England's Summer of Cricket 2023, Featuring The Ashes

First topic message reminder :

Wood's pace was not quite up there in that first over though he still was quick. The lengths weren't great. Fine half-century from Khawaja who is closing in on regaining the top-scorer position from Crawley for the series.

Head's punishing those bad balls with sweet timing. That's why I think the run-rate was never an issue for Australia. So many positive players throughout the order. Good point about Smith above. A fourth innings average of below 30 is what he currently has.

Target below 180 now. That could be as little as 40-45 overs left for England to take these wickets.

Got a blob of rain on the radar at around 14:00. Could take an hour, maybe a bit more, out of the game. There is some sunshine forecast later in the day, so if the test needs to go past 17:00/18:00, light shouldn't be an issue.

Got to stop straying onto Head's leg stump... He's taking Anderson on to great effect here : danger signs for England. Jimmy has bowled well in patches in this game but the old consistency isn't there I'm afraid. Can't afford any of the bowlers to to be leaking runs.

210/3 and the advantage is swinging back Australia's way...

Someone's gonna need to smack a ball into an advertising board very quickly or this could get out of hand

Moeen looking rather pedestrian in the field. He must surely be going to bowl today, else we would have another Gary Pratt out there.

What an absolute disaster of a summer Anderson has had - I know he's had some unrewarded spells, but here in ideal conditions he's served up some proper buffet stuff. Did not see this coming after his superb winter

kingraf wrote:Someone's gonna need to smack a ball into an advertising board very quickly or this could get out of hand

Don't tell Punter or the Aussies what happens in 23 overs time

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

kingraf wrote:Someone's gonna need to smack a ball into an advertising board very quickly or this could get out of hand

Don't tell Punter or the Aussies what happens in 23 overs time

Another 23 overs of Travis Head and its going to be a formality

You are right there , Olly. I don't know why Jimmy is suddenly "off" like this after what was indeed an excellent winter : wouldn't have thought age would catch up so quickly ; and as you say , he's had some good but unlucky spells. But although the ball is moving he's just not getting it where he needs to with any regularity today. Not the stuff England want from him in this situation !

Time for spin and Moeen. England need something to come off before lunch.

50 partnership as Smith drives through for four off Moeen's first. Just 61 balls, too. Might need that pace because the radar is looking worse.

Head is killing this at a rate of knots ... Just what Australia needed after that early collapse. England are certainly bowling some potentially wicket taking balls but unless one of them strikes - and soon - this counter attack is going to take the game right away.

Can't have it both ways of course : got to attack , pitch it up ... But if the batsman is good enough he can punish you.

Need Wood back I reckon. But it's going to be Moeen...

Bruised heel for Wood, apparently, but he's coming in again. Likely going to give Head a short ball barrage before lunch.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

GSC wrote:Carey Bairstow is closer than I would've thought. Don't think Carey's had a vintage series behind the stumps if not as bad as Jonny. And Jonny has far outperformed him with the bat./quote]
Yeah was going to say, Carey really hasn't been very good behind the stumps either - I can think of at least 3 very simple chances shelled off the top of my head, including the Brook one in the first dig here which was very poor. Bairstow's runs would get him in over Carey for me, albeit you're hardly choosing from two at the top of their game for that spot.

I thought Carey started really well behind the stumps but ended up poorly. Far greater consistency from Bairstow with the gloves. He began very badly and maintained it throughout the series.

Carey genuinely never recovered from stumping Bairstow. Wasn't able to ignore it, didn't want to apologise, couldn't embrace being the villain.[/quote]

Lowlandbrit wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

GSC wrote:Carey Bairstow is closer than I would've thought. Don't think Carey's had a vintage series behind the stumps if not as bad as Jonny. And Jonny has far outperformed him with the bat./quote]
Yeah was going to say, Carey really hasn't been very good behind the stumps either - I can think of at least 3 very simple chances shelled off the top of my head, including the Brook one in the first dig here which was very poor. Bairstow's runs would get him in over Carey for me, albeit you're hardly choosing from two at the top of their game for that spot.

I thought Carey started really well behind the stumps but ended up poorly. Far greater consistency from Bairstow with the gloves. He began very badly and maintained it throughout the series.

Carey genuinely never recovered from stumping Bairstow. Wasn't able to ignore it, didn't want to apologise, couldn't embrace being the villain.

Yes, it did seem to go all wrong for Carey immediatelly after his stumping of Bairstow. I thought he should have embraced it as being the astute keeper but there you go!

