The Ashes - TEST 2

Mwelolo said:
They said they would keep the same squad for the second Test, swapping Ali was unavoidable.

Surely we will now see some changes though.

Jimmy is fading fast and I hope Wood is now fit enough.

Tongue has probably done enough to keep his place.

God knows about spinners…..

Foakes could come in.

I don’t think Crawley will be dropped though, as popular as this would be.
Click to expand...
Aussies took Anderson out of the game, by making the game a short-ball fest, which shouldn't have even been legal.

If we go back to the actual rules, where there are only two short balls per over (shoulder height or above), then Aussies will have to pitch the ball up and play normal cricket, which would enable us to do the same and brings Anderson back in the game more.
 
Andy_W said:
Aussies took Anderson out of the game, by making the game a short-ball fest, which shouldn't have even been legal.

If we go back to the actual rules, where there are only two short balls per over (shoulder height or above), then Aussies will have to pitch the ball up and play normal cricket, which would enable us to do the same and brings Anderson back in the game more.
Click to expand...
Are you saying the aussies were bowling more short balls than should have been legally permitted
 
Andy_W said:
Aussies took Anderson out of the game, by making the game a short-ball fest, which shouldn't have even been legal.

If we go back to the actual rules, where there are only two short balls per over (shoulder height or above), then Aussies will have to pitch the ball up and play normal cricket, which would enable us to do the same and brings Anderson back in the game more.
Click to expand...
That statement is untrue and the umpires would have stopped it if that was the case.
 
Glover_elbow said:
Are you saying the aussies were bowling more short balls than should have been legally permitted
Click to expand...
Yes, they were bowling like 4 an over.

We then did the same in the second innings and the umps couldn't do anything to stop it, as they had let the Aussies do it.
 
Andy_W said:
Aussies took Anderson out of the game, by making the game a short-ball fest, which shouldn't have even been legal.

If we go back to the actual rules, where there are only two short balls per over (shoulder height or above), then Aussies will have to pitch the ball up and play normal cricket, which would enable us to do the same and brings Anderson back in the game more.
Click to expand...
That's nonsense. Aussie short ball bowling doesn't mean we have to follow suit.

For me there weren't anywhere near enough wides called. The umpires were poor in that respect.
 
Norman_Conquest said:
That statement is untrue and the umpires would have stopped it if that was the case.
Click to expand...
It's not untrue, Aussies bowling after we got to like 200-2 in our first innings (and after Lyon injured etc) was the shortest bowling spell of any innings since the rule change. Then next innings when we were bowling it was the shortest bowling in any innings since they started tracking where balls pitched.

I think in Aussies 2nd innings 96% of our balls bowled were short, yet none were wides and not even one warning for the two-ball rule, it's not possible to bowl that short and not break the rule, or not have loads of wides etc.
 
Last edited:
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
That's nonsense. Aussie short ball bowling doesn't mean we have to follow suit.

For me there weren't anywhere near enough wides called. The umpires were poor in that respect.
Click to expand...
It does if we want to compete.

The Aussies started playing a different game, which only used half the pitch, so that's where they put all the fielders. It's the exact reason why bodyline, and the two ball limit were brought in. Umpires just didn't seem to want to count the balls or do anything about it. I don't remember one wide being called (for height)?

If we didn't do that in Aussies 2nd innings then there wouldn't have even been any point in going out to bat in our second innings as we'd have had to get over 500.
 
Andy_W said:
It's not untrue, Aussies bowling after we got to like 200-2 in our first innings (and after Lyon injured etc) was the shortest bowling spell of any innings since the rule change. Then next innings when we were bowling it was the shortest bowling in any innings since they started tracking where balls pitched.

I think in Aussies 2nd innings 96% of our balls bowled were short, yet none were wides and not even one warning for the two-ball rule, it's not possible to bowl that short and not break the rule, or not have loads of wides etc.
Click to expand...
But it isn't illegal bowling or the three umpires and the match referee, who are neutral, would have put a stop to it. Other than yourself persistingly posting it on the Ashes threads, I haven't heard anyone else mention it being illegal.
 
Why did the Umpires refer it to the TV Umpire? It should have been obvious to the square leg umpire he was out of his crease, or was it because they had assumed it was the end of the over and they had taken their eyes off the play?
 
hewielewie said:
Why did the Umpires refer it to the TV Umpire? It should have been obvious to the square leg umpire he was out of his crease, or was it because they had assumed it was the end of the over and they had taken their eyes off the play?
Click to expand...
I think they had taken their eyes off the play and didn't know what was going on. I also thought it gave the Aussies an opportunity to get their act together and withdraw the appeal.
 
hewielewie said:
Why did the Umpires refer it to the TV Umpire? It should have been obvious to the square leg umpire he was out of his crease, or was it because they had assumed it was the end of the over and they had taken their eyes off the play?
Click to expand...
Stokes was alluding to this in his interview. The umpires had also started to move as they had made the same assumption as Jonny and the ball was deemed dead. Although when he asked the question whether they had called "OVER". The umpire confirmed he had not unfortunately. That would have been a lifeline if they had.
 
B_G said:
Stokes was alluding to this in his interview. The umpires had also started to move as they had made the same assumption as Jonny and the ball was deemed dead. Although when he asked the question whether they had called "OVER". The umpire confirmed he had not unfortunately. That would have been a lifeline if they had.
Click to expand...
To be fair to the Umpires. Most decisions they made in the Test were wrong so one more wouldn't have made a difference.
 
1finny said:
That’s different isn’ it?
Broad plays for England and it’s only the Aussies who cheat
Click to expand...
An interesting point that - with all the grief that Smith and Warner get (rightly) about Sandpapergate, everyone forgets (or ignores) the incident where Atherton - who incidently is preaching about the incident in The Times today - got caught tampering with the ball with soil in his pocket and all he got was a slight slap on the wrist and "don't do that again old boy, there's a good chap" warning
 
Andy_W said:
It does if we want to compete.

The Aussies started playing a different game, which only used half the pitch, so that's where they put all the fielders. It's the exact reason why bodyline, and the two ball limit were brought in. Umpires just didn't seem to want to count the balls or do anything about it. I don't remember one wide being called (for height)?

If we didn't do that in Aussies 2nd innings then there wouldn't have even been any point in going out to bat in our second innings as we'd have had to get over 500.
Click to expand...
More nonsense. What you're saying is that the team bowling first dictate the style of bowling and the other team must follow otherwise they don't win.
 
Am less angry about the specific incident today than I was yesterday, which I suspect will be the case for the England players. The first two Tests have shown me that if we can cut out the silly mistakes we can win this three-two, weather permitting. Time for Anderson to drop out at Headingley. Pope should go for Foakes and Ali come in for Robinson. Not sure either of the final two will happen, not even sure if Foakes is in the squad?
 
Otto42 said:
Am less angry about the specific incident today than I was yesterday, which I suspect will be the case for the England players. The first two Tests have shown me that if we can cut out the silly mistakes we can win this three-two, weather permitting. Time for Anderson to drop out at Headingley. Pope should go for Foakes and Ali come in for Robinson. Not sure either of the final two will happen, not even sure if Foakes is in the squad?
Click to expand...
I could see Jimmy being left out and Moeen Ali coming in but then again I feel the Headingley pitch will be different to the first two and they will be more swing for the seam bowlers.

I'm glad I'm not making that decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top