What's new

Australia v England | 2nd Ashes Test | Adelaide | Day 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
442 & 24 overs left today . Will Clarke declare at close ?
 
James said:
I would have made us follow on. Drive in the final nail.

I can understand making us bat again at Brisbane, but there was an opportunity for a crushing innings win here.
Click to expand...

It's really a mind game decision IMO. In the context of the game it probably won't affect the outcome whether you send England in again or have a bat. What's more important is what happens after you make the decision. Not enforcing the follow on only really works if you can put quick runs to make England's struggle to make 170 look pathetic, make the bowlers toil and look ineffectual, and then declare from a position of total strength with plenty of time to bowl them out. But Rogers and Twatto (especially Twatto who got out to a totally useless shot) getting out quick have put the OZ in a position where they have to rebuild a little bit and consolidate so as not to lose more wickets, because now that you've decided to bat you don't want to get bowled out for 100 or so - you want to choose when to end the innings. The last thing you want to do is be under the cosh when you're leading by so much in the game because it gives the other team some momentum and belief, if not to win this game but to finish strongly.

On the other hand if you decide to enforce it, you need to then nip out some quick wickets to totally demoralise them and keep your bowlers on a high, and also keep them fresh for the match at the WACA. What you don't want is to do it when your bowlers are tired and they end up toiling in the field for over a day and you end up getting the Pom batsmen into form.

I reckon that maybe thoughts of giving the bowlers a rest came into it, but also Clarke probably thought that the Pom bowlers were going to be ineffectual and thus they could grind some more runs before declaring tomorrow.

I would probably have kept batting, but I wouldn't have been happy at Twatto throwing his wicket away because that's changed the mindset for Warner and Clarke right at the moment.
 
Twatto truly is a liability. 400 runs ahead and he can still find a way to bottle it.
 
OZGOD said:
I would probably have kept batting, but I wouldn't have been happy at Twatto throwing his wicket away because that's changed the mindset for Warner and Clarke right at the moment.
Click to expand...

Well, now they can accelerate a bit.

On another note, wicket is turning bit more now so Lyon will be more than handy when Eng bats.
 
Last edited:
OZGOD said:
He would've if Rogers and/or Twatto had stayed in I think. It would be silly to declare now, it would make batting look totally pointless.
Click to expand...

Batting again gave a crucial 2 hour rest to MJ,ie in case they decide to bowl for 4 or 5 overs today . In any case ,i do not see Aus coming out to bat on day 4 .

455 ahead & 21 overs left . Why do i get the impression that the odd ball is keeping low ....
 
Aussies should bat on and get the lead upto 600 here at least.

If you want to rest bowlers , give them proper rest.
 
Stokes has bowled decently & could be a very useful 5th bowling option .
 
Gilly said:
Watson has been the best number three in this series by a long shot.
Click to expand...

He's better than one guy who went home with long-term depression and another who just played his first ever knock at 3. Bit like three one-legged men competing against each other in a butt-kicking contest.
 
Tubby hammering Cook for his defensive field placings


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
In hindsight they should have enforced the follow on lol. Here comes the 3rd player I expect to fail


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Sorry but this just seems a pointless batting exercise by oz!
Easy chance for innings victory gone begging.din't expect this from clarke.
 
Aus should slog now . 466 ahead,dust popping ,see no reason to conserve .
 
battler said:
Sorry but this just seems a pointless batting exercise by oz!
Easy chance for innings victory gone begging.din't expect this from clarke.
Click to expand...

