West Indies v England, 4th Test, Bridgetown - Feb 26-Mar 2

Augustus wrote:England could still lose from here so I wouldn't call it off just yet.

God, how bad are we that I actually fear we might lose from here! I don't even mean a lingering doubt, more a genuine fear we could lose it!

Suffice it to say that if we do, there'll be death. Lots of death. Mostly inflicted by me but not exclusively, I'm sure.

You would need eight days to get a result on this pitch.

Basil wrote:
You would need eight days to get a result on this pitch.

Or England to be bowled out for 52 again! England lost at Adelaide on the last Ashes tour after making 551-6d first dig and then being bowled out for 129 in the 3rd innings. Oz' record of 586 as the highest 1st innings score by a losing side which has stood for 114 years could be under threat!

On a statistical note, this partnership is a new ground record for the 6th wicket against England beating Richards & Lloyd's 153 in March 1981.

Allan D wrote:

Basil wrote:
You would need eight days to get a result on this pitch.

Or England to be bowled out for 52 again! England lost at Adelaide on the last Ashes tour after making 551-6d first dig and then being bowled out for 129 in the 3rd innings. Oz' record of 586 as the highest 1st innings score by a losing side which has stood for 114 years could be under threat!

On a statistical note, this partnership is a new ground record for the 6th wicket against England beating Richards & Lloyd's 153 in March 1981.

brilliant stuff from Sarwan but this is sad...its almost as if the bowlers don't even exist.

Is this match still on?

And the stats keep falling "thick as autumnal leaves, that strow the brooks of Vallambrosa" as Jackie Milton once wrote.

The 7th score of 250+ by a WI batsman v. England (1st being George Headley's 270* at Sabina Park in March 1935 and the previous Lara's 400* at St John's in April 2004).
The 15th against all teams by WI players.
The 20th against England by all sides (1st being Bradman's 254 at Lord's in 1930, the previous Lara's 400*)
The 73rd in all Test cricket (1st is 'Tip' Foster's 287 at the SCG in December 1903, the previous Younis Khan's 313 this week).

Congrats Denesh. That is a huge innings for West Indies cricket.

At long last our keeper batsman has a century.

Keeper batsman? He averages 22.5. Says a lot about the pitch and bowling that he has been allowed to get a century.

8th WI wicketkeeper to score century in Tests (and 16th instance) since Ivan Barrow's 105 at Old Trafford in July 1933, the previous being Ridley Jacobs' 107* at St John's in April 2004, also the 5th WI 'keeper (and 5th instance) against England, the first and last being instances cited.

150th instance of a wicketkeeper century in all Test cricket from Harry Wood's 134* for England against SA at Newlands, March 1892 to Kamran Akmal's 158 at Karachi this week. 25th instance against England from Percy Sherwell's 115 for SA at Lord's in July 1907 to previous instance of Adam Gilchrist's 102* at the WACA in December 2006.

beamer wrote:Keeper batsman? He averages 22.5. Says a lot about the pitch and bowling that he has been allowed to get a century.

He's better than that average suggests. He loses his head to often while batting. Needs to mature a little more. Also he was targeted for the job as a teenager and probably wasn't made to work hard enough for the job.

Well, no cheaping of Test cricket by a record score here. Still time for a 51 all out repeat, that's the only way we could possibly see a result.

Well played Ronnie.

beamer wrote:Keeper batsman? He averages 22.5. Says a lot about the pitch and bowling that he has been allowed to get a century.

Keeper batsman. Says a lot about the pitch that is true, but Ramdin has scored runs in FC cricket on much more difficult pitches, and he scored 71 against Warne and MacGill, Lee, Mcgrath etc. This may well prove the turning point for him.

And what an innings from Ronnie Sarwan. 291 of the most gorgeous runs you could wish to see. If you get a wicket like this, you have to take advantage, and that's what he did.

Another pointless game, test cricket is dead.

Shot of the match from JT. WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

3rd instance of both sides making 600+ in a Test - the others being Pakistan and Sri Lanka at Karachi this week and England and Australia at Old Trafford in July 1964.

Another classic declaration by Strauss as England struggle against a 100+ deficit on the final day.

Life's great with hindsight. One match he's criticised for declaring too late (correctly), next match, too early. You can't have it both ways. For me he made the best declaration to give us a chance of winning the match. That we have a 0.1% chance of losing it having done so is hardly grounds for criticism. If we lose from here then it's because we're a dreadful side rather than because our captain made a poor declaration.

I'm sure we could have scored 800/900 had we carried on. We certainly had enough batting left.

Allan D wrote:Another classic declaration by Strauss as England struggle against a 100+ deficit on the final day.

that's a bit harsh. He has to back his bowlers at some point

S-bottom still bowling at 74 to 78 mph?

I love watching JT bat.

What are the odds of Collingwood captaining in the Ashes?

Eric Air Emu wrote:I reckon Mr TV Umpire should only be able to overturn the man in the middle's LBW decision on the basis of whether the ball pitched outside leg and whether the batsman hit it. Anything else and you're guessing...

Exactamundo.

The LBW law is about the umpire's opinion. It's not fact. It's not something that can be cleared up once and for all in a single replay. It's an opinion.

And the farce of referring any LBW shout to the third umpire is that you're also just asking him to make an opinion. It's not fact - it's just another guess, another stab at it. So whose opinion wins out? Who has seniority - the guy in the middle or the guy with the TV? And how many opinions do you need? Maybe there should be a fourth umpire to have a look as well, just to act as a tie-breaker in the case of the two other opinions conflicting. Perhaps there should be some kind of meeting called where they all thrash out an opinion that everyone's comfortable with. And so on.

If the third umpire is the guy whose opinion is law, then there's really no point having a bloke out in the middle. He may as well refer every decision as his opinion is apparently worthless.

As Tom (or Rachel) says, if you have to have referrals for LBW, they should just be to establish if the ball pitched outside leg-stump, if the ball hit the batsman in line and to check if there's a discernible inside edge.

Allan D wrote:What are the odds of Collingwood captaining in the Ashes?

Why would he be captain?

Allan D wrote:What are the odds of Collingwood captaining in the Ashes?

Longer than the odds of play being stopped in this test by snowfall.