England's Summer of Cricket 2023, Featuring The Ashes

First topic message reminder :

Well done to Scott Boland, a very tidy job and added precious runs.

Another fantastic day in a fantastic test in a fantastic rivalry in a fantastic sport. Fantastic.

And just as the pattern has been throughout, when one team looked to be taking control, it just got yanked back. And it was Broad yanking it back with a brilliant spell. Labuschagne is the new Warner, as far as Broad's concerned.

174 to get. Seven wickets left. Still favouring Australia, but it'll be interesting to see how the bowling conditions are after the expected rain tomorrow. If they're anything close to what England's top order had to face yesterday, it could be curtains for Australia, but I'm not anticipating it to be that bad.

Will almost certainly be a delayed start. Hopefully the BBC's more pessimistic forecast doesn't come to fruition.

It'll probably go to the wire, that's the way the whole test has been shaping up. Might even be a tied test...

It was fun while it lasted but that's all she wrote, another epic innings from Stokes.

guildfordbat wrote:

alfie wrote:New ball in nine. Runs at a trickle now. Does Ben let Stuart take a bit more of the bowling , pick up these singles ?

Decisions...

I wouldn't. We're winning this the way we are. Around 14 more overs should be enough ....

So blame me but Plan B into operation. Broad and Robinson now need to take everything on offer but most of all play sensibly - unlike Robinson's opening hack and miss. They are both capable of reaching 30 to 40 which would be enough ....

guildfordbat wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

alfie wrote:New ball in nine. Runs at a trickle now. Does Ben let Stuart take a bit more of the bowling , pick up these singles ?

Decisions...

I wouldn't. We're winning this the way we are. Around 14 more overs should be enough ....

So blame me but Plan B into operation. Broad and Robinson now need to take everything on offer but most of all play sensibly - unlike Robinson's opening hack and miss. They are both capable of reaching 30 to 40 which would be enough ....

And another one you'll blame me for. Good catch by Smith, poor batting by Robinson.

Fat lady clearing her throat, sadly ....

I did fear once the game was slowed right down - dearth of boundaries , only about 1 single per over being taken - that there was a big risk something would go wrong before they could get within range. Was smart tactics by Australia to bowl wide rather than all the short balls as another 25 or so in a hurry would have just about broken it.

Robinson gone and that really is curtains. No justice in this world...

I do think Stokes and Broad should have rotated the strike more. Broad isn't a number 11 who needed protecting. The score just didn't tick enough.

Robinson caught now and it's nearly all over. But full credit to England who played cricket today and can hold their heads up.

Chris Woakes an adequate concussion replacement for Tongue?

Ultimately just dug the hole too deep earlier in the match. Bairstow wicket aside Australia have been ahead for the vast majority of the game, and England needed another Stokes miracle.

Broad gone too so at least bed before 1am is a consolation. Unlike WINVIZ - and Guildford! - I never felt England were favourites but it was certainly exciting for a couple of hours .

Australia have the win ; and probably the Ashes. I'm afraid they've lost me though - sadly as I'd come to really like this bunch - even Warner. Not any more. Not that they will care of course

Suppose Headingly might provide more thrills. Hopefully by then I'll be recovering my love of the game...

Concussion sub, get stokes back on

Under 50 to win, new ball due, it's all very familiar

Tongue playing well. Pity Robinson didn't play himself in as the Australian bowlers don't have much left. Under fifty to win but too many for 10 and 11.

Going to be 2-0 but it's hard to mount a case that there is that much between the two sides.

king_carlos wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Those 15 runs Lyon put on with Starc looking increasingly valuable to Australia ....

An amusing exchange from the group WhatsApp from my old cricket club in Edinburgh during that final partnership.

"What's Lyon doing? He's trying to look tough for no reason."
"Aye, or he's just trying to help his team win a cricket match."[

Carlos - Yep, Lyon helped achieve that and showed that your pal answering the question knows our wonderful game.

And so ends the fun. Australia now in firm control of the series. Suspect the post match talk will be dominated by something else entirely though.

Can England use this as a launchpad at Headingley?

So all done and the commentators will be trying to bury any controversy and just praise the winners. And yes , they deserved to win : reckon they would have done anyway. But quite honestly :

If , last week at Edgbaston , Ollie Robinson had paused in his delivery stride and mankaded Cummins - I would have found it hard to celebrate the win. And that's the way I feel tonight.

I didn’t really enjoy this match. The non stop hurling it at the batters head not for me. First test was so much better.

Shameful test, can't say i'm too concerned that England lost to a team that had to resort to that. Cummins should hang his head in shame.

