now needs to do what England batsman have rarely done recently and go big. He's done well to get here against an excellent opening pair from Australia, if he can see off the second new ball against them then he will set the strong lower order up to make this a commanding total.

Exactly, Carlos. So important to go big. A commanding total could well be on but if Burns and another go quickly now, we could even be struggling for parity.

There's always that worry of a few quick wickets from this England line-up.

It feels a long time ago that young fella with the silly hair cut was a wicket keeper, eh guildford!

Indeed, Carlos.

[Duty281]

Pattinson properly wasting this actual new ball. England about 80 runs away from being in control.

[guildfordbat]

Poor review then...ball was clearly pitching outside leg.  Odd , as Paine has seemed reluctant to go fishing today...

The control the Aussie bowlers have exerted has kept them in the game. If England had scored at their normal rate they'd be in front by now.  Good old fashioned Test Cricket , eh ?

Yes, Alfie and a good old fashioned Test innings from Burns. As you say, credit to the Aussie bowlers too - they've not had the breaks but stuck at it with determination and control which will mean we'll end the day behind. Not a problem though unless we fall away now in the final 5 or 6 overs tonight.

[alfie]

Lyon back already. Fast men must be a bit weary...will still struggle to get the prescribed seven overs in , I think ? Where's MFC ?

Plenty of turn for Lyon. You'd think Moeen comes into play in the second innings too.

Getting a bit weary myself...rather late down here . Vowed to stay through tonight as England have a tendency to collapse when I'm not watching...hang in there lads !

[Duty281]

Moeen will have a big part to play tomorrow, with England a seamer down (probably) and the wicket taking appreciable turn.

Lyon has been highly unfortunate to end up, so far, with zero wickets. The key moment of the day, and possibly the game, was Australia not reviewing the Burns LBW decision. That would have left England 40/2 and and Burns scoring 100 runs fewer. On such things can fledging careers and series turn.

Wow, 34 played and missed by Burns today. Fate's been on his side.

[alfie]

Last over...
And that is all...267/4 ...well played Rory Burns !


Summary after I've had some sleep...good night all

[Duty281]

Great day of cricket. Rory's day. Properly engrossing.

[CaledonianCraig]

England now in command. Seventeen runs behind with six wickets in hand. The new ball has had a bit of the shine taken off it too. I'd say from here England should be looking for a lead somewhere around 75 to 100.

[robbo277]

Very good day for England’s batters after a par day for the bowlers. In a good position to crack on tomorrow from here and England should be disappointed if the lead is less than 100. 1 bowler down and batting last well probably need it.

[CaledonianCraig]

Weigh that against posters on here who suggest England will collapse. Jeez they have a low opinion on their batsmen. People like Root (averaging close to 50 on Test cricket), Bairstow, Stokes, Roy and Buttler then they are presuming will be out cheaply.

Indeed, all based on what we've seen in recent times. The conditions aren't a concern. Olly mentioned England's great 2010/11 test side, with Strauss/Cook/Trott/Bell/Pietersen/Prior. If that side were batting today, it would be a case of 350 minimum in this innings and strong favourites overall.

But that side isn't batting today. Instead England have got Burns and Denly who aren't test class. Root is out of form and averaging around 30-35 for the last 7 tests he's played. Bairstow is a walking wicket, as is Ali. Roy is an unknown in test cricket. Stokes and Buttler haven't played red ball cricket for a while.

This England was outclassed by a dismal Irish bowling attack just last week, and today they're going up against the best bowler in the world (Cummins) and very able support in the form of Pattinson and Siddle and Lyon. 300 is the upper limit on what I see England making, but they're more likely to be bowled out for closer to 200 than 300.

Lots of errors here. Firstly, Burns scored a big century and is still there. Denly has yet to prove himself so you are correct there (for now). Root hit 57 so over his average knock. Bairstow and Ali we shall see how they do. Buttler failed but Stokes looking good on 38 not out. More likely to be bowled out for closer to 200? Way out there as now 300+ looks odds on now.

[guildfordbat]

Burns' day by far and only right he gets the plaudits.

Understandably he was overshadowed by Burns but Stokes also batted well in the final session. Be more than handy for us if the two of them can continue their partnership for some time tomorrow.

[Duty281]

Weigh that against posters on here who suggest England will collapse. Jeez they have a low opinion on their batsmen. People like Root (averaging close to 50 on Test cricket), Bairstow, Stokes, Roy and Buttler then they are presuming will be out cheaply.

Indeed, all based on what we've seen in recent times. The conditions aren't a concern. Olly mentioned England's great 2010/11 test side, with Strauss/Cook/Trott/Bell/Pietersen/Prior. If that side were batting today, it would be a case of 350 minimum in this innings and strong favourites overall.

But that side isn't batting today. Instead England have got Burns and Denly who aren't test class. Root is out of form and averaging around 30-35 for the last 7 tests he's played. Bairstow is a walking wicket, as is Ali. Roy is an unknown in test cricket. Stokes and Buttler haven't played red ball cricket for a while.

This England was outclassed by a dismal Irish bowling attack just last week, and today they're going up against the best bowler in the world (Cummins) and very able support in the form of Pattinson and Siddle and Lyon. 300 is the upper limit on what I see England making, but they're more likely to be bowled out for closer to 200 than 300.

