Thoughts On Ashes Third Test, Day Two

[talksport]

77/7 in Edgabaston When was the last time or last few times Australia lost that many - anybody ? Is it in Eden Gardens 2001

[veer]

that Mumbai test... 96 all out i think..

[gaurav92]

its the ball 1 and 2 that were magical and i think huss decides b4 even taking his guard that hes going to leave the first ball he faces...it was similar to jaffer's first ball duck v/s bangladesh when masrafe got his off stump bail demolished....similar dismissal

[Sachinism]

Yeh I think the 2001 series was when they lost 7 in a session (I think on more than one occasion)

[satishg]

Yeh I think the 2001 series was when they lost 7 in a session (I think on more than one occasion)

yep 3 times to be precise..what an epic series that was :icflove:

[gaurav92]

This was the worst performance by aussie probably

[Dhondy]

Thoughts On Ashes Third Test, Day Two Great players can inspire lesser ones to follow their methods, but the results are not always successful. If in doubt, look at an entire generation of Indian openers trying to ape Gavaskar's copybook batting style and falling flat on their face. Foot to the ball, eyes in line with the delivery, play in the arc...yes, but does it work for you? The most successful Indian opener since Gavaskar showed that getting legside of the ball, playing wide with a straight rather than the traditionally tought horizontal bat was equally effective, and what's more you could score much faster. But it took a cricketing apostate to find that out. For around 35 overs in the rain curtailed first day's play, the English bowlers were guilty of blindly following the path laid out by their figurehead in the 2nd Test. Bowl in the corridor outside off, tempt the batsman to have a prod, bring the men behind the bat into play. Anderson was getting prodigious swing even yesterday, but the lovely curved outswingers to the lefthanders curled harmlessy into the wicket-keeper's gloves. Onions too defaulted to the offstump line after a few straight ones hit the mid wicket fence. Watching the cricket live late on day one after hurrying home, I thought to myself, "Why aren't these guys attacking the stumps?" Today they did- somebody must have noticed the obvious missed ploy overnight- with spectacular results. Cloudy or not, you don't waste your time playing patience at Edgbaston- attack the stumps, and if you can move the ball, the world will be your oyster. It was just beautiful cricket- the curvilinear trajectory bending into the batsman's pads- LBW, followed by shattering stumps, batsman trying to play the patience game like the openers did for a few overs yesterday, and finding their stumps cartwheeling. Had it not been for umpires in advanced stages of undetected amaurosis, the LBWs column would have been more formidable. Koertzen's denial of Johnson's appeal against Bell was the shocker of the day. Earlier, Onions was denied by Dar. And herein lies a lesson for bowlers like Ishant Sharma, who look like a million dollars, beat the bat on countless occasions, but continue to languish with a bowling average in the thirties- attack the stumps. You may look a world beater as the cherry whizzes past the outside edge, but there's nothing like castling the batsman. If you bowl straight enough, well enough and move the ball, you'll ultimately reap bigger rewards than if you are constantly trying to catch the edge. There would only ever be one Glenn McGrath, he of the laser like accuracy, who could pitch exactly where he wanted, ball after ball after ball. In another part of ICF, some great West Indian bowlers were discussed. When you go back and look at their work, you are immediately struck by how straight they bowled, how relentlessly they attacked the batsman's stumps, giving little scope for the now much advocated patience ploy by batsmen to escape the noose. Holding, Garner, Marshall, Roberts... the same deadly pathfinders hurled from 22 yards. Alas, it was a lesson that our most talented quick never divined. Throughout his career, Srinath often looked a champion bowler, beating the batsman for fun, but didn't have the figures to match. A lesson driven home impeccably by the English bowlers today.

[kabira]

^wish that was so simple. When ball is moving yes you should attack the stumps, but what if ball is not moving??

