FlyingHigh wrote:Didn't think it was a great declaration last night.
I thought when Starc got his 50 was the time, but instead we batted another four overs, as I think we need to win this test, and as such an extra wicket last night was more important that the last 20 runs - we are only a Labuschagne nick and a moderate Smith innings from being 6/80 in the next test.
Broad's hold over Head has gone unnoticed with all the talk about Warner. Even in the 2nd innings of the first test when Head made 50, listening on the radio, sounded like in the first few overs of that Sunday he had him in trouble.
All the lefties are struggling against Broad. If we can't get 19 wickets with this attack over three days I don't think the extra four will make that much difference tbh.
All the lefties, as noted, can't work Broad around the wicket out. If we win this Test then no need for concern, if we don't do they make a simple right/left change in the middle order?
Booney wrote:All the lefties, as noted, can't work Broad around the wicket out. If we win this Test then no need for concern, if we don't do they make a simple right/left change in the middle order?
Who?? Bancroft comes into the middle order. Is he the only other right hander in the squad. Both Khawaja and Pattinson are lefties.
Broad was cooked but Starc showed the way to play him, hit it straight and not through mid wicket where Head Wade Harris are getting out. Broad isn’t really swinging it, it’s all the angle he is bowling from.
FlyingHigh wrote:Didn't think it was a great declaration last night.
I thought when Starc got his 50 was the time, but instead we batted another four overs, as I think we need to win this test, and as such an extra wicket last night was more important that the last 20 runs - we are only a Labuschagne nick and a moderate Smith innings from being 6/80 in the next test.
Broad's hold over Head has gone unnoticed with all the talk about Warner. Even in the 2nd innings of the first test when Head made 50, listening on the radio, sounded like in the first few overs of that Sunday he had him in trouble.
All the lefties are struggling against Broad. If we can't get 19 wickets with this attack over three days I don't think the extra four will make that much difference tbh.
regards,
REB
They are, but Head really does seem just a matter of time.
4 overs at the end of the game may or may not matter, but i just felt them having to bat for an hour, 14 overs, was keeping more pressure on them than the last 20 runs.
FlyingHigh wrote:Didn't think it was a great declaration last night.
I thought when Starc got his 50 was the time, but instead we batted another four overs, as I think we need to win this test, and as such an extra wicket last night was more important that the last 20 runs - we are only a Labuschagne nick and a moderate Smith innings from being 6/80 in the next test.
Broad's hold over Head has gone unnoticed with all the talk about Warner. Even in the 2nd innings of the first test when Head made 50, listening on the radio, sounded like in the first few overs of that Sunday he had him in trouble.
All the lefties are struggling against Broad. If we can't get 19 wickets with this attack over three days I don't think the extra four will make that much difference tbh.
regards,
REB
I can't see how Broad coming around the wicket is causing Head so much grief, surely they'd just keep working on that in the nets, I only seen his dismissal the once in real time, did he review it? Did hawkeye say it was hitting?
I can see why we batted as long as we did, at a guess we wanted to score as many runs as possible to try and make the poms bat twice in a row, I know we generally don't enforce follow-ons anymore but you've gotta back yourself in scoring around 500 in what has been a pretty lean run scoring series, we probably don't want to set a target either.
FlyingHigh wrote:Didn't think it was a great declaration last night.
I thought when Starc got his 50 was the time, but instead we batted another four overs, as I think we need to win this test, and as such an extra wicket last night was more important that the last 20 runs - we are only a Labuschagne nick and a moderate Smith innings from being 6/80 in the next test.
Broad's hold over Head has gone unnoticed with all the talk about Warner. Even in the 2nd innings of the first test when Head made 50, listening on the radio, sounded like in the first few overs of that Sunday he had him in trouble.
All the lefties are struggling against Broad. If we can't get 19 wickets with this attack over three days I don't think the extra four will make that much difference tbh.
regards,
REB
They are, but Head really does seem just a matter of time.
4 overs at the end of the game may or may not matter, but i just felt them having to bat for an hour, 14 overs, was keeping more pressure on them than the last 20 runs.
