West Indies v England, 3rd Test, St John's, Feb 15-19

this test match is not going too well.

Oh really?

Nightwatchman AGAIN. First innings was questionable but here it's taking the absolute piss.

I absolutely agree - I'd have sent Swanny out and told him to hit the ******, but England are taking the piss here. There are 188 overs left in this match and we need 120+ runs and ten wickets. Get it done asafp.

I could not believe my eyes when they sent Jimmy out... QUICK RUNS!

Talk about handing back the initiative...

I hope Strauss hasn't repeated the mistake of Freddy Calthorpe in the final Test against the Windies on England's inaugural tour at Sabina Park in April 1930. After only having a modest lead of 563 on first innings (England 849 - Sandham 325, Ames 149 - WI 286) Calthorpe declined to enforce the follow-on despite local warnings about the onset of the rainy season, a decision which E.W. 'Jim' Swanton, then a junior reporter, described as "inexplicable".

After England were dismissed for 272 the second time around WI were set a modest target of 836 to win. They had reached 408-5 (Headley 223) when the 8th & 9th days' play were lost to tropical downpours and despite the fact that it was a timeless Test the unlikelihood of further play and (as in the repeat situation at Durban 9 years later) the imperative of the shipping schedules and the contractural obligations of the professionals to join their counties for the start of the following English season caused the match to be abandoned as a draw. Needless to say, Calthorpe was not invited by the selectors to captain, or play for, England again.

eowyn wrote:Oh really?

yeah yaar

EOP.

Fast and hostile from Edwards.

Good day for England, all told. Net 312/1. The nightwatchman bollocks was and continues to be overly negative, but what can you do?

PP you must have enjoyed Fiddy's spell at the end?

That was fierce! 94 mph and fairly accurate too. It's just a same the game is out of our hands.

Farking nightwatchman with a 300+ lead FFS.

Looks like that slappage from India in Chennai has got into their Psyche a bit.

WIFAN wrote:PP you must have enjoyed Fiddy's spell at the end?

That was fierce! 94 mph and fairly accurate too. It's just a same the game is out of our hands.

i missed it... :|

but yeah 94 mph...thats some serious pace!
Did he get any reverse swing?

The best thing Jimmy can do tomorrow (apart from retiring forthwith from the game) is to give it a wipe from the word go. Nothing to lose - could garner us 20 -30 bonus runs, and if he get's out Shah replaces him.

PlanetPakistan wrote:

WIFAN wrote:PP you must have enjoyed Fiddy's spell at the end?

That was fierce! 94 mph and fairly accurate too. It's just a same the game is out of our hands.

i missed it... :|

but yeah 94 mph...thats some serious pace!
Did he get any reverse swing?

It was with the new ball and there was not much swing. He roughed up Strauss and got him caught in the slips as he was reluctant to get forward.

Basil wrote:The best thing Jimmy can do tomorrow (apart from retiring forthwith from the game) is to give it a wipe from the word go. Nothing to lose - could garner us 20 -30 bonus runs, and if he get's out Shah replaces him.

Aye. He's got to try hitting the ball, take some of the shine off it/hardness out of it.

If he just stands there trying to play out maidens, there is literally no point in him being there.

England want to be declaring no later than halfway through the second session.

WIFAN wrote:

Obviously I have to admit that Swann was impressive, but he was presented with 3/5 of his wickets too.

Blame Furriner...

amazing stuff...

if he bowls like that then ENG can be all out for 95-100...

eowyn wrote:Blimey, BBB, are you and Gussy in agreement???!!

Ooh, a rare failure by Shiv, and a Michelle for Swann??? WTF?? Has the world started revolving in the opposite direction??

So, my English colleagues, I take it Swann bowled well? Looks like Freddy bowled well also.

skully wrote:
So, my English colleagues, I take it Swann bowled well? Looks like Freddy bowled well also.

Swann was steady but gifted a few wickets. Freddie was Freddie...

JKLever wrote:

skully wrote:
So, my English colleagues, I take it Swann bowled well? Looks like Freddy bowled well also.

Swann was steady but gifted a few wickets. Freddie was Freddie...

And Jimmy was as much use as a rip in a spacesuit

JKLever wrote:

skully wrote:
So, my English colleagues, I take it Swann bowled well? Looks like Freddy bowled well also.

Swann was steady but gifted a few wickets. Freddie was Freddie...

Cheers Bas, I suspected that may have been the answer.

I have grave fears that we are gonna get Freddied in Ashes 09. My only hope is that there is not enough support for him.

Jimmy was Bage. (it'll catch on)

He basically in the side as a specialist nightwatchman.

Dello wrote:Jimmy was Bage. (it'll catch on)

He basically in the side as a specialist nightwatchman.

'bage is better than the straight 'bage'

He's not even worth the apostrophe.

He's dead to me.