[Cricket] First Ashes Test Australia vs England Brisbane 23rd-27th November

[DumLum]

Miss Stokes.

I think we are beat without him.

 

[Hugo Rune]

We need an Australia collapse. It’s possible if we get some early wickets and remove Smith. If not, this could end quite quickly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[CHAPPERS]

1.25 Exeter Crown Hill

 

[Superphil]

I think it’s all pretty much over now, they’ll knock out the runs they need in no time in the morning.

 

[CHAPPERS]

1.25 Exeter Crown Hill

Wow, it must have been early, this missed the correct thread by a mile.

 

[OzMike]

Surprised they didn't take the extra half hour to get a result.

 

[vegster]

Well, looks like that's that. No late night tonight for sure.... Success has a thousand fathers while failure is an orphan.

 

[DJ NOBO]

This ashes series was decided the night stokes decided to bash some chav in Bristol .
His absence tips the balance in aus favour, rather than marginally in ours.

 

[BadFish]

Dismissed with a whimper from a very average Australian side.

 

[HAILSHAM SEAGULL]

1.25 Exeter Crown Hill

That has a better chance of winning than England getting an Aussie wicket

 

[Surf's Up]

A depressing air of predictability about all this.

 

[BensGrandad]

What a poor performance by England. As Geoff Boycott said " you cannot win a test in 1 session but you can lose it in 1" and we did that in the session after lunch on Day 3 with poor captaincy and third rate bowling allowing them to recover from 100 behind on the first innings to lead it by 20 with only 3 wickets remaining. The Aussies batsmen then showed in the 2nd Innings how easy batting was with application and concentration.t

Ball and Woakes are not good enough bowlers as support to Andserson and Broad

Unless Somerset Police pull their fingers out and sort out the Stokes issue we are headed for another 5-0 defeat. Why can it be taking so long to review the evidence.

 

[HAILSHAM SEAGULL]

What a poor performance by England. As Geoff Boycott said " you cannot win a test in 1 session but you can lose it in 1" and we did that in the session after lunch on Day 3 with poor captaincy and third rate bowling allowing them to recover from 100 behind on the first innings to lead it by 20 with only 3 wickets remaining. The Aussies batsmen then showed in the 2nd Innings how easy batting was with application and concentration.t

Ball and Woakes are not good enough bowlers as support to Andserson and Broad

Unless Somerset Police pull their fingers out and sort out the Stokes issue we are headed for another 5-0 defeat. Why can it be taking so long to review the evidence.

You do come out with some bollox.
You listen to "the experts" and spout what they are saying, when some of your comments about cricket previously, prove you know very little about cricket in general.
We never beat the Aussies at the Gabba. Adelaide, Melbourne and Sidney will suit our seamers much better.
Whilst not disagreeing that our back up bowlers are not world class, they should have enough to back Jimmy and Broad on more seam friendly wickets.
Mo Ali's spin is a concern, he seemed off sorts in this match and was a mile behind Lyons as a threat on a wicket that gave assistance.

 

[BensGrandad]

I admit to not "being an expert" and I only speak as I see it as an interested follower and of how it appears to me. I would agree that Alli's bowling falls into the same class as not good enough for a test team but he possibly gets in because of his occasional ability with the bat, given that we have not much choice. My biggest moan is Woakes who is not good enough with either bat or ball IMHO. Both Ball and Woakes bowled too many bowls that lacked length and direction and allowed the batsmen to score runs when we needed to tie them down and frustrate them. Just my opinion having watched most of the game so far.

Can you please explain to me how the fact that we never win at The Gabba has any baring on the result as the match was going and the position that we were in after lunch on day 3.

 

[big nuts]

I admit to not "being an expert" and I only speak as I see it as an interested follower and of how it appears to me. I would agree that Alli's bowling falls into the same class as not good enough for a test team but he possibly gets in because of his occasional ability with the bat, given that we have not much choice. My biggest moan is Woakes who is not good enough with either bat or ball IMHO. Both Ball and Woakes bowled too many bowls that lacked length and direction and allowed the batsmen to score runs when we needed to tie them down and frustrate them. Just my opinion having watched most of the game so far.

After 18 tests:-
Chris Woakes batting average 32.14
Chris Woakes bowling average 30.60 with a strike rate of 59

He's had a poor game but when fully fit and on form he's a more than useful player for us.

 

[Pavilionaire]

It is difficult to argue with those who believe Stokes absence is the difference between being competitive and convincing defeat.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

There was an idiot "expert" reporter on 5 live this morning saying we still have chance to take 10 for 50

Stokes being absent doesn't help, but one person is not going to make this team much better (or worse). Toothless aging and rather slow pace attack (Stokes is a useful 4th seamer but isn't particularly quick even if he was there), no quality batting (Root out - all out) and no-one who can play aggressive fast bowling - or even very ordinary off spin, bog standard spinner, reasonable keeper but prone to dropping catches.

A few pretty scores of around 40-50 each are not going to win Test matches.

If England can't get good first innings leads, expect the worst, as they invariably get blown away in the second innings.

 

[vegster]

There was an idiot "expert" reporter on 5 live this morning saying we still have chance to take 10 for 50

Stokes being absent doesn't help, but one person is not going to make this team much better (or worse). Toothless aging and rather slow pace attack (Stokes is a useful 4th seamer but isn't particularly quick even if he was there), no quality batting (Root out - all out) and no-one who can play aggressive fast bowling - or even very ordinary off spin, bog standard spinner, reasonable keeper but prone to dropping catches.

A few pretty scores of around 40-50 each are not going to win Test matches.

If England can't get good first innings leads, expect the worst, as they invariably get blown away in the second innings.

But, other than that ?

 

[BensGrandad]

There was an idiot "expert" reporter on 5 live this morning saying we still have chance to take 10 for 50

Stokes being absent doesn't help, but one person is not going to make this team much better (or worse). Toothless aging and rather slow pace attack (Stokes is a useful 4th seamer but isn't particularly quick even if he was there), no quality batting (Root out - all out) and no-one who can play aggressive fast bowling - or even very ordinary off spin, bog standard spinner, reasonable keeper but prone to dropping catches.

A few pretty scores of around 40-50 each are not going to win Test matches.

If England can't get good first innings leads, expect the worst, as they invariably get blown away in the second innings.

At lunch on the 3rd day we looked like getting a lead of at least 80 but it all went by the by with poor bowling and captaincy after lunch.