4th Ashes Test England v Australia July 19-23 1930hrs @ Old Trafford

[Crankyhawk]

The fact that DRS shows there was a missed edge is, clearly an error of fact, but it does not necessarily show that the umpire's decision was incorrect; there are a number of reasons why the umpire should (as he did) correctly give it not out.

It was intended to show that England were getting drs decisions in their favour based on umpire errors being overruled but I was wanting to know how often Australia have copped umpires firing players for lbw which is harder to overturn

 

[kickazz]

A great way to retain them against such a petulant mob too

 

[scottywiper]

At the end of the day, England should view this as a glorious day.
Surely one of their colonial outposts rising up to become a success in its own right is actually a win for them too?
Is this not ultimately what they hoped for when they sent people to Oz for stealing loaves of bread????
Rule Brittania.

 

[Rabish Binney]

How about you put forward some valid reasoning for why you believe we shouldn't explore ways to improve the game by maximising the playing time rather than resorting to baseless personal insults? The irony is calling me Trumpian in all that...

When England got the benefit of rain ending the test in 2013, did you put forward any ways to improve the playing time?

No?

Didn’t think so.

 

[A Pom]

I agree with this statement. But I disagree with the hypocrisy of English punditry who've all of a sudden taken this particular stance where past instances they've happily remained silent despite the needs of change until suddenly it benefits them. I believe that level of bad faith will always raise suspicion in others and will make genuine change a lot more difficult to achieve the level of cooperation to achieve.

It was wrong of me to assume that personal stance of you (not that I necessarily believe you've been debating in good faith in here either at times) but achieving positive change requires bipartisan cooperation which requires trust. Something the behaviour of the English Cricket Board and media punditry have actively harmed with their stances. Why should India, Australia and other cricket boards trust to follow England's example when it's only now that they're championing these measures and not when it would've done good for the game in the past (i.e. when it would've really mattered)?

What ECB stance? The only person who's made any comments on ways we could look to maximise play is Root who has come out with reasonable suggestions we could explore and has made similar comments on play being lost to conditions in the past.

 

[Rabish Binney]

This whole series the English media, fans and especially players have been nothing but disrespectful to the Australian players. Not once have I heard them give any credit for their performances or acknowledgement of their objective success even when we have won

They talk a lot about the spirit of cricket. I'd go as far as saying England are doing far more damage to the spirit of cricket and sports etiquette more broadly with their ungracious, undignified and straight up hypocritical nonsense.

Here we are being told that retaining the ashes in England is something we should feel hollow about because one test match out of 5 was rain affected. Winning test matches overseas is an anomaly in modern cricket let alone retaining series.

I'm proud of this team and proud of this result. Looking forward to hopefully winning this series outright and watch them huff and puff.

Outstanding summary.

 

[A Pom]

They could not, reasonably, have been certain it was going to hit the stumps if it was that close to missing.

The fact we've got to the point where you're suggesting that a correct umpiring decision is a poor decision if it isn't plumb is insane...

 

[Gough]

This tour must be part of the new free trade agreement we signed with the Poms where Boris gave us everything we wanted and we left them with scraps.

 

[A Pom]

When England got the benefit of rain ending the test in 2013, did you put forward any ways to improve the playing time?

No?

Didn’t think so.

So your argument against looking for ways to improve playing times is that I (who wasn't present on this forum at the time) didn't come out with the same suggestion in 2013? Makes sense.

 

[FredLeDeux]

The fact we've got to the point where you're suggesting that a correct umpiring decision is a poor decision if it isn't plumb is insane...

It would be if we'd got there, but we haven't, you old strawman, you.

 

[Kuuz]

My main thing is that why did it take England so long to hit their straps and lay down their best performance.

They knew going in they had 3 days, this wasn’t a shock. Credit to them to try and get a result, but both sides knew days 4 and 5 were a likely washout. Arguably, England got more than expected by having 30 overs on day 4.

Guess I’m just saying, where was this killer instinct in the first two matches. Not to say they have been bad, but to save your best performances for a match that was doomed from the outset seems pretty typical from the moral spirits of cricket in bazball.

Finally, I really hated some of the nonsense Cummins said in the presser. Saying they came into the series seeking to retain rather than win does my head in - it’s so bloody defeatist. Cummins could learn from bazball and it’s boneheaded drive to win at all costs.

 

[Bedi]

Had no impact on the end result. Was the right decision to bat on.

it made all the difference. You could've had us on the ropes

 

[tigs2010]

Just caught up on the result. I assume the Poms have taken it well.

 

[Rabish Binney]

Absolutely nothing wrong with anything Prior says there. I just wish they weren't so two-faced about it.

Who knows - Mitch "Botham" Marsh could have blasted 150 and Josh "Willis" Hazlewood could have steamed in to take 8 for f**k all to give Aus a win by ten runs.

You bring up a good point.

If the weather was good, The Poms thought it would be a mere formality that they would wrap up the test…

No-one cared to think however that we may have been able to bat for most of the day(s) and save it?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

So your argument against looking for ways to improve playing times is that I (who wasn't present on this forum at the time) didn't come out with the same suggestion in 2013? Makes sense.

