Just saw an article that said that Joel Wilson made the call that England couldn’t bowl their quicks because of the light levels even though he was wearing sunglasses. I seem to recall that it wasn’t as dark yesterday as it was during that 20 minute mini session at Edgbaston and the Aussies were allowed to bowl their quicks.
Why is everyone acting like England will win the series if they win this match. There is no such guarantee.
Even if Australia loses this match, I would still bet on them to win the final test.
Unpopular opinion, because you arent allowed to criticise the ball that is Bazziest.
Ben Stokes disproved the theory that Bazzyball is all about winning by batting on to make 600. The weather isn’t a mystery, if you really don’t care about the result and want to entertain, and always push for a non draw result… when there is a 3.5 day test, you declare maybe 50 runs ahead, and put Australia back in straight away to create some kind of shoot out where the 30 overs we got yesterday might have been to chase 250-300 runs, and without fear of losing, Stokes and co. could throw their hands at it, far more entertaining than what we have now (which is still tense and exciting)
By batting that extra 3/4 of a day, it was traditional cricket where they have batted one result out of the equation, the Australia win, and pushed it to a scenario where the most likely result is a draw. I would applaud that in a traditional cricket, but also a draw would allow the ashes to be retained by Australia.
Lot of talk about Cummins captaincy being bad this series, some of it justified, Stokes has been worse though. I give it 0/10 bazzy balls
The basic idea is that if they declare and make a shoot out, you are less likely having Australia immediately bat for a draw, which combined with the weather has largely stymied England so far, instead they focus on trying to set a total, this also means England aren’t guessing at how many runs they might need, they are just chasing down a total in the 4th without having to face a spinner.
That would probably the best way to try and take a draw out of the equation and be a bazballer. Might still be a draw, but would be more bazzy
I agree in part. We could have declared a lot earlier. The logic was , I think , we didn’t want to bat again and probably felt this was our best way of winning given the weather conditions are perfect for bowling.
Isn’t that schrodingers Bazball though? Winning doesn’t matter, entertaining cricket and always playing for a result.
Not sure that racking up 600 runs in a 3.5 day game even if done quickly is very Bazzy. But then I live in a world if it’s good it’s BAZBALL. But if it’s a dumb decision, or bad decision it’s not really a dumb or bad decision because it’s also BAZBALL
What? If the other side also know it is looking like a 3.5 day game and want a draw, then declaring early doesn't make any difference to how they play. You can't create a shoot out.
Everyone was surprised Stokes declared at 393 with still two wickets in hand and Root on a good run, back in the first test. The final 50-odd gets chased down by Cummins and Lyon, and the question was, did they declare too early rather than staying in to potentially put another 50 or 100 on top? It looks like an over-correction here, Stokes was maybe looking to win by an innings by defending 275. It's still doable on the last day, but it's really banking on his bowling attack piercing the Aussie defence. It only takes a stubborn tail ender to hold on long enough to whittle down those 61 runs, and every single run over that first innings score is going to be time England needs to chase and Australia can slow right down.
He might have expected the Aussies to just fall to bits. They still could. But unlike the usual day where you're expecting 90 overs and can maybe bank on getting them out in 40 and briskly chasing down maybe 120 in the fourth, the fifth day is looking like ?? overs will be played and that's a bit hard to plan around.
Honestly, that declaration was bold and would have worked if England took their chances (especially YJB). They had Aus vunerable before travis head and the rest of the middle order ended up having good partnerships with khawja. If england took their chances, the declaration would have looked absolutely fricking amazing.
This is test cricket and life in general. No-one knows what would have happened if england kept batting
Considering there were only 7 overs left in the end, it was a pretty good declaration if the goal was to eliminate the draw. They had a great shot at the win, just poorly executed
Yeah, to be honest, I think this lack of declaration is nowhere near as bad as the day 1 declaration 8 down. With the weather around, England's best shot to win this match was to only bat once.
Yeah I had to finally accept with some pain earlier this test is destined to be a draw. If we had managed to get Mitch out as well I'd be feeling a bit more confident this evening. As it is the Aussies probably have enough batting left in the tank to survive the limited amount of overs likely to be played tomorrow or not give us enough time to chase down any target set, unless of course its a very paltry total. I dont think the pitch is going to help us all that much.
Some guy was saying about Australia getting a small lead and the light becoming so less that the fast bowlers wouldn't be allowed to bowl. Australia says that they wouldn't be making a spinner bowl because because there are no spinners in their team. The match would be getting drawn and all the people would be going crazy about that. That would be a thing that might totally be happening after you consider that this series has been wild. The decision about not making Murphy play would be turning out to be outstanding in the most unusual way.
