I've had enough of the knee-jerkers who have, since Headingley, infested the media with wild predictions about how Australia already have the Fifth Test wrapped up. I also had enough of their predictions after Edgbaston that the better balanced and performed England were all set to win the series.
Crash sums it up best:
LET’s be frank about this ... if England win this Ashes series it will be a dark moment in Australia’s cricket history.
The further this series has stretched the less respect we have had for this modest England team.
If this series has confirmed anything is is how cricketers can gain an inflated reputation on the back of performances against rubbish teams.
Ravi Bopara, a superstar when he was playing the West Indies, has been exposed as being technically flawed.
Ian Bell, who has eeked out a beuatiful living just being Mr Average in England’s middle order, has again showed he lacks the class to match it with the best. His lack of passion and personality grates on English fans and rivals.
Paul Collingwood is a solid scrapper but he’s no champion.
Andrew Strauss and Alastair Cooke are useful openers but please don’t mention them in the same breath as John Edrich or Geoff Bocyott or Michael Vaughan.
England have such little depth they considered recalling Mark Ramprakash who is 39 and averaged just 27 in his 51 Tests.
I’ll repeat that average in case you thought it was a misprint ... 27.
England lack world class players.
And yet they are one win away from snatching back the Ashes.
It makes you wonder ... how bad are we going?
Watching the USPGA the other morning I was struck by a strong parallel between Tiger's first two holes and the Aussies at Cardiff. Had Tiger sunk his birdy putt on either of those holes he would have been away. But, he didn't. He was unable to pull away from Yang and eventually Yang holed an eagle to pinch the lead and the tournament.
Will Cardiff's missed chance be the legacy of The 2009 Ashes?
By failing to take a 1-0 lead at the start of the series, the Aussies, one of two evenly matched sides, have left England with a chance to pinch the series at The Oval. One lucky moment, one inspired spell of bowling, one dropped Aussie catch, one great Pommy catch, one umpiring howler and the Test can be won/lost.
And then there's the toss. Here's an idea: change the rules to allow team sheets to be submitted after the toss, not before. I imagine a dynamic and responsive organisation like the ICC will be able to have such a minor modification to the Laws Of The Game up and ratified by tomorrow.
Evenly matched, bollocks. Maybe before KP got injured and Freddie broke down. If we can't beat them without their only two world-class players, then we're a rabble.
If we only cop one umpiring howler this Test then I would be very happy, because that would certainly drop the average.
Posted by: m0nty | Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 01:12 PM
predictions about how Australia already have the Fifth Test wrapped up
This.
This has got me very worried.
And what of the numerous Englishmen pushing this line of "reasoning"? Is this a case of double reverse psychology on their part?
m0nty - KP was a huge loss. Fack, that guy has heart. As big a loss as Pigeon for Australia when he rolled his ankle back in 2005.
[what's the Sportsbet odds on an outright England win?]
Posted by: Big Ramifications | Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 03:38 PM
sorry, forgot to close the italics after the quote in the first line...
Posted by: Big Ramifications | Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 03:40 PM
Will this match be seen as the making or breaking of Ricky Ponting as Captain? There's a good article here that suggests this game will define his legacy.
If he comes out and makes a big hundred and the side wins, he comes out as a captain that has beaten South Africa and England away, without the stars the apparently good captains have had in the past. However lose and he becomes only the second Australian captain in history to lose two series in England (Billy Murdoch around 120 years ago was the first)
Captaining World Cups, 5-0 home Ashes whitewashes, and averaging 56 in Tests and 42 in ODI's will probably also include this fact. Not as big an asterisk as some other players we talk about, but still important all the same.
Posted by: Adsy | Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 05:39 PM
Let me get those leany letters for ya, Biggy Talics.
Posted by: Tony | Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 06:14 PM
Fascinating (but entirely unsurprising) comment from Border in that article Adsy:
These back to back tests have become such a habit that the wait between Headingly and here has seemed to be forever. Too long to make any predictions based on momentum, or some other rubbish. The series is all square, both sides are heavily flawed but evenly matched. At their best, Australia will win. If they aren't all there, and it is rare they are all there, they might win, but it won't be pretty.
Posted by: Russ | Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 07:06 PM
"Will this match be seen as the making or breaking of Ricky Ponting as Captain?"
No, everyone has known for years he is a plodding and unimaginative captain. Winning or losing this test based on his own great batting won't change that. Captaincy and cricket skill are 2 different things. Making hundreds doesn't make you a good captain.
If you want examples of good captaincy, look at the ability of Steven Fleming to win matches where nobody in the team made a hundred and nobody bowled well either. He simply out-strategised the opposition.
