The Ashes 2009

thebish · Post by **thebish** » Sat Jul 18, 2009 10:57 pm

Bruce Rioja wrote: Well, we'll just see if your Smart Alec comments stack up tomorrow evening, shall we? I hope that that they do.
Posting an impossible score just means that the Aussies won't chase it. How come you're struggling with that concept?

indeed - is always a tricky one... they say the best way to beat the aussies is to give them a reason to play positively - the risk of racking up 600 is that they simply batten down the hatches - BUT - one might also say there is a huge risk in setting them a theoretically attainable target - if anyone would get it, it'd be the aussies..

I'm still in the not enforce follow on camp.. I could just see us putting them back in - them racking up 400 - putting us in at tea on Sunday - us getting edgy and nervy and getting bowled out for 187...

but - then again - did safety first ever beat the aussies? do we actually back ourselves to bowl them out twice? - not sure I do...

is just as well I'm not england captain!

BWFC_Insane · Post by **BWFC_Insane** » Sat Jul 18, 2009 10:58 pm

Bruce Rioja wrote:
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Bruce Rioja wrote:
CAPSLOCK wrote:
Now, it's heavily in our favour
Outrageous Comment Alert

Heavily in our favour?
Eh? How the fook can it not be heavily in our favour?

How many last innings 500 run chases do you remember?

Jesus christ can't believe how much perspective people are losing its cricket but because its the ashes everyone seems to lose all sense of reason.

Batting was not only the right option but realistically the only one.

And we should bat for about 40 minutes tomorrow morning as well. Had the Aussies made 400 we'd be chasing 200 batting last. And I for one wouldn't fancy that. 200 batting last is historically a tricky score even on a flat pitch like Lords. The Aussies are chasing 520 plus. Not impossible but about as near to impossible as you can get. Batting is the only way to achieve a situation where Australia won't feel that they have a realy sniff of winning!
Well, we'll just see if your Smart Alec comments stack up tomorrow evening, shall we? I hope that that they do.
Posting an impossible score just means that the Aussies won't chase it. How come you're struggling with that concept?

Recent history suggests this aussie side are not very good at saving games. But there is no "proof" one way or the other. I think England have done the right thing. If the Aussies were going to make a huge score it won't matter either way. We could still lose or draw the game this way or putting em back iin. But putting em back wouldmean they had 200 to chase down thten post a lead and attack that lead with their bowlers potentially giving them the momentum back. This way we reduce the chance of losing it and if the weather goes for us increase our chances of winning it!

TANGODANCER · Post by **TANGODANCER** » Sat Jul 18, 2009 11:07 pm

Somehow, whenever I think Ashes/Aussies, rather than any bodyline bowling, I get this sobering vision of Shane Warne taking three paces, floating balls down the pitch at two miles a fortnight and terryfying the shxt out of players and supporters alike. Makes me shiver..

Worthy4England · Post by **Worthy4England** » Sat Jul 18, 2009 11:10 pm

I think we've set an interesting challenge on a good track. There certainly hasn't been any chases to win with the total they'll end up going for and our 650-odd v South Africa for a draw was quite a while ago now.

I have to say though, the weather today looked better than I thought it was going to be. Hope it doesn't intervene over the next two days...

jonnybwfc · Post by **jonnybwfc** » Sat Jul 18, 2009 11:38 pm

I'm Australian ... many kind posters here are giving us way too much respect, and thinking of Australian teams of the past.

This team is devoid of fighters ... real fighters ... if we had 6 x Steve Waughs or Justin Langers in the batting line-up I'd fancy us to draw.

But with this current crop, I'd expect you to win at a canter if not this afternoon, then early tomorrow morning.

(I reserve the right to retract this post should Aus bat for 2 days).

Worthy4England · Post by **Worthy4England** » Sat Jul 18, 2009 11:50 pm

674-6 isn't too distant a memory, but you're right, trickier to do when you're up against it.

Hoboh · Post by **Hoboh** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 12:21 am

Bat for an hour and see what the Aussie bowlers can do, hope conditions favour swing, tight close disiplined fielding and we've got um!

Dujon · Post by **Dujon** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 1:20 am

If the Englanders don't win from here they are more gormless than I have given them credit for. Do you really think that the Australanders can put together a last innings total of 500+ even if you give them, say, five sessions in which to do it?

