Australia v England, 2nd Test, Adelaide, Dec 3-7, 2010

Will Swanny come to the party in the Second Test? He was peripheral figure in this past one.

But then, so were about six other players.

Midge probably wasn't peripheral enough, from an Australian point of view..

taipan wrote:

doremi wrote:

furriner wrote:

doremi wrote:This series will finish 12 -0 England.

Fixed.

For all the 'excitement', this series will be like two drunken bag ladies going at each other with threadbare handbags.

One where Australia outcraps England, and the other where KP single-handedly wins it for the English. For spectators' sake I'm hoping that doesn't happen in the same match.

Beats the hell out of SRT playing a match winning innings

I wouldn't mind seeing a couple in the next few months

I think England had half a mind to bring in Ian Holloway for Finn for this test bearming in mind the chance of reverse swing and the need to bowl a fuller length. With Finn taking 6-fer I can't see that happening now.

Zat wrote:Not surprised, disappointed.

Im disgruntled to the point of protest....I say it is time for a protest at CricketA hq - which Bannie city is it located in?

Did anyone else think Ponting's "catch" was actually a catch? Why is he bitching about technology?

I thought it was.

Hmmnnn!

Bradman wrote:Did anyone else think Ponting's "catch" was actually a catch? Why is he bitching about technology?

Looked like a catch live. The radio boffins were calling it a catch on analysis several minutes later. And those ones close to the ground always look like they touched the ground on the slo-mo.

FWIW, cricket grounds aren't actually flat in Australia, they all slope gently away from the pitch to the boundary. It helps with drainage. But it also means that on any vision with the wicket between the camera and the player there will be some ground higher than the player's feet. Thus making front-on shots next to useless with catches close to the ground.

It was a more a catch than the one Stauss claimed and had upheld in England last year. That was he was referring to in terms of the inconsistency. Undoubtedly though most catches get knocked back by the third umpire so he's also annoyed that the batsmen stand their ground.

The Adelaide curator is predicting a batsman's paradise for the test.

horace wrote:

Zat wrote:Not surprised, disappointed.

Im disgruntled to the point of protest....I say it is time for a protest at CricketA hq - which Bannie city is it located in?

Melbourne

Cricket Australia
60 Jolimont Street
Jolimont
Victoria 3002
Australia
(+61 3) 9653 9999

Blackadder wrote:

horace wrote:

Zat wrote:Not surprised, disappointed.

Im disgruntled to the point of protest....I say it is time for a protest at CricketA hq - which Bannie city is it located in?

Melbourne

Cricket Australia
60 Jolimont Street
Jolimont
Victoria 3002
Australia
(+61 3) 9653 9999

So those "racist" attacks in Melb last year were by cricket fans on people mistaken for CA officials ...makes more sense

Bradman wrote:Did anyone else think Ponting's "catch" was actually a catch? Why is he bitching about technology?

It looked a clean catch to me.

Bradman wrote:Did anyone else think Ponting's "catch" was actually a catch? Why is he bitching about technology?

I thought it was a clean catch too, had his hands under the ball, however he did seem pretty unsure himself about it.

vilkrang wrote:

Bradman wrote:Did anyone else think Ponting's "catch" was actually a catch? Why is he bitching about technology?

I thought it was a clean catch too, had his hands under the ball, however he did seem pretty unsure himself about it.

He told the umpire he was pretty sure he caught it. His explanation for looking less than exuberant was that the game was petering out to the predictable draw so he didn't bother throwing it up and looking animating. He believed Cook this as his cue for doubting him and staying at the crease.

Still no fine for the 'piss weak umpiring ' jibe?

vilkrang wrote:

Bradman wrote:Did anyone else think Ponting's "catch" was actually a catch? Why is he bitching about technology?

I thought it was a clean catch too, had his hands under the ball, however he did seem pretty unsure himself about it.

Yeah, Cook said something along the lines of, "I wasn't sure if he took it cleanly or not, and Ponting didn't look very sure either." I don't know how Ponting expects batsmen to walk if he doesn't even look convinced himself that he took the catch.

I think cricket could learn from Rugby League when it comes to using the third umpire.

When the video ref first came in many tries were being disallowed, simply because the evidence wasn't 100 per cent conclusive. Video refs were effectively looking for reasons NOT to award a try, and were finding them due to the imperfect nature of video.

Then the NRL introduced a guideline that the benefit of the doubt in video ref decisions should go to the attacking team. There was much gnashing of teeth at first, but it has been a good change. No longer do the shortcomings of technology prevent fair tries from being awarded (at least when the video ref doesn't stuff up).

If a fielder claims to have taken a catch and there is no conclusive video evidence to prove that it wasn't a catch then his claim should be respected. This would effectively mean giving the "benefit of the doubt" to the fielding team when close catches are referred upstairs.

Batsmen might whinge and the traditionalists might choke on their corn flakes, but I think it would result in consistently fairer outcomes.

Hass wrote:I think cricket could learn from Rugby League...

You lost me at that point.

I see that Tim Nielsen has come out and said that everyone in the Aus setup is behind Mitchell Johnson. Do you think they might one day realise that that approach hasn't worked over the last 18 months, and that it's time they tried the "get the f*ck out of the team and get your act together in Shield cricket" approach?

Henry wrote:I see that Tim Nielsen has come out and said that everyone in the Aus setup is behind Mitchell Johnson. Do you think they might one day realise that that approach hasn't worked over the last 18 months, and that it's time they tried the "get the f*ck out of the team and get your act together in Shield cricket" approach?

Wouldn't know about that but I'm dropping him

It's looking more and more like both sides will be unchanged.

Watch Midge get two Michelles and Ollie storm to a double.

Henry wrote:It's looking more and more like both sides will be unchanged.

Would be a result for England and pretty stupid by Australia. Very kind of them not to play their best pace bowler & spinner.

JKLever wrote:

Henry wrote:It's looking more and more like both sides will be unchanged.

Would be a result for England and pretty stupid by Australia. Very kind of them not to play their best pace bowler & spinner.

TGM and tgm?

Henry wrote:I see that Tim Nielsen has come out and said that everyone in the Aus setup is behind Mitchell Johnson. Do you think they might one day realise that that approach hasn't worked over the last 18 months, and that it's time they tried the "get the f*ck out of the team and get your act together in Shield cricket" approach?

Sack Nielsen