The Ashes: 1st Test, Trent Bridge - Final Day & Post Match Discussions

First topic message reminder :

England:
Alastair Cook*, Joe Root, Jonathan Trott, Kevin Pietersen, Ian Bell, Jonny Bairstow,
Matt Prior†, Stuart Broad, Graeme Swann, Steven Finn, James Anderson

Australia:
Shane Watson, Chris Rogers, Ed Cowan, Michael Clarke*, Steve Smith, Phil Hughes,
Brad Haddin†, Peter Siddle, Mitchell Starc, James Pattinson, Ashton Agar

If Broad was given out not even the first time when on 6 but on the second time Aus would have cruised to victory. And before anyone mentions Agar I think the Rodgers decision (given out when Anderson was kept in) and Broad being out TWICE more then evens it out

Well done Aus very young and exciting team

Wow, what a match! Credit to both teams there, fantastic drama across all 5 days. Don't think I can take many more of these.

As for "The Facts" - attention seeking little boy jog on please. Would encourage you all to put on the ignore list as I am about to do.

mystiroakey wrote:

dyrewolfe wrote:You have to feel for the Aussies. They fought back from seemingly hopeless positions and came within a whisker of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat.

Think England can count themselves lucky. Played some brilliant cricket, both batting and bowling, but always contrived to mess up when victory seemed certain.

 I think they should be very proud of what they acheived. It will be gutting- but they will take massive positives IMO.

Agreed. My main worry is this will make them even more fired up for the 2nd Test.

Plenty to work on for England if they're to capitalise on this start.

GloriousEmpire wrote:

The Facts wrote:Appaling decision not a chance you can give that out when there is no way of being a 100% sure. As I said 99% of the big decisions went England's way

Have to agree. Some hallucination of a hot spot, a clicking sound that could've been anything and somehow a game changing decision is "confirmed".  

No the Poms can't get to number 1.

Australia are ranked to low to gain the sufficient points.

Even if they did, everyone knows the Proteas are the true best side.

Come on chaps , remember rule One

Ignore the WUMs !

mystiroakey wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

The Facts wrote:Appaling decision not a chance you can give that out when there is no way of being a 100% sure. As I said 99% of the big decisions went England's way

Have to agree. Some hallucination of a hot spot, a clicking sound that could've been anything and somehow a game changing decision is "confirmed".  

 strange- deffo hotspot- deffo sound, deffo snicko , deffo edge, deffo out ..But ok belieev what you want i suppose:erm: 

All I can say is that given the result of the controversial decision favours England I can guarantee no fuss will be made.

The bright spot on the bat is there prior to the ball arriving and coincides with the advertising marking on the bat.

Although by the time the British commentary team are finished reviewing it and saying how certain and obvious it is I'm sure history will have been rewritten into a certainty.

Poor man's Steyn, Anderson, gets a 10 wicket match bag against the weakest Australian side in loving memory.

Will he get a knighthood?

I'll add Glorious Empire to the ignore list whilst I'm on it

Okay which of you lot made the click noise???  

Aus win without the Agar/Broad howler.
pretty much every lineball England LBW was given not out and upheld with DRS, every lineball Aussie LBW was given out, and upheld by DRS.

Please feel free to argue any of these points

I hope so, but I think you'll have a chance in Oz, provided you win here. We are playing in UAE in October, and I dont think a side not named Pakistan has actually forced a result there.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Okay which of you lot made the click noise???  

Must have been a stray cricket on the field or something Legendkillar  

I still have plenty of "loving memories", Gerry.

VTR wrote:Wow, what a match! Credit to both teams there, fantastic drama across all 5 days. Don't think I can take many more of these.

As for "The Facts" - attention seeking little boy jog on please. Would encourage you all to put on the ignore list as I am about to do.

Good idea - I have just followed your advice.

"The bright spot on the bat is there prior to the ball arriving and coincides with the advertising marking on the bat."

are you blind or something?

Did you not here the nick?- if you cant hear the nick on tv or see the clear Hotspot- check out snicko(a digital graph of sound) . Snicko has confirmed any doubts you may have due to your disadvantaged senses!

It was the sound of the last straw for the integrity of the game giving way.

Ohhhh "digital" it must prove everything then! Look if it was relevant at all it would be available to the umpires. It's not. What does that tell you?

I do like Michael Clarke

You know somethings gone right when the wums emerge en masse

In fact it was a great relief that there was absolutely no doubt that last decision was correct. Drs got this one 100% right...lucky England had a review left !