Lots of errors here. Firstly, Burns scored a big century and is still there. Denly has yet to prove himself so you are correct there (for now). Root hit 57 so over his average knock. Bairstow and Ali we shall see how they do. Buttler failed but Stokes looking good on 38 not out. More likely to be bowled out for closer to 200? Way out there as now 300+ looks odds on now.

Errors? Burns still isn't test class, neither is Denly, so that's not an error. One century doesn't make a career - especially not a frankly lucky century like Burns got today.

The stuff I was saying about Root/Roy/Stokes/Buttler is just factual - the latter two haven't played red ball cricket for a while and Root is averaging about 30-35 for his last seven tests.

England were more likely to be bowled out for closer to 200 than 300 on a statistical basis - more likely isn't a definitive, it's just a probable. You're more likely to win a hand of poker if you get dealt a pair of aces...but you won't definitely win the hand. Australia didn't win the hand today.

[Duty281]

Very good day for England’s batters after a par day for the bowlers. In a good position to crack on tomorrow from here and England should be disappointed if the lead is less than 100. 1 bowler down and batting last well probably need it.

Yep, need a 100+ lead which is far from certain. If one, or both, of Stokes/Burns go early tomorrow, that exposes a very weak lower order.

There's an astonishingly generous 6/1 available on Australia, which is pretty fair game considering England have to bat last on a lively track. I wouldn't fancy chasing 175 on this track on Sunday afternoon!

[CaledonianCraig]

Weigh that against posters on here who suggest England will collapse. Jeez they have a low opinion on their batsmen. People like Root (averaging close to 50 on Test cricket), Bairstow, Stokes, Roy and Buttler then they are presuming will be out cheaply.

Indeed, all based on what we've seen in recent times. The conditions aren't a concern. Olly mentioned England's great 2010/11 test side, with Strauss/Cook/Trott/Bell/Pietersen/Prior. If that side were batting today, it would be a case of 350 minimum in this innings and strong favourites overall.

But that side isn't batting today. Instead England have got Burns and Denly who aren't test class. Root is out of form and averaging around 30-35 for the last 7 tests he's played. Bairstow is a walking wicket, as is Ali. Roy is an unknown in test cricket. Stokes and Buttler haven't played red ball cricket for a while.

This England was outclassed by a dismal Irish bowling attack just last week, and today they're going up against the best bowler in the world (Cummins) and very able support in the form of Pattinson and Siddle and Lyon. 300 is the upper limit on what I see England making, but they're more likely to be bowled out for closer to 200 than 300.

Lots of errors here. Firstly, Burns scored a big century and is still there. Denly has yet to prove himself so you are correct there (for now). Root hit 57 so over his average knock. Bairstow and Ali we shall see how they do. Buttler failed but Stokes looking good on 38 not out. More likely to be bowled out for closer to 200? Way out there as now 300+ looks odds on now.

Errors? Burns still isn't test class, neither is Denly, so that's not an error. One century doesn't make a career - especially not a frankly lucky century like Burns got today.

The stuff I was saying about Root/Roy/Stokes/Buttler is just factual - the latter two haven't played red ball cricket for a while and Root is averaging about 30-35 for his last seven tests.

England were more likely to be bowled out for closer to 200 than 300 on a statistical basis - more likely isn't a definitive, it's just a probable. You're more likely to win a hand of poker if you get dealt a pair of aces...but you won't definitely win the hand. Australia didn't win the hand today.

Well a century knock in his first Ashes Test goes a way to disprove your point. It is only his 8th test and now he has 2 50s and a century to his name. Not to be sneezed at and an average now well up to a respectable level. You cannot say whether Denly is or not until he gets thrown on the scrap heap by England in the coming months if he does. Root averages near on 50 in his career and will have dips but I'd bank on him wrapping up his career he'll have an average in the mid to late 40s so a big knock is always around the corner with him. Roy is a stab in the dark but could be destructive if he gets his eye in. He isn't a Boycott or Trott-type as England don't have that sort of opener available. Stokes is fresh out of an outstanding World Cup so he has got his eye in - a different format but Stokes game does not really alter across the board. Buttler is a bit like Roy - hit and miss. A miss today but on another day could be a hit. Stats though mean nothing when players walk onto the pitch. England won the World Cup having never won it before. Burns was never going to get a century going by his stats but he proved stats mean nothing.

[guildfordbat]

Very good day for England’s batters after a par day for the bowlers. In a good position to crack on tomorrow from here and England should be disappointed if the lead is less than 100. 1 bowler down and batting last well probably need it.

Yep, need a 100+ lead which is far from certain. If one, or both, of Stokes/Burns go early tomorrow, that exposes a very weak lower order.

There's an astonishingly generous 6/1 available on Australia, which is pretty fair game considering England have to bat last on a lively track. I wouldn't fancy chasing 175 on this track on Sunday afternoon!

Hi Duty - as always a game of opinions and we never know for certain what will happen but I would categorise Bairstow, Moeen and Woakes at 7, 8, 9 as better than that.

I also think you're being harsh on Burns today. Sure, he had some luck but he didn't panic and fall apart. Instead, he ground things out making the most and more of any luck going - that shouldn't be overlooked or its value underestimated. He's not a classical test batsman but he is a fighter - some days the latter is more important and today was one of them.

