England v Australia, 1st Test, Trent Bridge, 10-14 July, 2013 (III)

Broad bowled very well for the most part - was decisive yesterday evening and didn't let the side down when the shit was flying.

KP and Cook deserve some praise, too - I feel certain that England would have crumbled but for that painstaking hundred partnership. I felt at the time that they were engaged in the most meaningful struggle of the match, the one that ultimately would determine whether England had any chance of winning the game.

Chivalry Augustus wrote:...And Tremlett over all three of those.

I saw Tremlett bowl for Surrey in a T20 a week or two back. Looked a long way from being in prime Test condition. Looked like a guy taking his baby steps back to full fitness.

Bowled at around 84mph, which is about his average, but there was a real lack of oomph.

Only desperation will see him play any part in this series, IMO. Pencil him in for the winter squad if he holds up over the coming months. But he won't rock up any earlier.

Dello wrote:

Chivalry Augustus wrote:...And Tremlett over all three of those.

I saw Tremlett bowl for Surrey in a T20 a week or two back. Looked a long way from being in prime Test condition. Looked like a guy taking his baby steps back to full fitness.

Bowled at around 84mph, which is about his average, but there was a real lack of oomph.

Only desperation will see him play any part in this series, IMO. Pencil him in for the winter squad if he holds up over the coming months. But he won't rock up any earlier.

Oh, I know it's wishful thinking. I wish they'd take a look at somebody else. It somehow feels too early to be talking up Chris Jordan, who is bowling with fire now he's free of Hell. He can bat, too. But is he even English, in his mind? The problem I see with this England team right now is there are no defined backups. There's no next in-line in batting or bowling. If it's not Finn, it's Bresnan. If it's not any of the current top six, God knows who it is.

Chivalry Augustus wrote:KP and Cook deserve some praise, too - I feel certain that England would have crumbled but for that painstaking hundred partnership. I felt at the time that they were engaged in the most meaningful struggle of the match, the one that ultimately would determine whether England had any chance of winning the game.

To come in at 11/2 and to grind it out was very good. I didn't particularly like how either of them gave up their wicket, but the sting had been taken out of the admirable Aussie attack.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Dello wrote:Well I'm glad I didn't watch any of that.

I just had to watch it. I was 'charity rowing' though. So I faked a shoulder injury and focked off to the 'tent' wherein I nearly shat myself watching us ramshackle it to victory. After nearly dying of a heart attack, I took up the charity shit with aplomb. By 'aplomb' I mean that I thought fock this after 10 minutes and faked the shoulder injury again.

 

By a stroke of good timing I managed to catch a bit of Sky Sports News just as England were reviewing Haddin's edge, which was perfect: I found out the result as it happened, with none of the stress from watching the hours previous.

This may be how I follow cricket from now on.

Dello wrote:
 

By a stroke of good timing I managed to catch a bit of Sky Sports News just as England were reviewing Haddin's edge, which was perfect: I found out the result as it happened, with none of the stress from watching the hours previous.

This may be how I follow cricket from now on.

That's a proper good effort, you're a lucky man and I wish I had done the same. I'm sure I was shitting it just as bad as in '05, but my frail older body couldn't take it. I feel like I've done 24 hours straight hod carrying, followed by a marathon shag, followed by 24 hours on the piss, followed by a gang-rape by some Serbian football hooligans.

Bresnan would have been a far better bet in these conditions than Finn who needs to go away and get some serious overs under his belt for Middlesex to get his rhythm back.

Brass Monkey wrote:Broad bowled very well for the most part - was decisive yesterday evening and didn't let the side down when the shit was flying.

Yes, I agree. Broad got rid of the two Aussie 'big guns' in Watson and Clarke yesterday and he bowled a couple of tight overs after Finn was taken off that were vital in regaining control.

The dot balls Broad bowled before lunch and Anderson after lunch helped build the pressure for the wicket. One of the reasons 2005 was such an incredible win was England had completely lost control in the field on that occasion, were hemorrhaging runs and it would only have taken another couple of balls before the game was lost. Aside from Finn all the bowlers kept control today (although i'm not quite sure how Swann didn't get collared more with all those half volleys)

Yeah, there was some serious filth in amongst Swann's shitload of overs. Incredible to think how well he was bowling a month ago - he looked an odds on threat in this series, in this match even. He stank it up superhumanly. His gibbering batting was a real disappointment. You wouldn't have thought he'd gotten near a ton not so long ago - albeit against a 2nd XI shit county side. Genuine tailend batting.

As Chiv said, he had the biggest overall shocker considering his stature.

But, going back to by far the worst - Finn, when was the last time he really impressed at Test level? He got a semi-permanent slot in the side sorted and regressed at a sharp old rate.

Hey Danny, do you actually row? Properly? Sliding seats and all?

No, I have hardly ever rowed (bar those awful machines) in my life. We were on benches. It was some thing for work - I didn't really even get the point of it. At least not the outcome of the 'races'. I didn't bother to even find out - unfortunately I could only think of the cricket.