Clearly your countrymen haven't pushed too hard for it, otherwise we'd be doing them now

 

[kickazz]

So your argument against looking for ways to improve playing times is that I (who wasn't present on this forum at the time) didn't come out with the same suggestion in 2013? Makes sense.

A lot has been done to improve playing times, games hardly ever get rained out now. You could add reserve days like the WTC final had, but that would compromise scheduling a bit.

Draws and rain add to the complexity of Test cricket.

This game always had day 4 and 5 looking sketchy. England stuffed up by not declaring. They can learn from that or blame other things, their choice.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

it made all the difference. You could've had us on the ropes

Someone raised a great point last night, that perhaps Stokes' first test declaration back-firing made him a bit cautious about declaring here.

Interesting.

I guess they'll have a couple of years to ponder that one

 

[A Pom]

A lot has been done to improve playing times, games hardly ever get rained out now. You could add reserve days like the WTC final had, but that would compromise scheduling a bit.

Draws and rain add to the complexity of Test cricket.

This game always had day 4 and 5 looking sketchy. England stuffed up by not declaring. They can learn from that or blame other things, their choice.

I'm not sure reserve days are viable with modern scheduling and the cost of staffing a full stadium. There are other things to look at though like using a ball (or developing a better ball) that is usable in poor light conditions or potentially extending the playing time further into the evening/under floodlights.

I don't think the declaration was bad or would have made any difference to the result personally.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Someone raised a great point last night, that perhaps Stokes' first test declaration back-firing made him a bit cautious about declaring here.

Interesting.

I guess they'll have a couple of years to ponder that one

I don't think they'll be doing much pondering.
Bazball means never having to say "we were wrong".

 

[Soggy2112]

What ECB stance? The only person who's made any comments on ways we could look to maximise play is Root who has come out with reasonable suggestions we could explore and has made similar comments on play being lost to conditions in the past.

I don’t have a problem with Root saying what he did, it is one of those damned if you do, damned if you don’t moments. If he says it it’s sour grapes, if he waits two months and says it no one pays attention.

I do think the play until 10pm thing is impractical. Is he suggesting play stops at 10, and players have 10 hours to get off, eat, recover, get back to the hotel, sleep, wake up, get to the ground, warm up and play? Not reasonable IMO.

I did however take issue with Bairstow’s comments. He basically questioned Hazlewood’s integrity when the Australian team was doing nothing wrong, he just admitted to what absolutely everyone in the Australian team’s position would be thinking.

To me, the way Bairstow has carried on in the media and on the field and the hypocrisy and complete lack of self awareness from him has been poor.

 

[kickazz]

Cummins' captaincy needs some work, no doubt.

But credit it to him for shelving his own ego to exploit the precious egos of his opponents.

It was clear at a point on day 3 we were never winning this. Hence, the more time England batted, the less we needed to in order to draw.

Setting defensive fields whilst that last wicket partnership dragged on was genius. I truly thought that at the time.

Actually trying to get Anderson out to leave Bairstow stuck on 99, great trolling

 

[Soggy2112]

This whole series the English media, fans and especially players have been nothing but disrespectful to the Australian players. Not once have I heard them give any credit for their performances or acknowledgement of their objective success even when we have won

They talk a lot about the spirit of cricket. I'd go as far as saying England are doing far more damage to the spirit of cricket and sports etiquette more broadly with their ungracious, undignified and straight up hypocritical nonsense.

Here we are being told that retaining the ashes in England is something we should feel hollow about because one test match out of 5 was rain affected. Winning test matches overseas is an anomaly in modern cricket let alone retaining series.

I'm proud of this team and proud of this result. Looking forward to hopefully winning this series outright and watch them huff and puff.

“Congratulate the opposition on their successes, and enjoy those of your own team.

Thank the officials and your opposition at the end of the match, whatever the result.”

England have obviously forgotten to read what the actual spirit of cricket says, before accusing the other team of not following it.

 

[aabp1978]

Am I the only one to remember England had 30 overs on Saturday to wrap this game up against what Piers Morgan called a “brutalised, white flag waving” team. And they got 1 wicket. Perhaps if they played cricket like it has been played for 150 years and stopped with the ridiculous declarations, the entertainment of watching Garfield Bairstow not getting a century when they already had more than enough runs then things would have been different…but they werent! Also, unless I am mistaken, there is still a test to go, so could just as easily finish 3-1 or 2-1 as it could 2-2…

 

[TigerCraig]

Lol.

Only on Bigfooty would Tassies Top 6 athletes be ranked like this. Farcical.

Sorry if the sarcasm wasn't clear

 

[Kapow!!!]

What ECB stance? The only person who's made any comments on ways we could look to maximise play is Root who has come out with reasonable suggestions we could explore and has made similar comments on play being lost to conditions in the past.

Fair enough, same question then: Why should we believe the intent behind Root's "reasonable suggestions" when this isn't a stance he has publicly taken before? Why should it be taken seriously by others when the first time he has brought it up was when it disadvantaged him?