posted Aug 20, 2009

I watched the highlights (some of us couldnt listen to TMS or watch on Sky) and I cant believe the negativity of some of the fans on 606 and the media...300 on the 1st day...VERY MUCH BETTER then the dire 1st Innings at Headingley!
Anyway when the Australians have been chasing, they collapse a la Lords.
We will have the Australians on Day 2.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 20, 2009

I have to agree with Red_Doc. I think going into this match it would have been fair to expect around 400 runs for the first innings' batting side on day one. But as was obvious (to me, at least) watching the day's play is that the pitch at the Oval has already started to crack and show some wear, so it's no longer as much of a batsman's pitch as it was originally.

I feel that now the minimum score needed from England in this first innings is about 350-370 runs. Tomorrow the conditions look like they will give the Aussie bowlers a lot more of a chance in the morning than at any point today really. So I would expect Australia to have us all-out by lunch at the latest; if we get them into bat sooner rather than later then we'll be better off for it because the conditions look like suiting bowlers later on. We should look to set another 50 at least from the last two wickets, then bowl fast and furiously to take two or three early wickets in the afternoon.

That'll get them thinking!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 20, 2009

Well...

...these teams have shown an ability to make the pitches look extremely different when they have been batting.

So I'm looking forward to seeing how the Aussies handle it, as it does look like a bit of a monster of a wicket...given another day or two.

However, the outfield is so fast, and given how timid England were as a rule, they still got up a decent amount of runs.

So if the Aussies bat like we know they can, the pitch may suddenly look a bit friendlier to the batsmen. lol.

I hope so. Still too many football fans ranting blind rubbish on these threads (your game is back..you can go back to those threads to rant rubbish now lol)...and they need silencing.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 20, 2009

Boreng: haha when it 600 ever just par?! Not in international cricket I'm afraid. Nice try though

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 21, 2009

Didnt see much, but from what I read on the text commentary, a few players got themselves in and then out again, Trott wasa bit unlucky and some loose shots from Strauss Prior and Flintoff, so I think we are still a hundred off a good score but we still have 300 on the board, if we can push it to 350 then there is something to bowl at.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 21, 2009

I have made centuries as a batsman and its much easier to turn 50 into 100 than to make 50 in the first place. When you first come out to bat you are at your most vulnerable point, you dont know what the pace and bounce of the wicket will be like so you are not settled.The ball looks more like the size of the squash ball than a cricket ball as your eyes need time to adjust.
Once you have made 50 you are really comfortable with the wicket, you have seen all the bowlers and know what each one is doing. The ball starts to become larger, as your eyes are fully adjusted and the repetative task of leaving balls outside off stump has given you a confident feeling of where your stumps are in relation to the line of the ball. Only a lapse in concentration or a freak ball will get you out now.
After 100 the ball is looking more like a soccer ball, you have so much time to adjust you can have a cup of tea between the bowler releasing it and you making your decision of what stroke to play. This is truly the heaven you play the game to arrive at. Over confidence or a truly freakish ball is the only way you can get out now.

Bell suffers from a lack of concentration. For someone to make so many fifties, batting high up the order, without converting, it is the only explanation. He has done the HARD work, and it continually throwing it away with momentary lapses. Batting is more about mental strength, than it is about technical ability.
When a batsman is regularly getting out cheap you challenge their technique, and rightfully so, but the reason Bell is never likely to be successful at test level is because of his inability to concentrate.
Cook, Bopara, Flintoff, Prior and Collingwood all have big floors in their techniques. Good bowling can sort any of them out pretty quickly.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 21, 2009

Bell had a difficult time out there, he was well aware of his responsibilities and his personal reputation being at stake, coupled with a very slow pitch.
I'm not a fan of his,well chronicled, but he had to grind it out. He played some good shots but typical of his style he retreated back in to his shell too often, it's a scene whereby he often apperas to treat the bowlers with contempt then make them look like world-beaters.
As much as I disliked his selection he tried hard. His wicket was a lapse of concentration in my opinion, he seemed to be intent on making the defensive shot look good rather than play the line of the ball.
A difficult track, no doubt, let's see what the Aussies can do.
It appeared to me that Ponting set out for the draw from the outset, his over-rate was derisory all day and hopefully someone has whispered in his ear about it.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 21, 2009

Test cricket is screaming out for a couple of rule changes.

1. Bowl 90 overs by 6pm or stay out there until you have bowled them. If that means 7pm or 8 pm then so be it. I bet you if they had to stay out there until 8pm the bowlers would get a wriggle on.
If they then subsequently go off for bad light they come back at 10am to bowl the remaining overs they failed to bowl the previous day.
2. When players leave the field there is no replacement. The only exception would be for a serious injury.
That would speed the game up and stop this never ending procession of players going off for a toilet break or to text a loved one on the mobile phone.
When captains realise they are leaking runs because someone forgot to have a leak, they will soon impress upon their players the need to do what they always do before taking a long car ride.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 21, 2009

The wicket was not that hard to play on. There was barely any swing. I dont understand why England try to score so quickly. A score of 260-270 for 4 is alot better than a score of 307 for 8. Bell(played well so can be forgiven), Collingwood, Prior and Flintoff all got out to deliveries they didnt need to play at. Most of the players cant just buckle down and take some pressure and score like 2-3 singles an over(maybe more). The boundries always come along.

All of a sudden now this pitch is hard to bat on. Barring a few deliveries that kept low there were no real demons on this wicket. Yes scoring was slow but this is test cricket. England can always argue they expect rain sometime so need to score quickly. The strategy should have been to Bat once and Bat long. Spin on this wicket though sharp was still slow and the batsmen had plenty of time to adjust.

We shall see though how the aussies bat. I may be wrong and 307 for 8 in a day maybe is the par score.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 21, 2009

No-one is saying it is hard to play on,it's just slow and it needs a lot more concentration than the flowert Prior and Flintoff showed.
What a pathetic T20 shot Prior played, all symptomatic of the desire to play limited overs style in a test match.

add comment | complain about this comment