Clarke would have been justcrazy to make his bowlers come straight back out and bowl again. If the England team got on top of a tired bowling unit them that could have given England the confidence they need. If England take any confidence out of picking up a few cheap wickets in Aus second dig then it will only bite them on the backside. Their batsmen are still crapping themselves at the thought of facing a rested Johnson.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Who's that fielder there? Kevinder? His mind is on a hot shower already I reckon


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Warner has decided that Monty has to go


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Gilly said:
Clarke would have been justcrazy to make his bowlers come straight back out and bowl again. If the England team got on top of a tired bowling unit them that could have given England the confidence they need. If England take any confidence out of picking up a few cheap wickets in Aus second dig then it will only bite them on the ****. Their batsmen are still crapping themselves at the thought of facing a rested Johnson.
Click to expand...

Also, wicket will get worse and Lyon will come into the picture.
 
Gilly said:
Clarke would have been justcrazy to make his bowlers come straight back out and bowl again. If the England team got on top of a tired bowling unit them that could have given England the confidence they need. If England take any confidence out of picking up a few cheap wickets in Aus second dig then it will only bite them on the ****. Their batsmen are still crapping themselves at the thought of facing a rested Johnson.
Click to expand...

England are mentally shot,even if johnson bowled 135 k they would make him look unplayable,johnson would have not even been needed to bowl full throttle.
Plus u have other bowlers like siddle,harris and lyon who are very capable of picking up wickets anytime.
Sorry but that was a poor decision by clarke.
 
battler said:
England are mentally shot,even if johnson bowled 135 k they would make him look unplayable,johnson would have not even been needed to bowl full throttle.
Plus u have other bowlers like siddle,harris and lyon who are very capable of picking up wickets anytime.
Sorry but that was a poor decision by clarke.
Click to expand...

You think its a bad decision, but its a no brainer, giving the bowlers a rest is priority.
 
battler said:
England are mentally shot,even if johnson bowled 135 k they would make him look unplayable,johnson would have not even been needed to bowl full throttle.
Plus u have other bowlers like siddle,harris and lyon who are very capable of picking up wickets anytime.
Sorry but that was a poor decision by clarke.
Click to expand...

Purely from cricket sense and winning this game, batting again was the best decision( keeping out any weather factor). Johnson sheer pace was the reason Eng folded so cheaply and there is no way he would have bowled the same way for the whole day.

Wicket is turning now so Lyon will be a threat in addition of Johnson and Harris. Then you want the same line up to play the next test match as well. Why risk it?
 
Last edited:
Since there is talk of rain on day 5 , i think with 11 overs left today , Clarke should think of declaring .
 
I do not think making follow on here would have been a good idea. Clarke did the right thing.
 
Still it's good. Annoys Anderson and England and it's always a good thing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Ims1 said:
Since there is talk of rain on day 5 , i think with 11 overs left today , Clarke should think of declaring .
Click to expand...

Might lose 5 minutes to rain.

Alex: "I don't know if the rain is really worth worrying about. The Bureau of Meteorology have between 0 and 2mm falling tomorrow, that may not be enough to even get them off the field."
Click to expand...
 
Buffet said:
Purely from cricket sense and winning this game, batting again was the best decision( keeping out any weather factor). Johnson sheer pace was the reason Eng folded so cheaply and there is no way he would have bowled the same way for the whole day.

Wicket is turning now so Lyon will be a threat in addition of Johnson and Harris. Then you want the same line up to play the next test match as well. Why risk it?
Click to expand...

Yeah exactly plus if oz had opted for the follow on,they would have bowled out England tomorrow,and got an extra rest day anyway,now they run the risk of the match going to day 5.
 
Should have been the follow-on. This gives the batsmen the chance to regroup.
 
Gilly said:
Might lose 5 minutes to rain.
Click to expand...

BoM -Aus : Sunday [ Cloudy. Isolated showers and the chance of thunderstorms about the hills and southern suburbs from the late morning, extending throughout during the afternoon and evening. Winds northwest to northeasterly 25 to 40 km/h shifting southwesterly during the afternoon then becoming light in the evening.]

Monday [ Partly cloudy. Scattered showers and the chance of isolated thunderstorms in the morning. Isolated showers redeveloping during the evening. Light winds becoming west to southwesterly 20 to 30 km/h in the middle of the day. ]


Looks like maximum of 15 to 20 overs might be wasted .
 
