Wire coming into focus
It may seem strange to say so, as Australia approach 300 for the loss of only 2 wickets, but I think that the England bowlers have bowled well. For once they haven't had much luck, and decisions have gone against them. Hoggard could have had LBW's, Giles an LBW and a bat/pad and Flintoff had Martyn caught behind. Bowden and Koertzen (sp?) both seem to be determined not outers. I guess that it's the best way to deflect criticism, which is far greater when a batsman is given out incorrectly than not given out. It does make life very dull however.
Apart from the lack of wickets though, the bowlers have managed to contain Australia. Flintoff has been particularly good at this, only going for about 2.5 an over. The others have backed him up. The King of Spain has done especially well as it was clear that the Australians wanted to get after him.
They've been helped by Hayden's lack of form. If England are already playing for the draw, they might want to drop him should he offer a sharp chance. I remember Clive Lloyd dropping Brearley during the 1979 World Cup Final. Did he do it on purpose? Who knows. I don't suspect that England would do this. Gilchrist lurks however. A run a ball century would lessen the significance of the weather.
Just as an aside, it's been interesting to see in the morning's press that I'm not the only one missing Graham Thorpe and a fifth bowler, or thinking that the whole Jerusalem business is a bit over the top.
Meanwhile, back to the game. The possibility remains of a rush of wickets this morning. The bowlers just need a bit of luck. Conditions are likely to be helpful. The more likely scenario, however, is that Australia bat for most of the day, trying to get as far ahead as possible before a declaration near the end. Given that the light is likely to be dodgy, I can't see them (duh) declaring much earlier because otherwise they might lose overs (unless they bowled Warne in tandem with a part time spinner, which they might). The pitch is flat, so England should be able to bat out the game, but with the Ashes at stake and Shane Warne bowling? It's going to be tight, I reckon. That old wire is coming back into focus. This game, like the previous 3, seems likely to go down to it.
Apart from the lack of wickets though, the bowlers have managed to contain Australia. Flintoff has been particularly good at this, only going for about 2.5 an over. The others have backed him up. The King of Spain has done especially well as it was clear that the Australians wanted to get after him.
They've been helped by Hayden's lack of form. If England are already playing for the draw, they might want to drop him should he offer a sharp chance. I remember Clive Lloyd dropping Brearley during the 1979 World Cup Final. Did he do it on purpose? Who knows. I don't suspect that England would do this. Gilchrist lurks however. A run a ball century would lessen the significance of the weather.
Just as an aside, it's been interesting to see in the morning's press that I'm not the only one missing Graham Thorpe and a fifth bowler, or thinking that the whole Jerusalem business is a bit over the top.
Meanwhile, back to the game. The possibility remains of a rush of wickets this morning. The bowlers just need a bit of luck. Conditions are likely to be helpful. The more likely scenario, however, is that Australia bat for most of the day, trying to get as far ahead as possible before a declaration near the end. Given that the light is likely to be dodgy, I can't see them (duh) declaring much earlier because otherwise they might lose overs (unless they bowled Warne in tandem with a part time spinner, which they might). The pitch is flat, so England should be able to bat out the game, but with the Ashes at stake and Shane Warne bowling? It's going to be tight, I reckon. That old wire is coming back into focus. This game, like the previous 3, seems likely to go down to it.
posted by djbrd at 8:53 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home