Close to lunch. After the early excitement, these two have restored Australia's advantage ; both with runs and the rate at which they've scored them. Long way to go still ; but you sense unless England can nip one of these two out soon they're going to have too much to do later . Especially if Wood ends up limping off before he can get at the tail. Not sure the spinners are going to be able to run through the innings.

Think we are back to this being Australia's to lose ?

Joel Wilson needs to be sacked. It's beyond a joke. England appeal and he looks at square-leg?

Great take from Stokes. Or not....?! For me that's a fair grab.

Strangely , I see WINVIZ still fancies England ! Not sure what it is smoking...

102/3 in 27 overs so far today. At this rate , another 150 will take what , 40 overs ?

And on the cusp of lunch , Stokes has caught Smith and then thrown it away - literally

Bloody celebration ! Just dropped the game I think...

This goes back to the fact that Herschelle Gibbs caught that ball.

Well this partnership has taken the wind out of England's sails, unfortunately, and that dropped catch will hurt still further. Was a brilliant start with Woakes doing the early damage, but it hasn't been backed up. Wood, I know he got Labuschagne, but he's not the same threat as he's obviously operating well below 100%, and the short ball stuff just isn't as threatening when it's mid 80s.

Broad bowled a good spell, but no reward frustratingly. Anderson just got it all wrong, mainly with the length. On the one hand it is just one bad series for him; on the other he is 41.

Head and Smith have played very well. A world-class partnership when in difficulty. Head's timing brilliant from the off and Smith has just been classic Smith.

Only question now is if Australia win 2-1 or 3-1. The radar has got worse and what looks like as much as a two hour burst of rain should start over lunch. There might even be some extra rain after that, around 17:00 which, if it hits, will certainly kibosh everything. Australia need, what, around 35-40 overs to win it? Maybe not even that much if Smith and Head bat through.

Not sure Australia will care though. It'll be a series win either way.

Quite clearly not a completed catch.

Depends what you mean by being "in control " of ball and movement. Pretty clear he had caught it fair and square ; and he was just throwing it in celebration. But he did so a bit too quickly ; and because he actually popped it out when he bumped his leg in the movement , you can say he wasn't in control of his body movement ... Starc will agree with the decision I'm sure

Afraid that might just have sucked the life out of England as they go to lunch.

Duty281 wrote:Joel Wilson needs to be sacked. It's beyond a joke. England appeal and he looks at square-leg?

Great take from Stokes. Or not....?! For me that's a fair grab.

Not for me. Stokes hadn't fully landed and so wasn't fully in control.

Adds to the thrills and excitement but ultimately brainless and poor cricket in celebrating a catch too soon.

Unfortunately dropped catches in the first test cost us, and one from Stokes late on on day 5...and that one from Stokes again on day 5 might be the nail in the coffin.

In a more serious sense though, hard to give that out. He caught it, for sure, but it's hard to argue that someone is in control of their movement when one leg is still in the air. Easy not out. The only real question is whether Stokes was celebrating or just bumped his leg coming down.

Yeah fair decision to disallow it ..whether he was actually starting to celebrate as I first thought , or just clumsy , it is still "not out" . But the annoying thing is losing a bloody review because the blind umpire didn't detect the glove in the first place !

Meanwhile, 20 odd miles south of the ground, just started raining here and looks set for a bit. The Oval will again be lucky to miss it ....

alfie wrote:Yeah fair decision to disallow it ..whether he was actually starting to celebrate as I first thought , or just clumsy , it is still "not out" . But the annoying thing is losing a bloody review because the blind umpire didn't detect the glove in the first place !

You can't really blame Wilson for losing the review. Stokes is both the captain and the player who took the catch; he knew he'd not completed it so shouldn't have gone for the review.

On the bright (desperately hopeful) side : Moeen is really getting some spin. Perhaps he can make KP_fan's day/week/month by taking a five wicket haul to victory

And Smith seems to be one lucky so and so this match ...

alfie wrote:Yeah fair decision to disallow it ..whether he was actually starting to celebrate as I first thought , or just clumsy , it is still "not out" . But the annoying thing is losing a bloody review because the blind umpire didn't detect the glove in the first place !

Hang on, Alfie. Haven't we lost the review because we chose to review it?

Soul Requiem wrote:

alfie wrote:Yeah fair decision to disallow it ..whether he was actually starting to celebrate as I first thought , or just clumsy , it is still "not out" . But the annoying thing is losing a bloody review because the blind umpire didn't detect the glove in the first place !