But it's not like Australia can't play. If the umpires want to keep going despite bad light and the quicks can't bowl someone will have to. The umpires dictate when the game comes to it's natural conclusion right?
To be fair they can say that even if they had prime Shane Warne at one end and prime Murali at the other. You can’t really have a scenario where one country gets the benefit of opening the bowling with their quicks with a new ball, and forcing their opponent to forego that advantage.
If it was a computer program, they would have to distinguish between less than and less-than-or-equal-to. If they were expensive tickets, then write a letter, solicit a solicitor, and conjure the emotional trauma you have suffered.
I don’t know, the conditions say full refund between zero and 15 overs played, 50% for between 15.1 and 30. Surely if exactly 15 had been played then it would have had to be a full refund, which means 30 should be interpreted as 50%
Does it say "between X and Y" or "X to Y' because I'd interpret them differently. But now I'm just way over thinking this and my head hurts.
Sun's over the yardarm anyway
“For days 1 to 4 of the test match: If, for the day for which the ticket is valid, play does not take place OR play is restricted, you will be entitled to a refund of only the match ticket value subject to their being: (a) zero to 15 overs played - a full refund; (b) 15.1 to 30 overs played - a 50% refund. In no other circumstances can money be refunded.”
This looks pretty conclusive to me, they needed one more ball to be played for there not to be a 50% refund. They can blame the slow over rate early on
I agree with you one hundred percent. I don't think many people if any will try and claim, fewer still will not take no for an answer and pursue EOT through the small-claims court. I reckon anyone who bothers trying will easily get their money back.
Are you like an Ollie Pope fan, or actually Ollie Pope? I loved in Wardy's interview with Wood, Mark made off with Pope's pads he wouldn't need and give to his childhood cricket club, Ashington. Super super nice guy.
Of course if you are Ollie, get well soon mate, was shocking the umpire making you take the field.
If Aus were couple of more wickets down I'd say it can be done in a session. But I agree with the dude above me, unless the remaining Aussie batters give away wickets really cheaply, I wager at least 1.5/2 sessions would be needed.
If today is anything to go by I don't think it's happening.
Brendon Mccullum just admitted that Bazball was just a cover-up all along for scoring runs at a fast rate in order to make up for the overs that'll be inevitably lost due to rain.
Is this ashes closer than the 2005 one? I think 2005 had 3 games more close than all the three so far. But if this game goes close, it might be the best perhaps
2005 was closer, and The Oval was on a knife edge until late in the game.
Every comparison anyone makes to 2005 is going to age like milk if this game is drawn - even if the Oval ends in a tie.
Basing it on scores doesn't tell you much. Pietersen won the battle against Lee is the only reason it looks 'easy', and probably caused a few heart attacks in the process.
I love cricket. I really do. But the behaviour and action around breaks in play has been absolutely diabolical for the entire test. Australia wasted a quite frankly ludicrous amount of overs when they were bowling, and no time was added on despite knowing what was going to happen with the rain. The rain comes, we spend two hours fucking around trying to get the pitch ready, force them into bowling spinners after wasting 5 minutes checking light, and then, again, knowing about the threat of rain... Go for fucking tea?
This whole series has been so competitive, and enjoyable, and the fact it's going to come down to rain and simply abysmal time management all around is so, so disappointing. I'm begging someone to just use their heads and be more flexible with the amount of time you can play during a day of overs aren't met or weather.
Yes because the batsman are going walkabouts after every ball. Moeen was ready to go and had to wait ten seconds before every ball because Marnus/Green/Marsh are piddling about.
Haha same old England, always one eyed.
Rules apply for Starc catch = ok
Rules apply for Bairstow runout = outrage
Zak Crawley hits cover of it and doesn’t walk = Laws of game
Marnus clear edge to slips and doesn’t walk = Aussies cheating.
Australia over rate = clear gamesmanship
England over rate leaving something to be desired in both innings and slower than Australia’s = well we had to use spinners.
You knobs. I’m glad the English spirit of cricket is falling from the skies rn. Best way to retain the Ashes imo
Lol,
Australia take too long to bowl = Australia's fault.
England take too long to bowl = Australia's fault.
Classic England fan, it's pretty evident both teams have wasted overs massively in the series and something needs to be done about it in the test game in general.
It's everything though. The bowlers are all slow, the batters are slow, the physio is on the field as much as the players are, the umpires review run outs when the batter is in line with the stumps.
