England v Australia, 4th Test, Chester-Le-Street, 9-13 August, 2013

PeterCS wrote:
If you don't mind, I'd prefer to disobey that order and keep my goo where it comes from.

Keep your goo where it comes from: have you gone on a Chivalry abstinence pact with yourself?

Although giving Taylor a go at The Oval wouldn't be a bad thing either.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Gary 111 wrote:Whisper it quietly, but the forum knicker twins to the rescue once again...?

Oh yeah - Aus were completely demoralised after that massive 28 from Bairstow. Half of them are sucking their thumbs and calling for their blankie.

I haven't got any access to TV today, but this doesn't surprise me.

The 54 & 43 they added at Trent Bridge proved decisive in a tight game. The 144 at Lords saved England and trampled Oz in the dirt. Then the 66 run partnership here has brought England right into the game.

The knicker twins are averaging 76.75 when they bat together. All these runs have come at a crucial time and so Clarke's salty years are justified.

It's the knicker twin Ashes folks.

baggygreen wrote:Although giving Taylor a go at The Oval wouldn't be a bad thing either.

They'll have to go with Taylor seeing as he was on standby at Old Trafford, but I'd go with Ballance, personally. I'm hearing more and more people say he's the real deal.

Brass Monkey wrote:

PeterCS wrote:
If you don't mind, I'd prefer to disobey that order and keep my goo where it comes from.

Keep your goo where it comes from: have you gone on a Chivalry abstinence pact with yourself?

No, it's just that, after all these years, it's taking me time to get to love Ron to that extent.

500 runs for Bresnan. What a legend.

Poms get another 100 and I don't think even the most optimistic Aussie would expect them to be able to chase 300 in the 4th. Especially not one down already (lolWatto) and with the rest having the application of Skully on twitter.

Gary 111 wrote:
I haven't got any access to TV today, but this doesn't surprise me.

The 54 & 43 they added at Trent Bridge proved decisive in a tight game. The 144 at Lords saved England and trampled Oz in the dirt. Then the 66 run partnership here has brought England right into the game.

The knicker twins are averaging 76.75 when they bat together. All these runs have come at a crucial time and so Clarke's salty years are justified.

It's the knicker twin Ashes folks.

He's averaging 33 in the period you've pointed out. He's averaging 29 this series. Put whatever slant you want on that Gary, from Yorkshire, but he's not performing. He's a technical mash up. He's looked edgy throughout and he's fluked a score. He's looked consistently not up to it.

taipan wrote:500 runs for Bresnan. What a legend.

TBBL

Brass Monkey wrote:

Gary 111 wrote:
I haven't got any access to TV today, but this doesn't surprise me.

The 54 & 43 they added at Trent Bridge proved decisive in a tight game. The 144 at Lords saved England and trampled Oz in the dirt. Then the 66 run partnership here has brought England right into the game.

The knicker twins are averaging 76.75 when they bat together. All these runs have come at a crucial time and so Clarke's salty years are justified.

It's the knicker twin Ashes folks.

He's averaging 33 in the period you've pointed out. He's averaging 29 this series. Put whatever slant you want on that Gary, from Yorkshire, but he's not performing. He's a technical mash up. He's looked edgy throughout and he's fluked a score. He's looked consistently not up to it.

Today was the best he's looked all series. But he still got out for 28.

Henry wrote:
Today was the best he's looked all series. But he still got out for 28.

I thought he looked good while he was at the crease, for the most part, it's probably the best he's looked.

It's the welcome return of the Belfohl™.

What a thunderbollocked beauty - he's carried this flimsy batting line up all series.

Pitch looks pretty sedate once the new ball wears off, though. Think England have to find a way up and over 300 to really feel in a strong position.

Yeah, he needs to get past that troublesome 109 for us to get enough, I think! Maybe Prior will find some form at last to set them an imposing target.

If Clarke gets going then anything within reason is gettable. Might need more than one seamer to show up to defend 250 or even 300.

beamer wrote:Why was the impact an "umpire's call" when it was outside where a fourth stump would be?

taipan wrote:

beamer wrote:Why was the impact an "umpire's call" when it was outside where a fourth stump would be?