[Duty281]

Weigh that against posters on here who suggest England will collapse. Jeez they have a low opinion on their batsmen. People like Root (averaging close to 50 on Test cricket), Bairstow, Stokes, Roy and Buttler then they are presuming will be out cheaply.

Indeed, all based on what we've seen in recent times. The conditions aren't a concern. Olly mentioned England's great 2010/11 test side, with Strauss/Cook/Trott/Bell/Pietersen/Prior. If that side were batting today, it would be a case of 350 minimum in this innings and strong favourites overall.

But that side isn't batting today. Instead England have got Burns and Denly who aren't test class. Root is out of form and averaging around 30-35 for the last 7 tests he's played. Bairstow is a walking wicket, as is Ali. Roy is an unknown in test cricket. Stokes and Buttler haven't played red ball cricket for a while.

This England was outclassed by a dismal Irish bowling attack just last week, and today they're going up against the best bowler in the world (Cummins) and very able support in the form of Pattinson and Siddle and Lyon. 300 is the upper limit on what I see England making, but they're more likely to be bowled out for closer to 200 than 300.

Lots of errors here. Firstly, Burns scored a big century and is still there. Denly has yet to prove himself so you are correct there (for now). Root hit 57 so over his average knock. Bairstow and Ali we shall see how they do. Buttler failed but Stokes looking good on 38 not out. More likely to be bowled out for closer to 200? Way out there as now 300+ looks odds on now.

Errors? Burns still isn't test class, neither is Denly, so that's not an error. One century doesn't make a career - especially not a frankly lucky century like Burns got today.

The stuff I was saying about Root/Roy/Stokes/Buttler is just factual - the latter two haven't played red ball cricket for a while and Root is averaging about 30-35 for his last seven tests.

England were more likely to be bowled out for closer to 200 than 300 on a statistical basis - more likely isn't a definitive, it's just a probable. You're more likely to win a hand of poker if you get dealt a pair of aces...but you won't definitely win the hand. Australia didn't win the hand today.

Well a century knock in his first Ashes Test goes a way to disprove your point. It is only his 8th test and now he has 2 50s and a century to his name. Not to be sneezed at and an average now well up to a respectable level. You cannot say whether Denly is or not until he gets thrown on the scrap heap by England in the coming months if he does.

Stats though mean nothing when players walk onto the pitch. England won the World Cup having never won it before. Burns was never going to get a century going by his stats but he proved stats mean nothing.

Stats mean nothing? They mean nothing when you compare apples to oranges. If you were to say the 2019 ODI team won't win the 2019 World Cup because previous teams, who bear little or no relation to the 2019 team, didn't do it, it's a false comparison. You're not comparing like for like.

Modern professional sport is built on statistical analysis, especially cricket and baseball. Cricviz don't do it for a giggle. And neither do the professional sides.

Denly looks woeful and is well short of test class. He's a stopgap until England find someone else. He may not even last the full series.

Burns is now averaging a snip over 30, which is still short of the 'respectable' standard. If he can follow up this fortuitous century with further big scores this summer, then alright, he may be test class. But I won't hold my breath - his technique is well below test standard and the number of 'played and missed' and edges he had today is more indicative of a Flintoff-esque slogger, not someone meant to open the batting!

[Duty281]

Very good day for England’s batters after a par day for the bowlers. In a good position to crack on tomorrow from here and England should be disappointed if the lead is less than 100. 1 bowler down and batting last well probably need it.

Yep, need a 100+ lead which is far from certain. If one, or both, of Stokes/Burns go early tomorrow, that exposes a very weak lower order.

There's an astonishingly generous 6/1 available on Australia, which is pretty fair game considering England have to bat last on a lively track. I wouldn't fancy chasing 175 on this track on Sunday afternoon!

Hi Duty - as always a game of opinions and we never know for certain what will happen but I would categorise Bairstow, Moeen and Woakes at 7, 8, 9 as better than that.

I also think you're being harsh on Burns today. Sure, he had some luck but he didn't panic and fall apart. Instead, he ground things out making the most and more of any luck going - that shouldn't be overlooked or its value underestimated. He's not a classical test batsman but he is a fighter - some days the latter is more important and today was one of them.

Ordinarily, I would as well, but Bairstow and Moeen (the latter especially) are on barren runs with the bat. Woakes could well chip in with a decent score, not too long ago that he got a ton v India!

I admired Burns' patience and grit at times, particularly when he was stuck in the 90s. I hope he kicks on this summer and proves me wrong.

[CaledonianCraig]

Weigh that against posters on here who suggest England will collapse. Jeez they have a low opinion on their batsmen. People like Root (averaging close to 50 on Test cricket), Bairstow, Stokes, Roy and Buttler then they are presuming will be out cheaply.

Indeed, all based on what we've seen in recent times. The conditions aren't a concern. Olly mentioned England's great 2010/11 test side, with Strauss/Cook/Trott/Bell/Pietersen/Prior. If that side were batting today, it would be a case of 350 minimum in this innings and strong favourites overall.

But that side isn't batting today. Instead England have got Burns and Denly who aren't test class. Root is out of form and averaging around 30-35 for the last 7 tests he's played. Bairstow is a walking wicket, as is Ali. Roy is an unknown in test cricket. Stokes and Buttler haven't played red ball cricket for a while.