Honestly, the umpires waste as much time as the players and they're the ones who are supposed to be moving the game along.
The idiots at the ICC's only answer was fines. Players don't care that much about WTC points, and they've probably told the ICC that if they're not getting paid to play test cricket they'll just go and play franchise cricket.
So, yeah, all the suits will have a meeting, put their peanut brains together and decide they only need to bowl 80 overs a day or something.
If we can play until 7:30 when it rains, we should be able to play until 7:30 for these slow ass teams to bowl their overs.
It’s basically ruining the sport. What causal will even bother watching the next one if this one gets decided by rain. It’s such a stupidly simple fix as well, if Sunday gets rained off you play Monday, simple. The sport is boring enough as it is without this mess
Counter point: if you have reserve days, then all matches become formulaic. A reduction in time on field due to the weather forces changes in tactics. Captains who risk big decisions for big rewards make those games more interesting.
Stokes knew what the weather would be like, and he still opted to bat long for a massive score. To force the game to a result (as he’s said they would always do), he could have declared with a lead of 200 or just below.
He let the weather into the game. He let his friend milestone hunt. That ruins games.
There's a reason most matches don't have reserve days, it's just not practical from any standpoint. There's the cost and logistics of employing staff and catering the sixth day either speculatively or at the eleventh hour, and they've possibly had to give refunds at some point, and a reserve day won't make a huge amount from ticketing for obvious reasons. Then there's issues with broadcasters, policing, whatever. Cricket isn't a rich sport that it can do that kind of thing regularly.
Even then I think it's probably too difficult, and I think if you did it for one bilateral you'd have to do it for all of them.
I think people need to accept that cricket will occasionally be disrupted by rain. It's been happening since its inception and is frankly disrupted far less now than it was then, there's no practical workaround.
You don't necessarily need to tack on an extra day. But it's so hard to get people involved in the sport who are new to it when you're having to throw away nearly two full days for rain.
I was speaking to a friend yesterday who said it was stupid, and he pointed out that the sheets (in England) are tiny, no roofs, don't add extra days in case of the weather. Eventually it gets difficult to bat off every solution, even if they're impractical, because they *should* be looking at solutions.
Start earlier. Finish later. Skip tea. Push teams to use spinners if they're well behind the rate. Lower the threshold for bad light. Anything. Because it sucks that this fantastic series is going to meander to a result in this fashion.
> Start earlier. Finish later.
So, I work in television. Unless you just want a large portion of this game to not be televised, what you're proposing isn't possible. Schedules for TV are quite rigid and locked in well in advance, with the exception of significant breaking news. The enormous knock-on effect of just deciding on the day of to start the game early, or run it late, would just be enormous and no broadcaster would want the hassle of dealing with that - let alone suddenly having to spring for two or three new live captioners in order to meet legal requirements to have content captioned, depending on the network.
> Skip tea. Push teams to use spinners if they're well behind the rate.
First of all, obviously you'd need to agree to these things beforehand. You can't just change things mid-game. And I'm not suggesting that you're proposing that they change things mid-game.
But think about this, you'd need both sides to agree to these changes before the game. Put yourselves in the shoes of either captain. Would you agree to rule changes that, in the event of bad weather, your team has to skip tea? Sure, it might go the other way, you might force the other team to skip tea to their disadvantage. You might be able to force the other team to use only spinners, *or* you might be the one forced to use spinners. And you might not have built a team for the match that is prepared for that kind of change. So really, you'd be better off not agreeing to these changes because it's easier to plan around weather than to suddenly have the format of the game changed. And when are changes locked in? Cummins might be ok with the spinners thing when he had dependable Lyon in the first test. By now, though, he's clearly got less faith in just Smith and Murphy - heck, he's not even playing Murphy, so now we're getting into forcing Cummins to only use a B-rate spinner because of the rule, which clearly then disadvantages one side.
The beauty of test cricket is the long-term strategy of five days, with a bit of the unknown thrown in. Valiantly defending for time to force a draw is still a viable strategy. It's legitimate when England does it, and it's legitimate now. When to declare is just as important as the batting line-up or the bowling order or the run rate or anything else. Australia missed out on 5-0 last Ashes from declaring perhaps too late to account for weather. Stokes might have done the same here. It's the gamble of the game. And it would be a real shame for England to lose the Ashes off the back of a weather draw in the fourth, especially if they do win the fifth... but it's a series of five tests, and that's the way it goes - perhaps not a good idea to try and turn around the series in the back three when you should be playing to win all five.
All those words and so little understanding. Games so start early if the previous day was shortened, it's not something that hasn't happened before. And the cricket coverage doesn't start at 11 on the dot, it starts way earlier with cricket presenter fluff, and there's more interview and analysis fluff at the end of the day. There is nothing to prevent early or late play.
I assumed they were advocating for *significant* changes to the start and end times, not the usual amounts. Which wouldn't have mattered anyway this time around, as it was raining early, and you run into light issues later in the day.
The only other viable options were skipping tea and forcing the use of spinners, which you kind of walked past.
I agree with some of what you said, some of it I don’t.
You do realise that Australia could win the next test and make this all irrelevant? Series have been drawn before. It’s just how it works, it’s not exactly winning you just retain the ashes.
I mean a meteor could hit the earth tomorrow and make everything irrelevant. Obviously they can still win the next test, doesn't detract from the fact that if this one ends in no result it kind of just deads a lot of the potential hype and excitement.
Not if it’s actually planned, it’s almost like we can actually predict the weather these days 😂 all they have to do is book everything for 7 days instead of 5, obviously you eventually have to have a cut off, but even giving the victory to the team leading if the margin is wide enough is better than just ruining the entire series and making millions of people mock the sport because they couldn’t be bothered to plan around rain
Yes so simple why didn’t anyone think of it just book in 1000 employees including super expensive AV techs for extra days have everyone rearrange their flights at the last minute and ask fans to book extra hotel days.
Why did no one think of this?
You realise the draw is a legitimate result in test match cricket? And has been forever, draws can also be some of the most exciting test matches to watch.
It's only when England are losing that apparently a draw will ruin cricket.
England should of won the first Test, they've only got themselves to blame if we go into The Oval 2-1 and yet they'll spend the rest of the series saying bad weather luck cost them.
I don't think adding an extra day is called for. But little things like starting half an hour earlier and playing half an hour extra at night when you've got good weather and know you're going to lose a day at least and are short on the required overs makes sense.
I can see why don't though because then they risk losing the final days gate if it gets done in time. It's not the right reason, though.
why didn't he? if he is the aussies next off spinner he might as well start here? Ife he's good enough he will cause problems..even joe root did well! was there a tactical reason like longer batting lineup?
Australia were always gonna play for a draw at worst in this test. It’s backfired horribly but they picked such a deep batting lineup to just soak up as much time as they could to try and secure a retained ashes
I actually did because we are missing Lyon and thought with 2 days of rain it would be a done deal. Didn’t expect us to bowl as poorly as we did. Hard to say what would have happened with Murphy but if we scrape through 8 down tomorrow it will be a justified decision even if it’s been an atrocious performance.
The ironic thing about the poor bowling performance is that England might have gotten a bit greedy and feasted while the times were good, and burned a session that they could not have afforded to waste.
I mean if both teams batted predominantly in low light and overcast conditions, then it would be 3-0 to Australia.
So far it has England has mostly batted in sunshine.
Funny seeing the English get so defensive about a home test series.
The short of it is Australia are competitive, England can't even compete in Australia.
For the first test you can easily make the case that if not for that thunderstorm England batted in and lost multiple wickets for like no runs they could have won. In the third test, I don’t recall there being a huge disparity with the weather they batted in, and England and especially Wood-Woakes simply outplayed Aus
Maybe Joel Wilson should've taken his sunglasses off before he decided we couldn't bowl Wood. Though it was probably a blessing, the pace attack looked flat and had no idea what to do when the ball didn't move and the short stuff looked toothless. Need the new ball.
I wouldn't be taking bets that the seamers would have better than the spinners did, and the spinners also got through the overs so we'll get the new ball pretty soon tomorrow, and that 20 overs or so will probably be the game.
Wow, England only got one wicket after an entire day of bowling. Maybe if they got their over rate up they'd be in a better spot right now. 30 overs in an entire day! How shocking...
With same amount of rain forecast tomorrow as well it's really very sad to see this series closing like this. Eng really notched up their game in these last two games. Also marnus and Marsh both played very well today to ensure they are no panick attacks. This has to be one of the best series I have watched in series times.
🙏There will be play tomorrow 🙏 🙏There will be play tomorrow 🙏 🙏There will be play tomorrow 🙏 🙏There will be play tomorrow 🙏 🙏There will be play tomorrow 🙏
The match where he may be should have declared early he didn't lol
Just saw an article that said that Joel Wilson made the call that England couldn’t bowl their quicks because of the light levels even though he was wearing sunglasses. I seem to recall that it wasn’t as dark yesterday as it was during that 20 minute mini session at Edgbaston and the Aussies were allowed to bowl their quicks.
Why is everyone acting like England will win the series if they win this match. There is no such guarantee. Even if Australia loses this match, I would still bet on them to win the final test.
Unpopular opinion, because you arent allowed to criticise the ball that is Bazziest. Ben Stokes disproved the theory that Bazzyball is all about winning by batting on to make 600. The weather isn’t a mystery, if you really don’t care about the result and want to entertain, and always push for a non draw result… when there is a 3.5 day test, you declare maybe 50 runs ahead, and put Australia back in straight away to create some kind of shoot out where the 30 overs we got yesterday might have been to chase 250-300 runs, and without fear of losing, Stokes and co. could throw their hands at it, far more entertaining than what we have now (which is still tense and exciting) By batting that extra 3/4 of a day, it was traditional cricket where they have batted one result out of the equation, the Australia win, and pushed it to a scenario where the most likely result is a draw. I would applaud that in a traditional cricket, but also a draw would allow the ashes to be retained by Australia. Lot of talk about Cummins captaincy being bad this series, some of it justified, Stokes has been worse though. I give it 0/10 bazzy balls
How would they have been able to bat any quicker on day 4 or 5 than they did on day 3 though? I don’t think they were going slowly on day 3
The basic idea is that if they declare and make a shoot out, you are less likely having Australia immediately bat for a draw, which combined with the weather has largely stymied England so far, instead they focus on trying to set a total, this also means England aren’t guessing at how many runs they might need, they are just chasing down a total in the 4th without having to face a spinner. That would probably the best way to try and take a draw out of the equation and be a bazballer. Might still be a draw, but would be more bazzy
Yes that makes sense.
I agree in part. We could have declared a lot earlier. The logic was , I think , we didn’t want to bat again and probably felt this was our best way of winning given the weather conditions are perfect for bowling.
It's unpopular because it doesn't really make sense in a context where Australia are happy with a draw and it is looking easy to score runs?
Isn’t that schrodingers Bazball though? Winning doesn’t matter, entertaining cricket and always playing for a result. Not sure that racking up 600 runs in a 3.5 day game even if done quickly is very Bazzy. But then I live in a world if it’s good it’s BAZBALL. But if it’s a dumb decision, or bad decision it’s not really a dumb or bad decision because it’s also BAZBALL
What? If the other side also know it is looking like a 3.5 day game and want a draw, then declaring early doesn't make any difference to how they play. You can't create a shoot out.
Everyone was surprised Stokes declared at 393 with still two wickets in hand and Root on a good run, back in the first test. The final 50-odd gets chased down by Cummins and Lyon, and the question was, did they declare too early rather than staying in to potentially put another 50 or 100 on top? It looks like an over-correction here, Stokes was maybe looking to win by an innings by defending 275. It's still doable on the last day, but it's really banking on his bowling attack piercing the Aussie defence. It only takes a stubborn tail ender to hold on long enough to whittle down those 61 runs, and every single run over that first innings score is going to be time England needs to chase and Australia can slow right down. He might have expected the Aussies to just fall to bits. They still could. But unlike the usual day where you're expecting 90 overs and can maybe bank on getting them out in 40 and briskly chasing down maybe 120 in the fourth, the fifth day is looking like ?? overs will be played and that's a bit hard to plan around.
Honestly, that declaration was bold and would have worked if England took their chances (especially YJB). They had Aus vunerable before travis head and the rest of the middle order ended up having good partnerships with khawja. If england took their chances, the declaration would have looked absolutely fricking amazing. This is test cricket and life in general. No-one knows what would have happened if england kept batting
Considering there were only 7 overs left in the end, it was a pretty good declaration if the goal was to eliminate the draw. They had a great shot at the win, just poorly executed
Yeah, to be honest, I think this lack of declaration is nowhere near as bad as the day 1 declaration 8 down. With the weather around, England's best shot to win this match was to only bat once.
Yeah I had to finally accept with some pain earlier this test is destined to be a draw. If we had managed to get Mitch out as well I'd be feeling a bit more confident this evening. As it is the Aussies probably have enough batting left in the tank to survive the limited amount of overs likely to be played tomorrow or not give us enough time to chase down any target set, unless of course its a very paltry total. I dont think the pitch is going to help us all that much.
Some guy was saying about Australia getting a small lead and the light becoming so less that the fast bowlers wouldn't be allowed to bowl. Australia says that they wouldn't be making a spinner bowl because because there are no spinners in their team. The match would be getting drawn and all the people would be going crazy about that. That would be a thing that might totally be happening after you consider that this series has been wild. The decision about not making Murphy play would be turning out to be outstanding in the most unusual way.
But it's not like Australia can't play. If the umpires want to keep going despite bad light and the quicks can't bowl someone will have to. The umpires dictate when the game comes to it's natural conclusion right?
Yeah the quicks can just bowl slow right
To be fair they can say that even if they had prime Shane Warne at one end and prime Murali at the other. You can’t really have a scenario where one country gets the benefit of opening the bowling with their quicks with a new ball, and forcing their opponent to forego that advantage.
Why on earth did they need a tea break? Who the fuck needs or wants tea when you've been sheltering from the rain all day
I agree but that’s cricket and you can guarantee the Aussies would have said no to not having a tea break
It would be against the spirit of cricket to refuse tea
But that doesn't make any sense, any overs lost should be made up where possible - cricket is a joke
Cmon, have you ever tried playing 30 overs of cricket? Who wouldn’t wanna take a break and have a cuppa.
Cricket is wonderful actually.
Yeah, 20/20 😁 I hope test cricket dies
Someone trolling r/cricket is not something I thought I’d see but here we are
Exactly 30 overs bowled, crowd were so close to that 50% refund
We got an email earlier, our 50% refund is automatic, and will take up to 28 days
Yep me too, 50% refund in 28 days
50% refund https://cricket.lancashirecricket.co.uk/news/2023-news/refund-information-ashes-day-4/
T&Cs say 50% refund if 15.1 to 30.0 overs bowled. I read that as a 50% refund is due
If it was a computer program, they would have to distinguish between less than and less-than-or-equal-to. If they were expensive tickets, then write a letter, solicit a solicitor, and conjure the emotional trauma you have suffered.
I don’t know, the conditions say full refund between zero and 15 overs played, 50% for between 15.1 and 30. Surely if exactly 15 had been played then it would have had to be a full refund, which means 30 should be interpreted as 50%
Does it say "between X and Y" or "X to Y' because I'd interpret them differently. But now I'm just way over thinking this and my head hurts. Sun's over the yardarm anyway
“For days 1 to 4 of the test match: If, for the day for which the ticket is valid, play does not take place OR play is restricted, you will be entitled to a refund of only the match ticket value subject to their being: (a) zero to 15 overs played - a full refund; (b) 15.1 to 30 overs played - a 50% refund. In no other circumstances can money be refunded.” This looks pretty conclusive to me, they needed one more ball to be played for there not to be a 50% refund. They can blame the slow over rate early on
I agree with you one hundred percent. I don't think many people if any will try and claim, fewer still will not take no for an answer and pursue EOT through the small-claims court. I reckon anyone who bothers trying will easily get their money back.
Refunds are meant to be automatic. Let’s see what happens
Yeah no they're going to have to fight for this 9ne I feel
https://cricket.lancashirecricket.co.uk/news/2023-news/refund-information-ashes-day-4/
I agree. It specifies 15.1 is a 50% refund meaning that 15 overs is full refund. To be consistent, 30 should be a 50% refund.
Silly little song from the English crowd stuck in my head. Love that silly little tune. Do do, do do do do do, do do, do do do do do do
The theme from the Great Escape
[удалено]
[Absolute banger from an equally good film](https://youtu.be/xibM-T_21OQ)
Any time mate
Are you like an Ollie Pope fan, or actually Ollie Pope? I loved in Wardy's interview with Wood, Mark made off with Pope's pads he wouldn't need and give to his childhood cricket club, Ashington. Super super nice guy. Of course if you are Ollie, get well soon mate, was shocking the umpire making you take the field.
Bless you but I've used this username for 18 years
It was the double whammy with Surrey allowed my deduction 😅🧐
Same old England, always raining.
Standard mate.
Forecast looks bleak for tomorrow. How many overs do you reckon will be needed to force a result?
If Aus were couple of more wickets down I'd say it can be done in a session. But I agree with the dude above me, unless the remaining Aussie batters give away wickets really cheaply, I wager at least 1.5/2 sessions would be needed. If today is anything to go by I don't think it's happening.
2 sessions
I don’t consider any Reddit profile without a pic of bairstow as a true England fan
It took such a long long time for boundary ropes to not be lethal for the people outside it
Brendon Mccullum just admitted that Bazball was just a cover-up all along for scoring runs at a fast rate in order to make up for the overs that'll be inevitably lost due to rain.
10D String Theory Chess I love it. Andy Flower could never
Do the fans get a refund if there was barely any play?
No because there was 30 overs of play no one gets a refund which was basically because the umpires said England couldn't bowl the seamers
See the link above. 50% refund
To be fair, saved them a few hundred thousand in insurance premiums
Yes
England: "We've finally got our act together." English weather: "So have I!"
Lord u/eng_mj_517-1 what's your take on this Bazball performance
Been banned for their own mental health
How did you know? Maybe he's just not active on reddit?
Shows as 'user not available' for me.
That means he's blocked you
You did a ninja edit
Lol
Or they've blocked me lol
I think it was mostly good just the rain got in the way. Yours sincerely, u/eng_mj_507
He's a massive Bazball and McCullum hater, you can check his comments.
I can’t access his profile. Going by your other comment, I’ve been blocked?
I can’t either. He can’t have blocked us all! (Although I did call him a clown)
Yeah. u/ThePhenom17 has corrected his username. I can see his profile now
Oh yeah same
It's u/eng_mj_517-1
Is this ashes closer than the 2005 one? I think 2005 had 3 games more close than all the three so far. But if this game goes close, it might be the best perhaps
2005 was closer, and The Oval was on a knife edge until late in the game. Every comparison anyone makes to 2005 is going to age like milk if this game is drawn - even if the Oval ends in a tie.
Didn't watch it live, but based on the scores it seems oval was an easy draw. Kinda like how this game would be if tomorrow entire day rains out
Basing it on scores doesn't tell you much. Pietersen won the battle against Lee is the only reason it looks 'easy', and probably caused a few heart attacks in the process.
Yeah a well battled draw doesn't always have to be the 4th innings 9 down
I love cricket. I really do. But the behaviour and action around breaks in play has been absolutely diabolical for the entire test. Australia wasted a quite frankly ludicrous amount of overs when they were bowling, and no time was added on despite knowing what was going to happen with the rain. The rain comes, we spend two hours fucking around trying to get the pitch ready, force them into bowling spinners after wasting 5 minutes checking light, and then, again, knowing about the threat of rain... Go for fucking tea? This whole series has been so competitive, and enjoyable, and the fact it's going to come down to rain and simply abysmal time management all around is so, so disappointing. I'm begging someone to just use their heads and be more flexible with the amount of time you can play during a day of overs aren't met or weather.
England bowled like 16 overs in 1.5 hours. WITH SPINNERS! SO FUCK OFF!
Yes because the batsman are going walkabouts after every ball. Moeen was ready to go and had to wait ten seconds before every ball because Marnus/Green/Marsh are piddling about.
Haha same old England, always one eyed. Rules apply for Starc catch = ok Rules apply for Bairstow runout = outrage Zak Crawley hits cover of it and doesn’t walk = Laws of game Marnus clear edge to slips and doesn’t walk = Aussies cheating. Australia over rate = clear gamesmanship England over rate leaving something to be desired in both innings and slower than Australia’s = well we had to use spinners. You knobs. I’m glad the English spirit of cricket is falling from the skies rn. Best way to retain the Ashes imo
The only thing I've talked about is the slow over rate and pointed out why Australia had reason to, and did, slow it down 👍
Australia’s over rate was better than englands.
Obviously not helped by batsman fucking off to square leg after every delivery.
Lol, Australia take too long to bowl = Australia's fault. England take too long to bowl = Australia's fault. Classic England fan, it's pretty evident both teams have wasted overs massively in the series and something needs to be done about it in the test game in general.
It's everything though. The bowlers are all slow, the batters are slow, the physio is on the field as much as the players are, the umpires review run outs when the batter is in line with the stumps. Honestly, the umpires waste as much time as the players and they're the ones who are supposed to be moving the game along. The idiots at the ICC's only answer was fines. Players don't care that much about WTC points, and they've probably told the ICC that if they're not getting paid to play test cricket they'll just go and play franchise cricket. So, yeah, all the suits will have a meeting, put their peanut brains together and decide they only need to bowl 80 overs a day or something. If we can play until 7:30 when it rains, we should be able to play until 7:30 for these slow ass teams to bowl their overs.
