The Ashes 2009

kmart6

I think it's a bit pathetic that the commentators, fans and players are happy with this! They were completely out-played....and should be somewhat embarrassed!

Berti Vogts

A shame really when one team is so clearly superior to the other.

Royale with Cheese

kmart6 wrote: »

I think it's a bit pathetic that the commentators, fans and players are happy with this! They were completely out-played....and should be somewhat embarrassed!

Yeah why would they be happy with saving a test match? Sure nobody's ever celebrated that before.

Brilliant end to the match. Fair play to Anderson and Monty, I wouldn't have given them a hope of batting out 11 overs. In test cricket, if you don't take 20 wickets in a match then you can't win. Australia have nobody to blame but themselves... and maybe a little bit of rain yesterday.

Mothman

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

Brilliant end to the match. Fair play to Anderson and Monty, I wouldn't have given them a hope of batting out 11 overs.

Not many did

kmart6

Bullology!!!!!! England could only take 6 wickets....so does that mean there more deserving of a draw than Austrailia!?

Marshy

The lost session yesterday afternoon was crucial in the end, though Australia still had plenty of time to get the 8 wickets today. Its a result they might well rue at the end of the series.

Marshy

kmart6 wrote: »

Bullology!!!!!! England could only take 6 wickets....so does that mean there more deserving of a draw than Austrailia!?

England were outplayed, no-one questions that. But the nature of the game means that there's limited time and a mixture of the weather yesterday and some resistance from England today meant they avoided defeat.

In the 2005 series, Australia avoided a loss in similar fashion at Old Trafford, finishing 9 down at the end of the 5th Day.

Mothman

A draw has been a feature of test cricket since timeless tests ended regardless of which team performed better. The weather has as well.

Mothman

Can also blame the pitch. Pretty benign for the fifth day.

Dan Dare

And maybe Australia missed Brett Lee.

d'Oracle

Dan Dare wrote: »

And maybe Australia missed Brett Lee.

I dunno.
He has not been himself and was not exactly on fire before the injury.
Mitch Johnson needs to step up here.

HonalD

Mothman wrote: »

Can also blame the pitch. Pretty benign for the fifth day.

I consider it great that the test lasted 5 days, and right to the end. There was turn on day 1 and the pitch still didnt deteriorate too much - the aussies just seemed to be 1 trick too short!

Mothman

HonalD wrote: »

I consider it great that the test lasted 5 days, and right to the end. There was turn on day 1 and the pitch still didnt deteriorate too much - the aussies just seemed to be 1 trick too short!

And England many tricks..
Both attacks were found wanting and this leads me to criticize pitch. We can thank England not batting to their potential for allowing Aus to nearly get a deserved victory and a nail biting end to 5th day.

kyp_durron

Let's be honest. The rain on Saturday saved the test for England. It's between Onions or Harmy for Lords, personally I think they should go with Harmison and Onions, drop Broad, he was muck in this test.

booth70

tbh if you cant bowl out 9,10 and jack with 40 overs left you don't deserve to win the test match;).....still a boring test match made exciting by Australia's inability to get Monty out!!:D

LFC5Times

Forgive my lack of knowledge when it comes to cricket,but with the main sports channels and papers going on about the Ashes I have no real choice but to have a look and try understand it.

The first innings, England scored 435 all out while the Aussies scored 674 and declared(not sure what this means?).

Englands second innings they scored 252 for nine wickets and the first test has managed to be a draw.

Do the Aussies not get a second innings?

Basically why has the first test turned out to be a draw, when it seems the Aussies have done better.

Thanks in advance

TrueDub

LFC5Times wrote: »

Forgive my lack of knowledge when it comes to cricket,but with the main sports channels and papers going on about the Ashes I have no real choice but to have a look and try understand it.

No worries, we're happy to assist!

LFC5Times wrote: »

The first innings, England scored 435 all out while the Aussies scored 674 and declared(not sure what this means?).

Each side has 10 wickets in their innings - England were all out, meaning they'd lost all their wickets. Australia declared, meaning they hadn't lost all their wickets but said "We've batted enough, you have another go". Essentially it means they'd amassed what they saw as a formidable total and would like another bowl at England.

LFC5Times wrote: »

Englands second innings they scored 252 for nine wickets and the first test has managed to be a draw.

Do the Aussies not get a second innings?

Basically why has the first test turned out to be a draw, when it seems the Aussies have done better.

Thanks in advance

A test lasts 4 innings (2 innings each) OR 5 days, whichever is the shorter. The Aussies didn't get a second innings as they failed to bowl England out.

