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

[swingdog]

Change the rules daddy!

 

[Visions]

Thinking about Root whinging about figuring out how to get more play in. I don't recall his comments when the Poms only bowled 83 overs on day 1, even with an extra half an hour played.

Root didn’t go far enough. Instead of arguing about playing on until 10pm, he should have argued until at least 7am the next morning to get a result.

Almost 2 in the morning in Manchester and still pissing down.

 

[sherb]

Why didn't England explore these ways over the past decade if wash outs are such a tragedy?

Because washouts are only a problem which need addressing when they negatively affect England.

 

[Silver Tongue]

did you even watch the 2013 ashes?

English fans were carrying on like idiots after they drew the 3rd match which meant they kept the urn.

2005 5th Test. Australia needed to bowl England out on the final day for the win to retain Ashes and Warne had them about 7 for when the rain delay came meaning the game was a draw. Umpires called the game off and England begin raucous celebration. No complaints from England players, media personalities or Barmy Army.

 

[Tugga27]

Hypocrisy would require someone to have claimed that we should never look at ways of changing the playing conditions to get more cricket played, care to point out where they've done that?

I've just got a question for you.
The Poms keep harping on about the spirit of cricket.

Shouldn't that means they should walk when they know they get an edge?
Surely knowing your out and staying out there when you know it is a tad hypocritical?

You can't have it both ways.

 

[jackn]

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

Was there actually a change here? Did they change the field to actually bring about a wicket to leave baorstow stranded? Or do you mean the guy bowling just looked more keen to take one? Because if they changed the field and strategy, legitimately as bairstow neared 100 to strand him and it paid off, Cummins deserves a statue.

 

[sherb]

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

Spot. On.

 

[Coasters7]

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.

No options are viable. That’s why it hasn’t been changed in 150 years. Reserve days are out of the question, like you say, and having an undisclosed and variable rule that allows you to change the ball type mid innings sounds like it would artificially affect results more than losing time would.

How many tests a year get the final two days washed out? And is it worth having a different ball as an option give it wouldn’t have changed this result because it pissed down for nearly 48 hours straight anyway.

The only option is retractable roofs but they’re both too expensive and would go too far the other way, taking the weather out completely. There’s a reason why we play series to decide the better side

 

[Sun Ra]

Australia Retain Ashes In Most Satisfying Way Possible​

WENDELL HUSSEY | Cadet |CONTACT

The Spirit of Cricket is rolling in its grave this morning, after having the Australian team spit in its face.

Famous for it’s desire to see the English cricket team win matches playing the greatest style of cricket ever seen by humankind (aka scoring at one more run an over and making wildly foolish declarations and lack thereof), The Spirit of Cricket is coming to terms with a rather unsatisfactory result.

This comes after the Fourth Test at Old Trafford was rained out.

The quintessentially English weather saw play abandoned on day 5 without a ball bowled, with only a few overs bowled the day before.

That wash out means Australia takes a 2-1 lead into the final test.

According to cricket tradition, which only applies to the English when it suits them, a team must outright win a series to reclaim a trophy.

A drawn series means that the team who holds the Ashes, keeps it.

While the rules of cricket tend to even out in the end, the likes of Stuart Broad have publicly claimed that the result was ‘unjust.’

Those comments follow on from previous ones by his coach Brendon ‘Baz the Genius and Wise’ McCullum who said that it felt like England won the first test.

Despite benefiting from their incredible shit weather in 2013 to retain the Ashes on home soil, it seems like English are seeking to forget history once again.

“It’s just not fair, we played such good cricket and the rain ruined everything,” said one salty Englishman this morning, acting like Australia winning the first two tests isn’t the reason we retained the Urn.

“Philosophically we were better.”

“We actually won when it comes to the spirit of cricket,” said the man who lost when it comes to the scorecard of cricket.

More to come.

 

[Croadymeister]

I've just got a question for you.
The Poms keep harping on about the spirit of cricket.

Shouldn't that means they should walk when they know they get an edge?
Surely knowing your out and staying out there when you know it is a tad hypocritical?

You can't have it both ways.

Broad not walking in that Ashes was disgrace

 

[badgrill]

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.

can they start earlier at all? Other than tv rights having a big say, are there any decent reasons for not adding time at the start if that would help?

 

[FreoRicci]

England should package and sell salt from their salty tears of despair.
**** them and Piers Morgan. 2010 much?

 

[chriso11]

I’m sure all the Poms think they are the better side and that retaining via draw is a false glory but the reality is they allowed themselves to be in a 2-0 hole in a 5 test series and had plenty of luck along the way. I hope we can wake up and push for a series victory in the last test to put the cocky sons of b* in their place. Bowling attack has had 2 extras days to rest thanks to wet weather. Hope Cummins comes out breathing fire and why not give the young Morris a start as a point of difference for an attack that the English showed they could master. It would also be nice to win a toss after losing 4 straight

 

[chriso11]

England should package and sell salt from their salty tears of despair.
* them and Piers Morgan. 2010 much?

