creeeeeeeekeeeeeet

[BWFC_Insane]

What sort of score do we reckon England need then? Strauss earlier reckoned a 200 lead would be enough. Boycott reckons Australia could knock off 270/80 quite easily if they bat well.

Hard to say how the pitch will play out, almost looks like it got flatter, but then Swann wasn't bowling on it.

I reckon 300 plus becomes psychologically very difficult.

But I think Australia could easily be bowled out for 150 or make 320 comfortably.

[Montreal Wanderer]

What sort of score do we reckon England need then? Strauss earlier reckoned a 200 lead would be enough. Boycott reckons Australia could knock off 270/80 quite easily if they bat well.

Hard to say how the pitch will play out, almost looks like it got flatter, but then Swann wasn't bowling on it.

I reckon 300 plus becomes psychologically very difficult.

But I thin Australia could easily be bowled out for 150 or make 320 comfortably.

As usual you have hedged your bets and covered all bases.

[BWFC_Insane]

What sort of score do we reckon England need then? Strauss earlier reckoned a 200 lead would be enough. Boycott reckons Australia could knock off 270/80 quite easily if they bat well.

Hard to say how the pitch will play out, almost looks like it got flatter, but then Swann wasn't bowling on it.

I reckon 300 plus becomes psychologically very difficult.

But I thin Australia could easily be bowled out for 150 or make 320 comfortably.

As usual you have hedged your bets and covered all bases.

It's unpredictable though this test.

England will lose anyhow.....

[bwfcdan94]

anymore than 275 and realistically Clarke is going to have to score a century if Australia are to have a hope.

[bwfcdan94]

I should also point out that the highest successful run chase in the fourth innings at Trent Bridge is 284 and therefore Australia are almost certainly going to have to complete the impossible if they are to win this test match.

[BWFC_Insane]

I should also point out that the highest successful run chase in the fourth innings at Trent Bridge is 284 and therefore Australia are almost certainly going to have to complete the impossible if they are to win this test match.

Boycott reckons those totals mean nowt as the game is so different now that 270/280 which was once a day and a half of batting at least is knocked off in a day now.

Interestingly on Sky Bumble was waffling on about some test in the 60's in India where an Indian bowler bowled 30 overs with 27 maidens or something for 10 runs or sommat like that. To illustrate how slow the scoring used to be.

[bwfcdan94]

Yes I heard that to, I presume that drawn test matches were very common with a minimum of two matches every 5 match series being draws because nobody wanted to attack and most sides had the attitude of its better to draw then risk losing I suppose.

[Montreal Wanderer]

Yes I heard that to, I presume that drawn test matches were very common with a minimum of two matches every 5 match series being draws because nobody wanted to attack and most sides had the attitude of its better to draw then risk losing I suppose.

That and the weather. You would not have enjoyed Trevor Bailey batting.

[TANGODANCER]

It's unpredictable though this test. England will lose anyhow.....

Your secret's out mate. I've finally realised the " B" in BWFC_Insane stands for "Boycott".

[Bruce Rioja]

Mind they'll both be gone without scoring again in the morning.

Just been having this conversation over a few Dunscar Bridges. Aye!

I hope to be proved wrong but I have this feeling that Bell will struggle to get out of single figures tomorrow. He really is an all or nothing kind of batter and I think today we saw him have his 'all' innings.

Still, I'm confident that overall we'll rack up a lead of 300 and that should be enough.

[Worthy4England]

I should also point out that the highest successful run chase in the fourth innings at Trent Bridge is 284 and therefore Australia are almost certainly going to have to complete the impossible if they are to win this test match.

Boycott reckons those totals mean nowt as the game is so different now that 270/280 which was once a day and a half of batting at least is knocked off in a day now.

Interestingly on Sky Bumble was waffling on about some test in the 60's in India where an Indian bowler bowled 30 overs with 27 maidens or something for 10 runs or sommat like that. To illustrate how slow the scoring used to be.