This England was outclassed by a dismal Irish bowling attack just last week, and today they're going up against the best bowler in the world (Cummins) and very able support in the form of Pattinson and Siddle and Lyon. 300 is the upper limit on what I see England making, but they're more likely to be bowled out for closer to 200 than 300.

Lots of errors here. Firstly, Burns scored a big century and is still there. Denly has yet to prove himself so you are correct there (for now). Root hit 57 so over his average knock. Bairstow and Ali we shall see how they do. Buttler failed but Stokes looking good on 38 not out. More likely to be bowled out for closer to 200? Way out there as now 300+ looks odds on now.

Errors? Burns still isn't test class, neither is Denly, so that's not an error. One century doesn't make a career - especially not a frankly lucky century like Burns got today.

The stuff I was saying about Root/Roy/Stokes/Buttler is just factual - the latter two haven't played red ball cricket for a while and Root is averaging about 30-35 for his last seven tests.

England were more likely to be bowled out for closer to 200 than 300 on a statistical basis - more likely isn't a definitive, it's just a probable. You're more likely to win a hand of poker if you get dealt a pair of aces...but you won't definitely win the hand. Australia didn't win the hand today.

Well a century knock in his first Ashes Test goes a way to disprove your point. It is only his 8th test and now he has 2 50s and a century to his name. Not to be sneezed at and an average now well up to a respectable level. You cannot say whether Denly is or not until he gets thrown on the scrap heap by England in the coming months if he does.

Stats though mean nothing when players walk onto the pitch. England won the World Cup having never won it before. Burns was never going to get a century going by his stats but he proved stats mean nothing.

Stats mean nothing? They mean nothing when you compare apples to oranges. If you were to say the 2019 ODI team won't win the 2019 World Cup because previous teams, who bear little or no relation to the 2019 team, didn't do it, it's a false comparison. You're not comparing like for like.

Modern professional sport is built on statistical analysis, especially cricket and baseball. Cricviz don't do it for a giggle. And neither do the professional sides.

Denly looks woeful and is well short of test class. He's a stopgap until England find someone else. He may not even last the full series.

Burns is now averaging a snip over 30, which is still short of the 'respectable' standard. If he can follow up this fortuitous century with further big scores this summer, then alright, he may be test class. But I won't hold my breath - his technique is well below test standard and the number of 'played and missed' and edges he had today is more indicative of a Flintoff-esque slogger, not someone meant to open the batting!

Yes stats mean nothing as in dictating how a player will bat on any given occasion. Look at Monty Panesar. His stats suggested he could not bat but once saved England from defeat in the Ashes with an unstats like knock. If they did Burns would have been out for around 20 today. Fortuitous century? Was he dropped on 0, then on 20, then on 35 or something? He played and missed as did Steven Smith yesterday. So you are now conceding you judged Burns too early? All I can say is it is a fantastic job you aren't in that England dressing room or else your pessimism would have had the team beaten before they crossed the ropes yesterday morning.

[VTR]

I thought Burns was really good today. Let's hope he can do that a bit more. Probably not a hundred all that often but even a solid fifty can help lay a platform.

Denly I am not so sure of now. If we want someone to play a few nice looking drives then get out, let's bring back James Vince!

[Duty281]

Fortuitous century? Was he dropped on 0, then on 20, then on 35 or something? He played and missed as did Steven Smith yesterday. So you are now conceding you judged Burns too early? All I can say is it is a fantastic job you aren't in that England dressing room or else your pessimism would have had the team beaten before they crossed the ropes yesterday morning.

He was plumb LBW on 20-odd and if the umpire had done his job he would have been out for 20-odd. But, luckily for Burns, the umpire failed in the execution of his duties. Also luckily, Australia didn't review.

Steve Smith's innings was one of near-flawless execution in tougher batting conditions than today. Burns edged and missed plenty but fate was on his side. And good for him. At the moment I don't think he's test class, but that could change, as could all judgements.

I'm not a pessimist or an optimist, I just say it how I see it.

[CaledonianCraig]

Fortuitous century? Was he dropped on 0, then on 20, then on 35 or something? He played and missed as did Steven Smith yesterday. So you are now conceding you judged Burns too early? All I can say is it is a fantastic job you aren't in that England dressing room or else your pessimism would have had the team beaten before they crossed the ropes yesterday morning.

He was plumb LBW on 20-odd and if the umpire had done his job he would have been out for 20-odd. But, luckily for Burns, the umpire failed in the execution of his duties. Also luckily, Australia didn't review.

Steve Smith's innings was one of near-flawless execution in tougher batting conditions than today. Burns edged and missed plenty but fate was on his side. And good for him. At the moment I don't think he's test class, but that could change, as could all judgements.

I'm not a pessimist or an optimist, I just say it how I see it.

Sorry but you are a pessimist. Look at your posts. A wicket falls and to you Australia are right on top.

But lets play your game and go by stats. If so then you have to be very optimistic for tomorrow as stats show Bairstow averaging 33, Ali just under 30, Woakes just under 30, Broad on 19.5 and Anderson just under 10. Stats therefore say that England will lead by 100 runs at the end of the first innings.

[Gooseberry]

The fact is England are odd on for 300+ and wearing down the Aussies seamers nicely which is crucial for the series. In the past it's England who have been made to took, it's nice to do an it back a bit even if they haven't exactly blazed the scoreboard.