First and foremost England's game management wasn't good enough. Not a whole lot between the two sides but Australia managed to press their advantage eventually. England about reached parity then gave it away.

Rest will suck up oxygen. Think in time Cummins and Carey in particular will probably regret doing that, particularly given they were still way ahead in the game.

alfie wrote:Broad gone too so at least bed before 1am is a consolation.  Unlike WINVIZ - and Guildford! - I never felt England were favourites but it was certainly exciting for a couple of hours .

Australia have the win ; and probably the Ashes. I'm afraid they've lost me though - sadly as I'd come to really like this bunch - even Warner. Not any more. Not that they will care of course

Suppose Headingly might provide more thrills. Hopefully by then I'll be recovering my love of the game...

Ha! The point I was really trying to make was that every over Stokes and Broad stayed together, we were closer to the winning line. Furthermore, the way they were playing exposed Broad only to a limited extent and lessened the chance of a wicket. Had they lasted another 7 or 8 overs together, well who knows?

Would have helped of course if Robinson hadn't batted like a total dope.

And all over. Australia win at their English fortress by 43 runs.

Ultimately, not good enough from England again. Won a great toss, but didn't convert it into a proper advantage. Conceded too many in the best bowling conditions of the test, and then didn't score enough with the best batting conditions of the test. Also didn't take proper advantage of Lyon's injury and ceded a great chance to get back in the series. Australia's short ball ploy will continue.

Alfie may argue there's not much between the two sides, but Australia have lost both tosses, still managed to win both tests on foreign turf (we know that's difficult) and lost a key bowler midway through this one, yet and in doing so have pretty much already won the series.

Stokes' heroics in Headingley in 2019 turned a likely 1-3 defeat to a respectable 2-2, but just fell short of another hero's effort. What a cricketer he is.

Australia's antics were very disappointing and left an otherwise good, and interesting test, in a poor light. I could see the guilt they felt through the nicely-nicely attitude they had on the field after lunch. Very poor stuff and not cricket. I wouldn't like it if England won in such a manner. But I do think the shameful action, contrary to the spirit of cricket, actually ignited England and made the margin closer than it otherwise would have been.

Selection for Headingley? Well, I imagine England's will be the same top seven, then Moeen, Tongue, Wood and Broad/Woakes? Can't see Anderson or Robinson making another test in a row. England's obsession with Moeen will continue. Wood should be there as long as he's fit. Tongue was the best bowler by far (not a high bar, admittedly). Australia's will probably be Murphy in for Lyon, and perhaps some questions over Hazlewood? Starc was superb in this test and justified his recall. More than justified.

Three defeats in four now for England, and the sole victory of those four barely qualified as a test, so big pressure now on Stokes/McCullum to try and turn this around. Looks likely that England are heading for their first series defeat at home to Australia for 22 years. Not a good look.

Anyway, quick turnaround to Thursday necessitates some rotation you'd guess. Wood to come in for Robinson? How much longer can Jimmy and Broad go

alfie wrote:Tongue playing well.  Pity Robinson didn't play himself in as the Australian bowlers don't have much left. Under fifty to win but too many for 10 and 11.

Going to be 2-0 but it's hard to mount a case that there is that much between the two sides.

I feared an Ashes Test would prove a step too far for Tongue after Ireland and Division 2. However, he showed I should have had more confidence as he had a fine game. The pick of England's bowlers over the two digs.

Duty281 wrote:...

Selection for Headingley? Well, I imagine England's will be the same top seven, ...

Yes, subject to Pope's shoulder. I don't know anymore about it but England won't want to take a risk on his selection and will need to be satisfied it's quickly and fully healed. Lawrence as usual on stand by.

I like Cummins but I think even he knows he's talking nonsense trying to equate the Bairstow wicket to the Starc catch

Last evening I had attributed 1% chance to Eng on account of divine power of the universe, Miracles etc.
And it was the Superman, the miracle-man who turned that 1% to 56% at one time, putting fear of defeat in Aus and joyous anticipation of the most incredible test match win that it might have been in the heart of all of Eng.

Eng is 2-0 down inspite of Stokes and not because of him.
His leadership has enabled his team to trade blows for blows and  been competitive against a Superior side in both tests

That Bairstow dismissal was as Karmik justice / equalizer to that Duckett's not out.

The pitch had died  today and spin if there was any could not be tried for the fear of Stokes.
Aussies were caught frozen like rabbits in headlight under the breathtaking assault from Stokes...bowling stuff that was easier for Stokes to put away on leg side.
They had big enuf a mountain of runs to allow them to regroup and recover.

