Remove this Banner Ad

Oh James!!

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Farang83150 said:
"James Anderson says Australia’s pace attack hasn’t caused any issues"

Both teams always come out with some silly stuff in the press but I recon Anderson's gone next level!
Click to expand...

Hard for Vaughan and Atherton to make a case for intimidatory bowling when the team says the bowlers aren't causing any problems.

That said, Jimmy has a point. The Poms biggest problem is themselves. Apart from blokes like Overton, they have been insipid and not up for the hard work involved in fighting out a test match. Their batsmen get out mostly to poor shots and their on field leadership has been poor. Their bowling plans have been fairly poor as well.

Their issues with our pace attack pale into insignificance compared to their issues within their team.
 
Last edited:
Truckosaurus said:
Up there with Root's "we haven't been blown away" after an innings defeat.
Click to expand...

He’s correct.
They have been up to their ears in every match. You could argue that they get blown away in very quick time at the crucial juncture of each match. But the difference in the two teams is Australia winning every key moment, not Australia coming out and smashing them from ball one.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

PhatBoy said:
He’s correct.
They have been up to their ears in every match. You could argue that they get blown away in very quick time at the crucial juncture of each match. But the difference in the two teams is Australia winning every key moment, not Australia coming out and smashing them from ball one.
Click to expand...
Up to their ears in every match????????? Who did you get that off, Mark Taylor?
Perth: After reasonable first day, were blown away. A player who has failed to make any impact at all in test cricket, smashes them all over the park. Embarrassing.
Adelaide: Won the toss. Shocking decision to bowl and conceded close to 450 runs. Game was virtually over. Conceded huge first innings lead and chased over 350 in last innings. Never going to win and crumbled on the last day. Came back a little on the fourth day, but hardly being up to their ears in it.
Brisbane: After even ist innings, England crumbled in their second innings and Australia wiped off the runs needed easily. Competitive for 2 1/2 days and then blown away.
You can say they Australia have not smashed them from ball one, but England have won all three tosses. If Australia win the next two tosses and bat, expect both days to finish on day 4. Australia 5/0.
 
gordo2016 said:
Up to their ears in every match????????? Who did you get that off, Mark Taylor?
Perth: After reasonable first day, were blown away. A player who has failed to make any impact at all in test cricket, smashes them all over the park. Embarrassing.
Adelaide: Won the toss. Shocking decision to bowl and conceded close to 450 runs. Game was virtually over. Conceded huge first innings lead and chased over 350 in last innings. Never going to win and crumbled on the last day. Came back a little on the fourth day, but hardly being up to their ears in it.
Brisbane: After even ist innings, England crumbled in their second innings and Australia wiped off the runs needed easily. Competitive for 2 1/2 days and then blown away.
You can say they Australia have not smashed them from ball one, but England have won all three tosses. If Australia win the next two tosses and bat, expect both days to finish on day 4. Australia 5/0.
Click to expand...


Ok mate.
 
PhatBoy said:
He’s correct.
They have been up to their ears in every match. You could argue that they get blown away in very quick time at the crucial juncture of each match. But the difference in the two teams is Australia winning every key moment, not Australia coming out and smashing them from ball one.
Click to expand...
Baffling.
I don't know how you can even begin to argue that for the Perth test match. Please don't suggest making 400 on that wicket was anything close to par. Additionally, it didn't matter how much their middle order put on with that partnership. Australia broke it, then Australia won by an innings.

They were weighed, measured and found wanting. They were completely blown away.
 
SherbertLemon said:
Baffling.
I don't know how you can even begin to argue that for the Perth test match. Please don't suggest making 400 on that wicket was anything close to par. Additionally, it didn't matter how much their middle order put on with that partnership. Australia broke it, then Australia won by an innings.

They were weighed, measured and found wanting. They were completely blown away.
Click to expand...

So for day one they were on top.

They were bowled out below par, sure, but they had Australia 4-200 or thereabouts. Quick wickets at that point puts them on on top, irrespective of par.

Had chances at Adelaide, didn’t take them, ultimately slipped well behind but came back with the ball, and a decent enough start to their run chase gave them a chance going into the last stage of the match.

They trailed by what, 30 odd in the first test?

Yeah baffling to think they’ve been competitive.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

PhatBoy said:
So for day one they were on top.

