Test The Ashes Fifth Test January 4-8 1000hrs @ The SCG

[Visions]

Even Steven’s but I’d rather be us than them only 200 behind basically is not a lot

Australia has a good platform to start with tomorrow on a day 3 batting paradise, and if they can bat all day will be in a dominant position, however it is Australia we are talking about and they always have a batting collapse in them without fail.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

I’d like to see a bay of Bill Lawrys
Everyone with a big fake nose and a pigeon on their shoulder
Every time there’s a wicket shouting “Got Him, Yes ! “

Do you remember the day someone hung a double bed sheet over the second tier of the MCG, and on the sheet was painted the words, "Bill Lawry's Hanky"?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Australia has a good platform to start with tomorrow on a day 3 batting paradise, and if they can bat all day will be in a dominant position, however it is Australia we are talking about and they always have a batting collapse in them without fail.

Exactly how I see it and we need Head to not just make a ton but go on and make what I call a “daddy ton” or a double

 

[satty]

Been a few changes to that program.
No test against Afghanistan and the Bangladesh tour has been brought forward to August this year. We have 4 tests against the Kiwis instead of 3 and there's the 150 year anniversary test against the Poms at the G in March 2027.

Still a brutal schedule even with those amendments.

 

[ABAB]

Those are very good odds for England. Where's the poster who placed a few K on England winning the Ashes should double down on them winning this Test.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Meh, tomorrow will tell if Marnus throwing his wicket away is just a blip or seriously costly.

To my way of thinking he's been part of a 105 run partnership and if it's so easy to bat out there, Head will cash in and probably one of Smith or Khawaja will too against a bowling attack that's hardly daunting.

When I'm at work and reduced to watching the live commentary on cricinfo, if I ever wonder how much stock I can give to the comments coming in, I'll just remember how they were going on about "Stokes' headlock!!!!", geez do any sporting fans do overreactions quite like cricket fans?

He can get a bit much by the end of an Ashes series, but I like Stokes and I'll miss him when he's gone.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Those are very good odds for England. Where's the poster who placed a few K on England winning the Ashes should double down on them winning this Test.
View attachment 2505401

That's insane odds for England. Unless we get at least 50 runs ahead, I'd have them in front.

 

[kickazz]

I dare say given the situation at the time and what happened afterwards it should be England whinging about that and not Australia given what was happening at the time: not really sure why you’re whinging about it

?

The situation at the time was they didn't bat in the dark.

What happened afterwards is they batted really well this morning in the sun.

 

[kickazz]

Meh, tomorrow will tell if Marnus throwing his wicket away is just a blip or seriously costly.

To my way of thinking he's been part of a 105 run partnership and if it's so easy to bat out there, Head will cash in and probably one of Smith or Khawaja will too against a bowling attack that's hardly daunting.

When I'm at work and reduced to watching the live commentary on cricinfo, if I ever wonder how much stock I can give to the comments coming in, I'll just remember how they were going on about "Stokes' headlock!!!!", geez do any sporting fans do overreactions quite like cricket fans?

He can get a bit much by the end of an Ashes series, but I like Stokes and I'll miss him when he's gone.

Smith will want to make a ton.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Marnus throwing it away again is infuriating

 

[KennyHuntersBlues]

Do you remember the day someone hung a double bed sheet over the second tier of the MCG, and on the sheet was painted the words, "Bill Lawry's Hanky"?

Yep Classic

 

[Crankyhawk]

job description mentions staying in.

If he can't manage 20 minutes, then what is the point of him being in the team

oh yeah

 

[PhatBoy]

?

The situation at the time was they didn't bat in the dark.

What happened afterwards is they batted really well this morning in the sun.

They were cruising and had every element of momentum and the pitch was at its most benign. The break benefitted one team and one team only; you DON’T think Australia were happy to go off after taking 0-97 in 21 overs after lunch and you think that HELPED England to have the game stopped that point?

They came out this morning and lost Harry Brook within 15 minutes and Ben Stokes 10 minutes later.

 

[PhatBoy]

Do you remember the day someone hung a double bed sheet over the second tier of the MCG, and on the sheet was painted the words, "Bill Lawry's Hanky"?

I remember a banner in the zinc cream era that looked like two snow capped mountains with a caption beneath that read ‘Twin Peaks: Bill Lawry and Matthew Elliott Sunbaking

 

[Borisdog]

I'd argue he should be reprimanded for touching an opposition player.

Shouldn't require that to get a wicket, and now encourages him (and others) to do it more.

Of course not, but do you think he fired the first shot there?

I certainly don’t condone or excuse it but it got our 2 blokes away from thinking about what they should’ve been thinking about and got them into “ I’m gunna belt this campaigner”.

I’d say the job was done before the “cuddle”

 

[Spirit Level]

They were cruising and had every element of momentum and the pitch was at its most benign. The break benefitted one team and one team only; you DON’T think Australia were happy to go off after taking 0-97 in 21 overs after lunch and you think that HELPED England to have the game stopped that point?

Yeah because every batsman loves facing pace bowling when they can barely see the ****en ball.

Yes that did help England and whos to say they wouldn't have lost quick wickets before lunch.

Going off was the right call, was unfair on the batsmen to face in those conditions.

 

[Spirit Level]

I've enjoyed this test more than most of the others this series.

Surprise it might also go 5 days

 

[Del35196]

Don't we complain when they're not flexible enough?

Only when it means we see less cricket. Why are we going off when we could be playing? And the rules state we should be playing.

 

[m0zza]

Any other workplace the arm around the shoulders can be reported as sexual harassment
Just saying

 

[Gough]

Any other workplace the arm around the shoulders can be reported as sexual harassment
Just saying

It's sport, men can cry and pat each other bum, and nobody calls them gay.

 

[Borisdog]

Any other workplace the arm around the shoulders can be reported as sexual harassment
Just saying

It’s sport firstly. No one is looking to shag each other. Well not on the ground anyways in front of the audience I’d hope.

There was WAY less malice in this than Kohli shouldering Konstas.

 

[Del35196]

Any other workplace the arm around the shoulders can be reported as sexual harassment
Just saying

So would be patting on the bum but you know, how far should we take it?

 

[Borisdog]

It's sport, men can cry and pat each other bum, and nobody calls them gay.

Mainly because, largely, they haven’t shagged each other.

 

[windyhill]

Just beyond belief this shit. Bowler getting injured as a ****ing nightwatchmen.

In the age of professionalism in 2025 how are we still doing this shit? You’re an elite batsman on the world stage, get out there and ****ing bat. How can facing four overs be beneath you? It’s your ****ing job.

One word, tradition.

 

[grumbleguts]

Is there a documented case of the first use of the nightwatchman? A cursory flick through the front page of google has not wielded much.

Yes. The very first ever test match had a night watchman.

Tom Garrett, opening bowler, and number nine came in at number 4 in the second innings to protect Bransby Cooper.

Although the term "night watchman" wasn't used until Douglas Jardine used it in the 1930s.

On another note from that first test match, Ned Gregory (for whom it was his only test) became the curator at the SCG and they asked him to build the scoreboard. He set the scoreboard up and had the word "for" between the wickets and the runs. However, he had the smaller side to the left so you couldn't fit 3 digits to the left of the word "for" so to overcome it, they put the wickets first and the runs second. So the scoreboard read "3 for 194" instead of 194 for 3.

This then translated to radio commentary when they would read out the score directly from the scoreboard.

This then spread to the rest of the country, so Ned Gregory is the reason Australia use the wickets for runs format in cricket scores in reverse of the rest of the world. And why the rest of the world is wrong.