It's not generally about scoring rate in the fourth innings of a test. Often a side will leave the best part of 5 sessions to bowl a team out in the fourth innings (so maybe 145 overs). At 3 an over, that's comfortably over 400, at 4 it's nearly 600. They still don't manage it very often, due to wear and tear on the pitch and general pressure,

The illustration that (I think Hussain rather than Bumble) gave is no bloody use without some context. He didn't mention whether it was against a side chasing 800 and just on crease occupation trying to bimble towards a draw or whether the team were set 80 in 60 overs and failed miserably.

I agree that generally sides score a lot quicker overall, but not sure whether or how that relates to 4th innings chases.

[Dujon]

A gritty display by Bell. Australia wasted the new ball when it was finally taken. Silly referrals by Clarke. I've never been an umpire other than social games but some of the decisions so far have been more than questionable, they've been wrong. I'm not castigating Broad for staying at the crease as it's the umpire's decision and not his. By the same token I cannot and never have understood how a fieldsman at point or square leg (or even for slip fielders in most instances) can set up a chorus of appeals for LBW decisions. With the restrictions placed on the criteria to be considered for an LBW surely only the umpire, bowler and, perhaps, the wicketkeeper can make any sort of fair assessment? Sorry, back to the test.

I cannot see Australia winning this test match. Even if England declared overnight (which it won't) it would be an uphill battle. The Australian top order has all too often of late shown itself as 'fragile'. Too many times the onus has fallen to the late middle order and the tail to introduce some sort of respectability to an innings. That is just not good enough. As always there are 'ifs' and 'buts'. Nevertheless, if England survives until half way through the lunch/tea session today then Australia must set itself for salvaging the match by way of a draw. I think that England will dispose of Australia in less than four and a half sessions.

[BWFC_Insane]

I should also point out that the highest successful run chase in the fourth innings at Trent Bridge is 284 and therefore Australia are almost certainly going to have to complete the impossible if they are to win this test match.

Boycott reckons those totals mean nowt as the game is so different now that 270/280 which was once a day and a half of batting at least is knocked off in a day now.

Interestingly on Sky Bumble was waffling on about some test in the 60's in India where an Indian bowler bowled 30 overs with 27 maidens or something for 10 runs or sommat like that. To illustrate how slow the scoring used to be.

It's not generally about scoring rate in the fourth innings of a test. Often a side will leave the best part of 5 sessions to bowl a team out in the fourth innings (so maybe 145 overs). At 3 an over, that's comfortably over 400, at 4 it's nearly 600. They still don't manage it very often, due to wear and tear on the pitch and general pressure,

The illustration that (I think Hussain rather than Bumble) gave is no bloody use without some context. He didn't mention whether it was against a side chasing 800 and just on crease occupation trying to bimble towards a draw or whether the team were set 80 in 60 overs and failed miserably.

I agree that generally sides score a lot quicker overall, but not sure whether or how that relates to 4th innings chases.

I think Boycotts argument was that now sides attack more with the bat. So in the past being set 280 last innings meant a long time batting. And on a deteriorating pitch chances are you got out before you got enough runs. Whereas now teams score at a quicker rate, so unless the pitch is really a minefield it makes chasing those scores more achievable. Still hard but well, his argument not mine!

[bwfcdan94]

A gritty display by Bell. Australia wasted the new ball when it was finally taken. Silly referrals by Clarke. I've never been an umpire other than social games but some of the decisions so far have been more than questionable, they've been wrong. I'm not castigating Broad for staying at the crease as it's the umpire's decision and not his. By the same token I cannot and never have understood how a fieldsman at point or square leg (or even for slip fielders in most instances) can set up a chorus of appeals for LBW decisions. With the restrictions placed on the criteria to be considered for an LBW surely only the umpire, bowler and, perhaps, the wicketkeeper can make any sort of fair assessment? Sorry, back to the test.

I cannot see Australia winning this test match. Even if England declared overnight (which it won't) it would be an uphill battle. The Australian top order has all too often of late shown itself as 'fragile'. Too many times the onus has fallen to the late middle order and the tail to introduce some sort of respectability to an innings. That is just not good enough. As always there are 'ifs' and 'buts'. Nevertheless, if England survives until half way through the lunch/tea session today then Australia must set itself for salvaging the match by way of a draw. I think that England will dispose of Australia in less than four and a half sessions.

