darwenblueswearehere Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 Rovers shirt in the crowd, the worthy cup season one. Behind the bowlers arm from the end Anderson has been coming in from. Yeah, there's two of them sat together
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
SAS Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 Also four dingles sat together at the opposite end. There were quite a few rovers fans in adelaide. Aussies all out for 268. Batting wicket too. Australia`s back order gave them the majority of the runs. Frustrating.
jim mk2 Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 Good day for England although the scorecard has an upside-down look. Need to hunker down early tomorrow and slowly build a big score. Stunning catch by Paul Collingwood today - one of the best.
deryck guyler's spoon Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 Phenomenal catch by Collingwood. England very athletic and professional in the field again, I think this really demoralised the Aussies in Adelaide. Having Tremlett and Finn lurching down from 6'5" plus must be like facing the Windies 1980's attack.
T4E Posted December 16, 2010 Posted December 16, 2010 2.5 hours behind Adelaide and 8 hours ahead of UK time. Apologies Don, misread the World clock on the iPhone. You're quite right.
neekoy Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Having Tremlett and Finn lurching down from 6'5" plus must be like facing the Windies 1980's attack. Except without the ability....
Paul Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 I was listening to a radio discussion of the Australian batting order from yesterday. It was said player X didn't look comfy at No.6 having been promoted from 7. I was thinking about the batting order, is there really such a difference? I can see why the best batsmen open but by the time you get to 6, 7, 8?? Is this simply based on the principle bowlers will be tired by the time the lower order batsmen come in, so the bowling "threat" is reduced against the weaker batter?
HemelRover Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Do we actually have a test match on now? Good bowling by Johnson.
Exiled_Rover Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Ah, this is the England we all know and despise.
Exiled_Rover Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 How the (Please don't use that word again) is this pie chucker tearing us apart. (Please don't use that word again) me. I hate this team.
SouthAussieRover Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 I was listening to a radio discussion of the Australian batting order from yesterday. It was said player X didn't look comfy at No.6 having been promoted from 7. I was thinking about the batting order, is there really such a difference? I can see why the best batsmen open but by the time you get to 6, 7, 8?? Is this simply based on the principle bowlers will be tired by the time the lower order batsmen come in, so the bowling "threat" is reduced against the weaker batter? Not quite Paul. Lot's of factors come into play. Skill is obviously one. Some batsman are better against spin than the new ball.A number 6 may well have been an opener at some stage in their career.Generally you would hope a number 6 is able to face the new ball that may be taken after 80 overs. Some batsman are more attack or defense minded. A may be that you prefer to have a left handed and right handed combination in order to put the bowler of his line and length. Of course it should be said that batting collapses throw everything into chaos.
neekoy Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 How the (Please don't use that word again) is this pie chucker tearing us apart. (Please don't use that word again) me. I hate this team. Holy ######, you guys are 1 up in the series with the Ashes as good as retained, you have one bad morning to a bowler who 9/10 is ###### but every now and again is truely world class and you hate the team. Jebus Kristus
dave birch Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Ah, this is the England we all know and despise. How the (Please don't use that word again) is this pie chucker tearing us apart. (Please don't use that word again) me. I hate this team. Goodness me! This is what you're like when they are ahead!
Ricky Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 It's the same as the fans who boo rovers when we are 3-0 up. If the ball swings then Johnson is dangerous..... But so is Anderson!! This game isn't over by a long stretch
dave birch Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Quite right, Ricky. 71 run lead is nothing that a bit of sensible batting can't overcome. Oh, ER, a 6/38 pie chucker. As Neekoy said, 9 times out of ten (of late) Johnson has been bordering on crap, today he's hit the spot. As an aside, Johnson used to be very consistent. After his heroics in SA it was decided that his action had to be changed for English conditions, (add swing etc). That completely stuffed his action and we all know the result. It may be that he's getting it all back together, but that remains to be seen. Let's give him a couple more innings. Notwithstanding today's happenings, I'd still like to see the back of: Hilditch Neilsen Ponting Clarke (though I did meet his grand dad last Saturday and see the Alan Border Medal that Clarke gave his Gdad for Christmas) Bring in as a selector, Steve Waugh, let's get that steel back into winning, and playing hard. As coach, I'd try to persuade John Buchanan to come back. A superb tactician, who worked on the frailties in the opposition.
Ozz Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Think it is Ricky. Thing is England usually have themselves to blame when this happens, but all credit to Mitchell-without him over the last 24 hours the Ashes would be over right now.
dave birch Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Oz, that's a comment you can make about any team when they fail to deliver. Let's see how Johnson goes over the next couple of innings. This may well have been a flash in the pan.
Ozz Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Indeed Dave, but I reckon he's won em this match. Staring down the barrel when batting, he top scored. Then England 78-0, he comes on and takes six to give Aus a 81 lead. Big lead in this match I reckon.
darwenblueswearehere Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 It's the same as the fans who boo rovers when we are 3-0 up. If the ball swings then Johnson is dangerous..... But so is Anderson!! This game isn't over by a long stretch I'd back England to chase down anything up to 300, so you're right. It is far from over. Terrific game though!
Ricky Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 SA chased dorn 420 on this wicket in 2008. They've been saying that it gets better as the days go on. Have it Ponting!!!!
darwenblueswearehere Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 SA chased dorn 420 on this wicket in 2008. They've been saying that it gets better as the days go on. Brilliant review to get rid of Ponting, GAME ON!!
Ricky Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Very good use of the review there. Just a nick off the bottom glove. Ponting for 1... love it!!!!
jim mk2 Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Poor show by England. From 70 without loss to 187 all out is inexcusable; Strauss and Cook started the rot by giving their wickets away with poor shots. Anderson looks tired and the decision to let him travel home between the Tests has taken its toll. Plus the wives and girlfriends have arrived - is this a professional sporting series or a family jolly ? Tall order now for England to save this match.
neekoy Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Australia need a lead of around 400+ but I am getting little bit happier, let's see if Johnson can back it up, oh and Clarke, Hilditch and Nielsen still need to go.
dave birch Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 You forgot Ponting, Neekoy. The big problem is, who is to replace him?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.