(anyone who saw hotspot mark , heard sound , saw snicko and even the way Haddin's head swung around ; and still denies it , is on another planet   )

Dramatic end to a great Test match...credit to both teams  

Mystir they are on the wind up no point arguing with them. They have not been on here until the moment of victory. Click their username then you can add them as a foe so never have to read their drivel again.

This is a good and friendly board so I'd rather only read the comments of the actual cricket fans not some little boys who come on here trying to get attention.

I like to know how GE knows that the mark was on the bat before the ball passed it? The bat was a mile from his pads.

I would like to know exactly what it was for a fact.

well done both teams anyway.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Okay which of you lot made the click noise???  

Might have been me. My grandmother is Xhosa, and at the exact time of impact, I told her 'I'm sorry' which is pronounced with a click in Xhosa.

Aussies

At least Australia got 21 wickets... maybe 22?

Anyway, it's a decent step forward for the Baggy Green. This Series will be a lot closer than most predicted.

Linebreaker wrote:At least Australia got 21 wickets... maybe 22?

Anyway, it's a decent step forward for the Baggy Green. This Series will be a lot closer than most predicted.

I will give you 21

minus root and trott off course = 19

We repeatedly see a bright mark on the bat coinciding with the advertising which has different thermal properties to the bat.

You will notice when an English batter decision is being reviewed the commentators point this out ad nauseum.

Snicko = withdrawn from official use for being so utterly unreliable.

Linebreaker wrote:I still have plenty of "loving memories", Gerry.

So an OBE is enough lol

GloriousEmpire wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

The Facts wrote:Appaling decision not a chance you can give that out when there is no way of being a 100% sure. As I said 99% of the big decisions went England's way

Have to agree. Some hallucination of a hot spot, a clicking sound that could've been anything and somehow a game changing decision is "confirmed".  

 strange- deffo hotspot- deffo sound, deffo snicko , deffo edge, deffo out ..But ok belieev what you want i suppose:erm: 

All I can say is that given the result of the controversial decision favours England I can guarantee no fuss will be made.

The bright spot on the bat is there prior to the ball arriving and coincides with the advertising marking on the bat.

Although by the time the British commentary team are finished reviewing it and saying how certain and obvious it is I'm sure history will have been rewritten into a certainty.

If you like Australia so much you may want to try emulating them. They are being far more dignified and sportsmanlike about it and accept that some decisions go for you and some go against you.

Gerry SA wrote:Poor man's Steyn, Anderson, gets a 10 wicket match bag against the weakest Australian side in loving memory.

Will he get a knighthood?

Come on Gerry ...we all admire Steyn on here ...why do you have to snipe at Jimmy all the time ? It is getting a bit tedious...

I think most people not called I. Botham predicted a close one linebreaker. Players raise their game for the Ashes, they are always hard-fought. Even the last series which England won 3-1 involved 2 Tests that Aus dominated. This is what makes it one of the great sporting events.

Great game.   That makes the score: Cricket 1, WUMs 0.

mystiroakey wrote:

Linebreaker wrote:At least Australia got 21 wickets... maybe 22?

Anyway, it's a decent step forward for the Baggy Green. This Series will be a lot closer than most predicted.

I will give you 21

minus root and trott off course = 19

 yeah sure mysti.
Thanks for the kind words, mate. (I'm not hurting as much as I should!... a good sign)

blah blah

Worst team to represent Aus in 100 years outplaying the best team in England in years lool you could not make it up

God forbid if Anderson gets injured because this much talked about English attack looks average at best outside Jimmy

Aus should just reverse the batting order and be done with it...

alfie wrote:

Gerry SA wrote:Poor man's Steyn, Anderson, gets a 10 wicket match bag against the weakest Australian side in loving memory.

Will he get a knighthood?

Come on Gerry ...we all admire Steyn on here  ...why do you have to snipe at Jimmy all the time ?  It is getting a bit tedious...

So why are your idiot former players Botham, Strauss, Lloyd etc

Proclaiming Anderson the best bowler in the world?

Steyn is streets ahead.

Oh wow. What a Test match. Was it mystiroakey who said a couple of days ago that this Test could be like Edgbaston 2005? He was more right than he knew!

After a tense hour, England took 3 wickets in the next 30 minutes to leave Australia 231/9. England on the brink of victory. Then another hour, where Australia whittled it down to 20 left. Unbelievable drama. A 40 minute break full of tension and what might be - even Edgbaston 2005 didn't have that!

