luckyluke 1 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Bugger. Still, we won the last series after being humped in the first test, so you never know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 19822 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 at least we put up a bit of fight after the no show in the first three days. fletcher's got some big decisions to make. jones is in the side to make runs. he failed on that score yet again. giles doen't take enough wickets. harmeson is in the worst form of his life. our problem in the field seems to be bowling accuracy - only flintoff has got his line and length right so far. we should have taken john lewis along imo. he can put it on the money - he would have lapped up these ozzie pitches. not sure if i fancy mamood or plunkett... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 1 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Lewis is a good line and length merchant but he lacks penetrance. Harmison CAN be a terrifying fast bowler when his radar's working, but that's not very often unfortunately. Looks like the Giles & Jones double act failed as most people predicted. What's the point of a stubborn 20 odd from Giles if the top order fail? And if Jones can't get runs then Read (whose batting has improved) should take his place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima 0 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Jon Lewis ffs , might as well just give them 5 p.o. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34441 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Penetrance???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 1 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Not right now, I've just had my breakfast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34441 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Did you mean penetration though? Penetrance is a medical term isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 1 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Oh yeah I did, penetrence is something to do with genetics, my mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34441 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Spaz! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 1 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Probably for the best I made the mistake, otherwise you would have gone all Finbar Saunders on me if I'd written 'lacks penetration'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34441 Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 Quack quack! Vaughan out for a duck on his return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 19822 Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 Jon Lewis ffs , might as well just give them 5 p.o. you think the likes of mamhood, anderson and plunkett would fare better? lewis is no pace merchant but i'd fancy him to tie up an end more than any of our other bowlers. at least he puts it in the right areas. did you see the graphic sky uses to illustrate a bowler's accuracy for harmerson? jesus wept! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Maul 0 Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 Bump. Starts tonight. Hopefully Panesar will come in for Anderson and McGrath wont play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0 Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 Bump. Starts tonight. Hopefully Panesar will come in for Anderson and McGrath wont play. We've picked the same side again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg 6 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 n0 m0nty, ffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetleftpeg 0 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 'God save the Queen...' Nah. Fuck her. COME ON ENGLAND! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammynb 2929 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 The run rate is a bit slow but kids it looks like the english are trying to make a go of this cricket lark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ 0 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Slow run rate was frustrating as England didn't look too into scoring runs, but were still dropping wickets. However hopefully Bell and Collingwood can keep this up for the moment till at least tea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammynb 2929 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Slow run rate was frustrating as England didn't look too into scoring runs, but were still dropping wickets. However hopefully Bell and Collingwood can keep this up for the moment till at least tea. If they keep up this rate my 1-0 win prediction could of been a good bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ 0 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Slow run rate was frustrating as England didn't look too into scoring runs, but were still dropping wickets. However hopefully Bell and Collingwood can keep this up for the moment till at least tea. If they keep up this rate my 1-0 win prediction could of been a good bet. I know what you mean. While I'm happy England have only dropped 2 wickets in nearly 2 sessions play is good. But I remember last summer when England scored 400 on the first day at Edbaston at more than 5 an over. Which is a far cry from the snooze fest so far today. Still, shouldn't grumble too much! Things could have been a lot worse at 45/2! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ 0 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Tea time. 86 runs. 0 wickets. I think I'd be right in saying that England didn't bat through a single full session last summer without dropping a wicket. Well done to Bell and Collingwood for knuckling down and getting to tea without losing a wicket, and both getting to 50. This evening session is crucial if England have any chance of winning this test match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ 0 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Bell out caught and bowled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Bottled it by not playing Monty again. You need 20 wickets to win a match ffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ 0 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 That's the thing Alex. England have had such a positive day with the bat, but however positive it gets tomorrow it may not make a difference. England could bat out tomorrow and score 600, but if they don't take 20 wickets there's not much point. That being said though Glenn McGrath was getting the ball to reverse a bit, which for me was a great sign for Flintoff and Anderson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellsy 0 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 I love watching KP bat, so aggressive. Takes everyone and anyone on. Thats what it is about. But i wish he would get out soon. A good revival there from England. Warne getting plenty of turn and had Bell in a spin for ages. Game is certainly on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now