Winning matches because Warney took 6/10 or Clarke makes 200 doesn't reflect on the captain in any way except for maybe saying good on him for remembering to pick that guy.
Posted by: Yobbo | Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 08:44 PM
I'm not for one minute trying to link Punter's personal form with his captaincy - Mark Taylor, being one of our great captains was an innings or two away from being dropped for his batting and can attest to that.
I still think after 60 Tests if you are able to win or at the very least save five out of every six matches (with a lot of dead rubber losses in that) you have to still be able to handle your side. He wouldn't have had that many chances with Warne and McGrath in the side to pull off the Fleming type captaincy moves. Whether or not these players had covered up his shortcomings is where I'm coming from - this is a perfect time to show if he knows his stuff.
Posted by: Adsy | Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 09:48 PM
Can't disagree with your analysis of England, worse luck, although yeah, we'd be better with the full, fit team on the pitch. Strauss is no boycott agreed, but I'd say he'll have given Edrich a run for his money once his test career is over.
Ponting's legacy as a captain is already made, I think. It'll only be redefined at the Oval by a loss. If he wins, he'll still rank below the last three.
Posted by: The Old Batsman | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 03:59 AM
Both teams are ordinary.
Until Clark came in and brought pressure on at one end our bowlers were four bowlers.
Siddle is very very lucky to play test cricket. At some stage batsmen will wake up that to play Johnson to square up your stance and wait for the short ball to cut otherwise play him off the hip to leg. You have to be unlucky if the ball swings!
Hotels is our only decent bowler.
if the ball swings we are cactus. if it doesn't we score a lot.
England rely to much on a few batsman and their bowlers do not know what to do when the ball won't swing.
Freddie isn't a patch on 2005.
there are very few decent captains. to be sure Taylor was one and should have been dropped
Posted by: The Don has risen | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:18 AM
If the ball swings ENGLAND are cactus, too.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:24 AM
Tony Australian bowlers have only used the conditions well once.
The poms have a better record and we will noy have Clark
Posted by: The Don has risen | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 12:36 PM
Noy according to 65-35 Crash.
Poms have had good swing conditions twice, us once. Both sides have cashed in when it suited.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 12:55 PM
That online Craddock is good stuff. One bloke posed the Q - when was the last time the Pommie team didn't have a former captain in the side. Fair Q thought Crash, probably early 90's with Athers. Highlighting the Pommie lack of confidence.
Crash is entertain and pretty insightful. He was the first on the Symonds = idiot wagon early last year while all the others were fawning over the media darling. He should be an Inside Cricket regular when that comes back.
Posted by: RT | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 01:40 PM
Saw Crash on The Back Page with Mike Gibson, Billy Birmingham and "resident Sydney journo who only knows about league" the other night. Was quite good actually, knew a bit about most sports, but went full bore when it came to cricket. Would fit really well with the other guys on IC.
Posted by: Adsy | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 03:37 PM
Adsy: so that would be two journos on that panel who only know about league, then.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 06:12 PM
Yes, it was quite leaguey. Anything AFL was met with a Darius Boyd level of scrutiny.
Posted by: Adsy | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 06:59 PM
Dammit, lost the toss. Sack Punter now before he does any more damage!
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 07:31 PM
GAH!!! Tails never fails Punter!!!
But no change to the line-up makes me happy.
Get stuck in boys - that first wicket could see another procession.
Posted by: Bruce | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 07:33 PM
I change my tune from before... everyone knows tails never fails Punter. Poor captaincy, he should have known that from the backyard. Even in Tassie.
Posted by: Adsy | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 07:36 PM
That pitch looks like a bloody road.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:01 PM
Ponting- lousy tosser. Worth sacking on that score alone.
Hilfy's radar is off.
Posted by: Lurker | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:08 PM
Work that stupid lacquer off lads.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:09 PM
Evening, all.
Regarding the toss.
Ponting needs to consult an expert - me.
On the half dozen occasions I called a toss during my footy and cricket career, I tossed a coin in the rooms beforehand and whatever that toss came up with, I went with out on the ground.
I only lost once.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:11 PM
And I won every toss in the rooms.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:13 PM
Any chance Hilf will get his haus in order.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:18 PM
Ah, that's a soft dismissal by Captain Cook.
Posted by: Lurker | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:20 PM
Cook out!
Caught Ponting, bowled Sizzler!
Go you good, Vic. (And Tassie bloke.)
Spot on, Lurkio - soft Cook.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:20 PM
SIZZZ!!!!!
Get into 'em now boys!
The new worst #3 in the world.
Posted by: Bruce | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:22 PM
As the philosopher Townshend wrote:
"Meet the new worst, same as the old worst."