Some churlish comments about Burns too, he's likely to be top scorer in this game anyway you cut it. Sure that doesnt make him Cook yet, but tmCook was a margin call away from getting dropped for Carberry of all people early in his career.

It's as food a day as any England can could have hoped for. The games still in the ballance but England have turned a difficult situation into a marginal lead. Sure they've road their luck at times but crucially they've kept their heads.

Denly though I don't think ever earned himself the amount of faith England have placed in him, not even a call up in the first place. If they do choose to make a change in the batting after this game it's him who's in the firing line right now.

Sure there's still doubts about England's line up but if the remainder function near their best they could get a very handy lead, and at worst will close enough to Aus to keep them in the game.

[Duty281]

Fortuitous century? Was he dropped on 0, then on 20, then on 35 or something? He played and missed as did Steven Smith yesterday. So you are now conceding you judged Burns too early? All I can say is it is a fantastic job you aren't in that England dressing room or else your pessimism would have had the team beaten before they crossed the ropes yesterday morning.

He was plumb LBW on 20-odd and if the umpire had done his job he would have been out for 20-odd. But, luckily for Burns, the umpire failed in the execution of his duties. Also luckily, Australia didn't review.

Steve Smith's innings was one of near-flawless execution in tougher batting conditions than today. Burns edged and missed plenty but fate was on his side. And good for him. At the moment I don't think he's test class, but that could change, as could all judgements.

I'm not a pessimist or an optimist, I just say it how I see it.

Sorry but you are a pessimist. Look at your posts. A wicket falls and to you Australia are right on top.

But lets play your game and go by stats. If so then you have to be very optimistic for tomorrow as stats show Bairstow averaging 33, Ali just under 30, Woakes just under 30, Broad on 19.5 and Anderson just under 10. Stats therefore say that England will lead by 100 runs at the end of the first innings.

But I don't care who wins, so surely I'm neither optimistic nor pessimistic? If England win, great, land of my birth triumphs. On, on you noblest English etc. If Australia win, great, I'm slightly richer. I don't mind who wins. I'm pleasantly happy either way.

I'd be astonished if any of Bairstow/Ali/Broad meet or exceed their average scores. I'd be astonished if Anderson comes out to bat! But a lead of 100 would be very welcome, indeed, for England.

[CaledonianCraig]

Also pointing to Burns being lucky for escaping a plumb decision is like knocking a player who makes a century after being dropped earlier on. Australia could have reviewed but didn't that was effectively a dropped catch. Warner had a similar escape with an edge behind but the difference is he could not capitalize on it and was out shortly afterwards. Burns certainly has capitalized
If we were to look through every test centurion I'd lay a good bet they had their share of luck on their run to 100.

As for Smith having tougher conditions well Burns had a tougher bowling attack to contend with so levels it up a great deal.

[CaledonianCraig]

Fortuitous century? Was he dropped on 0, then on 20, then on 35 or something? He played and missed as did Steven Smith yesterday. So you are now conceding you judged Burns too early? All I can say is it is a fantastic job you aren't in that England dressing room or else your pessimism would have had the team beaten before they crossed the ropes yesterday morning.

He was plumb LBW on 20-odd and if the umpire had done his job he would have been out for 20-odd. But, luckily for Burns, the umpire failed in the execution of his duties. Also luckily, Australia didn't review.

Steve Smith's innings was one of near-flawless execution in tougher batting conditions than today. Burns edged and missed plenty but fate was on his side. And good for him. At the moment I don't think he's test class, but that could change, as could all judgements.

I'm not a pessimist or an optimist, I just say it how I see it.

Sorry but you are a pessimist. Look at your posts. A wicket falls and to you Australia are right on top.

But lets play your game and go by stats. If so then you have to be very optimistic for tomorrow as stats show Bairstow averaging 33, Ali just under 30, Woakes just under 30, Broad on 19.5 and Anderson just under 10. Stats therefore say that England will lead by 100 runs at the end of the first innings.

I'd be astonished if any of Bairstow/Ali/Broad meet or exceed their average scores. I'd be astonished if Anderson comes out to bat! But a lead of 100 would be very welcome, indeed, for England.

And that proves my point about stats counting for nothing or st least do not put too much stock into stats.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Never thought I'd see a day when Duty was arguing for the use of stats

[Duty281]

Fortuitous century? Was he dropped on 0, then on 20, then on 35 or something? He played and missed as did Steven Smith yesterday. So you are now conceding you judged Burns too early? All I can say is it is a fantastic job you aren't in that England dressing room or else your pessimism would have had the team beaten before they crossed the ropes yesterday morning.

He was plumb LBW on 20-odd and if the umpire had done his job he would have been out for 20-odd. But, luckily for Burns, the umpire failed in the execution of his duties. Also luckily, Australia didn't review.

Steve Smith's innings was one of near-flawless execution in tougher batting conditions than today. Burns edged and missed plenty but fate was on his side. And good for him. At the moment I don't think he's test class, but that could change, as could all judgements.

I'm not a pessimist or an optimist, I just say it how I see it.

Sorry but you are a pessimist. Look at your posts. A wicket falls and to you Australia are right on top.

But lets play your game and go by stats. If so then you have to be very optimistic for tomorrow as stats show Bairstow averaging 33, Ali just under 30, Woakes just under 30, Broad on 19.5 and Anderson just under 10. Stats therefore say that England will lead by 100 runs at the end of the first innings.

