• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** 2nd Test at the Adelaide Oval


Global Moderator
What a tool. Who are the likely candidates for replacing him as coach once England go down 5-0, as they will he continues with the current selection policies?

Mister Wright

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Matt79 said:
What a tool. Who are the likely candidates for replacing him as coach once England go down 5-0, as they will he continues with the current selection policies?
There was a big story in the Sunday Mail about Darren Lehmann being the next England coach.


Global Moderator
I feel sorry for Monty. Does he want to emigrate to Australia - he'll probably get a game here once Warne retires before Fletcher is willing to admit he's wrong and pick him.

Mister Wright

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The Sean said:
That's astonishing. Surely they can't name an unchanged lineup for Perth can they?

I think this Test really might have destroyed England. To get outplayed completely and lose in Brisbane was one thing, but to dominate for much of this game, and to compete more than evenly for most of the rest of it and STILL lose is another thing entirely.
I'd say it's on par with the way Bangladesh felt after losing this test

Mister Wright

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Nnanden said:
Un-freaking-believable. Blames his batters for everything.

"We need to bat down to 8." What the hell is with this fascination? You need 20 wickets Dunc.

I honestly don`t know where to start. I feel so sorry for the English supporters.
You need 20 wickets to win a test match, but you need batters to play for a draw.


Global Moderator
Playing for a draw is a good way to end up losing 9 times out of 10. If all they wanted to do was end up with a 0-0 series result and thus retain the urn, they should have named 10 batsmen and Jones at 11.

Presumably they would like to win a match at some point, which means you need to select bowlers who you think can take wickets. He's got two very good bowlers in Hoggard and Flintoff, one bowler who could be good, but has not produced any consistent form for two years in Harmison, and two bowlers who are not test quality in Giles and Anderson. He can say that he decided they didn't need two spinners for this test, but wow, Pieterson sure bowled a lot of overs if that was the case, given the team has five other designated bowlers already.

Also, playing for draws when you are 1-0 down, or as is the case 2-0 down, doesn't make a lick of sense.


You'll Never Walk Alone
I think the comment that most gets me is "Look at Australia where (Shane) Warne had that 100 partnership with (Michael) Clarke (in the first innings). Those runs put the pressure back on to us."

He`s completely missing the point. England`s bowling wasn`t up to getting this pair out. If you have a good bowling attack, you`ll get Warne out and go through the tail. Yet he looks at it like Australia`s batting-depth did it.



International Coach

Only England could choke after such a good position, to think that the fate of the Ashes depended on 4 overs...........


You'll Never Walk Alone
One of the funniest things in this match was the last session. Very much like an ODI, which England have been stressing is not important compared to winning the Ashes. :D


Hall of Fame Member
pasag said:
Well i think Dunc is right, obviously people are going to go on about his selection now that England have lost. But up until this morning England had done very well & were in a position to save this test, Australia have to be given credit for how they pressured England's batsmen & got a victory from nowhere.

Everyone is on Gilo's case now, but his selection does hold some water. Its not like Giles hasn't made runs up to now in the series while his bowling has showed signs of improvement. I agree that Panesar would have made a huge difference to the bowling attack but given questions of Freddie's fitness & the balance of the team which is a VERY IMPORTANT area it would be hard to pick Panesar, also the fact that Warne took all of 80 plus overs in this test to take is 5 wickets as Dunc pointed out is a good point & he's a leggie, no way could we say just because Panesar is a more attacking bowler he would have been more successful in aiding England to get 20 wickets.

But in the future England should Panesar all the time & has i keep saying need a stable keeper-bat. Once all are fit, relieved of personal issures & the selectors make some bold decisions come next summer over here this would be my best England XI:

Vaughan * - Captain
S Jones

back-up from Cook, Bell, Anderson, Mahmood, Giles, Dalrymple & a back-up keeper in one of Jones/Read/Davies & England still have a side that can push to becoming the number one in the world.


aussie said:
Well i think Dunc is right, obviously people are going to go on about his selection now that England have lost.
Not true, nearly everyone on here was dismayed at the start of the second test when the squad was announced. There were even a few threads made about it. And dare I say it, those people were spot on.


Hall of Fame Member
yea i was one of them, but as i said the fact the Warne took 80 odd overs to take his 5 for, no way can we say even if Panesar had played even if he would have been a better attacking option than Gilo that he would have caused serious problems given that he's an offie.


Norwood's on Fire
andyc said:

Even Gillespie went better last year.

But seriously though, what is the point of Giles being in the team? I mean, they say that he can bat, but he was out for a duck today. They say that Monty's a bad fielder, but Giles dropped Ponting on 35, which cost England 107 runs. And then Monty can actually take wickets.
That's what I've been saying to everyone in work all day. Including the one guy who championed Giles pre-Ashes "because he got 59 in the last Test." Bla.


International 12th Man
Can I justs ay the Aussie fans make me laugh. Absoloute silence for all four days, and when you do decide to chirp up, its awesome songs like "2-0, 2-0!" and "Look at the scoreboard!" Honestly, your fans are awful,

I was livid with Jonesy, chasing the widest ball of the game and got out. He was more than capable of adding 20 more runs at least which really wouldve seen a better finish to the game. There were 2 awful decisions against us (Yeah, I know you Aussies had it last year) and our bowling attack is depleted, and final question, why the heck isnt Monty playing? giles is innefective and a negative choice. Monty is by far the better bwoler and must be feeling like the unluckiest man in the world not to be playing.