~~ Will Get Caught Again.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:24 PM
Crooky sinks the claws in:
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:27 PM
Strauss out, all out, this mob. The slips need to start chirping at him more.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:27 PM
Asud Rauf looks ridiculous with his nose swathed in suncream.
It is odd that Pakistan's leading export these days appears to be competent cricket umpires.
Posted by: Lurker | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:31 PM
Ha ha, Bell gloved one behind, no one went up.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:31 PM
That's off the wrist band.
Just walk, Sherm. You know you were out.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:31 PM
Lurk: "It is odd that Pakistan's leading export these days appears to be competent cricket umpires."
And terro... ahem.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:33 PM
TMS already talking about appealing for the light.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:34 PM
Teensy bit of shape for Clark's first nut.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:35 PM
TMS are always praying for interruptions. Gives them a chance to go with their favourite past-time: talking about cakes.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:35 PM
Want to read a footy rumour?
No?
I'll tell you anyway:
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:49 PM
Come on Johnno, this is your series to win.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:49 PM
Come on, Sherm, you hack. Just get off. Put us out of your misery.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:51 PM
I read that rumour on the large football site, TT. Fair to say it's vying for the most ridiculous rumour of the year.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:51 PM
How did Ian Bell ever get past county cricket? He's really not much chop at playing the short ball.
Posted by: Lurker | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:52 PM
Mont. I posted it as a gag on Demonland and so far not too many people have taken it seriously.
Didn't know it was on Large Football. Will have a slum now, see what they say.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 08:57 PM
Ah, so you're the culprit! Well played if so.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:00 PM
Can't find it on BF. (Actually, I can barely ever find anything on BF.)
Is there a link?
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:08 PM
Hmm, I think it may have been deleted. That was where I saw it though.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:14 PM
Not great bowling this morning. Not bad. Probably down to the lack of life in the track.
Looks like the Poms took a punt on Ponting calling the toss wrong and have made sure the track will turn big time when they bowl last.
Although, just now Stuey has got some nice shape.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:17 PM
Typical. The BF set-up is all over the shop.
My DL post is here.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:19 PM
Bell is looking pseudo-ominous. He is going to hack, clunk and plop his way to a score.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:31 PM
Bell's done a hammy. Perfick.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:35 PM
Obviously Bells heart is in his leg.
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:35 PM
Surely Bell hasn't done a hammy?!?
(Beautiful, Nick.)
Send out the physio and another set of gloves.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:35 PM
Muscle tear secondary to hair product overdose.
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:36 PM
Good ball to a bloke with a gammy leg, Hotels.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:38 PM
Around 1/100 at lunch, 3/300 at stumps, all out 500+.
Then the pitch starts turning.
This is looking ugly.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:51 PM
Isn't this where Warne comes on and bowls Strauss?
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:53 PM
This pitch is so easy for batting Bell is set to accidentally make the worst 100 in the history of Test cricket.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:53 PM
Where's Hauritz? What goose wanted a four man pace attack?
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:54 PM
Evidently the English authorities have settled on a 1-1 draw as a moral victory.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:54 PM
I think this pitch might be setup for a reverse swing setup. Make it dry to scuff things up because they think reverse is where they have the edge.
Posted by: Bruce | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:56 PM
It's full value for shots out there. 20 boundaries already and not that many pies have been sent down.
Posted by: Bruce | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:57 PM
There can be no doubt the Poms have got a pitch made to order. The very last thing they wanted was a track with life which would assist the Aussies main weapon.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 09:59 PM
Not enough solid line and length bowling and too much roobish! Oh well.
Posted by: Lurker | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 10:27 PM
Piss off Strauss, shocking shot, on yer bike ya Vark.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 10:49 PM
That was a lovely mozz by Maxwell, talking up how well Strauss had been leaving the ball. Then the big Saffer hangs his bat out to dry and gets a nick. Big pole.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 10:50 PM
Picked it. Remember two tests ago when Strauss got out after a break...
Now through the hardcasing, now for the soft chewy middle. But...pies for 200?
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 10:55 PM
Nah, Colly to go in single figures...
Posted by: Tom Le | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 10:58 PM
We've started already? I was watching The Family Guy. This low, slow road is Pies' dream track.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:04 PM
Why are short sleeves called shirt sleeves?
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:09 PM
KP wouldhave been carving us up at 3 here.
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:09 PM
This will be the softest Test 100 ever from Bell.
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:10 PM
50 to Bell?!? You have got to be kidding me. Been a long time since I've seen a more undeserving score.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:11 PM
In the pantheon of aesthetic crimes, Bell and Pies are up there with Krab and Jaques.