Oh.

Guess the point was the Cherriteeeee.

Mind you, even the machines that all but kill you would have been preferable to watching the cricket today.

doctorspin wrote:

Mind you, even the machines that all but kill you would have been preferable to watching the cricket today.

It was just something that had to be watched. You know when you need to see to the horror involved with the impending result so as to drink in the full extent of the result's magnitude?

Deary me. I get up this  morning to headlines of "controversial finish". Farken bullshit. On the first non-technology-supported replay, I thought "shit, he's nicked that". And the technology clearly confirmed it shortly after.

And it was a peach from Jimmeh. Brilliant slower offcutter that foxed the gutsy Haddin to induce the inside edge.

Again, well done to England in a classic Test match. May the rest of the series match it.

Brass Monkey wrote:

doctorspin wrote:

Mind you, even the machines that all but kill you would have been preferable to watching the cricket today.

It was just something that had to be watched. You know when you need to see to the horror involved with the impending result so as to drink in the full extent of the result's magnitude?

So true, just like how you can't stop looking at the scene of some horrible accident.

I'll be honest though, I couldn't watch it. Just kept glancing at Cricinfo score.

doctorspin wrote:I'll be honest though, I couldn't watch it. Just kept glancing at Cricinfo score.

Wise man. I don't feel any better for watching large chunks of it. I think it was more relief than any kind of joy. Until I realised that we've beaten Australia in a live Test. I'm still not that used to it. Pleased moreso for Jimmah - who didn't deserve to be on the losing side. And deserved a 10fer.

Jimmaahhh! Is just of another universe now. And to think he was of Dello's "Anderson Cycle".

Re Finn- I suppose you can say that even he had a part to play in the victory with those two wickets in a row of Watson and Cowan late on day one. He was about half a millimetre from knocking over Michael Clarke for a hat trick as well.

Now that we've won here I think we'll take him into Lord's (where the slope seems to correct his flawed action).

doctorspin wrote:Jimmaahhh! Is just of another universe now. And to think he was of Dello's "Anderson Cycle".

Ah, I see you've got hold of that too. Well actually Dello was the indulgent one back then.

There still IS an Anderson cycle though. Sometimes he finds it hard to take wickets (like for the first half or so of Australia's second innings), other times he is likely to claim two, three or four quite rapidly. It's called being a Test fast bowler. Ask Dazzler Gough. Or indeed, ask Dale Steyn.

beamer wrote:So, how to solve the Finn conundrum? He's got all the raw materials, pace, bounce and wicket-taking ability. Still averages under 30 in Tests with not far short of 100 wickets. But for some reason he hasn't really developed as a bowler, a scattergun approach, unable to build pressure and in some cases like today an absolute liability. Is it just a case of try to manage him carefully and hope he matures into a real top class bowler over the next few years?

PeterCS wrote:Bring him in for dead rubbers.

If he hasn't got the nous not to keep bowling short pies on a pitch that offers no pace, it's his head that needs counselling, not his technique addressing.

Agree with both the above. He's got a central contract, so the powers that be must see the potential there.

So - in principle, nurture him the way the young Anderson was brought along ...... in the squad, practicing with the team etc etc. In practice, don't do what Fletcher did with Jimmy, ie don't radically remodel his natural action (but by all means iron out his faults) - do play him in dead rubber games where he's not under pressure ( unlike Anderson who found himself pitched against SA in T4 at 1-all (Jan 05) with his head all over the show. Don't play him half fit (Jimmy T1 & T2 in Aus 2006 having last played in March, then wonder why he's being smeared all around the park. Finally, do let him get overs under his belt with his county when there are no tests going on. If he's not played a full series, he won't need the rest.

I always said at the time that Duncan Fletcher was one of our best coaches for years - but his management of Jimmy Anderson was scandalous compared with his other bowlers. Five years after his departure, the record books prove beyond question that I was correct.

I don't want to see Steven Finn being treated the same way Jimmy was for another two or three years.

Hass wrote:Well, I haven't been on the forum today because I was too engrossed in the game.

Just wanted to leave my mark and say: test match cricket - is there anything better?

I wish we'd won and I can't believe we have lost yet another close match. But that's the way it goes.

Congratulations England. Onwards to Lord's!

Aye, Test Cricket at it's grousest..Congrats to England on the win , on balance the better side over the 4.5 days won. On the Australian side of things a good effort to push England despite the fragile batting and the battling effort on day 5, and for now at least seem to have produced another international standard player in Agar.

The important thing for the series (and cricket, esp Test cricket) is that this was a gripping match, very much closer than seemed likely even a month ago (because England looked unpredictable, shaky but Australia looked an absolute shambles) - with each side displaying two or three stars, a few striking individual performances and quite a few (of course too many) misses ....

in other words, it looks like it's going to be a memorable series, closely fought and exciting.


The fact that there was a generous admixture of roughage among the fare served up somehow just makes it more uncertain, more dramatic.