Precisely

 

[Tugga27]

Umpires call is an arbitrary margin decided by the ICC, the existence of which results in less truly correct decisions being made than if we just got rid of it completely, I'm all for getting rid of it.

I didn't include those figures because like I said I was focusing on incorrect decisions, not decisions the technology showed was correct. If you really want the figures there have been 2 cases where an England batter has been given LBW and remained out after a review because it was umpires call, and just a single case for an Australian batter.

I'm of the opinion, once a decision has been made, take the umpire's call out of it.
If the ball is hitting you're out, end of.

I know people bang on about the accuracy of ball tracking etc but I still think it's the best way to go.
Getting 2 decisions on one ball because of the umpires call doesn't work for me.

I know others don't agree.

 

[badgrill]

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…

even if they'd won this one, we still could've won 3-2. Lots of assumptions going on here

 

[FreoRicci]

How many overs after lunch/rain delay did England take with Bairstow and Anderson batting? That probably was key. Australia were absolutely spent and demoralised. Easily had a bowl then

 

[sherb]

England won the 2013 series 3-0. Even if both drawn matches had been won by Australia, we still would have lost the series, and England would have retained.

If you are talking about English fans being equally crazy nuffies prematurely celebrating a potential drawn series just like you are all doing now, sure, that was equally stupid.

But you can't claim they retained the ashes due to rain because, no, they would have retained without that rain anyway.

If Australia had won the rained out Test at Manchester in 2013, it would have been 2-1 to England with two Tests to play.

A win in that Test could easily have shifted the momentum of the series, because the Ashes would have still been live.

 

[Gough]

At the risk of sounding cliched and for all the debate over selection this has been a great team effort, everyone has put up their hand at one time or another.

 

[Happy Mastenator]

How shit do you have to be, and how long for, that a drawn/lost series is seen as a massive victory, because of the "way" you play. When the way you play doesn't even help you win.

Poor English fans. They've been starved for so long it's kind of sad to see if it wasn't so funny.

 

[MinerBoy]

I actually feel sorry for England..






















Nothing to do with the cricket though. Just being England.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Purple Suit]

No options are viable. That’s why it hasn’t been changed in 150 years. Reserve days are out of the question, like you say, and having an undisclosed and variable rule that allows you to change the ball type mid innings sounds like it would artificially affect results more than losing time would.

How many tests a year get the final two days washed out? And is it worth having a different ball as an option give it wouldn’t have changed this result because it pissed down for nearly 48 hours straight anyway.

The only option is retractable roofs but they’re both too expensive and would go too far the other way, taking the weather out completely. There’s a reason why we play series to decide the better side

The best way to change it is to use more suitable grounds at more suitable times of year. Sydney is always raining around new years but rather than give them the first test, cricket Australia would rather risk a rain day and have the better time slot.

I’m sure England would be the same.

 

[Makeshft_Mauler]

hopefully marnus has gotten into some form and we just come out and win at the oval, my preference would be to win the series and not just retain.

really England only have themselves to blame

The declaration in the first test and then failing to produce any wickets at the end of day 1, while it was crazy to expect Australia to put on 54 for their last 2 wickets, England didnt need an early declaration besides ego, they stay out there 30 more minutes tonking it they put the game out of reach

their refusal to drop Bairstow who pretty much cost them the series with his poor glovework, also stank of ego, and he wasnt even putting the runs on to make up for his piss poor keeping, ironic that by the time he sorted his keeping and batting out it was too late.


really the moral of the story is you cant let your opponent go 2-0 up in a series where rain can and does happen. we earnt the right to benefit from the weather with our early victories.

for the last test id like them to bring in murphy, at the expense of green, Marsh has earnt the all rounders spot for this series, green can prepare himself for the australian summer. id also play harris over warner, but i think were going to be stuck with dave till he gets his fairwell test in sydney.

 

[Tugga27]

Yep, I'm the crazy and ignorant one for not prematurely celebrating what could still be a drawn series. It's definitely my lack of cricket knowledge that is the issue here.

Retention of the Ashes would've been the priority, especially when you're away.
After that would be the series.

Surely you can see that retaining the ashes is worthy of celebration, regardless of how it's been achieved.

 

[Linda Lovelace]

If Australia had won the rained out Test at Manchester in 2013, it would have been 2-1 to England with two Tests to play.

A win in that Test could easily have shifted the momentum of the series, because the Ashes would have still been live.

Sure. But that's not what happened. England won 3-0 is what happened. Which meant they won the series outright and thus complaining about rain is silly.