Bell at #6 has been discussed heavily in this thread before so I'll keep it short. But basically, he's there because he has a fantastic record there, and also because Vaughan coming back in at #3 in the next test for Shah would keep Bell in the same spot.
Possibly, but not very well as I'll be juggling the kids in the late afternoon. Sounds like you're OK for the first 2 sessions? I could probably produce something for Session 3 and a summary intro if you're really stuck. Do you have may home email address? If not, I'll briefy post it here so you can send me your wip later in the day if you don't get a better offer.
Mail me at (deleted), sounds an excellent idea if it's workable. I can do a proper job on the first 2 sessions, mail it to you, then you can do a brief intro and third session, and post it.
Vaughan dropped by Gilchrist & then bowled off a no-ball on his way to 166 at old Trafford spring to mind. IIRC they came in the same McGrath over. Maybe successive delivereies?
Honestly don't think we saw anything in that knock that we don't already know, but TBH it's hardly imperative.
Yes, successive deliveries. Clean forgot that. Collingwood was merely successive overs. Still, the Gilchrist chance was a bit more tricky than the Ganga one.
Mail me at(deleted) sounds an excellent idea if it's workable. I can do a proper job on the first 2 sessions, mail it to you, then you can do a brief intro and third session, and post it.
I doubt I'll get a better offer, TBH. Thanks mate.
Consistency. It wasn't a great knock or anything, but he showed that he can continue to score runs in Test cricket.
Not if he ends-up with 137 he won't. It'll be all this nonsense about "he fought his way through and scrapped even though he wasn't playing well".Haha, Collingwood. Seriously would have come out looking a lot better if he'd just been taken the first time.
