*Official Third Test at Edgbaston

[Woodster]

What a session!!Beyond my wildest dreams having Australia going in at lunch 8 wickets down! Thanks to some exceptional bowling from Anderson and Onions, who are two bowlers that can exploit most teams when the conditions are right. The swing is prominent, their areas have been excellent, and providing we can finish the Aussies off, which I expect with the swing around, we have an excellent opportunity to take real control of the Test.

It won't be easy if Australia find similar things happening and Hilfenhaus continues his good work in the series, but boy am I glad Stuart Clark is not their attack!

 

[Adamc]

I'd like to apologise for suggesting that Australia should have been able to get through that session without losing seven wickets. Clearly wasn't possible.

 

[Wiglad]

Good point on the radio, serious pressure on johnson to deliver now.

 

[Uppercut]

Haha you're ****ing Irish ****, get a grip on it hey.

Hey I'm just calling what I see.

 

[Top_Cat]

Before we go off the deep-end about the umpiring, let's not forget how many times the Aussies have been the beneficiary due to Koertzen over the years. Obviously incompetent is incompetent but there are many sides who'd not be too sympathetic right now.

 

[Burgey]

Australia haven't batted terribly, England were just too good for you. Deal.

Fair bit of both tbh.

If you're coming into bat in a test match at the start of a day, you don't ALWAYS get a few sighters, you know? Heaven forbid the bowler might revolutionise the game by putting the ball on the stumps. Each of Watson and Hussey were entitled to do better, which is not taking anything from the bowler.

 

[Craig]

Going to be very interesting to see England bat. I will back Hilfenhaus to do well and if the conditions stay the same, then you would have to think this is the place where Johnson can not only land it on the cut strip, but look dangerous as well. Same for Siddle. I bet McDonald would have done well on this wicket as well.

 

[Uppercut]

I'd like to apologise for suggesting that Australia should have been able to get through that session without losing seven wickets. Clearly wasn't possible.

They could have, they've been a bit unlucky and haven't been at their best. But it was definitely a good-bowling-induced collapse rather than one due to poor batting.

 

[Prince EWS]

Anderson: so, so gun.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Australia haven't batted terribly, England were just too good for you. Deal.

Bit of both for mine. The middle part of the session wasn't too bad batting wise, but things could look a lot better if it wasn't for some pretty poor mistakes. Acknowledging errors from Australia isn't the same as saying England didn't bowl well or don't deserve the position they're in.

 

[Richard]

I'd like to apologise for suggesting that Australia should have been able to get through that session without losing seven wickets. Clearly wasn't possible.

Wasn't realistic, IMO. Obviously nothing is completely impossible in cricket, but expecting any batsmen, however good, to repel top-quality swing bowling like that is in my view unrealistic.

 

[Johnners]

Agree with F00lins. England did bowl well, but there was some pretty poor batting involved.

Koertzen is a shocker, been about 10 years since he's called an LBW correctly (including those he's given n.o.)

 

[irfan]

I'd like to apologise for suggesting that Australia should have been able to get through that session without losing seven wickets. Clearly wasn't possible.

AWTA. Terrific bowling from both Anderson and Onions but some poor decision making and shot selections contributed majorly to losing 7 wickets on a featherbed. Johnson betta pull out his whole bloody bowling arm and not just his finger for Aus to have any chance.

 

[Ikki]

Onions and Anderson bowled very well, and some very dangerous spells. But 7 wickets...give me a ****ing break.

 

[Prince EWS]

The series leading wicket-taker is now Anderson. 10 wickets @ 30 to go with his batting average of 38.

Not even Matthews could manage to criticise Jimmy after that spell.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Anyway, the big test is for Australia's bowlers now. If the conditions are still there, Hilfenhaus, Siddle and Johnson have to deliver a decent performance at least. One bad session doesn't necessarily mean the game is over, look at Lords '05.

 

[Craig]

Before we go off the deep-end about the umpiring, let's not forget how many times the Aussies have been the beneficiary due to Koertzen over the years. Obviously incompetent is incompetent but there are many sides who'd not be too sympathetic right now.

He has given out some shockers.

 

[Ikki]

Bit of both for mine. The middle part of the session wasn't too bad batting wise, but things could look a lot better if it wasn't for some pretty poor mistakes. Acknowledging errors from Australia isn't the same as saying England didn't bowl well or don't deserve the position they're in.

Well said. It was a mix of very good bowling, very poor batting and very poor umpiring.

 

[Johnners]

Wasn't realistic, IMO. Obviously nothing is completely impossible in cricket, but expecting any batsmen, however good, to repel top-quality swing bowling like that is in my view unrealistic.

So it was unrealistic to expect the team to lose any less than 7 wickets? get a grip

 

[Uppercut]

Bit of both for mine. The middle part of the session wasn't too bad batting wise, but things could look a lot better if it wasn't for some pretty poor mistakes. Acknowledging errors from Australia isn't the same as saying England didn't bowl well or don't deserve the position they're in.

Well of course they played poorly, but the point is that bowling like that is almost impossible to play well.

They certainly have a fair shot at a creaky England batting lineup now though. If they match England's bowling performance today, they'll still get a first-innings lead.