You can't really blame Wilson for losing the review. Stokes is both the captain and the player who took the catch; he knew he'd not completed it so shouldn't have gone for the review.

Which is why Stokes was reluctant to take the review , I guess. But if Wilson had noted the glove , he would have called an umpire's review into the catch completion , no ?

Anyway , history now. Moving on...

guildfordbat wrote:

alfie wrote:Yeah fair decision to disallow it ..whether he was actually starting to celebrate as I first thought , or just clumsy , it is still "not out" . But the annoying thing is losing a bloody review because the blind umpire didn't detect the glove in the first place !

Hang on, Alfie. Haven't we lost the review because we chose to review it?

Sorry didn't see your post , guildford. And you are right. Ultimately a bad decision to review - even if he felt he did have control , had he not gone to throw it up , it was always dodgy at best. But think my reply to Soul covers it.

Pretty sure it wasn't out sadly. England now really need to take something like 3-50 to have a chance from here, not impossible but not looking likely. Saying that, even if they do it they'll probably bowl random short rubbish to the tail and lose it anyway

alfie wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

alfie wrote:Yeah fair decision to disallow it ..whether he was actually starting to celebrate as I first thought , or just clumsy , it is still "not out" . But the annoying thing is losing a bloody review because the blind umpire didn't detect the glove in the first place !

You can't really blame Wilson for losing the review. Stokes is both the captain and the player who took the catch; he knew he'd not completed it so shouldn't have gone for the review.

Which is why Stokes was reluctant to take the review , I guess.  But if Wilson had noted the glove , he would have called an umpire's review into the catch completion , no ?

Anyway , history now. Moving on...

Possibly / probably but there was no compulsion for us to take the review which only worsened the sloppy situation.

PS : Ha! And sorry to you, Alfie - hadn't seen your reply to me when I posted this.

Rain starting to fall. This could last for a couple of hours, but it does look clear after that (for now anyway).

So there might still be enough time for Australia to win the series in style. Haven't really had much luck with the weather in the last two tests, tomorrow looks dry as well.

Maybe we are having some fortune, covers are off right away and play may start very soon. Or it might not.

Duty281 wrote:Rain starting to fall. This could last for a couple of hours, but it does look clear after that (for now anyway).

So there might still be enough time for Australia to win the series in style. Haven't really had much luck with the weather in the last two tests, tomorrow looks dry as well.

Maybe we are having some fortune, covers are off right away and play may start very soon. Or it might not.

So I have to stay up and wait in hope , eh ? Typical bloody English weather

Potential venues for future series really dwindling now the Oval is too far north to schedule Ashes Tests

I just saw the replay of that Stokes "Catch"  and my thoughts

It was an unfortunate slip of the ball out of his hands in a hurry to go up in celebration knocking the hand against some part of his body....not a catch.

The look on his face was horrified "Ohh I dropped the last ashes test match"
Why he reviewed...he knew he dropped it t  ?
No logical reason...just panic I think.

Eng were in panic......the rain break gives them time to calm down and depending on length of it...brings draw again into picture depending on how much time is left.

I think Aus needs 40 overs to do it.
Aus should "go for it" when play restarts until/if  3 more wickets fall...and then they can drop shutter if still more than 50 runs needed.

How long can the play go no for if there is no rain?
730 PM?

Innings one and innings two of the final series test England got Smith out from potentially match winning positions but alas both times after going for review Smith was reprieved.

Lowlandbrit wrote:Potential venues for future series really dwindling now the Oval is too far north to schedule Ashes Tests

Hmmm, south of the Oval. As you would expect, I always like Surrey's Guildford outground. Also, Hants occasionally play on the Isle of Wight ....

alfie wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Rain starting to fall. This could last for a couple of hours, but it does look clear after that (for now anyway).

So there might still be enough time for Australia to win the series in style. Haven't really had much luck with the weather in the last two tests, tomorrow looks dry as well.

Maybe we are having some fortune, covers are off right away and play may start very soon. Or it might not.

So I have to stay up and wait in hope , eh ?  Typical bloody English weather

Been the case quite often this series, hasn't it? Not been the best English summer.

I'm reasonably confident they'll get back on by 17:00, but it doesn't inspire much confidence because it's heading for another Aussie win. If the Met Office are right we'll even see that thing called 'sunshine' this evening, which will aid Australia's task.

KP_fan wrote:How long can the play go no for if there is no rain?
730 PM?