For next game....Eng need to bring in bowlers who can bat  i.e Ali, Woakes and Curran

Aus will play Todd Murphy and I don't see them needing to change anything
Couple of  observations
Carrey is not only safe & electric behind the stumps....competent with the bat but also quite clever.
An Australian captain in the making.
Tubby Mark Taylor's comments and him wondering about this & that all the time shows he is out of touch with modern test cricket as its played now.

What is meant by 'spirit of the game'? This game is confusing enough, I don't understand what this means. So there are rules and a separate sets of other rules?

Jeff Navarro wrote:What is meant by 'spirit of the game'? This game is confusing enough, I don't understand what this means. So there are rules and a separate sets of other rules?

I will let someone else  answer.....
I will add though  it's generally invoked by a loser and a term heard almost exclusively when Eng is playing

Jeff Navarro wrote:What is meant by 'spirit of the game'? This game is confusing enough, I don't understand what this means. So there are rules and a separate sets of other rules?

Ignore KP_fan's rubbish. The spirit of the game is the preamble to the laws of the game. It is integral to the game of cricket. I've copied it in below:

Spoiler:

'Play fair' and 'accept the umpire's decision' - areas where I believe Australia have fallen short.

Duty281 wrote:

Jeff Navarro wrote:What is meant by 'spirit of the game'? This game is confusing enough, I don't understand what this means. So there are rules and a separate sets of other rules?

Ignore KP_fan's rubbish. The spirit of the game is the preamble to the laws of the game. It is integral to the game of cricket. I've copied it in below:

Spoiler:

'Play fair' and 'accept the umpire's decision' - areas where I believe Australia have fallen short.

Thank you, I knew the other dude was trolling me

guildfordbat wrote:

Duty281 wrote:...

Selection for Headingley? Well, I imagine England's will be the same top seven, ...

Yes, subject to Pope's shoulder. I don't know anymore about it but England won't want to take a risk on his selection and will need to be satisfied it's quickly and fully healed. Lawrence as usual on stand by.

Yes, I had forgotten about that. Apparently Pope is going for a scan on Monday, so he's a doubt for Headingley and, perhaps, the rest of the series. The Guardian are speculating that England will turn to Lees at 3, not Lawrence, because Lees is having a good season for his county. Would be an interesting call and would leave Lawrence as the most frustrated cricketer around.

GSC wrote:I like Cummins but I think even he knows he's talking nonsense trying to equate the Bairstow wicket to the Starc catch

I too like Cummins, but watching the Aussies in the field and him in the pressers, he is giving off mega mega puppet captain vibes. Smith is skipper in all but title isn't he really

Jeff Navarro wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Jeff Navarro wrote:What is meant by 'spirit of the game'? This game is confusing enough, I don't understand what this means. So there are rules and a separate sets of other rules?

Ignore KP_fan's rubbish. The spirit of the game is the preamble to the laws of the game. It is integral to the game of cricket. I've copied it in below:

Spoiler:

'Play fair' and 'accept the umpire's decision' - areas where I believe Australia have fallen short.

Thank you, I knew the other dude was trolling me

Hi Jeff - you're mainly a football man, aren't you? Some things can be done there but just shouldn't be. You kick the ball out of play so an injured opponent can receive treatment. They get the throw in, throw the ball to one of their teammates who scores. The rules don't forbid it but it still shouldn't happen. Similar to cricket's spirit of the game. Sometimes though it's not clear whether your opponent has been underhand or smart and you just dopey! Keeps us talking though.

Don't worry abot being trolled by the dude in question. Most of us are used to it.

guildfordbat wrote:With respect to GSC and his mobile, just a couple of follow on points without using quote chains.

1. Moeen and his damaged finger. Bad luck on him perhaps but not really on England. Getting a guy who for the last couple of years (that right?) has bowled no more than 4 overs per game to send down 29 overs on day 2 was always likely to be asking for trouble to him and us.
Around the time of the Ireland game, I voiced worry about Leach bowling 23 overs in a 90 over day with the guess being that the seam trio would bowl a combined 57 whilst Root and Stokes made up the remaining 10. I thought that might be too many for him and certainly any replacement. Having to deliver a further 6 than even that ... hmmm, not for me!
No easy solution whilst Stokes remains unable to be a proper fourth seamer although the main seam trio do need to step up more collectively.

2. ''The series is lost''. I adored Duty's pessimism if only becasuse it reminded me so much of the wailings of Dad's Army's Private Frazer that, ''We're doomed. Doomed, I tell ye!.''
I don't go as far as Duty or Frazer but fair to say the loss [of the first Test] is a kick in the nuts to us and a further lift to Australia on the heels of their World Championship victory. It's been done before of course but we'll still need to perform well to turn things round.
Joe Davis, one of the greatest sportmen of all time - provided you regard snooker as a sport - being 15 times World Champion and, even if you don't, always the most formidable of opponents, constantly stressed that the first frame of a match was so important to win as that meant your rival would need to win two in succession. Clever and canny guy, Joe.