Then after lunch, Anderson, the most talented bowler in all the world, managed to shake off the cramp that had plagued him before lunch. For England, James? For the urn, perhaps?

Then that nick. I was out of my seat straight away, a clear noise, but no says the umpire. What drama. One more review, and there it is, England win the Test. Very fitting it had to end on a DRS call. Very fitting Anderson got his ten wickets.

Oh the wums are back are they? Even better. ENGLAND!    

What an effort by Haddin and Pattinson though.  
Commiserations to Linebreaker and every other Australian fan.

What a Test.

I wish tremmers was fit.

Time for onions?

Gerry


Steyn could have taken 25 wickets, 20 legal ones, three referred and two umpires calls vs these Aussies

Lets all lighten up.. There was a great game between two very different teams, Test cricket cant ask for a better advertisement

Gerry SA wrote:

alfie wrote:

Gerry SA wrote:Poor man's Steyn, Anderson, gets a 10 wicket match bag against the weakest Australian side in loving memory.

Will he get a knighthood?

Come on Gerry ...we all admire Steyn on here  ...why do you have to snipe at Jimmy all the time ?  It is getting a bit tedious...

So why are your idiot former players Botham, Strauss, Lloyd etc

Proclaiming Anderson the best bowler in the world?

Steyn is streets ahead.

Bless your insecurities. Anderson is more talented than Steyn. Steyn is more consistent than Anderson.

Ergo, Steyn is the best in the world. But he's certainly not the most talented.

GloriousEmpire wrote:We repeatedly see a bright mark on the bat coinciding with the advertising which has different thermal properties to the bat.

You will notice when an English batter decision is being reviewed the commentators point this out ad nauseum.

Snicko = withdrawn from official use for being so utterly unreliable.

No system is perfect but its the best we've got at the moment. The same technology is used for both teams and the same rules apply.

Also, unless I'm very much mistaken, what the commentators think has no bearing on the umpire's decision.

Sounds like a very large bunch of sour grapes you've got there.

So because a few ex-players who don't represent the view on here say that we have to put up with endless posts about Jimmy being a club bowler

kingraf wrote:Gerry


Steyn could have taken 25 wickets, 20 legal ones, three referred and two umpires calls vs these Aussies

Lets all lighten up.. There was a great game between two very different teams, Test cricket cant ask for a better advertisement  

Steyn wouldn't need to bowl at this Aussie side.

They'd just walk back to the pavilion in fear

Someone on facebook just posted a sequence of images showing that the snicko was well after the ball passed the bat

The sound was also well after ball passed bat

Are we sure the snicko was actually at the right time?

Anyway, time to watch The Tour. Froome for the one-two today!

Victory for Test cricket as well, lest I forget!

dyrewolfe wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:We repeatedly see a bright mark on the bat coinciding with the advertising which has different thermal properties to the bat.

You will notice when an English batter decision is being reviewed the commentators point this out ad nauseum.

Snicko = withdrawn from official use for being so utterly unreliable.

No system is perfect but its the best we've got at the moment. The same technology is used for both teams and the same rules apply.

Also, unless I'm very much mistaken, what the commentators think has no bearing on the umpire's decision.

Sounds like a very large bunch of sour grapes you've got there.

 was snicko withdrawn?
I  thought it is just to slow to use as of yet- however snicko are wokling on making it quicker and the ICC want to use it..

mystiroakey wrote:

dyrewolfe wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:We repeatedly see a bright mark on the bat coinciding with the advertising which has different thermal properties to the bat.

You will notice when an English batter decision is being reviewed the commentators point this out ad nauseum.

Snicko = withdrawn from official use for being so utterly unreliable.

No system is perfect but its the best we've got at the moment. The same technology is used for both teams and the same rules apply.

Also, unless I'm very much mistaken, what the commentators think has no bearing on the umpire's decision.

Sounds like a very large bunch of sour grapes you've got there.

 was snicko withdrawn?
I  thought it is just to slow to use as of yet- however snicko are wokling on making it quicker and the ICC want to use it..

Does this mean that the umpire saw the replay which didnt have the noise with it?

The Facts wrote:Someone on facebook just posted a sequence of images showing that the snicko was well after the ball passed the bat

The sound was also well after ball passed bat

Are we sure the snicko was actually at the right time?

 link?