England v Australia, 2nd ODI, The Oval, 1 July, 2012

Brass Monkey wrote: I was talking about his fielding.

But you were thinking about his beauty. Don't say you weren't. We're all cool in here.

Anyway, he uglified himself by giving away a boundary with a dire leg-stump slower ball straight out of the Bresnan... Oh, he's taken a wicket.

Well done, Bres. You sexy f*cker.

Would be nice if this is the last time we see Bailey in our colours but evidently the brainless trust have installed him as T20 captain. What a joke!!

lardbucket wrote:

Terrible news about Cummins.

Cider. That should be his nickname. Anyone coined it yet? I'm having it...

The thing about Bailey is that he's taking up surplus balls, not gone off with the job and put pressure on all the remaining batsmen. Surely Arthur will f@@k him off. This will be a romp in the park for the poms. Even Punter in decline as he is couldn't be worse than effing Bailey.

Morgan has just dropped a sitter.

Morgan, dick. He better make up for it with his bat. Suppose it won't make that much difference to the total at this stage, although I make that 3 drops which has probably added more than a few runs to the total.

Red wrote:The thing about Bailey is that he's taking up surplus balls, not gone off with the job and put pressure on all the remaining batsmen. Surely Arthur will f@@k him off. This will be a romp in the park for the poms. Even Punter in decline as he is couldn't be worse than effing Bailey.

Morgan has just dropped a sitter.

Our specialty is not being able to chase 250.

vilkrang wrote:Morgan, dick. He better make up for it with his bat. Suppose it won't make that much difference to the total at this stage, although I make that 3 drops which has probably added more than a few runs to the total.

Three drops, 25 extras - sloppy as anything.

Now Brettles is raining sixes.

I really don't fancy England to chase 250+. So much stodge up the order - they'll fall way behind the rate and cock it up having a late slog.

Should be a doddle for England. Morgan has fielded terribly. Dernbach is pox.

Pretty terrible performance from England in the field. We should have kept Aus to 220.

Henry wrote:Pretty terrible performance from England in the field. We should have kept Aus to 220.

Take out the extras and the drops and they'd have been lucky to make 200.

Dello wrote:

vilkrang wrote:Morgan, dick. He better make up for it with his bat. Suppose it won't make that much difference to the total at this stage, although I make that 3 drops which has probably added more than a few runs to the total.

Three drops, 25 extras - sloppy as anything.

Now Brettles is raining sixes.

I really don't fancy England to chase 250+. So much stodge up the order - they'll fall way behind the rate and cock it up having a late slog.

The most consistent performer in cricket!!

Dello wrote:

But you were thinking about his beauty. Don't say you weren't. We're all cool in here.

.

Dashing chap. Really grown into his features. Good bones. Why, what's he want, a f*cking medal?

250 is gettable at the oval but we're not great at chasing down 250+ so 50/50 for me.

I just don't understand the selection of Dernbach and STILL playing Bres at 7. Surely the whole point of 5 bowlers is that you go for 5 because its your test attack and they are considered your best bowlers.

It kind of negates the whole point of doing it? You don't get the class bowler and you still have Bres one place too high.

Dickwads, that's why.

Then again, as the only other batsman in the squad is the utterly dickwad Johnny Bairstow, they might as well play the fifth bowler. Just not Dernbach as that fifth bowler.

He's had 15 ODIs now, and still can't go at less than sixes. 20 wickets @ nearly 40? Boy, they're really enamoured with his ability to bowl two or three different slower balls that are all useless.

JKLever wrote:250 is gettable at the oval but we're not great at chasing down 250+ so 50/50 for me.

I just don't understand the selection of Dernbach and STILL playing Bres at 7. Surely the whole point of 5 bowlers is that you go for 5 because its your test attack and they are considered your best bowlers.

It kind of negates the whole point of doing it? You don't get the class bowler and you still have Bres one place too high.

Dirtbag also bowled his full quota despite being our least economical bowler and Finn only bowled 9, despite being our best bowler today.

We really should have murdered Aus in this match but I agree with you that it's 50/50 as it is, particularly with the mental brain freeze we seem to have when chasing down 250 odd.

Hmm, for one thing, Finn's a nailed on certainty - Dernbach's not - they may as well have another look at a full 10 from him. I'd say he was unlucky, thought he bowled quite well without reward.

Wasn't Patel available?

I seem to have vague memories of England not being able to chase 250 down here 2 years ago. Didn't england collapse before Michael f'king Yardy of all people get a 50?

Patel? In place of whom? I mean, only Swann and Finn can be trusted for 10 cheapies and only Finn can be trusted for incision, so why bother with some fat, rolling dobber?

Brass Monkey wrote:Patel? In place of whom? I mean, only Swann and Finn can be trusted for 10 cheapies and only Finn can be trusted for incision, so why bother with some fat, rolling dobber?

As an extra bat I mean if we aren't going with our test attack.

They should play Meaker. He takes wickets, and surely can't be any more expensive than Bresnan and Dernbach.

JKLever wrote:

As an extra bat I mean if we aren't going with our test attack.

Our Test attack that, by and large, lost us the last WC?

Don't know.

Henry wrote:They should play Meaker. He takes wickets, and surely can't be any more expensive than Bresnan and Dernbach.

Aye, it was a toss up between him and Dernbach (being as they were both there this morning) - would've preferred Meaker by far. But saying that, I don't think Dirty bowled as badly as his figures suggest.

Brass Monkey wrote:

JKLever wrote:

As an extra bat I mean if we aren't going with our test attack.

Our Test attack that, by and large, lost us the last WC?

Don't know.

Probably illustrates it pretty well:

In recent times, I've sensed that maybe the bowling attack has started to believe their own hype a little bit. A few of them have taken their foot off the gas and are coasting. I've got a feeling South Africa will give them a wake up call.

They were under par against WI. But, it wasn't that long ago that the SubC was happening and it went damned well there.