Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

The Ashes 2009

1235714

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭Monkeybonkers


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


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,601 ✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 433 ✭✭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?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,413 ✭✭✭✭Trojan




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,601 ✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 152 ✭✭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.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,912 ✭✭✭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


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 35 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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 441 ✭✭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.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,912 ✭✭✭Washout


    Is Stuart Clark injured?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,156 ✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,912 ✭✭✭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?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,156 ✭✭✭Royale with Cheese


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


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,325 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,691 Mod ✭✭✭✭dfx-


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

    Always seem to be draws..


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,498 ✭✭✭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....


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,912 ✭✭✭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


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,139 ✭✭✭kyp_durron


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


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,912 ✭✭✭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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,139 ✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,139 ✭✭✭kyp_durron


    Jimmeh strikes. Hughes gloves down leg side haha.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 41,926 ✭✭✭✭_blank_


    Anderson again, this time Ponting.

    lol

    10/2


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 152 ✭✭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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,139 ✭✭✭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.

    106103.jpg


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,025 ✭✭✭d'Oracle


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

    Hawkeye says it would have hit off.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,912 ✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,172 ✭✭✭✭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!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,172 ✭✭✭✭kmart6


    Rain again...this coule get annoying!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,025 ✭✭✭d'Oracle


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

    +1


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,025 ✭✭✭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.


Advertisement