West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
+12
Carrotdude
Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler
sirfredperry
Shelsey93
guildfordbat
ShahenshahG
Liam
Duty281
msp83
JDizzle
Biltong
Pal Joey
16 posters
The v2 Forum :: Sport :: Cricket
Page 3 of 5
Page 3 of 5 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
First topic message reminder :
Frank Worrell Trophy
April 7-11, Kensington Oval, Bridgetown
Start time: 1000 AST, 1500 GMT, 0000 EST
This will be the 22nd Frank Worrell Trophy Series since 1960-61.
21 Series - Australia won 11, West Indies won 8, 2 series drawn
93 matches - Australia won 41, West Indies 30
Overall: Played 108 - West Indies 32, Australia 52, Drawn 23, Tied 1
West Indies:
1 Adrian Barath, 2 Kraigg Brathwaite, 3 Kirk Edwards, 4 Darren Bravo, 5 Shivnarine Chanderpaul, 6 Narsingh Deonarine,
7 Darren Sammy*, 8 Carlton Baugh†, 9 Devendra Bishoo, 10 Fidel Edwards, 11 Kemar Roach.
Australia:
1 Ed Cowan, 2 David Warner, 3 Shane Watson, 4 Ricky Ponting, 5 Michael Clarke*, 6 Michael Hussey,
7 Matthew Wade†, 8 Peter Siddle, 9 Ryan Harris, 10 Ben Hilfenhaus, 11 Nathan Lyon.
Frank Worrell Trophy
April 7-11, Kensington Oval, Bridgetown
Start time: 1000 AST, 1500 GMT, 0000 EST
This will be the 22nd Frank Worrell Trophy Series since 1960-61.
21 Series - Australia won 11, West Indies won 8, 2 series drawn
93 matches - Australia won 41, West Indies 30
Overall: Played 108 - West Indies 32, Australia 52, Drawn 23, Tied 1
West Indies:
1 Adrian Barath, 2 Kraigg Brathwaite, 3 Kirk Edwards, 4 Darren Bravo, 5 Shivnarine Chanderpaul, 6 Narsingh Deonarine,
7 Darren Sammy*, 8 Carlton Baugh†, 9 Devendra Bishoo, 10 Fidel Edwards, 11 Kemar Roach.
Australia:
1 Ed Cowan, 2 David Warner, 3 Shane Watson, 4 Ricky Ponting, 5 Michael Clarke*, 6 Michael Hussey,
7 Matthew Wade†, 8 Peter Siddle, 9 Ryan Harris, 10 Ben Hilfenhaus, 11 Nathan Lyon.
Last edited by Linebreaker on Sun 08 Apr 2012, 10:45 am; edited 4 times in total
Pal Joey- PJ
- Posts : 53337
Join date : 2011-01-27
Location : Ku-ring-gai
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
msp83 wrote:Shelsey93 wrote:Duty281 wrote:Clarke is out caught. Or is he? It's been reviewed but there is no HotSpot or Snicko....not out. Hmmm. Don't think there was enough evidence to overturn that, think Dilshan a few days ago.
My personal view is that there was just about enough evidence to overturn the Dilshan one - if you looked carefully there was clear air between bat and ball.
On this one it is again marginal. Though, for me, the right decision was made to overturn as it just didn't look like it had hit the bat - no deviation and no noise even if no clear air could be seen.
I think the issue is not much of whether either Dilshan or Clarke have hit it or not. Its more about consistency and standards. I tend to agree that there was nothing that clearly suggested Dilshan had hit, and likewise not much to suggest Clarke did the same. But Dilshan was given out and Clarke not out. On both the occasions the onfield call was out. Either if there is no substantive profe, you give the benefit of doubt to the batter, or stay with the onfield umpire. They say the DRS is there to avoid the absolute howlers. Both the Dilshan one and the Clarke decision were not bad enough to be called one. So may be the onfield call should have stayed. Or the benefit should have gone to the batter.
The ICC have to do something about this quickly, either bring in all the technology, or drop it. Can't have this inconsistent nonsense for ever.
Spot on.
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
msp83 wrote:Big wicket for the West Indies, one more quick wicket, and then it will be a struggle for the Australians.
