: Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:34 am  

MrPhilb wrote:

332 all out


I expect the aussies will plunder 600 and kill the game off

No chance, not on this wicket.

: Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:42 am  

Robbo4 wrote:

No chance, not on this wicket.

500 then...

: Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:44 am  

332 keeps us in the game and in a reasonable position providing we bowl well. The trouble is another 50-70 runs would have put us in a really strong position.

: Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:47 am  

Peckerwood wrote:

500 then...

I reckon they would take 400 right now

: Fri Aug 21, 2009 11:03 am  

PAUL M wrote:

332 keeps us in the game and in a reasonable position providing we bowl well. The trouble is another 50-70 runs would have put us in a really strong position.

lets hope the aussie's don't lose

: Fri Aug 21, 2009 11:03 am  

So, can anyone watching confirm whether Watson was as dead plumb lbw as Cricinfo are making it sound?

: Fri Aug 21, 2009 11:23 am  

Andy Gilder wrote:

So, can anyone watching confirm whether Watson was as dead plumb lbw as Cricinfo are making it sound?

Too high

: Fri Aug 21, 2009 11:28 am  

Andy Gilder wrote:

So, can anyone watching confirm whether Watson was as dead plumb lbw as Cricinfo are making it sound?

One of the shouts was plumb according to TMS.

: Fri Aug 21, 2009 11:33 am  

Just me, or does anyone else feel a cloud of unfortunate inevitability about the whole thing?

: Fri Aug 21, 2009 11:34 am  

OrdsallRed wrote:

Anyone now how accurate the sky sports speedo is??

If Shane Watson was bowling at 89mph (absolutely no chance whatsoever!!) and Siddle was getting to near 94mph then I dread to think what an on-fire Flintoff could reach!!

And what would Waqar and Wasim be reaching, 150mph??? :shock:

Watson & Siddle were both a sight quicker than Harmison's first over