James said:
Should have been the follow-on. This gives the batsmen the chance to regroup.
Click to expand...

The batsmen are chasing leather looking at a scoreboard showing them at least 500 runs in arrears, cant see that giving them much confidence knowing that Johnson is resting up ready to rough em up again.

Good decision by Clarke.
 
battler said:
Yeah exactly plus if oz had opted for the follow on,they would have bowled out England tomorrow,and got an extra rest day anyway,now they run the risk of the match going to day 5.
Click to expand...

You got my point wrong earlier. My mistake to not write it properly. I was defending Aus decision to bat again. Fast bowlers are more likely to get injured by bowling continuously and Aus bowlers have that problem anyway. Let me put it this way.

When bowlers are bit tired then one scenario is to let them bowl again because they may get 4 days of the rest when game it over. Other scenario is - let's not risk running them down the ground and give them a rest before bowling again in the 2nd test. In second scenario, they will get a break of 3 days rather than possible 4 day but every fast bowler will prefer that over the first scenario.
 
Last edited:
battler said:
Sorry but this just seems a pointless batting exercise by oz!
Easy chance for innings victory gone begging.din't expect this from clarke.
Click to expand...
Err... it was a great decision to bat again the Aussie bowlers are fragile and need a rest before having a go at the English again.
 
Last edited:
James said:
Should have been the follow-on. This gives the batsmen the chance to regroup.
Click to expand...
Re-group to get another thumping from Mitchell Johnson?.. Your batsmen have well and truly been rattled by MJ
 
That Monty shout to Warner earlier was pretty decent, I would have reviewed it.
 
Let's get a ton from Davey before stumps


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Buffet said:
You got my point wrong earlier. My mistake to not write it properly. I was defending Aus decision to bat again. Fast bowlers are more likely to get injured by bowling continuously and Aus bowlers have that problem anyway. Let me put it this way.

When bowlers are bit tired then one scenario is to let them bowl again because they may get 4 days of the rest when game it over. Other scenario is - let's not risk running them down the ground and give them a rest before bowling again in the 2nd test. In second scenario, they will get a break of 3 days rather than possible 4 day but every fast bowler will prefer that over the first scenario.
Click to expand...

Point is if every captain thinks that way,then there won't be any innings victory ever,u got to be ruthless at times.
 
Gilly said:
How can you deserve to be out to a ball not even hitting the stumps. Smith has a good eye.
Click to expand...

It was a centimetre that saved him. Not playing a shot to a good ball is always a risk. That's how you get in trouble.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Aman said:
Re-group to get another thumping from Mitchell Johnson?.. Your batsmen have well and truly been rattled by MJ
Click to expand...

I don't know if they are regrouping, after having OZ at 2-4 they are labouring in the field at the moment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
OZGOD said:
I don't know if they are regrouping, after having OZ at 2-4 they are labouring in the field at the moment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
England are done, SA will begin to decline soon as well.

It's all about finding young talent and developing it before the others now.

A new king will rise.
 
Last edited:
The lead is more than enough, aus could easily declare overnight
 
Aman said:
Putting more pressure on the English, 5 sessions will be more than enough against this shot England side.
Click to expand...

You can never predict the weather, I'd always leave some time for that
 
Couple of overs left before English players can enjoy their ginger biscottis.:snack:
 
Last edited:
I would face one ball tomorrow and then declare :markrichardson
 
Aman said:
I would face one ball tomorrow and then declare :markrichardson
Click to expand...

What would've been funny is if Clarke had decided to bat then declared on nought and send England back out :dav
 
Agnew on bbc yesterday : This is not a wicket where they should be blown away, and there is absolutely no rush. If they can get past that target of 371, then it will be a significant step to saving the match.
 