Agreed, the next man in is the wicketkeeper Wade who is making his debut. So he's already feeling pressure ontop of the extra pressure of the match situation!
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
1 run off the last 4 overs, the pressure builds....
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Big shout for LBW, turned down and the Windies review it...and it was missing by a big distance, high and down leg. No reviews left for the Windies!
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
The lead is now down below 300, 152/4 but still a long way back to parity for Australia.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Australia fighting back through Hussey and Clarke, West Indies need a wicket, and need it pretty soon. Who's going to get it? They are trusting the parttime spin of Narsingh Deonarine to do the job, just like what David Warner did for the Australians!. a couple of big wide full tosses and half-trackers can be tried, just to see!.
msp83- Posts : 16069
Join date : 2011-05-30
Location : India
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
200/4 at tea. New ball in ten overs so they'll probably want at least 3 wickets this session - get one of Hussey and Clarke and that will be very possible.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Last session coming up, with Australia's recovery well and truly on. They are 200-4, with clarke batting with a 50 under his belt and Hussey looking well set. The new ball is 10 overs away, and West Indies can have it in the first hour after tea itself. Think they should right away go for it and attack. Hopefully before that, Someone can separate Clarke and Hussey. Sammy should just bring Bishoo back and he himself should take the ball from the other end till the new ball can be given to Roach and Fidel.
msp83- Posts : 16069
Join date : 2011-05-30
Location : India
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
msp83 wrote:Shelsey93 wrote:Duty281 wrote:Clarke is out caught. Or is he? It's been reviewed but there is no HotSpot or Snicko....not out. Hmmm. Don't think there was enough evidence to overturn that, think Dilshan a few days ago.
My personal view is that there was just about enough evidence to overturn the Dilshan one - if you looked carefully there was clear air between bat and ball.
On this one it is again marginal. Though, for me, the right decision was made to overturn as it just didn't look like it had hit the bat - no deviation and no noise even if no clear air could be seen.
I think the issue is not much of whether either Dilshan or Clarke have hit it or not. Its more about consistency and standards. I tend to agree that there was nothing that clearly suggested Dilshan had hit, and likewise not much to suggest Clarke did the same. But Dilshan was given out and Clarke not out. On both the occasions the onfield call was out. Either if there is no substantive profe, you give the benefit of doubt to the batter, or stay with the onfield umpire. They say the DRS is there to avoid the absolute howlers. Both the Dilshan one and the Clarke decision were not bad enough to be called one. So may be the onfield call should have stayed. Or the benefit should have gone to the batter.
The ICC have to do something about this quickly, either bring in all the technology, or drop it. Can't have this inconsistent nonsense for ever.
I agree with everything you say. But how can you define the limit of enough evidence? Clearly Tucker thought that there was not enough evidence with Dilshan, and Erasmus thought there was enough evidence with Clarke. But they could both have gone the other way. Personally I believe the system is not just for 'howlers' and feel that it is there so that more correct decisions are made. As a result of the DRS, neither decision became 'less correct' than if there were no DRS or it was just for 'howlers' as, in my opinion, neither hit the ball.
Shelsey93- Posts : 3134
Join date : 2011-12-14
Age : 30
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Seems its raining!. Terrible.
msp83- Posts : 16069
Join date : 2011-05-30
Location : India
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Shelsey93 wrote:msp83 wrote:Shelsey93 wrote:Duty281 wrote:Clarke is out caught. Or is he? It's been reviewed but there is no HotSpot or Snicko....not out. Hmmm. Don't think there was enough evidence to overturn that, think Dilshan a few days ago.
My personal view is that there was just about enough evidence to overturn the Dilshan one - if you looked carefully there was clear air between bat and ball.
On this one it is again marginal. Though, for me, the right decision was made to overturn as it just didn't look like it had hit the bat - no deviation and no noise even if no clear air could be seen.
