*Official* Fifth Test at The Oval

[fredfertang]

filling his boots at Colchester - mind you Surrey's attack looks distinctly ordinary - bit like the WIndies in fact

 

[Nate]

It'll be very interesting to see how the deck plays tomorrow, but I am SO happy with that day's play. The pitch looked extremely flat, 400 was an absolute minimum.

Mike Hussey ton? Mike Hussey ton.

 

[Ikki]

The kind of match that can easily be an inning's defeat for England.

 

[grecian]

The kind of match that can easily be an inning's defeat for England.

I find most matches are like that, TBH.

Anywhoo, not happy, but not yet distraught. Have seen us bowled out on the first day on even more placid pitches. I feared we'd be totally out of it by now. Just wish some of the wickets had actually been through proper wicket-taking deliveries. Will have to wait and see whether this pitch will deteriorate, there have been signs, but that just might be undue optimism.

 

[tooextracool]

Tbh, I think there was a little bit in the wicket today. Siddle got the ball to nip about occasionally during his spell, there was a little bit of reverse swing and even occasionally some conventional swing to work with. Obviously its still a belter of a track and a lightening fast outfield and it depends on how England bowl, but if they bowl relatively well with the advantage of having won the toss they could very much be in this especially with North getting the ball to turn.

It is disappointing that they have lost 8 wickets to a bowling attack that Siddle aside was by and large toothless in the conditions and made the mistake of not picking a spinner, but nonetheless there is little that can be done about that. If Broad can inch England to somewhere in the vicinity of 350 at least they will have something to bowl at.

 

[Woodster]

Cook has been rubbish for a while now but its gone completely unnoticed by almost everyone.

Even un-noticed by the stats men, who will have noticed he averages just under 50 (in 2009) and only Strauss and Samaraweera have scored more runs than him in world cricket this year. Admittedly he has played more cricket than most, but still a respetcable average.

 

[Woodster]

Think to be honest people are bigging up Australia's day a bit too much here, while everyone is naturally keen to knock England's batting performance by way of habit. This is not the batsman's paradise that people expected (until Australia bat on it!), England were made to work hard for the runs, especially in the afternoon period, yes the outfield's quick. but the ball is already going through the top, on day 1!

I am not suggesting England are on top, nor do I think we batted particularly well, but it is difficult to ascertain how well, or poorly, a side has batted till both teams have had the pleasure. I agree with TEC that 350, if we can somehow edge and slog our way there, will be a reasonable total on this pitch having seen how it's played today.

 

[steds]

I can't look at Hilfenhaus without thinking "Anger. Pain. Fear. Aggression." It's creepy. He needs to shave his head or something.

 

[slippyslip]

England 14 half centuries. 1 century.

Is it just me or is that the telling stat for England this Ashes?

Going into the last test in 2005 Australia only had 1 century.

Why cant England batsmen convert all these half centuries, and 30+, scores in centuries? Is it because once you get to these scores in county cricket its a cakewalk to a century?

And is there is no swing then how the hell is England going to bowl out Australia?

 

[zaremba]

Another under-performance by England. But it's still reasonably even because that was a big toss to win. Australia ahead obviously but not by as much as some might think. Fast outfield but a pitch with a bit in it; and it may develop into a good pitch for Swann and the tall England bowlers: if they can bowl straight they may benefit from some uneven bounce.

 

[sledger]

Just hope Swann is up to the job to be honest, judging on how much the pitch span just today, it's going to up to him to effectively lead the attack here, could be a bit of a make or break game for him one feels. I really hope he does a great job, but I do worry. Somehow I can't see him bowling Australia out in the 4th innings to bring in the win.

 

[zaremba]

England 14 half centuries. 1 century.

Is it just me or is that the telling stat for England this Ashes?

Going into the last test in 2005 Australia only had 1 century.

Why cant England batsmen convert all these half centuries, and 30+, scores in centuries? Is it because once you get to these scores in county cricket its a cakewalk to a century?

Until very recently the England batting line up had an extraordinarily high proportion of players with great conversion rates. So I can't see the relevance of county cricket to this. Dropped off a little recently but Strauss, for one, is up there with the best of all time (Bradmam apart).

 

[howardj]

That's a good score from England considering:

(a) how difficult it will be to bat last on this pitch (the ball is already going through the top); and
(b) that Australia I think will need a lead of at least 100 on the first innings.

 

[Woodster]

England's conversion rate clearly is not acceptable so far in this series, and does need addressing, however, it is not the be all and end all, and series can still be won despite stats such as this heavily favouring the opposition.

 

[steds]

Ian Bell: "We've got 300 on the board, which is great." Pathetic. It's not great. It's barely even adequate.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Ian Bell: "We've got 300 on the board, which is great." Pathetic. It's not great. It's barely even adequate.

Yep that's always England's attitude in interviews. It stinks. KP is always saying how he'd take x and take y despite throwing his wicket away like a complete tit with the bowlers at his mercy. The hunger for runs, runs and more runs seems to be a totally alien concept to this lot. They seem to be easily satisfied with getting mediocre landmarks and above average scores. Could you imagine an Aussie sitting contented in the dressing room after giving his wicket away?

 

[four_or_six]

Ian Bell: "We've got 300 on the board, which is great." Pathetic. It's not great. It's barely even adequate.

He's hardly going to say "We've got 300 on the board, which is barely adequate," is he? That would be ridiculous.

 

[Woodster]

Yep that's always England's attitude in interviews. It stinks. KP is always saying how he'd take x and take y despite throwing his wicket away like a complete tit with the bowlers at his mercy. The hunger for runs, runs and more runs seems to be a totally alien concept to this lot. They seem to be easily satisfied with getting mediocre landmarks and above average scores. Could you imagine an Aussie sitting contented in the dressing room after giving his wicket away?

That may be his attitude in front of the cameras, I think within the confines of their own dressing room, or hotel room, they will be reprimanding themselves for not making the most of these opportunities. I think it's good to stay positive, to believe that runs on the board are a good thing, and that this is not the kind of wicket where you need 450+, try and put some seeds of doubt into Australia along the way. Some of them will be disappointed they've not gone on, but Bell's 72 may look like a great effort after both first innings, time will tell.

 

[sledger]

He's hardly going to say "We've got 300 on the board, which is barely adequate," is he? That would be ridiculous.

Well no, but he could at least say "We've got 300, which isn't quite what we had hoped for".

 

[Woodster]

He's hardly going to say "We've got 300 on the board, which is barely adequate," is he? That would be ridiculous.

Yes precisely. Why let Australia think these guys are down and are ruing their missed opportunites, and that this is a pitch where you need a massive first innings total. They will be disapponited, but are showing positivity.