*Official* First Test at the Gabba

[Marcuss]

Originally Posted by Spark

Nah get him driving early IMO. We saw early in this innings how many balls were squirted through gully/slips, and he looked like he'd nick one off soon - until the drop, that was, and then they weren't going to nick anything. He'll hit one or two through the covers but you're not out of the game.

Was not exactly early on itbt. 29(53b)?

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by Marcuss

Wouldn't say that's the perfect ball to get Trott at all, you saw how good he is on the drive today and yesterday. .

Yes, when the ball.is.not.doing.anything...

[Spark]

Originally Posted by Marcuss

Was not exactly early on itbt. 29(53b)?

Remove the word "early". Really, right until the drop I thought we had a real chance at getting him out on the drive. It's not exactly a natural shot for him.

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by Marcuss

Lol. Trott's a far better batsman than Watson is bowler

Apparently not.

Originally Posted by Marcuss

13.6 81.7 mph, gone! Watson strikes! Who would've thought it!? Not me. Watson goes fuller, finds some movement off the wicket into Trott who drove loosely and it went through the gate and clattered into middle 41/2

Ftr.

He wasn't hopping them away prior to the wicket either.

Yes, well if Cricinfo says it then it must be true.

Am starting to wonder if you were actually watching the game. Watson got more than one to move away before the ball that came back in to Trott. As Spark said, he looked ordinary on the drive on the off early in the piece. Don't recall him having middled one up until the point Watson bowled him.

[Marcuss]

Watson did **** all with the balk that over bar the last 2 balls which both cut in. Trott defended one with ease and then invited the next one to castle him, pretty much bought it a taxi and opened the door to let it in.
There was no genius plan for Watson to set him up for the outswinger. It was just a bad shot man.

[Marcuss]

Originally Posted by Son Of Coco

Apparently not.



Yes, well if Cricinfo says it then it must be true.

Am starting to wonder if you were actually watching the game. Watson got more than one to move away before the ball that came back in to Trott.

Was just showing you what im saying is hardly outlandish.
Watto didn't move any away to Trott in that first over. It was either well wide or cutting in. Bar the first ball.

[benchmark00]

Haha this is ridiculous.

Let's face it lads. England are so much better than Australia that the only way Australia can come close to them is if England throw all of their wickets away and if the umpires are blatant cheats.

[Spark]

It was a bad shot and well bowled to exploit a batsman's weakness.

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by Marcuss

Was just showing you what im saying is hardly outlandish.
Watto didn't move any away to Trott in that first over. It was either well wide or cutting in. Bar the first ball.

Actually, that's a good point. I thought Watto had bowled more to him before his dismissal.

Still don't think you can throw Trott in with batsmen like Strauss who threw his wicket away though. As I said before, the ball was far enough up to tempt the batsman to drive, but did enough to miss the bat. If Trott had defended then he probably would've gotten away with it.

Not sure how a batsman would pick up on that sort of movement from a good length though.

[vcs]

Sometimes I miss the pre-Hawkeye days when one LBW decision not given in an innings of 190+ pretty much used to be treated as a footnote (rightly).

[Shifter]

Didn't need hawk-eye to decide that was hitting the stumps. Only thing that saved him was the double noise.

[vic_orthdox]

Originally Posted by Marcuss

Well agree to disagree, my reaction to both was "what the **** was that?" Rather than "what a ball". To Trott's in particular, was a really, really loose one.

When a dismissal occurs, there's generally two reasons.

1. You've made a bad decision.
2. You've made the right decision, but executed it poorly.

Very occasionally, there is the third: you did everything right, but the ball was too good.

Trott was the second case. For mine, that's not a loose shot. Loose shot refers to something like Strauss', which was a bad decision.

[BoyBrumby]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

tbf, Richard generally has at least some idea what he's talking about.

GTFO.

Dicko's the prime exemplar on CW that knowledge and understanding aren't the same thing.

Anyway, dire last five or so pages it must be said. The test deserved better.

[flibbertyjibber]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

Haha this is ridiculous.

Let's face it lads. England are so much better than Australia that the only way Australia can come close to them is if England throw all of their wickets away and if the umpires are blatant cheats.

Thats a dirty stinking rotten lie and you should wash your mouth out.

To be honest i can't understand all the chat about who did this or that,the game is over.It was a draw on a road.Lets move on to the next match which unfortunately might be another road.

[Ausage]

Originally Posted by flibbertyjibber

To be honest i can't understand all the chat about who did this or that,the game is over.It was a draw on a road.Lets move on to the next match which unfortunately might be another road.

Pretty much this.