I'm not aware of Joe saying anything about losing the first two frames of a match but sure it's not something he would have advocated.

Duty281 wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

Duty281 wrote:...

Selection for Headingley? Well, I imagine England's will be the same top seven, ...

Yes, subject to Pope's shoulder. I don't know anymore about it but England won't want to take a risk on his selection and will need to be satisfied it's quickly and fully healed. Lawrence as usual on stand by.

Yes, I had forgotten about that. Apparently Pope is going for a scan on Monday, so he's a doubt for Headingley and, perhaps, the rest of the series. The Guardian are speculating that England will turn to Lees at 3, not Lawrence, because Lees is having a good season for his county. Would be an interesting call and would leave Lawrence as the most frustrated cricketer around.

Tough on Lawrence if he gets usurped by Lees. Lawrence scored 152 for Essex last week as they thrashed Warks in the Championship.

I just find it fairly impressive they managed to rile up the lord's members.

I was impressed by the members. Normally they're in a state somewhere between 'comatose' and 'semi-conscious', but today they rose to the occasion magnificently.

So Australia, as expected, won the game. But Ben Stokes, what a player! What an innings! What an explosion that transformed the game for a while. This is something I have always been saying, he and Root don't need to just do 'see or don't see the ball, just smack it stuff'. That is good for otherwise mediocre batters, to maximize their output. A very interesting test match in the end, and again, think the better team won. Australian batters batted with greater pirpose, and their bowling unit is looking and actually bowling better on these flat tracks.

On the Bairstow wicket. Surely a bit of gamesmanship from Australia. but Bairstow has to only blame himself. Unlike non-striker cheating often defended in the name of the same nonsense of Spirit of whatever, Bairstow wasn't taking unfair advantage as such. But he was casual and careless, and the game doesn't have space for all that. So tough, but just get on with it rather than feeling entitled.
I was reminded of a similar instance with Ian Bell think in 2011 against India. Then, MS Dhoni gave in to all the selfrighteous preachings and humbug.
It is pure nonsense that the laws of the game are against its spirit.

GSC wrote:Under 50 to win, new ball due, it's all very familiar ....

It is interesting that despite the different trajectories of the two tests it came down to the same situation towards the end of the final day of play: England having to bowl out the Australian tail in Test One, and Australia having to bowl out the English tail in Test Two.

alfie wrote:So all done and the commentators will be trying to bury any controversy and just praise the winners. And yes , they deserved to win : reckon they would have done anyway. But quite honestly :

If , last week at Edgbaston , Ollie Robinson had paused in his delivery stride and mankaded Cummins - I would have found it hard to celebrate the win. And that's the way I feel tonight.

Did Robinson do something daft like letting off a non-striker taking an unfair advantage in such a crucial situation? It may be a hypothetical situation, but if he had done that, its just daft!

guildfordbat wrote:

Jeff Navarro wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Jeff Navarro wrote:What is meant by 'spirit of the game'? This game is confusing enough, I don't understand what this means. So there are rules and a separate sets of other rules?

Ignore KP_fan's rubbish. The spirit of the game is the preamble to the laws of the game. It is integral to the game of cricket. I've copied it in below:

Spoiler:

'Play fair' and 'accept the umpire's decision' - areas where I believe Australia have fallen short.

Thank you, I knew the other dude was trolling me

Hi Jeff - you're mainly a football man, aren't you? Some things can be done there but just shouldn't be. You kick the ball out of play so an injured opponent can receive treatment. They get the throw in, throw the ball to one of their teammates who scores. The rules don't forbid it but it still shouldn't happen. Similar to cricket's spirit of the game. Sometimes though it's not clear whether your opponent has been underhand or smart and you just dopey! Keeps us talking though.

Don't worry abot being trolled by the dude in question. Most of us are used to it.

Hi Guildfordbat, mainly anything but cricket(prior to covid anyway but cricket is very interesting). But thank you for the explanation.

Ahmed and Potts released from the squad to play the 3rd Test. I think Lawrence will play as Pope could hardly throw. Ideal bowling would be Broad, Tongue, Wood, Stokes and Ali.

-------
Since too many posts were made, this topic has been divided automatically. You can find the rest of this topic here :
https://www.606v2.com/t71138-england-s-summer-of-cricket-2023-featuring-the-ashes