Re: England v India, 2nd Test, Trent Bridge, 29 Jul-2 Aug, 2011

by furriner Mon 01 Aug 2011, 21:45

Brass Monkey wrote:
Dello wrote:
India have turned up with excuses, but not much else. And that's a real shame.

Yeah, it's a big shame. There will always be a footnote under this series and England are damned if they do and damned if they don't. If Sehwag turns up and gets rolled then he's out of practice, if he flays us about then this is what they've been missing. If Zaheer plays and doesn't take wickets then he's not fully fit. If he takes wickets then that's what they've been missing. Gambhir? Well, as I've already highlighted he's hardly made any runs in 18 months absolutely no biggedy whatsoever. One could argue that Dravid up top and Yuvraj down the order did better than Gambhir could've dreamed of.

Why second guess yourselves? I wouldn't have had we won and your players were missing.

Look at the scoreboard. Only losers talk of 'what ifs'.

by Brass Monkey Mon 01 Aug 2011, 21:48

Yeah, but f'rinstance 2005 wouldn't have been as good had Warne & Hayden not played etc. It's not as good in some ways.

by Guest Mon 01 Aug 2011, 21:52

Trott was essentially out in our second innings, we didn't have Tremlett. Both teams have injury problems.

Having said that I hope Sehwag plays the next test.

by Yorkie Jill Mon 01 Aug 2011, 21:56

Brass Monkey wrote:
Dello wrote:Although if he just threw in a "three, f*cking three" homage into his performances, I would certainly be willing to reconsider my position.

Yeah, though, I mean - he used to romp up the century celebrations - people love to splurge bile about KP's celebrations, never heard them talk about Nass that way.

well he only got 14 in 171 test innings'. Pietersen already has 18 in 40 fewer attempts.

romp? yes sir! England v India, 2nd Test, Trent Bridge, 29 Jul-2 Aug, 2011 - Page 31 Nass_l10

England v India, 2nd Test, Trent Bridge, 29 Jul-2 Aug, 2011 - Page 31 Nass_l10

by PeterCS Mon 01 Aug 2011, 21:58

No self-respecting male would tuck his bat the other way by his hip while in that position.

by Brass Monkey Mon 01 Aug 2011, 21:59

Yorkie Jill wrote:
well he only got 14 in 171 test innings'. Pietersen already has 18 in 40 fewer attempts.

Aye, well he had Venkat saw him off about (literally) 15 times, he was probably celebrating that there hadn't been any sort of LBW shouts against him.

by PeterCS Mon 01 Aug 2011, 22:00

14 in 171 is not all that bad. Could have done with a few more 80s though.

by Brass Monkey Mon 01 Aug 2011, 22:00

vilkrang wrote:Trott's was essentially out in our second innings, we didn't have Tremlett. Both teams have injury problems.

Having said that I hope Sehwag plays the next test.

True. True. No, yeah, I hope they're all back. All of them. Fatty 1 & 2 and 'gonna be fatty 3' as well.

by skully Mon 01 Aug 2011, 22:02

Congrats to Engulund. Outstanding win after a very wobbly start to the Test.

Fat Brezzy Lad certainly didn't let his supporters down. Very Happy

by Guest Mon 01 Aug 2011, 22:05

skully wrote:Congrats to Engulund. Outstanding win after a very wobbly start to the Test.

It's one of the more remarkable turnarounds I can ever remember seeing in test cricket actually. We were looking dead and buried in our first innings at 124-8 and when India had a lead of 50 odd with only 4 wickets down it looked like we were going to get a sound thrashing. To absolutely batter them from the position we were in is quite stunning.

by LeFromage Mon 01 Aug 2011, 22:06

That it is.

England never win from a crap start. They're the comeback opposite of kings.

Great front runners, lousy losers.

by Yorkie Jill Mon 01 Aug 2011, 22:08

Brass Monkey wrote:
Yorkie Jill wrote:
well he only got 14 in 171 test innings'. Pietersen already has 18 in 40 fewer attempts.

Aye, well he had Venkat saw him off about (literally) 15 times, he was probably celebrating that there hadn't been any sort of LBW shouts against him.

Each celebration was relief at good umping. Probably definitely whilst on the sub-cont.

PeterCS wrote:14 in 171 is not all that bad. Could have done with a few more 80s though.

S'good, I just meant in comparison to Pietersen who already has more in fewer but celebrates rompishly, as did Nass.

Anyhoo, good win all round. Lots of romping to be done. If only Brez could lose the unfair fat tag, all would be well!

by Brass Monkey Mon 01 Aug 2011, 22:09

Can I just be an absolute shithead one more time? Well it's not the last time but anyway... isn't it incredibly abject to lose a Test from that position? Like, horrendously unprofessional?

by PeterCS Mon 01 Aug 2011, 22:13

(sh)it happens.

Someone has to win, another schmuck loses, as they said in the Godfather. Or should have.

It's sport.

That's life.

No big deal.

Comes with the territory.

Rise and shine. Move on.

by Brass Monkey Mon 01 Aug 2011, 22:14

Move on? Who the f*ck are you... merlin?

by PeterCS Mon 01 Aug 2011, 22:28

I am actually.

I am an ex-egg'n'bacon man who flies the red duster, hates pinkos with a passion and sings England ueber alles.

Alternatively, I might be shooting the breeze with nauseating cliche's, and watching in bemusement as people with their mouths agog catch flies ....

by Yorkie Jill Mon 01 Aug 2011, 22:33

Brass Monkey wrote:Can I just be an absolute shithead one more time? Well it's not the last time but anyway... isn't it incredibly abject to lose a Test from that position? Like, horrendously unprofessional?