It's a draw because they ran out of time.

The Aussies were the better side, but England hung on for the draw, which is a skill in itself.

Dozen Wicked Words

Already answered, better than I did by TrueDub

Malari

TrueDub wrote: »

The Aussies didn't get a second innings as they failed to bowl England out.

Aha. I wasn't sure about this.

TrueDub wrote: »

It's a draw because they ran out of time.

The Aussies were the better side, but England hung on for the draw, which is a skill in itself.

And quite exciting. Looking forward to the next test now!

dereko1969

what a great end to a test match, so exciting. thought strauss was acting the maggot sending the physio and the 12th man out twice in a few minutes though, but i'm sure ponting would've done something similar.
i was watching it in clontarf clubhouse having snuck in for the last 12 overs, does anyone know why broad was staring daggers at the ump for giving him out lbw? (no sound on in clubhouse) he was as plum as a plum that's been soaked in armagnac!

Monkeybonkers

Noooooo! Sky Sports subscription up yesterday. Not being renewed. No more Ashes for me

Marshy

dereko1969 wrote: »

i was watching it in clontarf clubhouse having snuck in for the last 12 overs, does anyone know why broad was staring daggers at the ump for giving him out lbw? (no sound on in clubhouse) he was as plum as a plum that's been soaked in armagnac!

That was very strange alright, was definitely out. He can have no complaints, got away with a close lbw call first ball as well.

giddyup

dereko1969 wrote: »

he was as plum as a plum that's been soaked in armagnac!

<pedantry> It's plumb not plum, so his plumness, which may be of passing interest to some is of little concern vis a vis the LBW call </pedantry>

Anyway, I saw a great point made on the BBC ball-by-ball page. It was something along these lines - If Australia hung on for the same draw they'd be praised for dogged determination and we'd admire them and England would be chastised for the impotence of their attack. When it's flipped the analysis is very much skewed for England at least where it's all luck and the result is not deserved etc.

Old Trafford - 2005?

Trojan

Guardian over by over was a good read (apologies if linked earlier)

Marshy

giddyup wrote: »

Old Trafford - 2005?

That was a slightly different scenario though. In that match Australia were actually chasing a target in the 2nd innings, albeit an improbable one, but not merely trying to bat out for the draw like England were on Sunday.

legend73

I've said this before, but 19 wickets vs 6 and nearly an outright victory. England were mediocre at best. They hung on for grim life, this kind of cricket personally bores me to tears and even though there are loads of people who seem to enjoy it as a tense situation, the anti-climax leaves a bad taste in the mouth and 60 overs loss to rain in day 3 & 4, was the deciding factor - not the rear guard action of an inept English team. Let's hope they dont go into the next 4 with the same attitude (rain dancing) - otherwise I'll be tuning into something like the Hills or Radio talkback about womens menstrual cycles come day 3 or 4.

Washout

Onwards to Lords.

Just listening th the commentry. so another batters paridise.
If there is nothing in the pitch at the start of a testmatch this is gonna be a dull one.

god have pity on bowlers

moneymouth77

Just watching it on Sky Player, quite fun so far... wish there was a bit more from the bowlers, a wicket or two would increase the tension a little, but I'm hoping England reaches 100 without losing one, that would certainly change the tide of things.

purple_hatstand

legend73 wrote: »

I've said this before, but 19 wickets vs 6 and nearly an outright victory. England were mediocre at best. They hung on for grim life, this kind of cricket personally bores me to tears and even though there are loads of people who seem to enjoy it as a tense situation, the anti-climax leaves a bad taste in the mouth and 60 overs loss to rain in day 3 & 4, was the deciding factor - not the rear guard action of an inept English team. Let's hope they dont go into the next 4 with the same attitude (rain dancing) - otherwise I'll be tuning into something like the Hills or Radio talkback about womens menstrual cycles come day 3 or 4.

Really? Picture the scene:

The England 'huddle' just inside the boundary rope on the first morning...

Strauss: right, chaps....here's the plan.....if we lose a couple of sessions to rain, there's a good chance we might nick a draw....


I'm sorry to sound sarky, but it just doesn't work like that. The end of the 1st Test was sporting drama of the highest order. And if Australia had needed their last 2 to see off 11 overs for a draw, I'd be saying the same.

Washout

Is Stuart Clark injured?

Royale with Cheese

Really not getting the backlash against England here. Is this the first time people have seen a team outplayed over 5 days but hold out for a draw? It's a large feature of test cricket, deal with it.

