3rd Test Thread.

mike65

So no sooner has the dust started to settle from the knife edge of Edgbaston
than its all off to Old Trafford (that caused some confusion when I was young!)

England have stuck with the same 11 + 12th man while Austrialia will be looking to bring in a new fast bowler with the news that Brett Lee has infection in a knee. McGrath is out also.

Mike.

arbeitsscheuer

Fantastic news, England haven't had much luck in Ashes series prior to this one - it seems that the Gods of Fate are most decidedly favouring us Poms!

But even with those 2 (crucial) players out, England need "big performances", as Vaughny would say.

Fingers crossed.

Harry2001

Australia have called up New South Wales fast bowler Stuart Clark into their Ashes squad as cover.

Clark called up

It's weird alright to see the Aussies dropping and England not having any worries apart from Vaughan last week, long may it last

Harry2001

Has anyone changed their overall ashes predictions after the first two tests?

I said 3-1 at the start and still think Australia will have too much overall, maybe 3-2 Aussies now

RuggieBear

i still reckon 2-1 to the aussies....:(

arbeitsscheuer

I said 2-2 at the beginning and I'm gonna stick with that.
I also always maintained that England would win at the Oval, so I guess that means they're gonna either lose at Old Trafford or Trent Bridge.

But I have hope. This is our best shot for as long as I've been watchin Cricket.

mike65

Dang!

Mike.

RuggieBear

was listening to 5live earlier and their reporter was watching McGrath and Lee do their fitness tests. He reckoned that McGrath looked fit enough to field but wasn't sure if the anklw would be capable of taking the strain of bowling.

county

the groundsmen i see say the pitch will not favour shane warne,but i would`nt read to much into that,the man is a class act and i`ve a gut feeling he could have a big game,hopefully i am wrong though

RuggieBear

warne can spin the ball on anything...the bastid

the groundsman also said he'd bat first on this pitch

Harry2001

McGrath plays, torn ligaments? yeah right!

England won toss and are batting

county

93 for 1 at lunch, good start,a few runs to be had on this wicket

Harry2001

Vaughan dropped by Gilchrist and then bowled off a no ball next delivery :eek:
McGrath not happy

RuggieBear

Harry2001 wrote:

Vaughan dropped by Gilchrist and then bowled off a no ball next delivery :eek:
McGrath not happy

priceless.... gilchrist has dropped two relatively simple catches...and i thought Jones was having a mare this series.

Brian017

Tea: England 195-2

kensutz

Vaughan out 290-3 caught by that cnut McGrath. Made a good 166.

mike65

Is Bell on a Work to Rule? He went about 45 mins without a run still if he says in long enough he'll get his 50! Great to see Vaughan shut the critics up.

Mike.

RuggieBear

sometimes pieterson is such a muppet...there was no need to be hooking in that light.

Royale with Cheese

If Bell and Flintoff can put a decent enough partnership together then England should make 500... meaning the most the Australians can really hope for is a draw unless England have a really pathetic second innings. For some reason I can see Flintoff giving his wicket away tomorrow doing something stupid.

arbeitsscheuer

We won't make 500, the tail doesn't wag that much.

I said when Tresco and Vaughn both got 'in', that I'd be happy with 450, and I reckon that's a realistic total. Bell could easily make a century.(I admit I doubted him like the typical naysayer I am, and yet again I am pleased to be proved wrong by an England hopeful) Although it'll probably take him about 3 hours to score the 40 runs he needs!

All in all, a pretty good day. (Altho I woulda thought Simon Jones would've been a better nightwatchman tbh)

cgf

Yaaaayyyyy

Off to Manchester tom morning on the red-eye for 2 days of the test.

mike65

Whats the point of a nightwatchman? I know (I think) why its done ie don't get a middle order batsman out last thing, but why should it happen? If the batsman is say Freddie then he can look after his wicket for a few late overs and if he can't he should'nt be there!

Mike.

Harry2001

mike65 wrote:

Whats the point of a nightwatchman? I know (I think) why its done ie don't get a middle order batsman out last thing, but why should it happen? If the batsman is say Freddie then he can look after his wicket for a few late overs and if he can't he should'nt be there!

Mike.

True but it's not worth taking the chance, Hoggard did his job even though he got out last ball, now Freddie and Bell can start afresh tomorrow

It's worked twice so far for England this series so the risk has been worth it

RuggieBear

cgf wrote:

Yaaaayyyyy

Off to Manchester tom morning on the red-eye for 2 days of the test.

bastid.....em...i mean that should be fun.

One of my mates is going to the trent bridge test...but he'll be supporting the australians... :rolleyes:

county

cgf wrote:

Yaaaayyyyy

Off to Manchester tom morning on the red-eye for 2 days of the test.

you dog,i will be in the home land next week but thats for the football,so not all bad

Royale with Cheese

SebtheBum wrote:

We won't make 500, the tail doesn't wag that much.

I said when Tresco and Vaughn both got 'in', that I'd be happy with 450, and I reckon that's a realistic total. Bell could easily make a century.(I admit I doubted him like the typical naysayer I am, and yet again I am pleased to be proved wrong by an England hopeful) Although it'll probably take him about 3 hours to score the 40 runs he needs!

All in all, a pretty good day. (Altho I woulda thought Simon Jones would've been a better nightwatchman tbh)

Ok, so maybe 500 is a little hopeful but you have to remember that England are effectively only 4 wickets down as Hoggard was the nightwatch man and wasn't going to make any runs anyway, he never does. With Bell going well and Flintoff capable of scoring quickly 500 is very much so possible. Geraint Jones will probably have to get more than 5 though, which doesn't seem likely.

mike65

So the tail did'nt wag but Freddie is the main villian for a lazy big hit that should'nt have been - it was only 7 mins to lunch! Still the Aussies have a hard job on to catch 444 as they are 103-3 as I type.

Mike.

Harry2001

199-7 Unbelievable stuff but after last week not getting carried away yet

mike65

Close of play has England in near complete control with Austrialia in danger of having to follow on for the first time since 1988! Thing is England dropped twice (albeit one a bit tricky) so it could be worse for the Crims.

Score at close 210 for 7, once Warne goes they won't hang on much longer.

Mike.

RuggieBear

england really bullied australia today...much like Aus did to Eng in the first test. I've to bring the girlie shopping tomorrow morning so i'm going to miss whether Eng can get them out and force the follow on or not....bugger.

arbeitsscheuer

RuggieBear wrote:

england really bullied australia today...much like Aus did to Eng in the first test. I've to bring the girlie shopping tomorrow morning so i'm going to miss whether Eng can get them out and force the follow on or not....bugger.

Unlucky mate.

I'll have my eyes glued to the tv. Btw, I'm a bit miffed that nobody praised my analysis of England's innings yesterday ^^^^^. I said 450 would be a good total, we got 444. And it seems to have been a f**king good total. Ppl complaining about England not making 500 have plainly not been whatching English international cricket of the last 15 years, esp against Aussie bowlers.

Fantastic batting from England, Particularly Tresco (v unlucky), Vaughny (amazing), Bell, Flintoff and G Jones. In fact, all the players who badly needed runs got them, after coming in for criticism a lot - G Jones, Bell and Vaughn.

And Giles was magnificent today, as was Freddie's bamboozling of Katich! Jones did well too. England have a great attack.

Need to get Warne first thing tomorro morning tho, to ensure Aus have to follow on. Pivotal.