When did England last do it, stattos? When did India, for that matter?

by Zat Mon 01 Aug 2011, 22:56

taipan wrote:
Red wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/14359723.stm

Bell calls himself an idiot and naive but I wonder if this is just another byproduct of the whole tv replays thing. In the past players would play something to the death but you get the sense that Bell either thought it was four or that they would be standing by for a replay, in which case a run out surely couldn't have been effected.Dhoni did the right thing by the spirit of the game but Bell was lucky in some ways to get a reprieve after that stupid presumption.

And if the ball had been in the middle of the over?

I doubt Bell would have been runnning off the ground for the tea break in the middle of an over.

by LeFromage Mon 01 Aug 2011, 22:59

Yorkie Jill wrote:
Brass Monkey wrote:Can I just be an absolute shithead one more time? Well it's not the last time but anyway... isn't it incredibly abject to lose a Test from that position? Like, horrendously unprofessional?

When did England last do it, stattos? When did India, for that matter?

Perth, 3rd Ashes Test, t'other day.

Aussies batting first: 69/5, 137/6, 189/7.

England lost by 267 runs. Good effort, that.

by LeFromage Mon 01 Aug 2011, 23:01

Zat wrote:
taipan wrote:
Red wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/14359723.stm

Bell calls himself an idiot and naive but I wonder if this is just another byproduct of the whole tv replays thing. In the past players would play something to the death but you get the sense that Bell either thought it was four or that they would be standing by for a replay, in which case a run out surely couldn't have been effected.Dhoni did the right thing by the spirit of the game but Bell was lucky in some ways to get a reprieve after that stupid presumption.

And if the ball had been in the middle of the over?
I doubt Bell would have been runnning off the ground for the tea break in the middle of an over.

The form he's in, I wouldn't discount the Belfohl™ from doing anything.

India probably called him back because they just wanted to watch him bat some more.

by LeFromage Mon 01 Aug 2011, 23:09

Dello wrote:
Yorkie Jill wrote:
Brass Monkey wrote:Can I just be an absolute shithead one more time? Well it's not the last time but anyway... isn't it incredibly abject to lose a Test from that position? Like, horrendously unprofessional?

When did England last do it, stattos? When did India, for that matter?

Perth, 3rd Ashes Test, t'other day.

Aussies batting first: 69/5, 137/6, 189/7.

England lost by 267 runs. Good effort, that.

Eng vs Sri Lanka, 3rd Test, Trent Bridge 2006.

SL batting first: 129/7, 139/8, 169/9

England lost by 134 runs. Magical effort, that.

by LeFromage Mon 01 Aug 2011, 23:13

Dello wrote:
Dello wrote:
Yorkie Jill wrote:
Brass Monkey wrote:Can I just be an absolute shithead one more time? Well it's not the last time but anyway... isn't it incredibly abject to lose a Test from that position? Like, horrendously unprofessional?

When did England last do it, stattos? When did India, for that matter?

Perth, 3rd Ashes Test, t'other day.

Aussies batting first: 69/5, 137/6, 189/7.

England lost by 267 runs. Good effort, that.

Eng vs Sri Lanka, 3rd Test, Trent Bridge 2006.

SL batting first: 129/7, 139/8, 169/9

England lost by 134 runs. Magical effort, that.

Eng vs Aus, 1st Test, Lord's, 2005

Aus batting first: 126/6, 178/9

England lost by 239 runs (in about three days). Outstanding.

by Gary 111 Mon 01 Aug 2011, 23:24

Eng vs Aus, The ground that shall not be named

Eng: 551 for 6 declared

Aus: 65 for 3

England lost by 6 wickets

Eng vs Sri Lanka, Trent Bridge

Sri Lanka batting first: 139/8

England lost by 134 runs

by Henry Mon 01 Aug 2011, 23:28

Dello wrote:
Brass Monkey wrote:
Allan D wrote:
Very much doubt it - only 2 draws needed after this match for England to go top of the Test rankings. Bopara will replace Trott though he will bat at 6 with Bell staying at 3.

Gadzooks! I'd prefer Bresnan. He's a better batsman for a start.

You know who's fit and playing again and would look bloody handsome at number six and turning his arm over here and there: Benjamin of Stokes.

Too soon? Maybe. But given that England's batting goes to 10 and India's bowling has as much cutting edge as a sponge cake, is it so crazy...?

It'll be Flopara, obviously, but that doesn't make it right.

I suggested Stokes as soon as Trott's participation in the next test became in doubt.

by LeFromage Mon 01 Aug 2011, 23:30

Henry wrote:
Dello wrote:
Brass Monkey wrote:
Allan D wrote:
Very much doubt it - only 2 draws needed after this match for England to go top of the Test rankings. Bopara will replace Trott though he will bat at 6 with Bell staying at 3.

Gadzooks! I'd prefer Bresnan. He's a better batsman for a start.

You know who's fit and playing again and would look bloody handsome at number six and turning his arm over here and there: Benjamin of Stokes.

Too soon? Maybe. But given that England's batting goes to 10 and India's bowling has as much cutting edge as a sponge cake, is it so crazy...?

It'll be Flopara, obviously, but that doesn't make it right.

I suggested Stokes as soon as Trott's participation in the next test became in doubt.

I know. I've since had a rethink based entirely on that revelation.

by Sponsored content