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

Is that a clump-fisted typing of Falkirk?

You should issue a visual health warning before you post effects like that.

Alec Stewart:

Ian Bell: 9.5. I may be his biggest fan and also his harshest critic as I rate him so highly. From ball one, he dominated and played in a most assured way. No-one can now doubt his value to the side.
(Following on from previous responses to my blogs, I would like you all to know that I write this as a neutral observer for the BBC and never take into account my position as a shareholder in a sports management company whose clients include Bell, Paul Collingwood and Matt Prior)

Paul Collingwood: 6. Have to give him a par performance mark as an appalling umpiring decision did not allow him to contribute with the bat when he knew he had to perform with the return of Andrew Flintoff imminent.

Tim Ambrose: 3.5. Failed with the bat again, but apart from dropping Smith off Pietersen kept wicket tidily with good concentration. He must be aware he needs to offer more if he is to secure his place.

Uh huh...

PeterCS wrote:You should issue a visual health warning before you post effects like that.

And give people who don't have broadband a heads-up that you're posting a bytes-heavy graphic.

Heads up:

Spoiler:

Dello wrote:Is that a clump-fisted typing of Falkirk?

I've been to both and Falkirk just shades it!

Why give South Africa any credit at all? they just banged a rusty little nail into the big old coffin lid of test cricket. If I saw Mckenzie in the street I'd smack the little runt for ruining my Sunday at the test match. You can block out the odd session or two in context but in these days of high ticket prices and intense media coverage you've got to remember you're in the entertainment business. That was just turgid sh*t on a featherbed - and I'm meant to be an aficionado of the longer game.

He has surpassed Jeetan Patel in the entitely rational hatred stakes for me. C*nt.


Anyway discovered a new test match game thanks to the super crab- guess which fielder the batsmen will block the ball to next? I know it doesn't sound much fun but fair play to him, he blocked it all over the place- gully, mid-off, mid-wicket, square leg and of course lots of the leave (sometimes the full monty, sometimes the play inside the line). I remember whooping with delight when he nailed one to Cook at mid-wicket. There's a real art to it. Try it next time you're sentenced to a day of bloody minded South African blocking.

Some people don't know they're born! Up to the advent of Packer, the scoring rate in test cricket was no better than we have witnessed for the last two days. A sustained rate of 3+ runs per over was rare.

S.A. had a game to save: it was a case of job done, no more no less.

I've watched test cricket for getting on 15 years and I've seen a few go-slows in my time. I think the problem with this one was that with the bowlers getting so little assistance it seemed a bit OTT. It's fine to admire afar from Cricinfo but watching every ball live- it takes a particlular psyche to find it engaging.

Of course the biggest villian is the pitch- I understand groundsmen are under pressure to make games last five days, but there's got to be more an incentive to prepare livelier pitches. There was a lot of people leaving that game yesterday feeling short changed and a bit pissed off at cricket.

McKenzie should have been out to Monty a day and a half ago, but I think he deserves credit for his innings. It wasn't a classic, but he saw out the majority of the balls required for the draw and probably staked a significant claim for man of the match. To hate him for it is pretty pathetic. When you're following on 300+ runs adrift with two days to go, what exactly can you do?

Oh lordy lordy lord.

Just finished watching the "highlights" and it was one of the most tedious 30 minutes of my life (they had to pad the other 15 mins out with interviews). My sympathies go out to anyone who saw the whole day live.

By the way - what were the odds on 4 different South African batsmen scoring tedious centuries and not one of them being Kallis?

Got a feeling Jacques will unleash a terrible vengence at Headingley. 103 off 482 balls perhaps.

Gary 111 wrote:Oh lordy lordy lord.

Just finished watching the "highlights" and it was one of the most tedious 30 minutes of my life (they had to pad the other 15 mins out with interviews). My sympathies go out to anyone who saw the whole day live.

I think for the 'live' version of events you just need to scroll up a few posts to Toms (Emu's) post to get an idea

Poor bastard!!

I thought the last day of the NZ test at Lords was turgid went I went!

Yeah - reminds me of skiving off college back in the day several times to watch England play Pakistan (in the most boring Test series of all time). Then to rub salt into the wounds, the 15th day (out of 15) when i'd long given up and decided algebra wasn't so dull after all - out of nowhere it turned into a cracker with an amazing finish. And I missed all of it.

Gary 111 wrote:By the way - what were the odds on 4 different South African batsmen scoring tedious centuries and not one of them being Kallis?

Got a feeling Jacques will unleash a terrible vengence at Headingley. 103 off 482 balls perhaps.

They do have some of the most boring batsmen in international cricket in their line-up. And still somehow manage to be quite good at the JAMODI game...

Eric Air Emu wrote:
Of course the biggest villian is the pitch- I understand groundsmen are under pressure to make games last five days, but there's got to be more an incentive to prepare livelier pitches.

In defence of Mick (Mike, really, but he's obviously fudged his nickname) Hunt, he said before the match that he wasn't happy with the pitch as the rubbish weather in the build up had totally ballsed up his plans for it.

I just watched Amla's interview on the bbc website. I'm captivated by his beard. He looks like an ordinary looking bloke underneath it but it just looks so cartoonish. It must be a nightmare in everyday life.

Gary 111 wrote:By the way - what were the odds on 4 different South African batsmen scoring tedious centuries and not one of them being Kallis?

What were the odds SIX different England players taking the new ball - one of them being Kevin Pietersen.

Lara Lara Laughs wrote:I just watched Amla's interview on the bbc website. I'm captivated by his beard. He looks like an ordinary looking bloke underneath it but it just looks so cartoonish. It must be a nightmare in everyday life.

Don't choose a religion that makes you look like a c*nt. It's a schoolboy error.

Dello wrote:

Gary 111 wrote:By the way - what were the odds on 4 different South African batsmen scoring tedious centuries and not one of them being Kallis?

What were the odds SIX different England players taking the new ball - one of them being Kevin Pietersen.

Yeah - was going to mention this. Has it ever happened before?

To find out I felt about being mischievous and posting it as a question on the difficult trivia thread. If this really was the first time ever though it would drive the likes of Skully and WW potty trying to think of the other times and trawling through 1890s scorecards though...

Oh, and LLL - that graphic isn't really worth screwing up the whole format of the forum is it?

Especially when mine is a far, far more skillful player anyway...

Oi, Dello, how come I can't do Avatars now? You didn't even give me a chance to find a new one and change it!

Have you got a new one? Try it now.

It doesn't move! Why doesn't it move?!!

Dello wrote:

Eric Air Emu wrote:
Of course the biggest villian is the pitch- I understand groundsmen are under pressure to make games last five days, but there's got to be more an incentive to prepare livelier pitches.

In defence of Mick (Mike, really, but he's obviously fudged his nickname) Hunt, he said before the match that he wasn't happy with the pitch as the rubbish weather in the build up had totally ballsed up his plans for it.

He could have gone at it with a power drill, acid and some pot plants.