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

Brass Monkey wrote:

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.

You just don't understand Clarke's genius. You are a mere mortal.

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.

With the seam movement I would have thought this pitch would have suited him too.

When he came over here in 2009 he was a new ball bowler. Now they don't seem to trust him with the new nut, and prefer a one wicket per Test crock like Watson to bowl the key spells. He's taken 2 wickets all series - it isn't working.

Brass Monkey wrote:

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.

It's all to do with the backward Aussie attitude to vegans. "He ain't a proper cobber, he don't eat meat?" (The question mark is there to make sure you get right inflection when you say it in an incredulous Aussie accent)

Gary 111 wrote:

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.

With the seam movement I would have thought this pitch would have suited him too.

When he came over here in 2009 he was a new ball bowler. Now they don't seem to trust him with the new nut, and prefer a one wicket per Test crock like Watson to bowl the key spells. He's taken 2 wickets all series - it isn't working.

Maybe Clarke hates Watson so much that he's willing to forfeit the series by bowling him until he snaps rather than actually trying to take wickets with a proper bowler.

Regarding Watson, Mickey Arthur is looking like a genius ATM - Lehmann sticks him up to open and he does shit, he has some batting success at #6. Lehmann allows him to bowl again and he breaks down.

eowyn wrote:
It's all to do with the backward Aussie attitude to vegans. "He ain't a proper cobber, he don't eat meat?" (The question mark is there to make sure you get right inflection when you say it in an incredulous Aussie accent)

It's good - but it doesn't sound genuine without an 'Aww, look mate' prefixed to it.

Anyways, What a wonderful innings by Bell. This is almost getting silly, isn't it? Turned out he'd been saving up all his match turning tons for the age of 31.

The balance, poise, range of strokes, ability to adapt to different wickets... is it too late for Bell to step up a level and become the eminent player of this England generation?

Gary 111 wrote:Anyways, What a wonderful innings by Bell. This is almost getting silly, isn't it? Turned out he'd been saving up all his match turning tons for the age of 31.

The balance, poise, range of strokes, ability to adapt to different wickets...  is it too late for Bell to step up a level and become the eminent player of this England generation?

He's in the form of his life.

™

Well, at this rate he could end up averaging higher than KP, Cook or Trott. On the other hand, it might be a case of "same old Bell" in a year's time...

Hmmm, 3-49 just after Lunch, ay? 5-234 at Stumps, ay? Belfohl™ 105*, ay?

That's pretty farked, ay? Thank fark my early rising had me asleep by 10.30 pm Sydney time (lunch in the cricket).

With Prior and the strong tail still to come, Aus will be chasing 300+. No farken chance.

Or is this wicket getting easier to bat on?

lardbucket wrote:Stats and search-and-destroy merchants ... what was the most recent occasion when someone older than Rogers made a debut Test ton?

I'm not necessarily asking about an Aussie, as I've now heard that the only older Aussie to make a debut ton in Tests was Arthur Richardson, who was 37 when he made his ton back in the 30s. I was wondering about this question last night on the match thread, not long before Rogers got there. Symcox came to mind, but I'm not sure how to pursue the answer.

Previous older player was Kumble when he made 110* at The Oval in 2007. See here: Oldest players to make a maiden Test hundred

skully wrote:Hmmm, 3-49 just after Lunch, ay? 5-234 at Stumps, ay? Belfohl™ 105*, ay?

That's pretty farked, ay? Thank fark my early rising had me asleep by 10.30 pm Sydney time (lunch in the cricket).

With Prior and the strong tail still to come, Aus will be chasing 300+. No farken chance.

Or is this wicket getting easier to bat on?

O ye of little faith but with Watto karked you may be right, Skulls.

Bell's shown he can do the 'hundred when the chips are down'. Now I want to see a KP style signature daddy innings. 171* should do it.

Skuller, the pitch is still seaming and there is variable bounce and increasing turn. The ball continues to seam up until 35-40 overs then life gets a little easier.

200 is competitive, 300 should be enough, but I want to see Bell take us to 350+, then this really would be his Ashes.

On the other hand, if Aus get a similar start to England on Day 3 they could be hitting the winning runs just after tea.

Brass Monkey wrote:

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.

Yep, definitely a better player when he's going for his shots - unlucky to get a ball from Lyon that bounced.

Is it me or did Prior wince with pain when he caught Rogers - I'm assuming that's not serious as I can't find a mention of it anywhere.

And while I'm on the subject - If Watto has gone in the groin, this could be his last test.

-------

http://www.flamingbails.com/viewtopic.forum?t=14214