England v Australia, 3rd Test, Edgbaston, Jul 30 - Aug 3

embee wrote:

Rob I wrote:

Shoeshine wrote:It's just worth emphasising that England could have refused to allow Manou to replace Haddin - they would have been completely within their rights.

Of course, they were absolutely right to allow it, and full credit to them for so doing, but it's worth pointing out to those idiots who slated Strauss in the Aussie media for "ugly" cricket.

Good point well made.

He's been double bluffed by the 'idiots' ...he had to allow Manour to replace Haddin so as to not look the cheating mean spirited poo poo head that he is ...and Manour is worse than a broken fingered Haddin anyway

How is Manou's keeping?

So Oz gets off to a flyer and we have .......Ding Dong

Swannneeee!!!!

Looked like he could've had POCson LBW earlier in the over too.

SSSSWWWWWWAAAAANNNNYYYYYYYYYAAAAAAAAAA

Dello wrote:Swannneeee!!!!

Looked like he could've had POCson LBW earlier in the over too.

Yep. Looked out that one. Katich could have been given out lbw right at the start too, but it was a fair enough call given that it was hard to know whether it was pad/bat or bat/pad.

furriner wrote:I know some of y'all discussed it, but I never thought it would come to pass; Watson opening.

That there is to me an admission of something wrong - poor planning, poor thinking, poor decision making - or a combination of all three.

....................

I bet all of you wish you were me.

Always.

And Watson gets his fifty, just as I predicted.

Well played man.

Easiest fifty of his life.

England's bowling has been abysmal. And Strauss' field settings always seem to leave massive gaps in really simple-to-reach areas.

All in all, it's been rubbish.

England need another wicket to barely break even today.

This TAYne POCson bloke has got a bit of elan and style about his batting. The way he holds the pose. Reminds me of a young Stewart.

^^ The Rajasthan Royals taught him everything he knows, the good bits that is.

Strauss's field settings are always so by the book and conservative. The mid on and mid off has been to wide for the Aussie batsmen ALL SERIES. And Jesus, how many runs have they scored down to third man so far.


Strauss is an average captain. Pity there's no better alternative.

Rob I wrote:This TAYne POCson bloke has got a bit of elan and style about his batting. The way he holds the pose. Reminds me of a young Stewart.

The old Stewart would fill his boots against this shitehouse attack.

Why the hell did Strauss take Swann out of the attack??

Even Flintoff has bowled rubbish today.

22 fours in 30 overs.

Test match bowling? Not even first class quality.

I've never really had the impression that Strauss rates Swann. He's almost a last thought most of the time. This may just be an impression that has been bred in me by his crap captaincy.

Congratulations to England though - they've allowed Australia to move a rain-affected game on a long, long way in just one paltry session. There's pretty much only two results you can imagine from here.

Strauss is too scared to do things outside of the box. I reckon that Swann should bowl first up tomorrow against Ponting and Watson, because they're not great starters against spin, but I BET he opens up with Anderson and (probably) Broad. So predictable.

Anderson: 10-0-45-0- 4.50

Useless, as he always is when the sun shines.

Flintoff: 9-2-31-0- 3.44

All right. Bit flat.

Onions: 3-0-21-0- 7.00

Garbage. If they don't trust him to bowl more than a tenth of the overs, why are they picking him?

Broad: 6-1-24- 0- 4.00

Powder puff, non-threatening pies. I wonder if his average needs to top 50 before the selectors question his position in the side.

It's their own fault. England were complacent. Broad and Onions didn't contribute at all to the win at Lord's and should've been replaced.

Chivalry Augustus wrote:I've never really had the impression that Strauss rates Swann. He's almost a last thought most of the time. This may just be an impression that has been bred in me by his crap captaincy.

He did give Swann a bowl first change against the Windies earlier in the "summer".

Don't think it's a case of not rating him, just Strauss being a rather uninspired thinker.

The good news for England is that the pitch looks great for batting, so come their turn........

I rated Onions' attitude before, but he's starting to frustrate. He seems to have a simple, repeatable action where nothing can really go wrong, yet why is he so often inconsistent with his line and length? It must be a patience thing. If he just concentrated on hitting the top of off stump ball after ball, he's take stacks of wickets.

Looks a decent pitch to me. Expect some humble pie from the Ozzers about Watson when they come on later....

Dello wrote:Anderson: 10-0-45-0- 4.50

Useless, as he always is when the sun shines.

Flintoff: 9-2-31-0- 3.44

All right. Bit flat.

Onions: 3-0-21-0- 7.00

Garbage. If they don't trust him to bowl more than a tenth of the overs, why are they picking him?

Broad: 6-1-24- 0- 4.00

Powder puff, non-threatening pies. I wonder if his average needs to top 50 before the selectors question his position in the side.

It's their own fault. England were complacent. Broad and Onions didn't contribute at all to the win at Lord's and should've been replaced.

Blimey not sure you can rip a bowling attack apart on the first day of a game when only 30 overs were bowled on a decent pitch!

Jimmykins we all know will go for runs if he doesn't have things in his favour...

Henry wrote:I rated Onions' attitude before, but he's starting to frustrate. He seems to have a simple, repeatable action where nothing can really go wrong, yet why is he so often inconsistent with his line and length? It must be a patience thing. If he just concentrated on hitting the top of off stump ball after ball, he's take stacks of wickets.

I think Dello & I picked up on this during his debut - for inexpicable reasons he goes through periods of utter dross.