Also confused. Don't know what 3m has to do with it.

I may be mistaken, but once the ball has been intercepted beyond the 3 metre mark (from the stumps), the Hawkeye folks say there's too much guesswork involved for them to accurately predict the future path so, as in this instance, it's down to the umpire's judgement.

I reckon it all depends on the overhead conditions. The pitch will have deteriorated a little by the afternoon session, but if the sun is out it seems a whole lot easier to bat on. We'd want over 270 - if we're getting past that we've got something to defend.

Dello wrote:

beamer wrote:Why was the impact an "umpire's call" when it was outside where a fourth stump would be?

taipan wrote:

beamer wrote:Why was the impact an "umpire's call" when it was outside where a fourth stump would be?

Also confused. Don't know what 3m has to do with it.

I may be mistaken, but once the ball has been intercepted beyond the 3 metre mark (from the stumps), the Hawkeye folks say there's too much guesswork involved for them to accurately predict the future path so, as in this instance, it's down to the umpire's judgement.  

Yeah, but they gave the point of impact as umpire"s call. Either it hit outside the line or it didn't. The distance shouldn't matter.

I think that England have to somehow bat into the afternoon session.

Aust have pissed this away although Bell played the best innings I have ever seen from him.

WTF Clarke was doing with his fields and bowling changes today I will never know.

taipan wrote:

Dello wrote:

beamer wrote:Why was the impact an "umpire's call" when it was outside where a fourth stump would be?

taipan wrote:

beamer wrote:Why was the impact an "umpire's call" when it was outside where a fourth stump would be?

Also confused. Don't know what 3m has to do with it.

I may be mistaken, but once the ball has been intercepted beyond the 3 metre mark (from the stumps), the Hawkeye folks say there's too much guesswork involved for them to accurately predict the future path so, as in this instance, it's down to the umpire's judgement.  

Yeah, but they gave the point of impact as umpire"s call. Either it hit outside the line or it didn't. The distance shouldn't matter.

Especially as in this instance it was clearly well outside the line of the stumps.

Why did Siddle bowl so little? 12 overs, wasn't it?

Are they resting him for the Oval Test?

He's only bowled 30 out of 166 overs in this match for Australia. Their best bowler. Madness.

JGK wrote:Aust have pissed this away although Bell played the best innings I have ever seen from him.

WTF Clarke was doing with his fields and bowling changes today I will never know.

Chappelli thinks Clarke is a genius at field settings.

I think this pitch will be tricky in the 4th innings.  Did you see that ball that Lyon pitched outside the right handers leg stump?  It ragged out of the rough and flew for four byes.  The Australian left handers and going to find Swann a real handful.

If we can scrape together another 80 - 100 runs I think we'll win comfortably.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Gary 111 wrote:
I haven't got any access to TV today, but this doesn't surprise me.

The 54 & 43 they added at Trent Bridge proved decisive in a tight game. The 144 at Lords saved England and trampled Oz in the dirt. Then the 66 run partnership here has brought England right into the game.

The knicker twins are averaging 76.75 when they bat together. All these runs have come at a crucial time and so Clarke's salty years are justified.

It's the knicker twin Ashes folks.

He's averaging 33 in the period you've pointed out. He's averaging 29 this series. Put whatever slant you want on that Gary, from Yorkshire, but he's not performing. He's a technical mash up. He's looked edgy throughout and he's fluked a score. He's looked consistently not up to it.

It's only when the two knickers are aligned that you get the full power. The Australians have been unable to penetrate until its much too late.

Neil D wrote:I think this pitch will be tricky in the 4th innings.  Did you see that ball that Lyon pitched outside the right handers leg stump?  It ragged out of the rough and flew for four byes.  The Australian left haners and going to find Swann a real handful.

If we can scrape together another 80 - 100 runs I think we'll win comfortably.

Actually, on replay, Lyon ragged that one off the straight. Was a bit of a freak, though. Mostly there was little turn.

Dello wrote:Why did Siddle bowl so little? 12 overs, wasn't it?

Are they resting him for the Oval Test?

He's only bowled 30 out of 166 overs in this match for Australia. Their best bowler. Madness.

I've been finding this whole making him second change thing quite startling.