They were bowled out below par, sure, but they had Australia 4-200 or thereabouts. Quick wickets at that point puts them on on top, irrespective of par.

Had chances at Adelaide, didn’t take them, ultimately slipped well behind but came back with the ball, and a decent enough start to their run chase gave them a chance going into the last stage of the match.

They trailed by what, 30 odd in the first test?

Yeah baffling to think they’ve been competitive.
Click to expand...

They were never in it after the first day in Perth. Even at 4-250, Aus were looking comfortable. Embarrassing performance after Day 1 considering where they were and what was on the line. Calling them competitive is way too generous.

Adelaide, they were never in it from the start. The comeback they had reduced the margin of defeat, from obliteration to a standard beating but they were never more than an outside shot. In it up to their ears? Maybe up to their ankles.

I'll give you Brisbane, for the first few days at least.
 
PhatBoy said:
So for day one they were on top.

They were bowled out below par, sure, but they had Australia 4-200 or thereabouts. Quick wickets at that point puts them on on top, irrespective of par.

Had chances at Adelaide, didn’t take them, ultimately slipped well behind but came back with the ball, and a decent enough start to their run chase gave them a chance going into the last stage of the match.

They trailed by what, 30 odd in the first test?

Yeah baffling to think they’ve been competitive.
Click to expand...
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! Open your eyes up.
 
SherbertLemon said:
Baffling.
I don't know how you can even begin to argue that for the Perth test match. Please don't suggest making 400 on that wicket was anything close to par. Additionally, it didn't matter how much their middle order put on with that partnership. Australia broke it, then Australia won by an innings.

They were weighed, measured and found wanting. They were completely blown away.
Click to expand...
He's blinded by his Australian hate
 
gordo2016 said:
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! Open your eyes up.
Click to expand...

If not for Smith's performances England would have won the first test. England have had success against Warner who has a great record at home and also Khawaja who was even on top of the South African attack last year. Their batting has been mixed but their debutantes have found a way and at least haven't fallen to water like some of our newer guys in the past who've gone to England like Hughes, S. Marsh and even guys like Voges who had county experience. It was always going to be a tough tour but a lot of the talk about them imploding and not being able to take 20 wickets is nonsense IMO. If it weren't for Smith we'd likely have lost at least one of the Tests.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

to1994 said:
If not for Smith's performances England would have won the first test. England have had success against Warner who has a great record at home and also Khawaja who was even on top of the South African attack last year. Their batting has been mixed but their debutantes have found a way and at least haven't fallen to water like some of our newer guys in the past who've gone to England like Hughes, S. Marsh and even guys like Voges who had county experience. It was always going to be a tough tour but a lot of the talk about them imploding and not being able to take 20 wickets is nonsense IMO. If it weren't for Smith we'd likely have lost at least one of the Tests.
Click to expand...
Scoreboard is 3/0. England have been flogged.
 
to1994 said:
If not for Smith's performances England would have won the first test.
Click to expand...

And if not for Shaun Marsh, they would have won the second test?

And if they weren't having trouble taking 20 wickets in a match, surely they would have done it by now?
 
Last edited:
Doodlesweaver said:
And if not for Shaun Marsh, they would have won the second test? And if only they could have got out a much maligned all-rounder they would have won the third?

Is that how this goes?

And it's ok to say they are having trouble taking 20 wickets a test when it's obvious that they are.
Click to expand...

Sure, we can look at it like that but they've had success getting most of the top 6 out and have arguably done a better job of that then a lot of the teams in the last few years bar South Africa on our shores. They certainly aren't a great team and their batting has holes but their batsman have adapted to our conditions a lot better then we have theirs in recent years. Sure, we won a couple of Tests in 2015 but they were on flat pitches that weren't very English, as soon as the conditions actually suit them over there we can't even compete.
 
to1994 said:
Sure, we can look at it like that but they've had success getting most of the top 6 out and have arguably done a better job of that then a lot of the teams in the last few years bar South Africa on our shores. They certainly aren't a great team and their batting has holes but their batsman have adapted to our conditions a lot better then we have theirs in recent years. Sure, we won a couple of Tests in 2015 but they were on flat pitches that weren't very English, as soon as the conditions actually suit them over there we can't even compete.
Click to expand...

In terms of what this means for Aus players in English conditions, I agree. This win means zilch for that.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

W
    • Like
James Anderson 704 wickets
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
The_Reaper
The_Reaper

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom