The Ashes

Nigel · Post by **Nigel** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:15 pm

norbs wrote:If the Poms win the Ashes, I will ban Nige for beiong a traitorous bastard.

Guess I better go for Australia then.

Post by **Big Kev** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 8:31 am

Hmmm....
Think we're gonna need a bit more rain to save us yet

277 for 2 at close of play is a good run for the Aussies. If they get to 600 we're in big doodoo.

Post by **norbs** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 8:42 am

I dont know what the rain os doing over the next few days, but I reckon we have run out of time. There is only 2 days left, and we arent even in fron t yet. And we still need to take 10 wickets. Warne bowling on the last day will be great, but I fear the fact that McGil is not there is the end of us.

TIMMY30 · Post by **TIMMY30** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 11:33 am

Yep unfortunatly these rain breaks have killed us, along with Langer and Hayden taking the bad light option

. We needed every minute of this match we could get since England are only playing for a draw. Ah well we cant hold the ashes forever

pixelboy · Post by **pixelboy** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 11:45 am

There is time yet..

If we get 300 more tonight to take us to approx 550~600 then we have a day to bowl em out..

A slim chance.. any more rain and we are r00ted

Latch · Post by **Latch** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 12:08 pm

A typical days play gets 300 runs. If you score fast, you'll get 400. If we can have 1 more solid partnership and don't have a major collapse we should be 200 ahead by the end of the 4th day.

Then a whole day for Warne to bowl at them on a 5th day wicket. We still have a good chance yet, weather permitting.

Montey · Post by **Montey** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 1:53 pm

I want to know why it is that suddenly the Aussie's have remembered how to play Test Match Cricket? Suddenly they recall the art of building an innings, waiting for the loose ball, not swiping at everything that passes the bat. Why now, what about the last 3 matches that seemed to be extended one-day games?

w00dsy · Post by **w00dsy** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 2:12 pm

Montey wrote:I want to know why it is that suddenly the Aussie's have remembered how to play Test Match Cricket? Suddenly they recall the art of building an innings, waiting for the loose ball, not swiping at everything that passes the bat. Why now, what about the last 3 matches that seemed to be extended one-day games?

It's called match fixing, they'll win a lot of money if they all put a few bucks on england to win the ashes. They show in the last test they still can play after all, and when things start heading their way, go back to the rooms because of bad light.

Nigel · Post by **Nigel** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 4:13 pm

Bah, for sixteen bloody years all I have ever heard is Australia will win, or it will be a draw. No other team can beat us, and the ever reliable "you beat us only coz we played bad" Never that the other team is actually better. Now its you beat us coz we fixed the match.

w00dsy · Post by **w00dsy** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 4:43 pm

You must be in the wrong place http://forum.rscnet.org/forumdisplay.php?f=443

Nigel · Post by **Nigel** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 4:50 pm

LOL you bastard

pixelboy · Post by **pixelboy** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 10:31 pm

Well thats it really..

A middle order collapse has handed the ashes to the poms..

Well done.. we dont deserve it anymore

breakneck · Post by **breakneck** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 12:45 am

Nah Pix, I think if this test was played out, we have it in the bag. Otherwise the pommies wouldnt be running off for bad light.

Poor way for such a close series to finish.. Maybe it's time the english brought their grounds up to the late 20th century standard and install some lights..

edit: lightened it up a bit.. sorry.

Montey · Post by **Montey** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 12:56 am

It's always interesting that a common turn of phrase in England is, "it's just not cricket", said to imply it just isn't fair. Yet one of the major instigators of pushing the limits of rules in cricket is England. Ironic Huh!!!

pixelboy · Post by **pixelboy** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 12:58 am

ha ha ha...

After a "bad light" delay..

"The Australian team - every single member - has walked out with sunglasses on. Cheeky that!"

Johnny X · Post by **Johnny X** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 1:16 am

Jeez, some of you guys are (potentially, cause it aint over yet) bad losers.

England have given the Aussies the best chance they've had of retaining the ashes today by bowling out the Aussies in quick style this morning. Now, Warne has the chance to devastate the English batting (something he started early on with Strauss' wicket) and give the Aussies a low target to get tomorrow.

Unfortunately the light conditions are giving us the chance to get off the pitch and get the draw we need. The umpires are doing thier job and have offered the light to the English batsmen as they did the Aussies yesterday. The Aussies chose not to take it last night as they needed to reach a big total. Once its offered to the English batsmen they won't think twice and it'll help get us to the draw we need. The umpires are just being consistent and none of you can say that if the shoe was on the other foot the Aussies wouldn't be doing excatly the same as England

No Englishman wants to win the Ashes under these circumstances, Its just another twist in this incredible test series.

As it happens, if the final game would have been at Old Trafford (about 25 miles from here) they would have been out in cracking sunshine and us English would have been in big trouble

Montey · Post by **Montey** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 1:52 am

Hmmm... is that fresh bait I smell?

"No Englishman wants to win under these circumstances", you're having a laugh right? How many times have the crowed been carrying on about how dark it is, etc...

Also, as rightly pointed out by Dean and Greg on SBS, the light rule makes no mention of fair. It says if the light gets bad, such that it poses a safety risk to the batsmen, the fielders or the umpires they can offer the light. With two spinners on, there was no such trigger for the rule.

Look, I don't blame the English for taking the decision to take the light. I think its not the best in terms of the spirit of the game, but if the light is offered they have every right, under the rules, to take it. The dubious question is, should it have been offered in the first place?

Post by **Big Kev** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 2:41 am

The rules don't actually say anything about safety.
They used to.

They simply say someting along the lines of it being too dark for them to play. And that's what they've taken. As Johnny said, if you were 2-1 up you'd be off like a shot.

3.7.5 The following procedure will apply for the use of light meters on
the field of play:
a) Once the umpires have judged the light to be unfit for
play, the umpires shall offer the light to the batting side
and immediately take a reading of the light level.

Montey · Post by **Montey** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 4:51 am

An interesting thing I just discovered, there is no provision in the rules to actually go off due to bad light.

3.7.5 is the closes reading (in full):

3.7.5 The following procedure will apply for the use of light meters on
the field of play:

a) Once the umpires have judged the light to be unfit for
play, the umpires shall offer the light to the batting side
and immediately take a reading of the light level.

b) The reading should be taken from the pitch, pointing the
light meter (if the hand held version) at the sightscreens
and in any other direction as the umpires see fit.

c) Once the umpires have agreed on the reading it should be
noted and used as a benchmark reading for the remainder
of the stoppage.

d) Only when the reading has subsequently increased above
the benchmark reading should the umpires consider the
light level is sufficient for play to resume.

So, just writing the flow of actions...
a) Umpire goes, "hmm, getting a little dark here."
b) umpire offers the light to the batting side.
c) batting side says, "yes please, we'll have that."
d) umpire takes light meter reading from the pitch pointing the light meter at each of the sight screens.
e) umpires note the reading value.
f)....then nothing. It doesn't actually say, that once the light level has been metered play is supended until paragraph (d) is met. All it says is that once the level gets above the metered mark the umpires should consider it nice to play. so, it continues....
g) some time later, after some more overs, the umpire notes from the meter, "it's sufficiently light to play. Never mind that we never stopped."

Post by **norbs** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 8:50 am

Johnny X wrote:Jeez, some of you guys are (potentially, cause it aint over yet) bad losers.

Johnny, I hear what you are saying mate. I would like to think that I have been reasonably fair all the way through the series. I hardly think the Aussies should be whinging about the Poms taking bad light after they themselves took it twice. I am going to be very interested to see how the Aussie players react to losing the ashes. Ponting has already been crapping on about "dont blame me" over here in the papers. For the 1st time in a long time, they have been out played in all aspects of the game. They have made bad decisions time after time. Bowling the morning McGrath rolled his ankle. Not playing McGill this test. etc etc. Ponting's captaincy has been unimaginative and uninspiring. The batsmen have thrown away their wickets too often. The bowlers have bowled poorly, except for Warne. They have dropped catches. Its been sad to watch.

So when the Poms win the Ashes, I will be the first to say well done. And give them a hearty

breakneck · Post by **breakneck** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 8:58 am

The rules that SBS put up briefly last night have a clause for safety:

/and yeah.. sorry for my slightly flaming post last night.. I don't mind you English blokes... Really

I'm adjusting to you blokes winning something. Don't think it's happened in my lifetime yet.. well not since ive been old enough to follow sport.

Dr. Pain · Post by **Dr. Pain** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 10:38 am

Ponting is a good captain but not a great captain like Steve Waugh. Steve had the gift to pull the team together and did stuff to make that team great. Stuff like making everyone wear a baggy green for the first session in the field and putting pressure on the batting team. Also he was good for the odd sledge or 256!

Ponting just seems to lack this but I guess if he acted like Steve Waugh he would be seen as being not creative as a captain. Now people are starting to say he's lacking imagination. He seems to be damned if he does, damned if he doesnt. He had massive shoes to fill by following Steve Waugh and it must be tough for him now. I feel sorry for him at the moment.

Sterling · Post by **Sterling** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:22 am

I fear that the Ashes are going Englands way, weather wise the Aussies have been unlucky, but England really have been the better team since the second test.

Flintoff has been the difference in my opinion, his efforts with the bat and ball really have given England the push along they have needed.

Its going to need a huge effort from the Aussies to pull this one out of the fire, I'm hopeful but I don't see it happening............. I think a few Aussies are going to be looking for new jobs soon and thats not just players.

nutty · Post by **nutty** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:58 am

Yep unless warne pulls somthing out of a bag, I can say that we arnt going to win this test.. Kinda disapointed because its a close match and if it wasnt for the rain it would have been a cracker of a test

Montey · Post by **Montey** » Mon Sep 12, 2005 1:34 pm

breakneck wrote:The rules that SBS put up briefly last night have a clause for safety:

/and yeah.. sorry for my slightly flaming post last night.. I don't mind you English blokes... Really I'm adjusting to you blokes winning something. Don't think it's happened in my lifetime yet.. well not since ive been old enough to follow sport.

I had a look for the word "bad" (case insensetive) in the rules and regulations on the ICC website, and "bad" appears precisely zero (0) times. So I don't know which orifice they pulled that one from.