Australia v England, 1st Test, Brisbane, 21-25 November, 2013

embee wrote:Furry is always good for dodgy links ...and he used to live in the US

The links aren't a problem. I want to watch it on tv preferably live.

It looks like Prior will be fit.

Henry wrote:It looks like Prior will be fit.

good to see a wicketkeeper being allowed to play

JGK wrote:Big question - will Lardy make a reappearance for the First Test?

He'll be at Day 1 so maybe we might get an after-play update.

wonder if the joint will be deluged in pomgolian hubris in the next week....maybe jkl will return

Might be a lively deck. Plenty of rain up Norf this week.

not as much as wot lands in essex...according to St lever's letter to the Essesians...

but yep.....shd be a very lively deck after all this rain...wonder if they might drop nemo for fork...nemo has been in the dailies bigging up his record at the gabbattoir

HTF are England 3.45 on Betfair and Aust only 2.8?

Collingwood supporters are backing Australia?

JGK wrote:HTF are England 3.45 on Betfair and Aust only 2.8?

Oz havent lost at Brisbane since Nov 1986 ...I'd be backing the draw if Oz is to maintain that record

JGK wrote:HTF are England 3.45 on Betfair and Aust only 2.8?

Historically Brisbane's a graveyard for England.
Oz have won 61 percent of their matches there as opposed to England's 18 percent (according to Sunday's Das Telegraf)

When was the last time England won the first Test of an away series?

Australia justifiable favourites, I'd have thought.

Dello wrote:When was the last time England won the first Test of an away series?

Australia justifiable favourites, I'd have thought.

I'm thinking it's SA 04/05. If you exclude minnow types. As you say, Aus are rightfully favourites.

p.s. May as well get this Rikki'd now? Shucks, there's no reason not to.

Oz sure to win this one. Maybe by an innings. And 250.

PeterCS wrote:Oz sure to win this one. Maybe by an innings. And 250.

Your head up in the clouds Petey . . . or is it "elsewhere" ??!

Merlin wrote:Your head up in the clouds Petey  . . . or is it "elsewhere" ??!

Peter thinks that if you make an honest prediction about your team's chances in an upcoming team, he'd better say that you're trying to reverse woof. It's a strange rationale. For him, you shouldn't try to judge your team's chances, you should just let it happen.

A bookie was on tonight and said Australia's odds had to shorten because of the flood of money for the hosts. Weather looking ordinary which has meant the draw is now attracting a lot of interest.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Merlin wrote:Your head up in the clouds Petey  . . . or is it "elsewhere" ??!

Peter thinks that if you make an honest prediction about your team's chances in an upcoming team, he'd better say that you're trying to reverse woof. It's a strange rationale. For him, you shouldn't try to judge your team's chances, you should just let it happen.

This may need a translation.


Actually, it's more that straight talk is very quickly done, and generally also flat.

And second, the real possibilities are generally a lot more open than any plain, cocksure sentence.


So the ironic, subacid or droll layers of conversation might as well reflect that greater unpredictability.

Just a view, I know.

Brass Monkey wrote:p.s. May as well get this Rikki'd now? Shucks, there's no reason not to.

Cheese needs its rest too.

PeterCS wrote:This may need a translation.


Actually, it's more that straight talk is very quickly done, and generally also flat.

And second, the real possibilities are generally a lot more open than any plain, cocksure sentence.


So the ironic, subacid or droll layers of conversation might as well reflect that greater unpredictability.

Just a view, I know.

People have taken into account Australia's record at the ground, the fact that England are very poor starters to the series, the fact that England were hardly ascendant on the truer pitches in the last series and drew the conclusion that the odds were hardly outlandish - and that warrants such a glib response? I feel I'm in disagreement with you.

That's fine.

It would be a dull forum if we were all of one mind and it were simple, like.




Let's see what happens, though.

And I'd have to disagree with you on one thing.

'Glib' generally seeks to close down dialogue. I prefer Bails to be wide open.

PeterCS wrote:And I'd have to disagree with you on one thing.

'Glib' generally seeks to close down dialogue. I prefer Bails to be wide open.

I viewed it as quite the opposite.

Well, in that case I'm afraid I'd just have to contradict you.