Originally posted by karoly aczelYeah, and then he hurts his knee again in his third over, after conceding 30 runs for no wicket and Australia are a bowler short for the remaining 5 days...
Bring in Tait. Get him bowling 160kms in 3-4 over bursts and watch England become suspect of the whole attack
Originally posted by CrowleyI honestly thought of that scenario, and the way things look, Ponting has plenty of part timers if someone breaks down.
Yeah, and then he hurts his knee again in his third over, after conceding 30 runs for no wicket and Australia are a bowler short for the remaining 5 days...
Originally posted by rja211077He's a wusss!!
Tait has made it clear he has no desire to play test cricket. He believes his body won't stand up to it, and he's clearly not motivated enough to test it out.
In short, he's not available, so calling for him to be brought in is futile.
But point taken, Tait is not an option for test cricket.
And England win the second test by an innings and 70.
Perth next.
I actually think this series is quite even. But the next match will determine whether The Aussies can come back and win a couple.
I'm going to hold off on predictions until I know the 11 going on the field in WA.
The Aussie tail is too long.
Clarke fell to the last ball of the day and Hussey was unlucky ,the forutnate did NOT favour the brave in his case. But you cant expect Hussey to save them everytime.
My prediction is that Ponting and North will come into their own and score a lot of runs in WA. The only problem is being able to take 20 wickets. The attack has the skill, but absolutely no confidence...
Originally posted by karoly aczelEngland 4-0, that's my prediction. Don't want to sound over confident but all the early signs point towards a complete whitewash atm, and i might just add that it's about time the boot swung back the other way for a change!
And England win the second test by an innings and 70.
Perth next.
I actually think this series is quite even. But the next match will determine whether The Aussies can come back and win a couple.
I'm going to hold off on predictions until I know the 11 going on the field in WA.
The Aussie tail is too long.
Clarke fell to the last ball of the day ...[text shortened]... lem is being able to take 20 wickets. The attack has the skill, but absolutely no confidence...
Originally posted by MarinkatombMy prediction is 2-1 to the Aussies. I stand by it.
England 4-0, that's my prediction. Don't want to sound over confident but all the early signs point towards a complete whitewash atm, and i might just add that it's about time the boot swung back the other way for a change!
Luck has a way of evening out.
And there will be results (as long as there is no rain), so its just a question of which way those results are going to go.
Originally posted by karoly aczelI don't want to sound cynical, but when a side wins a match by an innings and 71 runs, I don't think luck really comes into it.
My prediction is 2-1 to the Aussies. I stand by it.
Luck has a way of evening out.
And there will be results (as long as there is no rain), so its just a question of which way those results are going to go.
If I was Australian, I would be worried about the impotency of the bowling attack: They don't look like being capable of taking 20 wickets, or even putting England under a sustained period of pressure with tight bowling, maidens etc.
However, as an Englishman, I am not too concerned!
Going off the last post, the suggestion being something really rather special would occur if the Aussies won the ashes come '11. I think it fair to say that this is the best overall prepared English team I've yet seen...good 'rounded' solid squad, fitness, good use of sports psychologly, use of modern technologies to aid and so on. I wasn't too sure about the big t.v screen they're utilising with the 'auto bowler' ( the one they can put any bowlers run up and image to to create a realistic'ish live game ) in the indoor practice nets. Can an auto bowler really propel a ball with all swing, spin and atmnospheric considerations I wonderd..those things with speed and length, given it's a computer, I could believe but surely a pipe full of air has difficulty in replicating say a 'genuine Wakar Younis inswinger'....the players seemed to think life like so it must work.. I wasn't convinced but wrongly, I just thought it seemed tech' for the sake of tech'...
I could be wrong but I rather felt Karel may have not meant literally that England were lucky with the reslut, merely that fortunes change, they even out.
Originally posted by CrowleyJust what I was thinking. 1137/6 over two innings goes a bit beyond "luck".
LOL @ "luck'.
On the other hand, I'm an English cricket fan and therefore naturally pessimistic. I find it hard to believe Australia will continue to be that poor.
Originally posted by RevRSleekerSorry if my post came out badly - I wasn't jumping on the previous post, just stating the fact that luck had nothing to do with the win.
Going off the last post, the suggestion being something really rather special would occur if the Aussies won the ashes come '11. I think it fair to say that this is the best overall prepared English team I've yet seen...good 'rounded' solid squad, fitness, good use of sports psychologly, use of modern technologies to aid and so on. I wasn't too sure abou ...[text shortened]... t England were lucky with the reslut, merely that fortunes change, they even out.
I actually agree with the comments on TV referals (I was against using them for anything other than line decisions, run-outs etc.) Frankly, the way things are going with the referals, we can't be that far away from a batsman being clean bowled neck and crop, refering the decision and being given not out because, in the view of the tech, the ball was bouncing over the top!
Originally posted by homeaboveYou raise an interesting point.
Sorry if my post came out badly - I wasn't jumping on the previous post, just stating the fact that luck had nothing to do with the win.
I actually agree with the comments on TV referals (I was against using them for anything other than line decisions, run-outs etc.) Frankly, the way things are going with the referals, we can't be that far away from a b ...[text shortened]... and being given not out because, in the view of the tech, the ball was bouncing over the top!
Will be funny to see the number 11 batsman - needing just 10 runs for victory, or having to survive just a few more overs or something similar - calling for a referral after being cleaned up and then getting the decision reversed because it's a close-call no-ball.
Oh man, I can hear the 'purists' wail already.
Referrals are here to stay and I'm behind them 100%. In this professional sports day and age, I'm surprised the system took so long to get off the ground.
I'd actually like to see the system refined further, in that both sides get an extra review per session of play.
Let's at least attempt to get the correct result with every call.