***Official*** First Semi-Final: Australia vs. England

[pasag]

Bloody good comeback.

[wpdavid]

And that is why some of us get seriosuly pissed watching this lot and wonder where they left their brains at the start of play. Two overs left unbowled. England, having recovered admirably,to a position of some strength then set about 20-30 less than they should.

[Sanz]

257 is a pretty good score and would have taken it after England were down 6 for 100 runs.

[Matt79]

Batting powerplay claims wickets again

As someone is mentioning, England would be a little disappointed with that, compared to where they were five overs ago, but they should more accurately be stoked to have such a competitive total after being 100-odd for 6 down. Great effort by Bresnan there.

[Prince EWS]

Originally Posted by Matt79

Actually, looking it up, they're much the same - which surprises me given Watto has taken slightly less than a wicket a match, and Lee's averages around 2.5 a match, IIRC, and that while Lee has a much better average, Watson's is not terrible. Assumed Watto must be a bit tighter to have a decent average when not taking that many wickets...

I'm talking out my backside is the short version.

Watto's played a few games as a specialist batsman, and often didn't bowl out his ten in his early days.

[Uppercut]

I reckon they've set about 120 more than they should have. What's the projected score at 101/6? 150?

[Matt79]

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

Watto's played a few games as a specialist batsman, and often didn't bowl out his ten in his early days.

Yeah, good points.

[Uppercut]

257 is supposed to be a par score, but that's changed over the past couple of years, Australia should chase this down easily.

[Matt79]

Was the ball doing anything in the air?

[Uppercut]

Mmm not really.

EDIT: Come to think of it though, who would it have moved for?

[Prince EWS]

Originally Posted by Matt79

Was the ball doing anything in the air?

Nah, it did absolutely nothing at all. Anderson's much better at getting swing than Lee and Siddle though and it should be a bit easier under lights as well so it might swing a bit for him, but don't let all the caught behinds fool you; the conditions were nigh on perfect for batting all innings.

[wpdavid]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

I reckon they've set about 120 more than they should have. What's the projected score at 101/6? 150?

Circular argument isn't it? Of course it's way more than would have been forecast from 101 for 6. But having got to where they did it was a slight waste, esp losing 2 wickets to runouts. I'm more focused on the latter as I've been away from the game until just before Wright was out. But no-one's arguing against the bigger picture that Bres & Wright did brilliantly to make this, hopefully, a competitive game.

[Matt79]

Originally Posted by Prince EWS

Nah, it did absolutely nothing at all. Anderson's much better at getting swing than Lee and Siddle though and it should be a bit easier under lights as well so it might swing a bit for him, but don't let all the caught behinds fool you; the conditions were nigh on perfect for batting all innings.

Then we should get the runs easy. A one trick pony ain't no good when it can't get its trick to work.

[Woodster]

Tim Bresnan and Luke Wright did fantastically well in rescuing an innings that was going seriously downhill. We now have a total over 250, which was beyond our wildest dreams when these two first came together. They played positively yet sensibly and showed the top 6 exactly how to do it. Collingwood looked extremely good and that is how he has been batting in this tournament, so positively.

The big frustration for me is our use of the batting powerplay, we have wasted 2.2 overs of the opposition having fielding restrictions in place. Nick Knight on commentary thought England had timed the use of it well today, I have to disagree vehemently. In leaving it so late, not only do you run the risk of having tail enders bat while it's in place, but you are also facing their specialist death bowlers during the powerplay and because it's at the end of the innings. Why would you do that ? Force Ponting's hand earlier and then they will either use Lee during the Powerplay or at the end, but not both.

You do not have to bat without a brain during the powerplay, if it was taken while Wright and Bresnan were batting, they could have batted in a very similar style but would have found boundaries easier to come by. Absolutely stupid decision again to leave it so late, and consequently waste half of what is supposed to be an advantageous period of play for the batting side!!

[wpdavid]

Originally Posted by Matt79

Then we should get the runs easy. A one trick pony ain't no good when it can't get its trick to work.

That's the logical view. I suppose England will hang onto the thought that if Bresnan can make 80 with the bat then anything's possible. Aus will know that they should have bowled us out for 150 so maybe there's some pressure there if they do lose early wickets.

My money would still be on Aus though.