I'd be astonished if any of Bairstow/Ali/Broad meet or exceed their average scores. I'd be astonished if Anderson comes out to bat! But a lead of 100 would be very welcome, indeed, for England.

And that proves my point about stats counting for nothing or st least do not put too much stock into stats.

Maybe because you shouldn't look at overall stats, but the recent ones. They're the most pertinent.

[Duty281]

Never thought I'd see a day when Duty was arguing for the use of stats

Bloody love 'em, my dear fellow. Wouldn't be knocking the bookmakers around without 'em.

Moneyball's arguably my favourite book.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Very good day for England’s batters after a par day for the bowlers. In a good position to crack on tomorrow from here and England should be disappointed if the lead is less than 100. 1 bowler down and batting last well probably need it.

Yep, need a 100+ lead which is far from certain. If one, or both, of Stokes/Burns go early tomorrow, that exposes a very weak lower order.

There's an astonishingly generous 6/1 available on Australia, which is pretty fair game considering England have to bat last on a lively track. I wouldn't fancy chasing 175 on this track on Sunday afternoon!

Hi Duty - as always a game of opinions and we never know for certain what will happen but I would categorise Bairstow, Moeen and Woakes at 7, 8, 9 as better than that.

I also think you're being harsh on Burns today. Sure, he had some luck but he didn't panic and fall apart. Instead, he ground things out making the most and more of any luck going - that shouldn't be overlooked or its value underestimated. He's not a classical test batsman but he is a fighter - some days the latter is more important and today was one of them.

Agree with you here Guildford - he took advantage of his luck, and has made a real contribution, (should be noted none of Cook, Atherton, Trescothick or Stewart made a home ashes hundred btw, but Burns has first dig)

And it is only his 2nd home test, after starting his career in foreign conditions. Not to get carried away, he could go the way of a Lyth/Robson, but it’s promising.

Also noted pre game he went away after the Ireland test with Neil Stewart, his batting mentor/coach and turned up a day after all the other players so he could have an extra session with the Stewart’s at the Oval. Burns is someone who takes his game very seriously, and has proper mental resolve. A trait that many recent players we’ve tried I would sense didn’t have...

[CaledonianCraig]

Fortuitous century? Was he dropped on 0, then on 20, then on 35 or something? He played and missed as did Steven Smith yesterday. So you are now conceding you judged Burns too early? All I can say is it is a fantastic job you aren't in that England dressing room or else your pessimism would have had the team beaten before they crossed the ropes yesterday morning.

He was plumb LBW on 20-odd and if the umpire had done his job he would have been out for 20-odd. But, luckily for Burns, the umpire failed in the execution of his duties. Also luckily, Australia didn't review.

Steve Smith's innings was one of near-flawless execution in tougher batting conditions than today. Burns edged and missed plenty but fate was on his side. And good for him. At the moment I don't think he's test class, but that could change, as could all judgements.

I'm not a pessimist or an optimist, I just say it how I see it.

Sorry but you are a pessimist. Look at your posts. A wicket falls and to you Australia are right on top.

But lets play your game and go by stats. If so then you have to be very optimistic for tomorrow as stats show Bairstow averaging 33, Ali just under 30, Woakes just under 30, Broad on 19.5 and Anderson just under 10. Stats therefore say that England will lead by 100 runs at the end of the first innings.

I'd be astonished if any of Bairstow/Ali/Broad meet or exceed their average scores. I'd be astonished if Anderson comes out to bat! But a lead of 100 would be very welcome, indeed, for England.

And that proves my point about stats counting for nothing or st least do not put too much stock into stats.

Maybe because you shouldn't look at overall stats, but the recent ones. They're the most pertinent.

No they really aren't. Burns last test knock was a shocker so that counted for nothing. Panesar' latest knocks prior to his match saving knock were rank. It just matters what happens on the day.

[Duty281]

Fortuitous century? Was he dropped on 0, then on 20, then on 35 or something? He played and missed as did Steven Smith yesterday. So you are now conceding you judged Burns too early? All I can say is it is a fantastic job you aren't in that England dressing room or else your pessimism would have had the team beaten before they crossed the ropes yesterday morning.

He was plumb LBW on 20-odd and if the umpire had done his job he would have been out for 20-odd. But, luckily for Burns, the umpire failed in the execution of his duties. Also luckily, Australia didn't review.

Steve Smith's innings was one of near-flawless execution in tougher batting conditions than today. Burns edged and missed plenty but fate was on his side. And good for him. At the moment I don't think he's test class, but that could change, as could all judgements.

I'm not a pessimist or an optimist, I just say it how I see it.

Sorry but you are a pessimist. Look at your posts. A wicket falls and to you Australia are right on top.

But lets play your game and go by stats. If so then you have to be very optimistic for tomorrow as stats show Bairstow averaging 33, Ali just under 30, Woakes just under 30, Broad on 19.5 and Anderson just under 10. Stats therefore say that England will lead by 100 runs at the end of the first innings.

I'd be astonished if any of Bairstow/Ali/Broad meet or exceed their average scores. I'd be astonished if Anderson comes out to bat! But a lead of 100 would be very welcome, indeed, for England.

And that proves my point about stats counting for nothing or st least do not put too much stock into stats.

Maybe because you shouldn't look at overall stats, but the recent ones. They're the most pertinent.

