: Sat Feb 07, 2009 12:26 am  

PAUL M wrote:

Harmison and Monty have one each, Broad has three and Freddie has two

Cheers mate. I hate not having Sky.

: Sat Feb 07, 2009 9:22 am  

PAUL M wrote:

Ended 352-7, game is still in the balance.

England bowled really well yesterday to be fair, I guess yesterday was something like 170-6, which for a whole days play is pretty good. That pitch is going to be a bugger to score on next time round, the likes of Strauss it should be made for, where you get to 100 with 90 singles. KP & The Strokemakers (sounds like a 70's band) need to be patient.

Monty got better as the day went on, he just shits his undies when someone like Gayle goes after him.

If, IF, we set them a 250 total, it'll take some getting on that, unless they let Gayle do a Sehweg and knock 80 off it mega quickly.

: Sat Feb 07, 2009 11:09 am  

JWP wrote:

If, IF, we set them a 250 total, it'll take some getting on that, unless they let Gayle do a Sehweg and knock 80 off it mega quickly.

By the time we've finished off their first innings and knocked off the defecit we'll do well to lead by 150 at close of play today. Unless the final target is under 200 I can't see either side winning. It's unlikely we'll get a big enough lead to declare with enough time to bowl them out a second time.

: Sat Feb 07, 2009 11:47 am  

Prince of Denmark wrote:

By the time we've finished off their first innings and knocked off the defecit we'll do well to lead by 150 at close of play today. Unless the final target is under 200 I can't see either side winning. It's unlikely we'll get a big enough lead to declare with enough time to bowl them out a second time.

I'm not too sure, first thing will be to get them out quickly, which we're capable of with Freddie yorkers. Then, bat sensibly and try to negotiate Benn - which didn't look that easy in the first innings. If we do this, and get to tea, say 80 in front, with wickets in hand, it's not beyond the realms for us to have a dash and set a target, more than likely though that with this being the first Test, you play the percentages, take the draw and move onto the next Test, if your 1 down it's different I guess.

Wouldn't it just be England though for Strauss & Cook to lay a platform and then the old 'England Callapse' springs into action.

[John_D]

: Sat Feb 07, 2009 12:04 pm  

Something has to be done about over rates. 12.5 per hour is utterly woeful and the fines and suspensions dished out don't seem to be having any effect. Not sure how I'd approach it exactly, but penalty runs for not meeting the 15 per hour limit has to be investigated now.

: Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:30 pm  

airliebird9 wrote:

It's pure speculation!! You have no way of knowing this at all. Maybe the effort and added pressure of opening the bowling has the same effect on Sidebottom and he really would average 50 with the bat too

Really??

You really are a fool

: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:14 pm  

John_D wrote:

Something has to be done about over rates. 12.5 per hour is utterly woeful and the fines and suspensions dished out don't seem to be having any effect. Not sure how I'd approach it exactly, but penalty runs for not meeting the 15 per hour limit has to be investigated now.

If the number of overs bowled by the scheduled close is, say, ten short of the required number, take the number of runs scored in the ten most expensive overs of the day and add this to the batting team's total. That should do the trick!

Two years ago in a championship match at The Oval I saw Shane Warne & Shaun Udal bowl 23 overs in an hour for Hampshire against Surrey. It can be done, and it really put pressure on the batting team to have so little time to compose themselves between deliveries and overs. Obviously fast bowlers can't bowl at that rate, but if fielding teams are proactive it can actually work in their favour to sustain a high tempo.

: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:42 pm  

I think it's Sidebottom who replaced Jimmy isn't it? Not the best decision if you ask me...a) Sidebottom hasn't played for months and b) Jimmy offers more IMO...I'll admit I'm biaised as I watch Jimmy bowl on a regular basis.

Good to see Broad get his first 5 fer as well...now if only that Flintoff chap could get a few of them too

: Sat Feb 07, 2009 4:11 pm  

OrdsallRed wrote:

I think it's Sidebottom who replaced Jimmy isn't it? Not the best decision if you ask me...a) Sidebottom hasn't played for months and b) Jimmy offers more IMO...I'll admit I'm biaised as I watch Jimmy bowl on a regular basis.

Harmison was also brought back after being dropped for the final Test in India. Swann & Anderson were both dropped for this one with Sidebottom & Harmison both recalled.

: Sat Feb 07, 2009 4:34 pm  

OrdsallRed wrote:

I think it's Sidebottom who replaced Jimmy isn't it? Not the best decision if you ask me...a) Sidebottom hasn't played for months and b) Jimmy offers more IMO...I'll admit I'm biaised as I watch Jimmy bowl on a regular basis.

Good to see Broad get his first 5 fer as well...now if only that Flintoff chap could get a few of them too

Not only that, but Sidebottom didn't offer anything in the games before he got injured.

I'm pleased for Broad.