What do yourself and aussies in general think of Clarke as a captain. I honestly get the feeling that he is hated by his players, he does not give any plans time to work and therefore his plans don't work and that he is just not mentally equipped to lead this Australian team. Of course he may well go on to win the Ashes series this summer but as far as I can see this is the worst Australia team ever and that is in part due to his man management (look at all the fall outs with other senior players Warner, Watson possibly even Haddin) and the fact that in the past year or so his batting has fallen by the waste side which means his captaincy and his ability are a batsman are in serious question. Clarke is meant to be the one world class player in that team and yet for over halve of his time as captain his batting has been dreadful, his captaincy has been awful throughout hence Australia really haven't competed with England and South Africa and whereas England and South Africa have gone to the sub continent and won series of late Australia's trips to the sub continent have been disastrous. personally I think Haddin would make a much better captain.

I know comparisons have been made between the current Australian and a couple of week Australian teams but I believe that this one must be the worst. Even the side in the 78/79 series contained two world class players (Boarder and Kim Hughes) compared to this side that contains just one in Clarke.

[Worthy4England]

I should also point out that the highest successful run chase in the fourth innings at Trent Bridge is 284 and therefore Australia are almost certainly going to have to complete the impossible if they are to win this test match.

Boycott reckons those totals mean nowt as the game is so different now that 270/280 which was once a day and a half of batting at least is knocked off in a day now.

Interestingly on Sky Bumble was waffling on about some test in the 60's in India where an Indian bowler bowled 30 overs with 27 maidens or something for 10 runs or sommat like that. To illustrate how slow the scoring used to be.

It's not generally about scoring rate in the fourth innings of a test. Often a side will leave the best part of 5 sessions to bowl a team out in the fourth innings (so maybe 145 overs). At 3 an over, that's comfortably over 400, at 4 it's nearly 600. They still don't manage it very often, due to wear and tear on the pitch and general pressure,

The illustration that (I think Hussain rather than Bumble) gave is no bloody use without some context. He didn't mention whether it was against a side chasing 800 and just on crease occupation trying to bimble towards a draw or whether the team were set 80 in 60 overs and failed miserably.

I agree that generally sides score a lot quicker overall, but not sure whether or how that relates to 4th innings chases.

I think Boycotts argument was that now sides attack more with the bat. So in the past being set 280 last innings meant a long time batting. And on a deteriorating pitch chances are you got out before you got enough runs. Whereas now teams score at a quicker rate, so unless the pitch is really a minefield it makes chasing those scores more achievable. Still hard but well, his argument not mine!

He's missing a trick. I think side *can* potentially score quicker today, but you generally used to get more overs bowled in a day in the 1950/60's - we're pretty much capped at 90 now.

I picked a draw out at random - 590 overs bowled so 118 per day - England V West Indies 1957 - 1315 runs @ 2.22 per over

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/62825.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

England's last draw 3rd test v New Zealand, was over 444 overs - 1203 runs scored @ 2.71 per over

280 in the 1957 test I would have got in 126 Overs (just over a days worth @ 118 overs per day)

280 in the 2012 Test I would have got in 103 Overs (just over a days worth @ 90 per day)

280 in 2012 would have been a marginally bigger ask in term of run rate, to fit it into a last day run chase. So they go quicker, because they have to - but that increases the risk of getting out.

150 overs less than the match in 1957. They didn't need to score as quick back in the day, as Boycott's strike rate is admirable testament to.

[BWFC_Insane]

Good stuff there worthy. I guess if you face less balls to make the same runs it reduces the chance of getting an unplayable.

I dunno.

I think Boycott also made the point that psychologically a par one day score such as 260/270 as is now seems less daunting than it used to as players are so used to knocking those totals over.

Not saying he's right but in general bigger chases seem more 'on' today than they used to, perhaps that's just perception. Or perhaps it's more Geoffrey's favourite subject, 'uncovered pitches'.

[TANGODANCER]

Is somebody indicating we aren't going to play wonderfully and win?

What a grand innings from Ian Bell..A genuinly decent cricketer.

[Bruce Rioja]

What time's lunch?

[Worthy4England]

What time's lunch?

One O Clock usually

[bobo the clown]

What time's lunch?

One O Clock usually

Your own Bruce ? About 11.30am till 4pm I should think.