1. Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Ashes 2019

Discussion in 'Cricket' started by RugbyReg, Feb 4, 2019.

  1. Braveheart81 Rocky Elsom (76)

    Likes Received:
    22,814
    Reports suggesting that Hazlewood is coming in for Pattinson and that will be the only change for tonight.
  2. Brumby Runner Phil Kearns (64)

    Likes Received:
    4,998
    The way I see it is that Hazelwood and Siddle are more like for like in that they tie one end up while the strike bowlers attack the other. Pattinson is one of the attack bowlers, so if he's to be rested then I would have thought Mitch Starc would have come in.

    My own preference would have been to bring both Hazelwood and Starc into the Lords test. It just seems to take a lot of sting out of the attack if we have both Siddle and Hazelwood in the team.
  3. Braveheart81 Rocky Elsom (76)

    Likes Received:
    22,814

    The news out of training (and the recent tour match) is that Hazlewood's form is better and he's troubling batters (both opposition and Australian) more.

    Hopefully the decision proves to be a good one.
  4. Froggy Jim Clark (26)

    Likes Received:
    778
    Listening to Crash on The Back Page last night, he seemed to think that Hazelwood was going to get the nod. He suggested the plan was going to be to strangle the Poms and force them to take risks. Cummins, Siddle, Hazelwood and Lyon can all bowl a pretty tight line and be very hard to score off. He also suggested Starc hadn't been in great rhythm in the nets (hard to imagine after the way he bowled in the WC).
    Personally I would have preferred to see Starc and Hazelwood, with Siddle also getting a rest, but we'll see how it goes.
    Brumby Runner likes this.
  5. lincoln Syd Malcolm (24)

    Likes Received:
    269
    Take risks - you mean like in the 1st innings of the first test? Burns 133 off 312, Root 57 off 119, Stokes 50 off 96, Woakes 37 off 95. Poms would be more than happy for the Aussies to bowl 140 plus overs.
    I feel Starc has more ability to break open a game with a dazzling spell. Would prefer him to Siddle unless carrying a niggling injury.
    Hound likes this.
  6. Brumby Runner Phil Kearns (64)

    Likes Received:
    4,998
    I've said it multiple times but I'll say it again for the record. Starc thrives on high bowling workload. If he's struggling in the nets after a standout WC, it probably has more to do with missing the first test than any other reason. The more he rests the more his bowling suffers.
  7. Up the Guts John Thornett (49)

    Likes Received:
    2,282
    Well, we’ve chosen to bowl and have an early wicket under our belt. Good bowling so far but the ball certainly isn’t swinging around corners so we need to cash in while it’s new.
  8. Up the Guts John Thornett (49)

    Likes Received:
    2,282
    Hazelwood on fire, 2-2 from 4.
  9. Bobby Sands Nicholas Shehadie (39)

    Likes Received:
    933
    Hazelwood the chief destroyer!

    This bowling battery we’ve been putting together is getting close to mythical.
  10. The_Brown_Hornet David Codey (61)

    Likes Received:
    4,950
    Wasn't sure about electing to bowl first, but so far so good.
    RugbyReg likes this.
  11. Hound Fred Wood (13)

    Likes Received:
    113
    Not a bad day all up - would have been nice not to lose Warner but it was a pretty decent ball. Now all we have to do is bat for a day and half put on a lead of 350 and bowl the poms out on the final day. Too easy !
  12. Brumby Runner Phil Kearns (64)

    Likes Received:
    4,998
    I think the approach to this test has been a little on the negative side. From picking both Hazelwood and Siddle to keep it tight and make scoring difficult to sending the Poms in, it looks to me that Langer/Paine are keeping an option to hang out for a draw on the last day very much to the forefront.

    However, all good plans often go astray. After a fairly even first session, the bowlers started to get the upper hand after lunch. I think they toppled England probably a bit easier than they might have thought it would be. Now it's up to the batsmen, some of whom are far from consistent. Would be great to see a couple stand up and provide Smith with a bit more support at the top of the order.
  13. The_Brown_Hornet David Codey (61)

    Likes Received:
    4,950
    Reasonably happy with that, though if you insert the opposition you generally want to be rolling them for a low total. I guess I can understand it in the context of a now four day game. The most important thing will be to not lose early wickets and bat sensibly. We really want to be ahead by the evening session if possible.
  14. Braveheart81 Rocky Elsom (76)

    Likes Received:
    22,814

    Regardless of the team picked, winning the toss and sending England in is a pretty aggressive move. It gives Australia a better chance to force a result but also a substantially higher chance of that result being a loss.

    I think honours are reasonably split after day 1. If you go back to the premise of batting first or second and thinking that you are determining whether you can score more runs in the 1st innings or the 4th innings that puts us needing over 250 in the 4th innings of the match on the final day to win the test. Certainly not an easy feat to achieve.

    We are going to need to dominate day 3 tonight to put ourselves in a strong position.
    RugbyReg likes this.
  15. Up the Guts John Thornett (49)

    Likes Received:
    2,282
    Batting fourth shouldn’t be as bad given the pitch will only have 3 days play on it before the last day. Bowling out England cheaply was probably a better bet in getting a result rather than batting for a day and a half and trying to bowl them out twice in 2 and a half days.
  16. The_Brown_Hornet David Codey (61)

    Likes Received:
    4,950
    Yeah that's where I got to. You'd have to make a big total and then flog your bowlers for 2 days, with a 3 day turnaround to the next test. The more I think about it, the better an idea it was.
  17. Brumby Runner Phil Kearns (64)

    Likes Received:
    4,998
    Flogging the bowlers isn't such an issue with both Pattinson and Starc on the sidelines for this test. I still think it was a pretty conservative approach to the game. Like the Wallabies, I'd rather see the team go out with intent to win rather than being in a position where it would be hard to lose.
  18. The_Brown_Hornet David Codey (61)

    Likes Received:
    4,950
    Pissing down at Lords again. Something remarkable would have to happen for a result now, though it has to be said that we're in a fair bit of trouble at the moment.
    Hound likes this.
  19. RugbyReg Stirling Mortlock (74)

    Likes Received:
    13,038
    If Smith is concussed, which he has to be right? Can we bring in a new batsman in under the new guidelines?

    Could that player be Mitchell Starc?
  20. Up the Guts John Thornett (49)

    Likes Received:
    2,282
    Supposed to be a “like for like” replacement. So, as much as I’d like Starc to have a go at them, it’d be Labuschagne who would come in.

Share This Page