England's Summer of Cricket 2023, Featuring The Ashes

First topic message reminder :

Well done to Scott Boland, a very tidy job and added precious runs.

Another fantastic day in a fantastic test in a fantastic rivalry in a fantastic sport. Fantastic.

And just as the pattern has been throughout, when one team looked to be taking control, it just got yanked back. And it was Broad yanking it back with a brilliant spell. Labuschagne is the new Warner, as far as Broad's concerned.

174 to get. Seven wickets left. Still favouring Australia, but it'll be interesting to see how the bowling conditions are after the expected rain tomorrow. If they're anything close to what England's top order had to face yesterday, it could be curtains for Australia, but I'm not anticipating it to be that bad.

Will almost certainly be a delayed start. Hopefully the BBC's more pessimistic forecast doesn't come to fruition.

It'll probably go to the wire, that's the way the whole test has been shaping up. Might even be a tied test...

20.1.2 The ball shall be considered to be dead when it is clear to the bowler’s end umpire that the fielding side and both batters at the wicket have ceased to regard it as in play.

Umpire should have done something in the interest of the spirit of the game, but it's two weak umpires out there.

stokes counter attack incoming, could be entertaining

Soul Requiem wrote:It's killed the series to be honest, England were never winning that game but it will be remembered for that. I'd rather lose than win like that.

I remember England could have done something similar to Glenn McGrath in the Old Trafford test in 2005, which would have won England the test, but thankfully they didn't.

Maybe a bit grumpy about the catch last night not given but that had nothing to do with England. It's not cheating sure but it definitely isn't playing in a sporting manner.

And a pity too because this series has previously been played in a good spirit. Hard to see that continues.

Cummins (who has always been regarded as one of the good guys) may come to regret not withdrawing the appeal.

alfie wrote:And a pity too because this series has previously been played in a good spirit. Hard to see that continues.

Cummins (who has always been regarded as one of the good guys) may come to regret not withdrawing the appeal.

Aye, just feels so grubby and unnecessary. How desperate are you against a side 5 down and on its last 2 recognised batsmen

Are we really that surprised? Makes me wonder about Lyon batting yesterday now.

Yes, so much for cleaning their image up their image after the sandpaper incident. Nothing has changed

Such a shame. By the letter of the law it's out. There are many instances in cricket where that can happen though and in less pressured scenarios teams don't do it. The Test will likely be remembered for that. Which is sad as even if this is 2-0 the Tests have been closer than the score line would suggest.

It seems to have ignited Stokes. 100 up.

Nothing the umpires could do of course. Legally , the ball isn't dead (even though the umpire is already turning away to give the bowlers cap back). They might ask Cummins if he wants the appeal to stand ; but if it does , that's out.

Has fired Stokes up as well, as the crowd

Great 100 anyway . Might bury those "Stokes not worth his place" trolls on BBC ?

And just to harp on : it really isn't "the Australian Way" . Remember past instances of Marsh calling back Derek Randall (before DRS existed!) over a catch that he didn't quite take...and much earlier , Wally Grout refusing to run out a West Indian batsman after a collision with a fielder - even though the Test was on the line.

Other times I guess. But don't think they'd approve. Will sour the win a bit surely . Unless Stokes works a miracle of course

Now Cummins timewasting to ensure they don't bowl another over before lunch. Such a pathetic team.

Well Australia's antics have sparked Stokes into life. 50 partnership in the blink of an eye. Dazzling century. Lunch at the right time for Australia, because another hour of that would have seen England get close. But now Stokes has to reassess and Australia can regroup.

Never heard Lord's so animated. Khawaja almost squaring up to someone as they filed back.

Very dismal stuff from Australia and undermines them as a cricket team.

It is actually entirely the umpires decision, by turning away and giving the bowler his cap is that not a signal that the ball is dead. There's a common misconception here, the umpire doesn't have to call dead ball if it's obvious the ball is dead as detailed in law 23.4.

alfie wrote:Nothing the umpires could do of course. Legally , the ball isn't dead (even though the umpire is already turning away to give the bowlers cap back). They might ask Cummins if he wants the appeal to stand ;  but if it does , that's out.

Has fired Stokes up as well, as the crowd

Great 100 anyway . Might bury those "Stokes not worth his place" trolls on BBC ?

Yes, the umpires could have done something, but weak umpires are in the middle.

Duty281 wrote:

alfie wrote:Nothing the umpires could do of course. Legally , the ball isn't dead (even though the umpire is already turning away to give the bowlers cap back). They might ask Cummins if he wants the appeal to stand ;  but if it does , that's out.