Is there a risk of a draw? Certainly. Is there is a risk of a loss? Certainly. The chance of either of those results (weather permitting) is pretty remote. I don't think that the Australanders have a pair of batsmen who can dig in and play the dour role of blockers. The exercise then becomes a fine balance in giving them an outside chance of winning, and thus putting the batsmen at risk of making a silly stroke, or forcing them to defend in the hope of a draw.

At stumps on day three the Englanders had a lead of roughly 520. If they can bat for an hour and add, say, 40 runs that would give the opposition some 560 runs to collect from about 150 overs, which is a touch under four runs an over. Perhaps Strauss should ask his remaining batsmen to play for time but, really, is that necessary? Should the weather come into play, as it did yesterday, then to bat for too long could well result in a draw. It really is a fine line but one over which the Englanders have control.

Worthy4England · Post by **Worthy4England** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 9:15 am

Dujon wrote:If the Englanders don't win from here they are more gormless than I have given them credit for. Do you really think that the Australanders can put together a last innings total of 500+ even if you give them, say, five sessions in which to do it?

Is there a risk of a draw? Certainly. Is there is a risk of a loss? Certainly. The chance of either of those results (weather permitting) is pretty remote. I don't think that the Australanders have a pair of batsmen who can dig in and play the dour role of blockers. The exercise then becomes a fine balance in giving them an outside chance of winning, and thus putting the batsmen at risk of making a silly stroke, or forcing them to defend in the hope of a draw.

At stumps on day three the Englanders had a lead of roughly 520. If they can bat for an hour and add, say, 40 runs that would give the opposition some 560 runs to collect from about 150 overs, which is a touch under four runs an over. Perhaps Strauss should ask his remaining batsmen to play for time but, really, is that necessary? Should the weather come into play, as it did yesterday, then to bat for too long could well result in a draw. It really is a fine line but one over which the Englanders have control.

Can't see much to take issue with there Dujon, other than to say that we (well me anyhow) probably have about as much faith in our bowlers ability to bowl out a decent team as you guys have in your batters ability to defend 5 or 5 and a bit sessions.

Worthy4England · Post by **Worthy4England** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 12:03 pm

Hughes got a poor decision there - but I really don't care too much

TANGODANCER · Post by **TANGODANCER** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 12:12 pm

Worthy4England wrote:Hughes got a poor decision there - but I really don't care too much

We've had one or two against us, a decidedly wrong lbw (Bopara?) in the first, and Pietersen almosst gave himself out when no one else seemed to think so. Swings and roundabouts.

wovlad · Post by **wovlad** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 1:55 pm

Ponting gone now, thats a big wicket, probably the crucial wicket come on england grind the aussies into the dust.

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 2:47 pm

4 wickets down, 3 of which shouldn't have been given. My heart breaks.

(At least Ponting's wicket was not debatable, the sour faced moo).

Montreal Wanderer · Post by **Montreal Wanderer** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 3:01 pm

Verbal wrote:4 wickets down, 3 of which shouldn't have been given. My heart breaks.

(At least Ponting's wicket was not debatable, the sour faced moo).

5 now - only the rain can save them at this point.

TANGODANCER · Post by **TANGODANCER** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 3:14 pm

A win, by any means, is irreversible. Get it, take it. We'll have the same situations before the series is out. Take the advantage, the Aussies give nothing.

thebish · Post by **thebish** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:30 pm

Verbal wrote:4 wickets down, 3 of which shouldn't have been given. My heart breaks.

(At least Ponting's wicket was not debatable, the sour faced moo).

if he moans about the dodgy wickets like he moaned about the cardiff timewasting - does that make him a whinging Pon?

thebish · Post by **thebish** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 5:57 pm

anyone else starting to worry!

Montreal Wanderer · Post by **Montreal Wanderer** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 5:59 pm

thebish wrote:anyone else starting to worry!

Er... well, a wee bit.

thebish · Post by **thebish** » Sun Jul 19, 2009 6:02 pm

bloody frustrating with us virtually treading water for 10 overs waiting for the new ball - saying, here Aussies have as many runs as you like - and not cutting off the singles for Haddin's 50....

new ball in freddie's hands now... 4!

FD · Post by FD » Sun Jul 19, 2009 6:09 pm

Jesus, do we need a wicket or what

We're miles ahead with loads of time yet they looked like scared kids out there!

Connect with your social network account

The Ashes 2009

Who is online