After Australia's first innings there was only going to be 2 possible outcomes from the match, and neither of them were an England win. Of course they were going to try to hold out for a draw. Anyway, if you'd told Ricky Ponting before the match started that he'd have 11 overs to get rid of either Monty Panesar or James Anderson to win the match, he'd have bitten your hand off. Not hearing much on here about the inept Australian attack that failed to remove either of them.

Good morning session for England. 126/0 at lunch.

Washout

I have a question on that actually.

whatever happened to the rule whereby a team can use an extra hour at the end of the test match if a result is possible?

i think play finished up about 15 minutes before 7...could they not have played till 7pm?

Royale with Cheese

I'm not 100% but I think both teams have to agree to the extra hour.

Dozen Wicked Words

Don't think both teams have to agree to the extra hour, I'm not sure but couple of ideas:

Isn't the extra hour only offered if the 90 overs for the day haven't been bowled?

or,

They can only be offered in the final innings of a game, and as it wasn't the last innings, technically England could have scored another 150 and the extra hour would not have been seen as enough to warrant the last hour.

dfx-

Outside of WIndies/New Zealand/Bangladesh, when was the last time there was a result at Lord's?

Always seem to be draws..

Mothman

dfx- wrote: »

Outside of WIndies/New Zealand/Bangladesh, when was the last time there was a result at Lord's?

Always seem to be draws..

I think the last Ashes series in 05....

Washout

Mothman wrote: »

I think the last Ashes series in 05....

The following is the results of test matchs at lords since 2000

Opponent Result Date
Zimbabwe England May 18-21, 2000
West Indies England Jun 29-Jul 1, 2000
Pakistan England May 17-20, 2001
Australia Australia Jul 19-22, 2001
Sri Lanka drawn May 16-20, 2002
India England Jul 25-29, 2002
Zimbabwe England May 22-24, 2003
South Africa South Africa Jul 31-Aug 3, 2003
New Zealand England May 20-24, 2004
West Indies England Jul 22-26, 2004
Bangladesh England May 26-28, 2005
Australia Australia Jul 21-24, 2005
Sri Lanka drawn May 11-15, 2006
Pakistan drawn Jul 13-17, 2006
West Indies drawn May 17-21, 2007
India drawn Jul 19-23, 2007
New Zealand drawn May 15-19, 2008
South Africa drawn Jul 10-14, 2008
West Indies England May 6-8, 2009
Australia - Jul 16-20, 2009

kyp_durron

Johnson is bowling worse then Stuart Broad. If you can believe that.

Washout

kyp_durron wrote: »

Johnson is bowling worse then Stuart Broad. If you can believe that.

just as you say he takes a 3rd wicket...thanks for putting the hex on .

didn't think hey would ever get that last wicket.

kyp_durron

Washout wrote: »

just as you say he takes a 3rd wicket...thanks for putting the hex on .

didn't think hey would ever get that last wicket.

You know, I think Jimmy should be promoted up the order to no 3. God knows he is out performing Bopara.

Hopefully he is going to find some swing with the new ball.

kyp_durron

Jimmeh strikes. Hughes gloves down leg side haha.

_blank_

Anderson again, this time Ponting.

lol

10/2

legend73

as han solo said 'laugh it up fuzz ball', ponting out to a dodgy decision - actually not out. And if the luck now turns in favour of the Aussies hopefully these two (katter and mr cricket) dig in and make some runs.

kyp_durron

legend73 wrote: »

as han solo said 'laugh it up fuzz ball', ponting out to a dodgy decision - actually not out. And if the luck now turns in favour of the Aussies hopefully these two (katter and mr cricket) dig in and make some runs.

He was clearly out LBW if not caught behind.

Good to see him getting clapped off the pitch.

d'Oracle

Didn't see it, but it supposedly hit his foot.

Hawkeye says it would have hit off.

Washout

d'Oracle wrote: »

Didn't see it, but it supposedly hit his foot.

Hawkeye says it would have hit off.

anything that stops Pointing from getting closer to Tendulkars highest number of runs record is fine by me.

kmart6

Doesn't matter if Ponting was LBW ayway,the Umpire was only looking for the decision about wheather it had been learly caught! So the umpire got it wrong! Ponting should still be there!

kmart6

Rain again...this coule get annoying!

d'Oracle

Washout wrote: »

anything that stops Pointing from getting closer to Tendulkars highest number of runs record is fine by me.

+1

d'Oracle

kmart6 wrote: »

Doesn't matter if Ponting was LBW ayway,the Umpire was only looking for the decision about wheather it had been learly caught! So the umpire got it wrong! Ponting should still be there!

Was out, is out.

Anything else is just nitpicking.