I think the issue is not much of whether either Dilshan or Clarke have hit it or not. Its more about consistency and standards. I tend to agree that there was nothing that clearly suggested Dilshan had hit, and likewise not much to suggest Clarke did the same. But Dilshan was given out and Clarke not out. On both the occasions the onfield call was out. Either if there is no substantive profe, you give the benefit of doubt to the batter, or stay with the onfield umpire. They say the DRS is there to avoid the absolute howlers. Both the Dilshan one and the Clarke decision were not bad enough to be called one. So may be the onfield call should have stayed. Or the benefit should have gone to the batter.
The ICC have to do something about this quickly, either bring in all the technology, or drop it. Can't have this inconsistent nonsense for ever.
I agree with everything you say. But how can you define the limit of enough evidence? Clearly Tucker thought that there was not enough evidence with Dilshan, and Erasmus thought there was enough evidence with Clarke. But they could both have gone the other way. Personally I believe the system is not just for 'howlers' and feel that it is there so that more correct decisions are made. As a result of the DRS, neither decision became 'less correct' than if there were no DRS or it was just for 'howlers' as, in my opinion, neither hit the ball.
If it comes down to the judgement of the umpire, I think the onfield umpire's call should stand, you don't need a third umpire to give a subjective judgement like that. Otherwise, give the benefit of doubt to the batsman. Even better, involve all the damn technology available.
msp83- Posts : 16069
Join date : 2011-05-30
Location : India
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Last session started but was briefly held up due to rain. WI need quick wickets and they have a chance under heavy cloud.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
243/5 now with Clarke gone on 73, Bishoo taking his first wicket. Still 206 behind and WI would like a few more before the close...
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
msp83 wrote:Shelsey93 wrote:msp83 wrote:Shelsey93 wrote:Duty281 wrote:Clarke is out caught. Or is he? It's been reviewed but there is no HotSpot or Snicko....not out. Hmmm. Don't think there was enough evidence to overturn that, think Dilshan a few days ago.
My personal view is that there was just about enough evidence to overturn the Dilshan one - if you looked carefully there was clear air between bat and ball.
On this one it is again marginal. Though, for me, the right decision was made to overturn as it just didn't look like it had hit the bat - no deviation and no noise even if no clear air could be seen.
I think the issue is not much of whether either Dilshan or Clarke have hit it or not. Its more about consistency and standards. I tend to agree that there was nothing that clearly suggested Dilshan had hit, and likewise not much to suggest Clarke did the same. But Dilshan was given out and Clarke not out. On both the occasions the onfield call was out. Either if there is no substantive profe, you give the benefit of doubt to the batter, or stay with the onfield umpire. They say the DRS is there to avoid the absolute howlers. Both the Dilshan one and the Clarke decision were not bad enough to be called one. So may be the onfield call should have stayed. Or the benefit should have gone to the batter.
The ICC have to do something about this quickly, either bring in all the technology, or drop it. Can't have this inconsistent nonsense for ever.
I agree with everything you say. But how can you define the limit of enough evidence? Clearly Tucker thought that there was not enough evidence with Dilshan, and Erasmus thought there was enough evidence with Clarke. But they could both have gone the other way. Personally I believe the system is not just for 'howlers' and feel that it is there so that more correct decisions are made. As a result of the DRS, neither decision became 'less correct' than if there were no DRS or it was just for 'howlers' as, in my opinion, neither hit the ball.
If it comes down to the judgement of the umpire, I think the onfield umpire's call should stand, you don't need a third umpire to give a subjective judgement like that. Otherwise, give the benefit of doubt to the batsman. Even better, involve all the damn technology available.
The system is supposed to operate as you say msp. The review should only over turn a decision when the third umpire feels theres strong evidence to do so. he may feel " well Id probably give that not out" but if he isnt sure the on field call is wrong then he doesnt change it.
The system doesnt make work calls, but it may on occasion uphold some bad ones where there isnt a clear case
Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler- Posts : 10344
Join date : 2011-06-02
Location : Englandshire
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:msp83 wrote:Shelsey93 wrote:msp83 wrote:Shelsey93 wrote:Duty281 wrote:Clarke is out caught. Or is he? It's been reviewed but there is no HotSpot or Snicko....not out. Hmmm. Don't think there was enough evidence to overturn that, think Dilshan a few days ago.
My personal view is that there was just about enough evidence to overturn the Dilshan one - if you looked carefully there was clear air between bat and ball.