Has fired Stokes up as well, as the crowd

Great 100 anyway . Might bury those "Stokes not worth his place" trolls on BBC ?

Yes, the umpires could have done something, but weak umpires are in the middle.

But what could any umpire have done ? The ball is not technically dead until both sides agree it is - or until "over" has actually been called.
All they could do is maybe ask the question of Pat : don't know whether they did.

Soul Requiem wrote:It is actually entirely the umpires decision, by turning away and giving the bowler his cap is that not a signal that the ball is dead. There's a common misconception here, the umpire doesn't have to call dead ball if it's obvious the ball is dead as detailed in law 23.4.

Simon Taufel, an Aussie but magnificent umpire and very fair man, messaged into the Sky box about it. The balls dead, "when the batters and fielding side have ceased to regard it as in play". Carey catches it and throws pretty much immediately. He doesn't stand there with it for 5 seconds. I think it's clearly out by the laws.

It's very dozy from Bairstow as well which shouldn't be overlooked.

Very much in the same camp as a player getting to a pressured situation, cracking under said pressure and mankading with no prior warning though. It leaves a very bad taste in the mouth.

Stokes' blitz was thrilling. Would be amazing if he did another Headingly here.

But sadly even if he does I am not going to regard this day with much affection. I'm probably just too old fashioned though...

It is dozy from Bairstow but it's not as if he's doing anything to gain an advantage. That it's pre meditated honestly makes it worse, this was clearly something Australia saw they could target Bairstow with and talked about doing

It's not Dozy from Bairstow, let's not try putting some of the blame on him when this entirely down to poor sportsmanship from the Aussies.

Bairstow thinks the ball is dead, he's not trying to steal a run, and it's very poor form from Australia. I hear the English-hating Jonathan Liew on TMS prattling on about how England think the rules don't apply to them.

I hope England don't sink to Australia's level and try similar things in future tests.

king_carlos wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:It is actually entirely the umpires decision, by turning away and giving the bowler his cap is that not a signal that the ball is dead. There's a common misconception here, the umpire doesn't have to call dead ball if it's obvious the ball is dead as detailed in law 23.4.

Simon Taufel, an Aussie but magnificent umpire and very fair man, messaged into the Sky box about it. The balls dead, "when the batters and fielding side have ceased to regard it as in play". Carey catches it and throws pretty much immediately. He doesn't stand there with it for 5 seconds. I think it's clearly out by the laws.

It's very dozy from Bairstow as well which shouldn't be overlooked.

Very much in the same camp as a player getting to a pressured situation, cracking under said pressure and mankading with no prior warning though. It leaves a very bad taste in the mouth.

Just following on from Carlos' post, if Cary's throw had missed the stumps - I would have expected us to run any overthrow available and for it to be allowed.

I'm therefore not so sure we can claim the ball was dead because what resulted wasn't what we expected or wanted.

I don't disagree it was lawful.

Anyway, can Stokes top his Headingley miracle? That's pretty much what's required from here. Shame the touchpoint that might spark a bit more from England will likely come when the series is almost finished

Soul Requiem wrote:It's not Dozy from Bairstow, let's not try putting some of the blame on him when this entirely down to poor sportsmanship from the Aussies.

It is dozy. He's wandered out of his crease as soon as the ball passes him to go gardening. By the law the ball is live.

I also believe it's poor to claim the wicket. But it's bad cricket from Bairstow nonetheless.

Ooft bad drop from Smudge.

Whatever the result, England are already 2-0 up in the Entertainment Ashes. That's for sure!

I understand Stokes' mood but he still needs to be careful. One mistimed shot and it could unravel for England.

Have a feeling this'll be all over before tea.

Stokes will just go hard. If it comes off, it comes off. No point tapping about. Do think he could trust Broad a little more with the strike, though.

Hilarious drop from Smith earlier.

I guess it is indeed a bit dozy in that he didn't look back to check the keeper had "settled" . But he did tap his guard before walking out , obviously not interested in taking a run ; obviously not even considering an "ambush".

Was it premeditated? I assumed Carey had just idly tossed it back without any real intent - and then thought " hey ! Here's a chance ". But if it was a plan it kind of smacks of desperation and a cold blooded determination to win at any cost...

Shades of the Underarm Ball - which poor old Greg Chappell never quite lived down.

I better just let it go. Not good for my blood pressure. And this is my alcohol free day...

Duty281 wrote:Stokes will just go hard. If it comes off, it comes off. No point tapping about. Do think he could trust Broad a little more with the strike, though.

