Who would've thought? Maybe not exact, but it's the result that matters.
Off Topic Cricket Thread
- Thread starter sb_73
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I said before a ball was bowled that the difference between these two sides is the bowling attacks.
We have an injured, average spin bowler, two aging legends, with Anderson looking worryingly ineffective and Broad probably too old to play every test.
Robinson is good when conditions suit, but for some strange reason England seem to want flat, dead pitches! Yes our batsmen will score heavily on those wickets, but so will their equally good batting line up.
They have 3 world class pace bowlers, a world class spinner and a very good seamer in Boland.
That will be the difference, whether Wood plays or not imo.
Oh and obviously Stokes is nowhere near fit enough to bowl much either.
We have an injured, average spin bowler, two aging legends, with Anderson looking worryingly ineffective and Broad probably too old to play every test.
Robinson is good when conditions suit, but for some strange reason England seem to want flat, dead pitches! Yes our batsmen will score heavily on those wickets, but so will their equally good batting line up.
They have 3 world class pace bowlers, a world class spinner and a very good seamer in Boland.
That will be the difference, whether Wood plays or not imo.
Oh and obviously Stokes is nowhere near fit enough to bowl much either.
Last edited:
You and Staines should host a podcast together titled "Who is the ugliest Aussie cricketer?"
Nice post Col, but this game was close and Moeen's injured finger didn't help your cause.
If England maintain their intensity, the next game may be yours. Hope not but we'll just have to wait and see.
be a long one
England made us work hard for that one and l'll take that result everyday of the week.
Nice one, Australia.
Nice one, Australia.
The declaration didn't cost us the game, selection did. If Foakes and Wood had both played we'd of won the game quite easily. If we've asked for every pitch to be a road then one of Anderson or Robinson has to sit out. Also hopefully they'll play the young leggie instead of Ali now, I think he'll scare quite a few of their batsmen.
Monsieur Jeffrainjerr, did ju 'ave a bru'zzer call'ed Michel de Nostredame, per'aps?
(Appolojeez, but ma axon eez, ...'ow you say in Ongland, pritty sheet).
Oh my. I've insulted the French and the writers of 'Allo 'Allo all in one crappy post.
What can I say but, je m’en fous!
Last edited:
Yes, he has a head like a smacked arrrrseole.
Where are you Didley? Wake up. WE WON!!!
l was getting my beauty rest.
As an old fart, l need all l can get and then some.
May need to partake in some beverages purely for medicinal purposes, of course….. a small win.
Getting up at midday is not beauty sleep
It's just pure laziness
Recommended for all
Totally. You know we, as QPR fans, can take a loss if our players have put everything into it and put themselves on the line. England did that in buckets; and fair play they made a hell of a game of it. Well done Australia for winning a completely mesmerising game full of ebb and flow. If this is the new ‘test match’ cricket they will be pulling the crowds back. Certainly a game of captains. Definitely a contrast of styles. No doubting the commitment and skill from both sides.
Well played both teams
I thoroughly enjoyed listening to all five days of test match special.Looking forward to game 2 and what these teams may do differently to take this critical match.
I disagree. Stokes nearly got England home despite depleted bowling resources whilst Cummins nearly threw it away with his negativity. Stokes's captaincy is attacking and brilliant, whilst Cummins is negative and prosaic. I know which captain I'd rather have.
Do you think that the rise in popularity of the shortened version of the game, might be somehow effecting the mindset and thinking of some in the cricketing world ?
It just seemed to me that England were taking a more modern approach to the game, whereas Australia kept it more traditional. Definitely got me excited more about Test Cricket
Yeah, the way England play is born out of the inventiveness of the short forms of the game. Imagine Geoff Boycott playing a reverse scoop off the first ball of the day as Root did! It's exhilarating.