Corky Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 Mr Benn and Powell are putting up a firm fight.
Napoleon In Rags Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 I take my hat off to Benn, that was some hit. Bad light could be threat now but i reckon we'll do it. Which genius thought WI could knock off over 500 though?
SamL Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 Blimey, I can't remember feeling this tense about an England cricket match since the 2nd Ashes test in 2005. One more boys.
Joe. Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 Fidel was bricking it beforehand, wonder what he's like now. This match won't last much longer.
Joe. Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 Come on Freddie. He's the man to sort these out.
Joe. Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 Fucking bastards. How we've not won that I'll never know.
purpleronnie Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 We were over cautious we tend to be but I guess its hard when you have to make the decisions. Hindsight is 20/20.
Sparky Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 Fooking stupid not to make them follow on , Bowlers only had 40 mins left in the day to bowl so tiredness should not have been an issue.
Ultra Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 Absolutely. Batting again gave them time to regroup. We had enough to bowl them out without Harmison or Flintoff. Once again England have been exposed as the fcuk-up merchants of world cricket - led by fcukwits both on and off the field. Forget the Ashes - we'll do well to win EITHER of the series against the Windies.
Milky Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 My main issue was with the late declaration. Harmison said they made the decision based on time, not runs, so they'd declare one hour after lunch. Shame they couldn't be more flexible with that. 500?
purpleronnie Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 I know the Aussies arent doing as well as they have in the past but they knew how to kill games off its something we seem to lack, I dont know why. The amount of winning positions england have been in and not gone on to win is astonishing.
Fox You Forest Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 Sir Ian called it 2 days ago, Botham for coach!
Milky Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 So much time was wasted. Botham said it, we all said it! Our nighwatchmen wasted an hour yesterday morning for starters, and a 450 lead was more than enough. Going on wasted another hour.
RowlattsFox Posted 19 February 2009 Posted 19 February 2009 I don't have a problem with the following-on, but we should have scored quicker, we wasted so long having the night-watchman in, especially with him partnering Cook. we still had more than enough time to bowl the Windies out and we could well have done were it not for some resilient and at sometimes lucky batting towards the end there. I've been saying it a lot in the last couple of series but againwe prove our bowlers are not good enough to take 20 wickets to win a test match on most occasions, yes we were without a fully fit Flintoff today but he's not a huge wicket-taker himself. I hope the knock KP took at the end isn't serious because we don't want to be without him and Flintoff in Barbados.
dandannieldanok Posted 20 February 2009 Posted 20 February 2009 What a shambles, we'll struggle to get another winning foundation as good as that. Strauss basically made the wrong call regarding the follow-on then compounded that with a number of wrong decisions about how we batted in the 2nd innings.
welck12 Posted 20 February 2009 Posted 20 February 2009 I think whoever said it before was right, the follow on wasent the wrong decision. The only wrong decisions were not declaring earlier (i thought an hour before lunch would have been best time) and the way we batted, we didnt look to push the pace and score runs quick enough; which would have lead to an earlier declaration. But as stated above again (yes i'm to lasy to quote) the bowlers at the moment are not good enough to take 20 wickets a test match on a consistent basis, until they are we will always struggle to be really competitive
Brainy Posted 20 February 2009 Posted 20 February 2009 Nobody has (I don't think) mentioned the time lost yesterday. I know time was added on at the end but if we hadn't lost the hour at the start of the day we'd have most likely got the seven wickets.
Fosse Boy Posted 20 February 2009 Author Posted 20 February 2009 To a certain degree I blame the lack of intelligence showed by some of England's bowlers during the latter stages of the game. THEY'RE TAIL ENDERS YOU MORONS, BOWL IT ON THE FUCKING STUMPS! I'm targeting Harmison especially on this, reminiscent of the spell he bowled in the 2005 Ashes test at Old Trafford when we were trying to get Lee and McGrath out for the win.
Milky Posted 26 February 2009 Posted 26 February 2009 This pitch is as flat as Mr Flatty Mcflat from Flattown. Getting 20 wickets aint gonna be easy. Only four main bowlers aswell.
Fox You Forest Posted 26 February 2009 Posted 26 February 2009 This pitch is as flat as Mr Flatty Mcflat from Flattown. Makes a change. Steady start though.
Fosse Boy Posted 26 February 2009 Author Posted 26 February 2009 Good ball to get him out, but still a bloody good innings from Strauss.
Mickyblueeyes Posted 26 February 2009 Posted 26 February 2009 Good ball to get him out, but still a bloody good innings from Strauss. That bit of bowling was old school windies!!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.