On this one it is again marginal. Though, for me, the right decision was made to overturn as it just didn't look like it had hit the bat - no deviation and no noise even if no clear air could be seen.
I think the issue is not much of whether either Dilshan or Clarke have hit it or not. Its more about consistency and standards. I tend to agree that there was nothing that clearly suggested Dilshan had hit, and likewise not much to suggest Clarke did the same. But Dilshan was given out and Clarke not out. On both the occasions the onfield call was out. Either if there is no substantive profe, you give the benefit of doubt to the batter, or stay with the onfield umpire. They say the DRS is there to avoid the absolute howlers. Both the Dilshan one and the Clarke decision were not bad enough to be called one. So may be the onfield call should have stayed. Or the benefit should have gone to the batter.
The ICC have to do something about this quickly, either bring in all the technology, or drop it. Can't have this inconsistent nonsense for ever.
I agree with everything you say. But how can you define the limit of enough evidence? Clearly Tucker thought that there was not enough evidence with Dilshan, and Erasmus thought there was enough evidence with Clarke. But they could both have gone the other way. Personally I believe the system is not just for 'howlers' and feel that it is there so that more correct decisions are made. As a result of the DRS, neither decision became 'less correct' than if there were no DRS or it was just for 'howlers' as, in my opinion, neither hit the ball.
If it comes down to the judgement of the umpire, I think the onfield umpire's call should stand, you don't need a third umpire to give a subjective judgement like that. Otherwise, give the benefit of doubt to the batsman. Even better, involve all the damn technology available.
The system is supposed to operate as you say msp. The review should only over turn a decision when the third umpire feels theres strong evidence to do so. he may feel " well Id probably give that not out" but if he isnt sure the on field call is wrong then he doesnt change it.
The system doesnt make work calls, but it may on occasion uphold some bad ones where there isnt a clear case
Sadly I think that dodgy 3rd umpire call has cost WI 46 runs.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
248/5 and they're off for bad light, that's probably it for the day as well. Forecast looking quite rainy for tomorrow as well so a draw is looking pretty nailed-on.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
windies bowling attack certainly got more out of this pitch than the aussies :P
i think pattinson will play the next test.
i think pattinson will play the next test.
Guest- Guest
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
2 wickets already this morning! 250/7 now, I love seeing the Windies being competitive.
Carrotdude- Posts : 1574
Join date : 2011-03-28
Location : Kent
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Yes, this is good, it might just be a competitive series after all.
Biltong- Moderator
- Posts : 26945
Join date : 2011-04-27
Location : Twilight zone
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Well done the West Indies, IF the rain holds off and IF they wrap up these last 3 wickets quickly...there is a real chance of victory for them. The Aussies are still 199 behind.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Just checked the weather forecast and there is a small chance of showers throughout this test but that's all it is. A small chance and I wager that every cricket fan besides those living in Australia would want the rain to hold off and WI to get a famous victory.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
This is day 4 correct?
Biltong- Moderator
- Posts : 26945
Join date : 2011-04-27
Location : Twilight zone
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
biltongbek wrote:This is day 4 correct?
Yes.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
So 82 overs left for today, plus 90 tomorrow.
Aus is 256/7, 193 behind.
If WI can get them out by lunch at the latest it would mean Aus might be 140-150 behind.
WI bat for the rest of today which could give them a lead of 300-320.
Then tomorrow Australia has to bat for 90 overs.
Aus is 256/7, 193 behind.
If WI can get them out by lunch at the latest it would mean Aus might be 140-150 behind.
WI bat for the rest of today which could give them a lead of 300-320.
Then tomorrow Australia has to bat for 90 overs.
Biltong- Moderator
- Posts : 26945
Join date : 2011-04-27
Location : Twilight zone
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
biltongbek wrote:So 82 overs left for today, plus 90 tomorrow.
Aus is 256/7, 193 behind.
If WI can get them out by lunch at the latest it would mean Aus might be 140-150 behind.
WI bat for the rest of today which could give them a lead of 300-320.
Then tomorrow Australia has to bat for 90 overs.
Actually Biltong, they're playing extra overs because of the rain/bad light delays. There's still 89 overs left today and probably 98 tomorrow.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Even better, that will give WI a few more overs to take CONTROL.
Biltong- Moderator
- Posts : 26945
Join date : 2011-04-27
Location : Twilight zone
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
I know it's his debut but Matthew Wade is doing diddly squat out there, 24 scored off 92 and being outscored by Ryan Harris!
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
And finally Wade is gone to the bowling of Fidel Edwards which makes it 285/8. WI gotta wrap these last 2 wickets up quickly.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Big black, fast and aggressive, bouncers hitting batsmen? Whats this, West Indies you say? Good times ahead I hope. Come back legendary teams.
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
We might be having a THREE HOUR morning session which is just ridiculous. Australia 344/9, frustration personified for the West Indies.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Hello all,
Back on these boards after a busy Easter week-end with family and cricket.
Australia tail resisting on what looks to me like a typical nowadays West Indian wicket.
Surprised by Pattinson's omission, probably due to still recovering from injury. If Australia ever do get these 4 seamers and Cummins fully fit there's a tough choice to make out there.
A lot of players have made starts, but only Chanderpaul has scored 100. I'm not sure that's much to do with the pitch but more to do with how cricketers play nowadays.
Unless either side collapses in the next innings the draw is looking favourite from here.
Back on these boards after a busy Easter week-end with family and cricket.
Australia tail resisting on what looks to me like a typical nowadays West Indian wicket.
Surprised by Pattinson's omission, probably due to still recovering from injury. If Australia ever do get these 4 seamers and Cummins fully fit there's a tough choice to make out there.
A lot of players have made starts, but only Chanderpaul has scored 100. I'm not sure that's much to do with the pitch but more to do with how cricketers play nowadays.
Unless either side collapses in the next innings the draw is looking favourite from here.
Mike Selig- Posts : 4295
Join date : 2011-05-30
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Australia get through to lunch. If they can hang around for another 20 at least after lunch, they'll be pressure on the West Indian batsmen, who didn't deal with it too well against India. Could be interesting.
Mike Selig- Posts : 4295
Join date : 2011-05-30
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
These late order runs shows how much of a work in progress this WI side, and how far do they have to go to consistently challenge top sides. At 285-8, they had a big lead in sight, but the last 2 wickets have so far added 81. I just hope the WI get this last wicket soon and then more importantly, manage to avoid a batting collapse.
Think it will be dificult for them to win from here, they should look to possitively bat out the rest of the match now.
Think it will be dificult for them to win from here, they should look to possitively bat out the rest of the match now.
msp83- Posts : 16069
Join date : 2011-05-30
Location : India
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
This might just be the day when ryan Harris scores his first test ton!. If Warner can be the next best alternative to Warne!.......
msp83- Posts : 16069
Join date : 2011-05-30
Location : India
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Sadly, I now have to agree. Ryan Harris and Nathan Lyon are doing tremendous to bat their team to relative safety. The pendulum has swung dramatically now, if Australia manage to get early wickets they may get victory which looked nigh-on impossible a couple of hours ago.
Last edited by Duty281 on Tue 10 Apr 2012, 6:49 pm; edited 1 time in total
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
matthew lyon?
these two doing a sterling job for the Australians, WI will be very disappointed they haven't managed a big lead here. Edwards gets Harris LBW, but it's overturned on review as it was just too high.
these two doing a sterling job for the Australians, WI will be very disappointed they haven't managed a big lead here. Edwards gets Harris LBW, but it's overturned on review as it was just too high.
Mad for Chelsea- Posts : 12103
Join date : 2011-02-11
Age : 36
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Mad for Chelsea wrote:matthew lyon?
these two doing a sterling job for the Australians, WI will be very disappointed they haven't managed a big lead here. Edwards gets Harris LBW, but it's overturned on review as it was just too high.
Sorry had a bit of a brainfreeze there, I meant Nathan! Lead down to 50 now.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Tough to see the West Indies winning from here you'd have to say. They'd need either to collapse somwhat themselves and hope Australia don't do better, or hope for a complete collapse by Aus.
Shades of Adelaide 2006, except of course a certain Mr Warne won't be bowling.
Shades of Adelaide 2006, except of course a certain Mr Warne won't be bowling.
Mike Selig- Posts : 4295
Join date : 2011-05-30
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Mike Selig wrote:Tough to see the West Indies winning from here you'd have to say. They'd need either to collapse somwhat themselves and hope Australia don't do better, or hope for a complete collapse by Aus.
Shades of Adelaide 2006, except of course a certain Mr Warne won't be bowling.
Probably a draw at this stage, though WI capable of a collapse. They do have a slight balance issue, but I think an unavoidable one if Dwayne Bravo is unavailable, given that Baugh is nowhere near good enough to bat at No. 6 and Sammy is bowling and captaining well.
Shelsey93- Posts : 3134
Join date : 2011-12-14
Age : 30
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Australia have declared at 406-9. WI leads by 43, and the match is their's to lose!. Will the frustrations with the last wickets haunt their batting? Will the batters show the same application that they did in the first innings? Will anyone else other than Chanderpaul would manage to do it long enough to put a big one on the score book?
msp83- Posts : 16069
Join date : 2011-05-30
Location : India
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
That's gotta hurt the Windies, Australia were on the ropes at 285/8 and looking like they'll be polished off for around 300. Harris hits 68, Hilfenhaus 24 and Lyon 40, Australia declare on 406 and suddenly the pressure is all on the Windies! 46 overs left until stumps - the West Indies must not scratch around at 2 an over, they must be positive and get into a big as lead as possible.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Barath has just been bowled off an inside edge, Windies 2/1. Game on.
Duty281- Posts : 32622
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 28
Location : Not having Chance on here
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Duty281 wrote:That's gotta hurt the Windies, Australia were on the ropes at 285/8 and looking like they'll be polished off for around 300. Harris hits 68, Hilfenhaus 24 and Lyon 40, Australia declare on 406 and suddenly the pressure is all on the Windies! 46 overs left until stumps - the West Indies must not scratch around at 2 an over, they must be positive and get into a big as lead as possible.
And they're 2 down. They can't bat as negative as they did in the first innings, otherwise they will lose this test match. Aussies are fired up and if they can get them 5/6 down at the end of play they'll win this test match.
Liam- Posts : 3574
Join date : 2011-08-09
Location : Wales
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
What a terrible shot by Barath, that's why he shouldn't be opening the batting. You have to be positive against the new ball, but not stupid, there's a fine line.
Liam- Posts : 3574
Join date : 2011-08-09
Location : Wales
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
oh dear, given out but there's an appeal.
OUT.
4/3, incredible how cricket can change in a split second.
OUT.
4/3, incredible how cricket can change in a split second.
Liam- Posts : 3574
Join date : 2011-08-09
Location : Wales
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Wow. I said WI are capable of a collapse. At least Shiv's next but if another wicket falls there really isn't much from six down.
Shelsey93- Posts : 3134
Join date : 2011-12-14
Age : 30
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Well that couldn't have gone much better for the Aussies. Chanderpaul or nothing for the Windies really...
Mike Selig- Posts : 4295
Join date : 2011-05-30
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Mike Selig wrote:Well that couldn't have gone much better for the Aussies. Chanderpaul or nothing for the Windies really...
heard that a few times over the past few years haven't we
Liam- Posts : 3574
Join date : 2011-08-09
Location : Wales
Re: West Indies v Australia, 1st Test, Barbados
Windies 4-3 in their second innings. Surely even they can't snatch defeat from the jaws of a safe draw?
guildfordbat- Posts : 16560
Join date : 2011-04-07
Page 3 of 5 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Similar topics
» Australia v West Indies test series
» West Indies v Australia, 2nd Test, Trinidad
» West Indies v Australia, 3rd Test, Dominica
» West Indies vs England, Barbados - Friday 1st May to Tuesday 5th May
» Australia v West Indies Series
» West Indies v Australia, 2nd Test, Trinidad
» West Indies v Australia, 3rd Test, Dominica
» West Indies vs England, Barbados - Friday 1st May to Tuesday 5th May
» Australia v West Indies Series
The v2 Forum :: Sport :: Cricket
Page 3 of 5
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|