Agreed, to be honest. Broad is indignant and it's brought out much more focus in his batting than we usually see from him these days. He's playing it well. He's also fully into his pantomime act and it is making me laugh amongst the angst!

Aussies have got it all wrong since that Bairstow dismissal. Where's Starc? Still plenty of time for them to rectify it, of course, England 95 away. Which is a lot.

Starc did go off with the physio looking like he'd jarred his knee shortly after taking that divot out. Maybe he's not quite fit to steam in?

Pal Joey wrote:Whatever the result, England are already 2-0 up in the Entertainment Ashes. That's for sure!

I understand Stokes' mood but he still needs to be careful. One mistimed shot and it could unravel for England.

Have a feeling this'll be all over before tea.

Agreed, PJ. It would take a massive change in pace to drag on late into the day. Previously in this Test that slowing of pace has come through the short ball but it's only sped things up in this partnership!

Starc on. Big moment. He's been lethal at times in this Test.

Starc not at full clip for that first over, so perhaps not fit enough to steam in.

Think England should be taking more singles. Broad and Robinson can be trusted with the bat to do a job.

If England are to do this, we’re gonna need Broad and Robinson to get 20/30s each I think - would like to see Broad have a bit of a swing when on strike.

Tough for Stokes to score with this field

If Starc can't steam in that's an issue for Australia.

Cummins is bowling very well but is into his 22nd over. Even Cummins will surely tire!

Hazlewood hasn't quite been at his best this innings whilst Green was all over the shop trying to find his mark with the bouncers. Cummins slowed that last over before lunch down to prevent another over from Green's end.

With no Lyon (this shows how monumental a loss he is) they are then looking at Head, Marnus or Smith as their ways to alter the pace for Stokes to work with.

Good to get Green on. He caused Stokes problems yesterday, nearly got him out.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:If England are to do this, we’re gonna need Broad and Robinson to get 20/30s each I think - would like to see Broad have a bit of a swing when on strike.

Tough for Stokes to score with this field

I was thinking that re Broad having a bit more of a swing prior to seeing Starc not quite a full tilt.

As said in above post if England can just keep surviving overs whilst ticking that runs required down I think the seamers should tire further.

Green back. He'll need to bowl better than his previous spell.

And it is better from Green to be fair. A maiden and kept Stokes on strike.

The potential of a full over at Broad. If the field is up then this may be the moment I'd agree with Olly about Broad chancing his arm more.

Hundred partnership ... Timely

Long way to go . Runs have slowed so another 78 seems quite a task. Green and Starc bowling quite craftily lately.

I said to my wife yesterday afternoon that we'd lose by 10 runs. I'm sticking to it.

Lost sight of it a little, but the new ball will arrive in 11 overs.

Stokes goes to 150. Win, lose or tie here, he is one of the greatest cricketers England have ever, ever had.

Duty281 wrote:Lost sight of it a little, but the new ball will arrive in 11 overs.

Stokes goes to 150. Win, lose or tie here, he is one of the greatest cricketers England have ever, ever had.

I was just about to post that. If Australia can keep the scoring rate slower like it currently is then there would be around 40 required with that second new ball. Still a fair way to go.

New ball in nine. Runs at a trickle now. Does Ben let Stuart take a bit more of the bowling , pick up these singles ?

Decisions...

Those 15 runs Lyon put on with Starc looking increasingly valuable to Australia ....

JuliusHMarx wrote:I said to my wife yesterday afternoon that we'd lose by 10 runs. I'm sticking to it.

Good on you, Julius.

But, remember, there are other women out there.

alfie wrote:New ball in nine. Runs at a trickle now. Does Ben let Stuart take a bit more of the bowling , pick up these singles ?

Decisions...

I wouldn't. We're winning this the way we are. Around 14 more overs should be enough ....

guildfordbat wrote:Those 15 runs Lyon put on with Starc looking increasingly valuable to Australia ....

An amusing exchange from the group WhatsApp from my old cricket club in Edinburgh during that final partnership.

"What's Lyon doing? He's trying to look tough for no reason."
"Aye, or he's just trying to help his team win a cricket match."

What an innings but Stokes can't put England on his back this time and that might be it

Ah well...was fun while it lasted . I'm afraid 70 more is beyond mortal cricketers.

Stokes looks shattered. But what an innings ! He is a true giant of the game

Ahhh, well played Stokes. A great cricketing innings.

But no Headingley this time. 70 to get. Wouldn't entirely rule England out, but it's incredibly uphill from here. Broad and Robinson are capable of scoring 30/40ish each.