England v South Africa, 1st Test, Lord's 10-14 July (II)

skully wrote:Aye. We still talk fondly about that night to this day. It were under the Sydney Harbour Bridge on a loverly moonlit night.

Mate, that sounds awesome - nothing like mine. We were sitting on my bed when she comes up with 'there's something I want to know'.

I wish I'd planned something.

Brass Monkey wrote:

skully wrote:Aye. We still talk fondly about that night to this day. It were under the Sydney Harbour Bridge on a loverly moonlit night.

Mate, that sounds awesome - nothing like mine. We were sitting on my bed when she comes up with 'there's something I want to know'.

I wish I'd planned something.

Is there a ring involved?

Demelza wrote:
Is there a ring involved?

No. I don't wear rings. I hadn't even planned to get her one yet, so it was a little strange.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Demelza wrote:
Is there a ring involved?

No. I don't wear rings.

What, not even hers? Not even once to see what it's like?

holcs wrote:You know whats going to happen......

Flintoff back. Prior to bat @ 6!!!!!!!

If that gets us back to a 5 man bowling attack then thats a good thing.

Geoffrey Trueman wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:

Demelza wrote:
Is there a ring involved?

No. I don't wear rings.

What, not even hers? Not even once to see what it's like?

Oi, a bit of decorum, please. Tis a day of special occasion for Lucky Pierre.

Geoffrey Trueman wrote:
What, not even hers? Not even once to see what it's like?

There was a disastrous attempt one time. Even the mention of it doesn't go down too well.

skully wrote:
Oi, a bit of decorum, please. Tis a day of special occasion for Lucky Pierre.

As they say skulls: "Up the bum, no harm done".

Ian Bell is finally cementing a place, silencing the doubters and putting a lot of egg of some faces of people on this forum.

Once again though he has failed in the bullshit analysis mentioned on the forum of scoring the 1st century in the side. Not so easy to do coming in at 5 of course. You have to succeed and the 4 players in advance of you have to fail.

How about The Fluoride Treatment? Got to be worth a go.

Anyway, back to the cricket. Young Master Bell marches on, now at 160. Welcome to real Test Cricket Dale Steyn 1-116 off 32.

THICKEDGE wrote:
Once again though he has failed in the bullshit analysis mentioned on the forum of scoring the 1st century in the side. Not so easy to do coming in at 5 of course. You have to succeed and the 4 players in advance of you have to fail.

Pointed that out, no-one listened. Often at 6 too.

THICKEDGE wrote:
Once again though he has failed in the bullshit analysis mentioned on the forum of scoring the 1st century in the side. Not so easy to do coming in at 5 of course. You have to succeed and the 4 players in advance of you have to fail.

Thicks, I think the allusion is that we're usually already going great guns when he gets to the crease. Obviously this wasn't the case this time.

skully wrote:Anyway, back to the cricket. Young Master Bell marches on, now at 160. Welcome to real Test Cricket Dale Steyn 1-116 off 32.

Yeah, he has done better in worse bowling conditions against more in form batsmen than this before now. Though, I do think we play pace pretty well.

Oo, we are getting up into trivia territory here. Give Jackie a bowl. Currently 3 Saffie bowlers have conceded over 100 runs. Harris has 95 against his name and Jackie has a conservative 70. It is not often that 5 bowlers have conceded 100 runs in the one innings.

Huzzah, Harris is now in the 100-runs-conceded club. Chuck the ball to Jackie, FFS.

FFS, 100 run partnership between Bell and Broad. How deflated have the Yarps become.

skully wrote:Huzzah, Harris is now in the 100-runs-conceded club. Chuck the ball to Jackie, FFS.

Before this game Harris was averaging 30 with the ball. Having not seen him before I can't imagine how that was possible?

He doesn't seem to spin it...

THICKEDGE wrote:

skully wrote:Huzzah, Harris is now in the 100-runs-conceded club. Chuck the ball to Jackie, FFS.

Before this game Harris was averaging 30 with the ball. Having not seen him before I can't imagine how that was possible?

He doesn't seem to spin it...

Aye. He looks tosh from what I've seen.

Yeah, can't understand how Harris has managed to get any wickets. That said, flat pitch, second day, good batting. Perhaps we're being harsh.

So this Broad chappie, makings of an allrounder then?

Consecutive Test 50s for the son-of-Chris. Well played.

skully wrote:So this Broad chappie, makings of an allrounder then?

Nope. He can't bowl.

re: Harris - gets grip and bounce.

Yep, we've got a marvellous little talent on our hands in this fella. As soon as someone tells him to bowl a fuller length in Tests, who knows what he'll become. He's probably got a level of talent that's up there with the Fredster.

Steady now. Fred = God.