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

JKLever wrote:

Merlin wrote:

JKLever wrote:Eng 5.7
Saf 230.00

Draw 1.21

Pretty sporting odds for England.
Think I might have me a piece when Laddies open at 10,
before the Jaarpies lose Amla and Kallis in the first hour!

Weather's set fair for the day.

We need a minimum 3 wickets in the morning session to leave them trailing still and 4 down overall by lunch...

If we haven't knocked anyone over by lunch or just taken the 1 wicket it could match yesterdays turgid play.

Aye. Need to get a couple of quick wickets otherwise game is dead!!

JKLever wrote:

Merlin wrote:

JKLever wrote:Eng 5.7
Saf 230.00

Draw 1.21

Pretty sporting odds for England.
Think I might have me a piece when Laddies open at 10,
before the Jaarpies lose Amla and Kallis in the first hour!

Weather's set fair for the day.

We need a minimum 3 wickets in the morning session to leave them trailing still and 4 down overall by lunch...

If we haven't knocked anyone over by lunch or just taken the 1 wicket it could match yesterdays turgid play.

IMHO turgid is a tad unfair.

It was solid test match batting trying to save the match.

taipan wrote:

JKLever wrote:

Merlin wrote:

JKLever wrote:Eng 5.7
Saf 230.00

Draw 1.21

Pretty sporting odds for England.
Think I might have me a piece when Laddies open at 10,
before the Jaarpies lose Amla and Kallis in the first hour!

Weather's set fair for the day.

We need a minimum 3 wickets in the morning session to leave them trailing still and 4 down overall by lunch...

If we haven't knocked anyone over by lunch or just taken the 1 wicket it could match yesterdays turgid play.

IMHO turgid is a tad unfair.

It was solid test match batting trying to save the match.

No - it was great batting when you were under the cosh - just farkin turgid viewing. And I only watched the highlights!

JKLever wrote:

taipan wrote:

JKLever wrote:

Merlin wrote:

JKLever wrote:Eng 5.7
Saf 230.00

Draw 1.21

Pretty sporting odds for England.
Think I might have me a piece when Laddies open at 10,
before the Jaarpies lose Amla and Kallis in the first hour!

Weather's set fair for the day.

We need a minimum 3 wickets in the morning session to leave them trailing still and 4 down overall by lunch...

If we haven't knocked anyone over by lunch or just taken the 1 wicket it could match yesterdays turgid play.

IMHO turgid is a tad unfair.

It was solid test match batting trying to save the match.

No - it was great batting when you were under the cosh - just farkin turgid viewing. And I only watched the highlights!

No, it was absorbing viewing.

Can't blame the batsmen for the negative bowling.

I'm sure it was from your perspective!

JKLever wrote:I'm sure it was from your perspective!

Yep I remember Athers great knock at the Wanderer's. I hated every moment of it but still had to acknowledge that it was one of the top knocks of all time.

Aye ... have to admit that an excessive indigestable diet of T20 and meaningless ODI's tend to distract from the importance (and dourness) of long, concentrated knocks when one side attempt, against all odds, to save a game.

Test cricket at its best.

Monty off.

On a side note for this game.

Looks like the Saffa first innings was the usual aboration when a side gets a big first innings score.

The pitch has been very slow and generally very flat the whole game here.

abhorration?

PeterCS wrote:abhorration?

And. I can't spell. Your problem?

McKenzie's return to Test cricket has been outstanding. Does anyone have his figures?

JGK wrote:McKenzie's return to Test cricket has been outstanding. Does anyone have his figures?

792 runs @ 88 incl. this innings with 3 tons. Although one of them was a double v the Bangers.

holcs wrote:

PeterCS wrote:abhorration?

And. I can't spell. Your problem?

I was seeking clarification. ~ Abortion?

PearlJ wrote:

JGK wrote:McKenzie's return to Test cricket has been outstanding. Does anyone have his figures?

792 runs @ 88 incl. this innings with 3 tons. Although one of them was a double v the Bangers.

Also big hundreds against us and India in India!

Was listening to Pollock yesterday who was saying its not the technique that has changed but his mindset!

I feel sorry for those who've bought tickets today!

Joisus... Zzzzzzzzzzzz

Perfect pitch for a timeless test.

holcs wrote:On a side note for this game.

Looks like the Saffa first innings was the usual aboration when a side gets a big first innings score.

The pitch has been very slow and generally very flat the whole game here.

Aye, similar to Englands collapse to 99-5 following Laras 400 in Antigua.

JKLever wrote:

holcs wrote:On a side note for this game.

Looks like the Saffa first innings was the usual aboration when a side gets a big first innings score.

The pitch has been very slow and generally very flat the whole game here.

Aye, similar to Englands collapse to 99-5 following Laras 400 in Antigua.

Exactly, tends to be the way.

Don't think Smith got the toss wrong at all, just think his bowlers let him down horribly and then were facing an uphill battle, combine that with some good batting after tea on the first day, and he's been stuffed by his own boys really.

Test should be a draw now, and I can see SA, being alot better for their experiences and the pitches they have coming up.

Aye, though the pitch would be taken out of the equation if England could get any swing but even that's pretty non existant.

What time do you think Vaughan turns to his part timers so that his bowlers are rested up? Mid -session after lunch I reckon...

holcs wrote:
Don't think Smith got the toss wrong at all, just think his bowlers let him down horribly and then were facing an uphill battle, combine that with some good batting after tea on the first day, and he's been stuffed by his own boys really.

Exactly my views.

Of course he got the toss wrong FFS. Win the toss, bat first. That's what you do.

”When you win the toss - bat. If you are in doubt, think about it, then bat. If you have very big doubts, consult a colleague - then bat.”

PearlJ wrote:Of course he got the toss wrong FFS. Win the toss, bat first. That's what you do.

”When you win the toss - bat. If you are in doubt, think about it, then bat. If you have very big doubts, consult a colleague - then bat.”

Some might also look at the stats. Normally you would bat first, unforunately in the 17 tests played at Lords this decade, 9 have been won by the team bowling first and only 3 by the team batting first.

taipan wrote:

PearlJ wrote:Of course he got the toss wrong FFS. Win the toss, bat first. That's what you do.

”When you win the toss - bat. If you are in doubt, think about it, then bat. If you have very big doubts, consult a colleague - then bat.”

Some might also look at the stats. Normally you would bat first, unforunately in the 17 tests played at Lords this decade, 9 have been won by the team bowling first and only 3 by the team batting first.

So? That shouldn't have had bearing on whether he batted first.
If the pitch is flat and you win the toss, you bat first. Simple as that.

And if you win the toss and field and the other team rack up 593-8d then it's the wrong decision,.

PearlJ wrote:

taipan wrote:

PearlJ wrote:Of course he got the toss wrong FFS. Win the toss, bat first. That's what you do.

”When you win the toss - bat. If you are in doubt, think about it, then bat. If you have very big doubts, consult a colleague - then bat.”

Some might also look at the stats. Normally you would bat first, unforunately in the 17 tests played at Lords this decade, 9 have been won by the team bowling first and only 3 by the team batting first.

So? That shouldn't have had bearing on whether he batted first.
If the pitch is flat and you win the toss, you bat first. Simple as that.

And if you win the toss and field and the other team rack up 593-8d then it's the wrong decision,.

The perceived wisdom is that the ball would swing. It didn't and his bowlers let him down.

Hindsight is an exact science that you have clearly mastered.

AT LAST!