[Mr. Wicket]

Koertzen's LBW negation v. Johnson was indeed shocking, makes me wonder just what one needs to do to be an ICC umpire. Apparently it's the only job today with no accountability, no problems with non-performance and inconsistency and plenty of job security. England though were phenomenal in the field. The start Onions had was just mindblowing. I like the guy a lot; he reminds me almost of a more consistent Alderman with the way he can swing it all over. What a way to begin the day - perfect inswinger, then the perfect outswinger (inswinger to the left hander) to just clip Hussey's off. IMO Onions outbowled Anderson across the day, shame he didn't finish with a five-fer as he really deserved it. (Might have been different had Flintoff not dropped Clarke off his bowling) Meanwhile you can see the difference in the two camps. Poor game for Panesar, clear weak link visible at Cardiff and he was out the next game for Onions (who I felt should have played from game 1 and really should be taking the new ball instead of the overrated Flintoff who barely moved it and is always too short with it). Poor game for Johnson at Cardiff, worse at Lord's - and yet they stick with him while making constant comments in the media about how he's almost back to his form and how they'll expect him to fire soon. No wonder one attack can create such a collapse with that sort of outstanding bowling display, while the other struggles to take 20 wickets these days.

[Cricketics]

England is still long way away from taking the game away from Australia. I feel they would be bundled out for 300 odd and Aussies would come back hard to give England a tuff 4th inning chase. Its going to be 1-1 by hook or by crook.

[Lord]

Great players can inspire lesser ones to follow their methods, but the results are not always successful. If in doubt, look at an entire generation of Indian openers trying to ape Gavaskar's copybook batting style and falling flat on their face. Foot to the ball, eyes in line with the delivery, play in the arc...yes, but does it work for you? The most successful Indian opener since Gavaskar showed that getting legside of the ball, playing wide with a straight rather than the traditionally tought horizontal bat was equally effective, and what's more you could score much faster. But it took a cricketing apostate to find that out. For around 35 overs in the rain curtailed first day's play, the English bowlers were guilty of blindly following the path laid out by their figurehead in the 2nd Test. Bowl in the corridor outside off, tempt the batsman to have a prod, bring the men behind the bat into play. Anderson was getting prodigious swing even yesterday, but the lovely curved outswingers to the lefthanders curled harmlessy into the wicket-keeper's gloves. Onions too defaulted to the offstump line after a few straight ones hit the mid wicket fence. Watching the cricket live late on day one after hurrying home, I thought to myself, "Why aren't these guys attacking the stumps?" Today they did- somebody must have noticed the obvious missed ploy overnight- with spectacular results. Cloudy or not, you don't waste your time playing patience at Edgbaston- attack the stumps, and if you can move the ball, the world will be your oyster. It was just beautiful cricket- the curvilinear trajectory bending into the batsman's pads- LBW, followed by shattering stumps, batsman trying to play the patience game like the openers did for a few overs yesterday, and finding their stumps cartwheeling. Had it not been for umpires in advanced stages of undetected amaurosis, the LBWs column would have been more formidable. Koertzen's denial of Johnson's appeal against Bell was the shocker of the day. Earlier, Onions was denied by Dar. And herein lies a lesson for bowlers like Ishant Sharma, who look like a million dollars, beat the bat on countless occasions, but continue to languish with a bowling average in the thirties- attack the stumps. You may look a world beater as the cherry whizzes past the outside edge, but there's nothing like castling the batsman. If you bowl straight enough, well enough and move the ball, you'll ultimately reap bigger rewards than if you are constantly trying to catch the edge. There would only ever be one Glenn McGrath, he of the laser like accuracy, who could pitch exactly where he wanted, ball after ball after ball. In another part of ICF, some great West Indian bowlers were discussed. When you go back and look at their work, you are immediately struck by how straight they bowled, how relentlessly they attacked the batsman's stumps, giving little scope for the now much advocated patience ploy by batsmen to escape the noose. Holding, Garner, Marshall, Roberts... the same deadly pathfinders hurled from 22 yards. Alas, it was a lesson that our most talented quick never divined. Throughout his career, Srinath often looked a champion bowler, beating the batsman for fun, but didn't have the figures to match. A lesson driven home impeccably by the English bowlers today.

maybe not.the Johnson dismissal was tad high n Clarke one also looked like missing leg.