OZGOD said:
What would've been funny is if Clarke had decided to bat then declared on nought and send England back out :dav
Click to expand...

And if Eng had gotten to 100/0 , then ? Just imagining a hypothetical situation here in response to another hypothetical scenario.
 
Last edited:
ims1 said:
agnew on bbc yesterday : This is not a wicket where they should be blown away, and there is absolutely no rush. If they can get past that target of 371, then it will be a significant step to saving the match.
Click to expand...

371?
 
I would be concerned about swanns bowling form. This is not the first time I have seen that when he has failed it has left the other bowlers exposed. If he is not taking wickets, creating pressure then he is a liability.
 
battler said:
Point is if every captain thinks that way,then there won't be any innings victory ever,u got to be ruthless at times.
Click to expand...

The thinking behind the decision was correct, the way it was executed losing 2 wickets in the first couple of overs was not. You don't get more points by winning by an innings. Look what happened to NZ. The WI piled on runs because their attack grew fatigued.

That said, there are many instances where enforcing a follow on makes sense - when there is not as much time in the match for example. Keep in mind that of the 10 Pom wickets that fell, MJ took seven of them. Siddle took 1, Lyon took 1 and Twatto took 1. Are you going to bank on MJ to get a bagful again?

Pup probably saw this as a) a chance to rest the bowlers; b) a chance to get some batting practice out in the middle; c) a chance to keep the Poms bowling so that THEY are not fresh for the WACA; and d) a chance to show the Poms how easy it actually is to bat on this wicket and make their laboured effort to get to 172 look laughable. Bit of mind games.

I don't see how grinding the Poms under a mountain of runs, making them field again when it's probably the last thing they want to do, keep the scoreboard ticking towards 600 with 2 days to play, then declaring at a time of your choosing is not ruthless. Australia did it at the Gabba in 2006 - Ponting and Co piled on 550+ in the first innings, rolled England for sub 200, then batted for another 100-odd runs before putting them back in. He was criticised for it too but he said it was because McGrath and Warne were getting on and he wanted to preserve them.
 
Last edited:
IMO Clarke has turned a 100% chance of an Aussie victory into a 90% chance. There could be rain or somebody could do an Atherton.
 
James said:
IMO Clarke has turned a 100% chance of an Aussie victory into a 90% chance. There could be rain or somebody could do an Atherton.
Click to expand...

It's Adelaide.

You might miss 5 minutes in the next two days.
 
This is the perfect way to do it, make england follow on and if things don't go our way we might end up having our bowlers bowl 2+ days with no rest and maybe even having to face a tricky little chase late on day 5.

This way we got a huge amount of overs at england and plenty of rest for our quicks.
 
Does 2-0 close this series down completely, or can England still escape with a tie?
 
trogger said:
This is the perfect way to do it, make england follow on and if things don't go our way we might end up having our bowlers bowl 2+ days with no rest and maybe even having to face a tricky little chase late on day 5.

This way we got a huge amount of overs at england and plenty of rest for our quicks.
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised by the decision at all. It's been SOP for Australian sides for quite a while.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

The Bald Eagle
England (371) defeat West Indies (121 & 136) by an inning and 114 runs to win the 1st Test match and lead the 3-match series 1-0
2
Replies
146
Views
2K
batandballbattle
B
A
How much will England score in a day in a Test match against Pakistan?
Replies
24
Views
669
Cricket Warrior
C
FearlessRoar
England (376 & 87/0) comfortably defeat West Indies (282 & 175) in the 3rd Test by 10 wickets to clinch the series 3-0
2 3
Replies
188
Views
2K
James
James
BouncerGuy
India tour of Australia (2024/25)
2 3 4
Replies
262
Views
5K
FearlessRoar
FearlessRoar
FearlessRoar
  • Poll
Sri Lanka tour of England (2024)
3 4 5
Replies
396
Views
5K
sweep_shot
sweep_shot
Back
Top