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:12 PM
Evening all. Not exactly a great start. I'm blaming Bruce for anti-mozzing Bell earlier. Still, could be worse. Clark is keeping the game in check, without looking terribly dangerous either.
Posted by: Russ | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:13 PM
CMJ on TMS has just called Hotels "pigeon-toed" twice in five minutes.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:17 PM
If Bell had such trouble with the short ball earlier, why haven't we bowled one at him in the past 30 minutes. He looks just fine flicking them off his pads.
Posted by: Russ | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:18 PM
Was just going to say Russ theres been a bloody lot down the leg side in the first session, but I missed a bit watching the last 30 minutes of Zulu on Fox Classics. A bit like the Aussies at Cardiff - swarming all over them but couldn't or wouldn't finish them off when they had the chance.
Posted by: Adsy | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:25 PM
Time to bring back Johnson to stick a few into Bell's throat.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:27 PM
If Pies had a set, that would have finished him. Ps : nice no ball to end Strauss' innings...
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:30 PM
It's absurdly simple to hit fours on this billiard table.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:31 PM
Come to think of it, Bell does look a bit like Michael Caine.
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:31 PM
Poms 2.85 to win. 2.25 the draw. 3.60 Oz the win...
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:33 PM
Nick, you're right. Just read it on Crooky. Fiasco D'Umpiring 2009 continues.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:33 PM
However, my mate Ravi reckons the Tie at 500 to 1 is a safe bet.
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:34 PM
Is Ravi's idea of a safe bet also Melbourne for the 2009 premiership?
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:36 PM
Ravi says even getting Melbourne into the 8 would be a suspicion arousing feat...hansie died trying to do it...
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:42 PM
"Ideal" was the best thing on during the luncheon interval. Took me a while to work out what was going on, but it has its charms.
For some weird reason Hilf's bowling action reminds me of Steve Waugh. Not exactly a promising comparison, but he's bowling moderately well. Studs on the other hand, is a danger to his slips coordon and his average.
And what a bloody disgraceful use of statistics that "leading wicket taker" list is. Spinners make the list because they have long careers you blithering twits. Start by comparing the average of all bowlers, not the f'n top dozen, then realise that even that is, at best, largely irrelevant to the question over Ritz.
Posted by: Russ | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:44 PM
Was Hansie the real father of Tom Scully?
Posted by: m0nty | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:44 PM
Talking about Zulu, do you reckon if the Poms win this they will hand out VC's instead of OBE's? Interesting comparisons below:
Corporal William Wilson Allen = Cook
Lieutenant Gonville Bromhead = Strauss
Lieutenant John Rouse Merriott Chard = Bell
Acting Assistant Commissary James Langley Dalton = Collingwood
Private Frederick Hitch = Trott
Private Alfred Henry Hook = Flintoff heheh
Private Robert Jones = Prior
Private William Jones = Broad
Surgeon Major James Henry Reynolds = Anderson
Corporal Christian Ferdinand Schiess = Swann
Private John Williams = Harmison
Also, five men were awarded the Distinguished Conduct Medal. They were:
Colour Sergeant Frank Bourne = Panesar
Private John William Roy, The only Scottish defender at Rorke's Drift = KP
Second Corporal Michael McMahon, His medal was later withdrawn for desertion = Bopara hahaha
Second Corporal Francis Attwood Army Service Corps = Andy Flower
Wheeler John Cantwell Royal Horse Artillery = Onions
Posted by: Adsy | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:45 PM
Gotta get Siddle on. Or Katich.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:45 PM
Looking at the Poms line up, Hansie might be the father of the future of England cricket.
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:46 PM
10 no balls and 2 wides in 40 overs is a very ordinary effort.
Posted by: Russ | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:48 PM
Given that Hauritz would have come in for Clark or Siddle, and Clarks holding up sn end and Siddles got s top order wicket, how would you put Hauritz in this side? Warne for Siddle - yes.
Posted by: Nick | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:48 PM
Watto's health is injured.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:50 PM
That's an oddly shaped white mark on the bat being referred to as "nothing" there. Not that Pies was necessarily out there, mind, I just wouldn't mind a few more looks.
Posted by: Russ | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:54 PM
Must admit, I didn't think it was out; both live and in replay.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:55 PM
Snicko was more generous to the Aussies. A nick, but hard to match it with the bat/ball movement.
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, August 20, 2009 at 11:56 PM
The spin of the ball is always the best indicator of an edge, which, to me, indicated a little nick. Not a big nick though, and no surprise it wasn't given.
Posted by: Russ | Friday, August 21, 2009 at 12:00 AM