Which tour group are you with?
CATO. Cricket Australia Travel Office. Can recommend. Went to the first two tests.
Armchair expert wrote:Broad was cooked but Starc showed the way to play him, hit it straight and not through mid wicket where Head Wade Harris are getting out. Broad isn’t really swinging it, it’s all the angle he is bowling from.
To be fair I saw him swing a couple past Smith's bat when he was over 100.
Armchair expert wrote:Broad was cooked but Starc showed the way to play him, hit it straight and not through mid wicket where Head Wade Harris are getting out. Broad isn’t really swinging it, it’s all the angle he is bowling from.
Yes he's not really swinging it, it's the movement off the seam that is giving our batsman, mainly the left handers the most trouble. It just has to move enough either way to take the outside edge or miss the inside edge to hit them in the pads and he's in the game. The angle from around the wicket exaggerates the seam movement away from the left hander.
Head didn't help himself with his dismissal as it looked like it was trying to play that delivery through mid on/mid wicket instead of straight, Mark Taylor mentioned it straight away after Head got out.
Broad bowled a delivery to Paine yesterday that was the perfect length and moved off the seam just missing Paines outside edge as he played the line of the ball before the movement. It was an absolute jaffer.
FlyingHigh wrote:Didn't think it was a great declaration last night.
I thought when Starc got his 50 was the time, but instead we batted another four overs, as I think we need to win this test, and as such an extra wicket last night was more important that the last 20 runs - we are only a Labuschagne nick and a moderate Smith innings from being 6/80 in the next test.
Broad's hold over Head has gone unnoticed with all the talk about Warner. Even in the 2nd innings of the first test when Head made 50, listening on the radio, sounded like in the first few overs of that Sunday he had him in trouble.
All the lefties are struggling against Broad. If we can't get 19 wickets with this attack over three days I don't think the extra four will make that much difference tbh.
regards,
REB
They are, but Head really does seem just a matter of time.
4 overs at the end of the game may or may not matter, but i just felt them having to bat for an hour, 14 overs, was keeping more pressure on them than the last 20 runs.
Which tour group are you with?
With respect to the declaration, I was thinking along the lines of Border at Headingly in 1993 at the start of day 3, "Boys we're batting on this morning to cause them more mental and psychological deterioration" or words to that effect.
Basically take the win for them out of the equation - you've less than three days to get over 750 runs and take 10 wickets if you want to win this game. Therefore all you are playing for is not to lose before we get to the Oval "highway".
Let that be a lesson to you Port, no one beats the Bays five times in a row in a GF and gets away with it!!!
whufc wrote:Many moons ago there were endless debated between myself and a couple of other posters in particular.
I continued to defend the reselection of Smith on multiple occasions.
Out of jest I labelled him 'The Blonde Don'
I actually never thought that would become a reality.
WOW.
Heres some posts from 2014 on the The Blonde Don
* If he faced his own bowling consistently, he could be a blonde Don.
* I can see East Coast Smith being found out within 18 months
* I reckon he wont get past 30 Tests
stan wrote:I feel this is the test we need to win. Going ovall 1 - 1 scares me because at some point the 2 blokes carrying our batting will fail.
Win this one and it's done and in the bank.
Agree Stan
And taking a wicket in the 6-7th over with 3-4 left, they were always going to send in a nightwatchman.
Taking a wicket in the 6-7th out of 14 and they probably expose another batsman.
whufc wrote:Many moons ago there were endless debated between myself and a couple of other posters in particular.
I continued to defend the reselection of Smith on multiple occasions.
Out of jest I labelled him 'The Blonde Don'
I actually never thought that would become a reality.
WOW.
Heres some posts from 2014 on the The Blonde Don
* If he faced his own bowling consistently, he could be a blonde Don.
* I can see East Coast Smith being found out within 18 months
* I reckon he wont get past 30 Tests
Forecast looking better for today than it was yesterday, maybe a delay to the start but should be good for a large percentage of play, with it being windy the ground will at least dry quickly. A good bowling performance today and we retain the Ashes.
