That's the thing, they don't really need to take a crazy risk. They'll be extremely confident of winning the 3rd test with a rampart archer and no Smith/injured Smith which makes it 1-1 with 2 tests to go. No need to play high risk high reward in the 2nd test when you feel you are the better team (and they will feel that now)
2019 2nd Ashes Test - Lords 14-18 August 2019
- Thread starter Pykie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
That's the thing, they don't really need to take a crazy risk. They'll be extremely confident of winning the 3rd test with a rampart archer and no Smith/injured Smith which makes it 1-1 with 2 tests to go. No need to play high risk high reward in the 2nd test when you feel you are the better team (and they will feel that now)
Spuddigger
Senior List
Looks like his replacement might put pressure on others to get off their arse if they want a game.
- Aug 2, 2012
- 34,820
- 56,389
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Far more likely that they simply consider it too hard, and give in to the illegal behaviour, as they've done with the throwing and the illegal intimidatory bowling.
Wait for the solution.
"A bit of ball tampering is allowed".
- Jul 1, 2013
- 21,992
- 18,412
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Fulham, 76ers, Cubs, Bills
But why would they feel 'extremely confident' that they would win?
Their batting lineup is still crap, they have no matchwinning spinner, and they have to win 2 of 3 which heaps the pressure on them.
If they'd gone quicker at the start of the day, they'd have easily managed to set 240 with 55+ overs left and given themselves a real chance.
They don’t drop Head and they have a pretty good chance last night on what they did set!
They had us on the ropes this test despite losing the toss, Archer has half our batsmen scared shitless, Smith completely carries our Batting and he will either not play or play under duress... So yea, they'll be feeling confident.
If they went quick early and lost a bunch of wickets they could of been bowled up cheaply and given us most of the day to chase a much smaller total, which would of been an absolute disaster.
What happens if last night Australia is within striking distance of the total when the umpires say only the spinners can bowl and Root unleashes Archer just to bounce people?
Then people complain about the umpires, claim Root is unsporting and state "this wouldn't have happened if England were batting".
- Jul 1, 2013
- 21,992
- 18,412
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Fulham, 76ers, Cubs, Bills
Yup! But they didn't give themselves the best chance.
Marnus and Head managed okay with Archer. Woakes only bowled a few overs.
That can't be sustained through another 3 tests.
Agreed that if they'd lost a bunch of wickets, but they could also try to defend and build a total. Their tail can hang around.
Is that still the bad light rule? I had thought there was changes about offering the light (i.e. they don't , the umps decide) and needing to bowl spinners (i.e. if you stay on, anyone can bowl?). Could be wrong though. Can't get a straight answer in my searching.
The umpires no longer offer the option to the batsman about the light like they used to but they can still tell the fielding team that they'd consider the light inadequate if a pace bowler was bowling.
- Jul 1, 2013
- 21,992
- 18,412
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Fulham, 76ers, Cubs, Bills
They go off the field, the batsmen don't get a choice anymore.
Would be no issue with england doing that either they are under no obligation to bowl spin it's just a heads up from the umps that they will go off if they bowl the quicks.
You'd assume he would. Though logically he wouldn't be bowling Denly or himself in that situation anyway so there'd already be a pacer bowling.
- Aug 16, 2006
- 5,094
- 6,695
- AFL Club
- Geelong
That's right. Ball tampering.
But overall, congratulations on not addressing my main argument on three seperate occasions. Well done, too, in flatly refusing to adress the examples of Atherton, or Panesar using his zip. You excel in the dubious arts of 'internet debating'. Carry on now, and be sure to neglect anything that contradicts your bias. All the best ratting on Smith for the same things you would accept in an English player.
So you've concluded it's ball tampering to have a sugary drink and subsequently shine the ball?
If you bothered to read other posts you'd notice I've addressed the Atherton point. Admittedly I haven't read Panesar's book and wasn't aware of what he says he did which I clearly condemn. Presumably he can't have done it whilst playing for England though given an England kit hasn't had zips for as long as I can remember.
- Aug 16, 2006
- 5,094
- 6,695
- AFL Club
- Geelong
No, that's not what I said. Not even vaguely. I'm not going to repeat my argument. It's there for you to read. If you can't see any double standard in English fans calling Smith a cheat while simultaneously celebrating Atherton and Paneser then you are too far down the rabbit hole to be worth any further time.
It is quite literally exactly what you have just said:
To which your response was:
Nankervis brothers said:
Still legal and fine but you pledge your allegiance to one side
- Aug 16, 2006
- 5,094
- 6,695
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I was referring to the mints, not sugary drinks, as mints (as I've pointed out to you) also contains oils which create the desired effect of swing.
The law doesn't differentiate between what's effective and what's not. It states it's illegal to apply an artificial substance to the ball which both this saliva containing this oil and saliva containing sugar from sugary drinks is. The sandpaper didn't appear to do Australia much good in South Africa getting the ball moving but the players involved didn't get off with it because of that.
- Sep 15, 2011
- 31,578
- 48,040
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Australia’s have erred by not taking more bats. There’s no real need for Holland in the squad but we could sure use some options. Realistically, Bancroft should be dropped but Warner’s playing even worse, I have no more faith in Harris. Burns would probably offer some resistance at this point.
Keaton Jennings, Sam Robson and so many more have played all their pathway cricket elsewhere. It’s unfair especially on the poorer nations as they will keep losing players. If you don’t want to represent a nation because you want to play elsewhere don’t.
I don’t really care about Archer I want to see the best players playing test cricket but I think at the moment we have problems especially with South African’s and West Indian’s turning their back on test cricket. We have already lost the West Indies as a power and we are losing South Africa at the moment.
- Aug 16, 2006
- 5,094
- 6,695
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Perhaps they should have experimented with different grit sandpapers, just as the English experimented with different type of mints. You know, to find the most the effective.
Similar threads
- Poll