No they really aren't. Burns last test knock was a shocker so that counted for nothing. Panesar' latest knocks prior to his match saving knock were rank. It just matters what happens on the day.

Oh dear.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

After saying today was the crucial day in this test yesterday...I’m going to say tomorrow is!

England have a real opportunity here to bat themselves into a position of great strength in this game, if we can get ourselves into a lead of 100 plus tomorrow. Would be great if Bairstow can refind the test form of 2016 for one day...

Also, batting some time and a day has given Broad, Woakes and Anderson a day with their feet up, and legs resting. The longer we bat, the more time the physios have to work on Jimmy...every little may help.

Finally, if england can get that lead, and are all out for say 420 towards tea tomorrow it does bring the draw into the game. A bit of rain is forecast for Sunday/Monday, which may help take an Aussie win out of the equation if we can get a decent sized lead...I know we’d like a win, but considering we lost our best bowler a half hour into the game getting away with a draw wouldn’t be a dreadful result in my book

[Duty281]

After saying today was the crucial day in this test yesterday...I’m going to say tomorrow is!

England have a real opportunity here to bat themselves into a position of great strength in this game, if we can get ourselves into a lead of 100 plus tomorrow. Would be great if Bairstow can refind the test form of 2016 for one day...

Also, batting some time and a day has given Broad, Woakes and Anderson a day with their feet up, and legs resting. The longer we bat, the more time the physios have to work on Jimmy...every little may help.

Finally, if england can get that lead, and are all out for say 420 towards tea tomorrow it does bring the draw into the game. A bit of rain is forecast for Sunday/Monday, which may help take an Aussie win out of the equation if we can get a decent sized lead...I know we’d like a win, but considering we lost our best bowler a half hour into the game getting away with a draw wouldn’t be a dreadful result in my book

It's a tough one - having lost Anderson, you're right, a draw wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. But, in the context of the series, a win at fortress Edgbaston seems pretty essential, especially with Lord's up next. A lot's going to depend on how Moeen fares in the second innings.

Hopefully rain doesn't curtail it!

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Very good day for England’s batters after a par day for the bowlers. In a good position to crack on tomorrow from here and England should be disappointed if the lead is less than 100. 1 bowler down and batting last well probably need it.

Yep, need a 100+ lead which is far from certain. If one, or both, of Stokes/Burns go early tomorrow, that exposes a very weak lower order.

There's an astonishingly generous 6/1 available on Australia, which is pretty fair game considering England have to bat last on a lively track. I wouldn't fancy chasing 175 on this track on Sunday afternoon!

Hi Duty - as always a game of opinions and we never know for certain what will happen but I would categorise Bairstow, Moeen and Woakes at 7, 8, 9 as better than that.

I also think you're being harsh on Burns today. Sure, he had some luck but he didn't panic and fall apart. Instead, he ground things out making the most and more of any luck going - that shouldn't be overlooked or its value underestimated. He's not a classical test batsman but he is a fighter - some days the latter is more important and today was one of them.

Agree with you here Guildford - he took advantage of his luck, and has made a real contribution, (should be noted none of Cook, Atherton, Trescothick or Stewart made a home ashes hundred btw, but Burns has first dig)

And it is only his 2nd home test, after starting his career in foreign conditions. Not to get carried away, he could go the way of a Lyth/Robson, but it’s promising.

Also noted pre game he went away after the Ireland test with Neil Stewart, his batting mentor/coach and turned up a day after all the other players so he could have an extra session with the  Stewart’s at the Oval. Burns is someone who takes his game very seriously, and has proper mental resolve. A trait that many recent players we’ve tried I would sense didn’t have...

https://m.cricbuzz.com/cricket-news/109193/derbyshire-sign-rankin-for-remainder-of-t20-blast-season

Link here for anyone who fancies a read pre game tomorrow...

[Gooseberry]

Never thought I'd see a day when Duty was arguing for the use of stats

Bloody love 'em, my dear fellow. Wouldn't be knocking the bookmakers around without 'em.

Moneyball's arguably my favourite book.

Put your last 100 dollars on Burns making an (as yet unbeaten) century then? That seems like a pretty pertinent recent stat.

Some of us are old enough to remember a certain batsman having scored 100 runs in his first 6 innings of a series against England. Then going on to make 400 n/o in the 7th. Most recent stats aren't always the most pertinent.

[king_carlos]

Moving day coming tomorrow, if Burns and Stokes can get to the 100 over mark then England should be set to get a match winning lead.

If Australia can get to Bairstow with the second new ball still moving then it's game on.

Fascinatingly poised test match. Moeen couldn't ask for a better set-up to prove his doubters wrong. A good platform from which the lower middle order can produce a lead and a pitch that is turning on day 2.