Play can go on for as long as necessary (presuming no rain/light is good) to get the scheduled overs bowled because it's day five. But they're only allowed to schedule overs for a 7 or 7:30 close (I'm not sure which), because cricket makes no sense.

So if they got back on at 5, it might be 30 or 38 overs of play.

England can lose the test series by 2-1 or 3-1. Those are the options. What have the English team learnt apart from snatching defeat from victory? Well they have kept each match close and when they have lost it has been either the last session or the last day.

Duty281 wrote:

KP_fan wrote:How long can the play go no for if there is no rain?
730 PM?

Play can go on for as long as necessary (presuming no rain/light is good) to get the scheduled overs bowled because it's day five. But they're only allowed to schedule overs for a 7 or 7:30 close (I'm not sure which), because cricket makes no sense.

So if they got back on at 5, it might be 30 or 38 overs of play.

T1 finished somewhere between 730pm and 8pm as I recollect.
And no one was talking about then any closure of play because of a certain time reaching.
Because there were still plenty of overs left.

However a limit of overs ~40 or so works in Aus favor.
They can go for it and when then lose 2 to 3 wickets the shut shop

I guess reduced overs is good for Australia because they can push for the win and still revert to blocking it out if they lose quick wickets. 40 overs should easily see it done for them unless they collapse ; so the ideal scenario.

Need a Broad super spell and/or a Moeen hat trick. We can dream...

Rain already beginning to ease, so looks as though the start may be earlier than 17:00.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:What an absolute disaster of a summer Anderson has had - I know he's had some unrewarded spells, but here in ideal conditions he's served up some proper buffet stuff. Did not see this coming after his superb winter

There's been a lot of spells where he just hasn't been getting the carry of the other seamers. When Jimmy struggles he has had a tendency to drag his lengths back as he can't stand being driven. It's how they bowled in the Flower days and Jimmy has stuck with it a bit more. Whereas Broad's lengths have got fuller as he's turned into a wobble ball bowler. I do wonder if that's why Jimmy's beaten the bat so much without taking the edge. If your lengths are that bit shorter the best batters can react, play inside the line. Particularly to swing as it can usually be picked up out the hand.

When he didn't get the new ball at Edgbaston to star the series I queried it. Now I'd certainly be giving it to Woakes and Broad from this attack.

Something that has benefited both sides at points in this series but really needs sorting is out of shape balls being replaced with obviously newer ones. If a batting side have put the work and skill in to blunt the ball then they should reap the rewards. Be that England doing it quickly by whacking boundaries to soften and scuff the ball or the Aussies playing time.

While we have time to kill , perhaps I should reply to Duty's suggestion that I was angling for a job as a Spin Doctor for England with my generally favourable treatment of their recent efforts

I should make it clear - if it wasn't already - that I do not think they are the finished article by any means. And I also note that they have made a number of mistakes this summer  - which have contributed significantly to their failure to win back the Ashes.

But honestly : the fact that many (including you , Duty ?) have hinted that they ought to have beaten the WTC Champions but for "unforced errors" surely shows they have improved out of sight from the sorry state of March 2022  ?

You seem to suggest that nothing much has really changed : yet when I look back at discussions from that time (yes I am bored waiting for rain to go away ) I see that you declared they were a shambles with hardly any competent batsman ; predicted an easy win for NZ ; were ambivalent about the SA series and held out virtually no hope for any success in Pakistan... One might suggest that if you keep declaring it has all been down to luck and they are going to get their true desserts eventually , you will one day get it right

I know you don't really like the McCullum/Stokes approach. Heck I know you didn't want Stokes as captain ; and regularly criticize his tactics. Fair enough ; we can always argue details. But I do think you might acknowledge that this leadership team has brought a lot of interest in the Test Match game in England - and not a little success.

I am disappointed this series has gone as it has. Think they could have done better.  But at the same time , just because they may end up with the "worst result against Australia in England" since 2001 , I reckon the bald margin rather understates the closeness of the contest in every match. And to say Australia were poor by their standards rather misses the point that perhaps they were below their best because England didn't let them produce their best ?

We can disagree ; in fact I am sure we will. But I'm not spin doctoring : just seeing reasons to be pleased with what has gone right , while acknowledging that they still need to refine their methods to go forward. Glass a little more than half full for me...

Will be a bit fuller if they can conjure seven wickets this evening !

Pitch inspection at 4, so things are moving in a positive direction.

Starting at 4:20 if no more rain