[alfie]

Thoroughly engrossing day of Test Cricket. "Slow" by modern standards ...just under three runs per over  : though those of us with memories of Trevor Bailey and Ken Mackay might see that as fairly rapid
But the constant battle between accurate bowling backed up by some fine ground fielding and batsmen who never seemed quite in command made for a good watch - never boring.
Anyone damning Burns' innings with faint praise is deluded , in my view. Sure he's not the most fluent stroke maker of all time ; nor is he , at this point in his career , a player of such obvious class that he is nailed on for the next five years in an England shirt : but on this day he stood up and resisted everything the opponents could throw at him ; outlasted "better" players like Root and played an innings that brought his team from early anxiety to a position of potential command.  It wasn't easy..never looked easy : he had an intense struggle to overcome Nathan Lyon's wiles on a pitch that gave the spinner quite a bit of assistance. Early on it seemed inevitable he'd be a victim but he found a way to survive  - and did not fail to take advantage of anything loose served up to him. Dare I say something rather Cook-like about his handling of the spin threat ?  OK , "Cook-lite" then ...not to overdo the panegyrics
Seriously , he had some luck...played and missed often enough but so does everyone in the course of a long innings. Even Smith the day before had his streaky moments.  I am not over fussed about his getting away with an lbw shout early on. I remember thinking at the time that it looked a decent shout and was a little surprised the Aussies were not more enthusiastic about their appeal ; but I'd honestly expected it to be umpires call rather than the clear out that hawk eye announced ...certainly wouldn't have called it a howler - and obviously the bowler and fielders felt the same way. Pre drs , uncounted batsmen have had similar lucky breaks on their way to centuries...and in any case it has no relevance to the batting that followed.
Obviously , he will need to back up this innings in future games. (To say nothing of hopefully going on with it on Saturday !) But after this day he must surely be seen as having a decent chance of doing so , rather than being one or two games from the axe...

Apart from Burns the batsmen all found the going difficult - although Stokes was starting to look a bit freer before he went into late day/new ball lockdown : Roy unconvincing , Root scratchy , Denly attractive but brief - although he did get a very good ball - and Buttler not really getting started. Suggests there is still enough for the bowlers that both third and fourth innings might be tricky for the batsmen - if in a different manner than on day one. Barring a lot of weather I'd fancy a result here.

The Aussie bowling was generally tight if not always particularly inspired . For much of the day I reckoned Siddle the standout performer , although Pattinson found his mojo after the ball change. Lyon perhaps not quite at his best though he was a little unlucky not to get some reward for his efforts - he did beat the bat enough that on another day he'd have had several scalps. Wade gets the booby prize for an over of unmitigated filth

Will leave the road map for Craig. But obviously England will hope to negotiate the still fairly new ball against rested bowlers and then cash in. Still a risk that there might be a clatter of wickets if one goes early , thereby limiting their lead , so I'm taking nothing for granted yet. But I am looking forward to another good day in which the direction of the contest may - or may not - be made a little clearer...

[No name Bertie]

End of Day Two:  Australia 284 all out & England 267 - 4

Day Three: Worst case scenario (?): Burns out in first few overs, Bairstow out for a duck or single figures followed by an England collapse and all out for about 330 with lead of about 50.

Warner was unlucky to get out lbw to a ball missing stumps in the first innings but they had the option of reviewing it.  Conversely Burns was lucky not to be given out lbw to a ball hitting stumps (again Australia failed to review it).  Australia had the luck of changing an old ball with an old ball that swung. Shame about James Anderson's injury.

[robbo277]

If England bat one session today we'll be favourites. Two sessions and you can remove Australia win from the equation.

I hope Burns plays the exact same way today, if he can anchor the innings he'll have strokemakers at the other end who can score runs at a quicker rate.

There's a bit of rain forecast for the last 3 days which may help England with their 4 man attack as they look to bowl Australia out.

[Gooseberry]

(Makes the point again that England even without Anderson have more depth to their bowling resources and will have bowled less in the first innings)

I agree though you'd think Moeen would need to come to the party regardless of England's lead for them to win. As with Lyon even with a bit of help and bowling fine that won't always happen though. He's perversely tended to fair well in a lot of games where there wasn't much in it for spin and batsmen have underestimated him getting out hitting.

It seems to be one of those tests that will have a lot of twists. England twice had Aus in trouble and themselves looked in danger when Roy went early. Then again when the mini collapse came.

As it stands now I think most of us feel batting out a session should be enough and should be achievable given the batting they have.

It feels like Smiths wicket is the key again. Hopefully they have some plans that don't involve Anderson to get it.

[CaledonianCraig]

England resume this morning on 267 for 4 trailing by 17. Here is my road map for the day (in the spoiler for those who do not want to see it).

Road Map:

[dummy_half]

If England bat one session today we'll be favourites. Two sessions and you can remove Australia win from the equation.

I hope Burns plays the exact same way today, if he can anchor the innings he'll have strokemakers at the other end who can score runs at a quicker rate.

There's a bit of rain forecast for the last 3 days which may help England with their 4 man attack as they look to bowl Australia out.

Absolutely. Vaughan actually said something interesting at the start of the match, that as a Test batsman, especially an opener, you don't need all the shots, just 2 or 3 go to runs scorers and otherwise good defence and a good leave. A template that Burns followed yesterday. He may have had some luck with the LBW and some play and misses (although I wonder if the high count of those is because he's the sort of batsman to line the ball up and then keep the bat inside the line a bit), but he's battled hard and showed that the bit between his ears at least is up to Test class,

Potentially a strong position for England, but it could still fade out to a lead of only 20-30 with one of our patent collapses. Of course the other extreme would be big runs for a couple of the remaining batsmen and a score of 500+ late today.

[CaledonianCraig]

England resume this morning on 267 for 4 trailing by 17. Here is my road map for the day (in the spoiler for those who do not want to see it).

Road Map:

[Sponsored content]