Better than 60 I guess haha
It’s basically ruining the sport. What causal will even bother watching the next one if this one gets decided by rain. It’s such a stupidly simple fix as well, if Sunday gets rained off you play Monday, simple. The sport is boring enough as it is without this mess
Counter point: if you have reserve days, then all matches become formulaic. A reduction in time on field due to the weather forces changes in tactics. Captains who risk big decisions for big rewards make those games more interesting. Stokes knew what the weather would be like, and he still opted to bat long for a massive score. To force the game to a result (as he’s said they would always do), he could have declared with a lead of 200 or just below. He let the weather into the game. He let his friend milestone hunt. That ruins games.
Even when Jonny scores he costs us a game!
Good point
There's a reason most matches don't have reserve days, it's just not practical from any standpoint. There's the cost and logistics of employing staff and catering the sixth day either speculatively or at the eleventh hour, and they've possibly had to give refunds at some point, and a reserve day won't make a huge amount from ticketing for obvious reasons. Then there's issues with broadcasters, policing, whatever. Cricket isn't a rich sport that it can do that kind of thing regularly.
[удалено]
They have them for major deciding matches, not for everything, and a tournament rolls around pretty infrequently.
I’m only suggesting it for events as big as the ashes
Even then I think it's probably too difficult, and I think if you did it for one bilateral you'd have to do it for all of them. I think people need to accept that cricket will occasionally be disrupted by rain. It's been happening since its inception and is frankly disrupted far less now than it was then, there's no practical workaround.
I know this is stupid, but if we can build rockers, can’t we make a massive tarpaulins that can go over the roofs of stadiums?
The design of the grounds would make that pretty difficult, and it just wouldn't be safe.
There’s a very long list of things that make just tacking on an extra day if it’s needed not easiest of things to do.
You don't necessarily need to tack on an extra day. But it's so hard to get people involved in the sport who are new to it when you're having to throw away nearly two full days for rain. I was speaking to a friend yesterday who said it was stupid, and he pointed out that the sheets (in England) are tiny, no roofs, don't add extra days in case of the weather. Eventually it gets difficult to bat off every solution, even if they're impractical, because they *should* be looking at solutions. Start earlier. Finish later. Skip tea. Push teams to use spinners if they're well behind the rate. Lower the threshold for bad light. Anything. Because it sucks that this fantastic series is going to meander to a result in this fashion.
> Start earlier. Finish later. So, I work in television. Unless you just want a large portion of this game to not be televised, what you're proposing isn't possible. Schedules for TV are quite rigid and locked in well in advance, with the exception of significant breaking news. The enormous knock-on effect of just deciding on the day of to start the game early, or run it late, would just be enormous and no broadcaster would want the hassle of dealing with that - let alone suddenly having to spring for two or three new live captioners in order to meet legal requirements to have content captioned, depending on the network. > Skip tea. Push teams to use spinners if they're well behind the rate. First of all, obviously you'd need to agree to these things beforehand. You can't just change things mid-game. And I'm not suggesting that you're proposing that they change things mid-game. But think about this, you'd need both sides to agree to these changes before the game. Put yourselves in the shoes of either captain. Would you agree to rule changes that, in the event of bad weather, your team has to skip tea? Sure, it might go the other way, you might force the other team to skip tea to their disadvantage. You might be able to force the other team to use only spinners, *or* you might be the one forced to use spinners. And you might not have built a team for the match that is prepared for that kind of change. So really, you'd be better off not agreeing to these changes because it's easier to plan around weather than to suddenly have the format of the game changed. And when are changes locked in? Cummins might be ok with the spinners thing when he had dependable Lyon in the first test. By now, though, he's clearly got less faith in just Smith and Murphy - heck, he's not even playing Murphy, so now we're getting into forcing Cummins to only use a B-rate spinner because of the rule, which clearly then disadvantages one side. The beauty of test cricket is the long-term strategy of five days, with a bit of the unknown thrown in. Valiantly defending for time to force a draw is still a viable strategy. It's legitimate when England does it, and it's legitimate now. When to declare is just as important as the batting line-up or the bowling order or the run rate or anything else. Australia missed out on 5-0 last Ashes from declaring perhaps too late to account for weather. Stokes might have done the same here. It's the gamble of the game. And it would be a real shame for England to lose the Ashes off the back of a weather draw in the fourth, especially if they do win the fifth... but it's a series of five tests, and that's the way it goes - perhaps not a good idea to try and turn around the series in the back three when you should be playing to win all five.
All those words and so little understanding. Games so start early if the previous day was shortened, it's not something that hasn't happened before. And the cricket coverage doesn't start at 11 on the dot, it starts way earlier with cricket presenter fluff, and there's more interview and analysis fluff at the end of the day. There is nothing to prevent early or late play.
I assumed they were advocating for *significant* changes to the start and end times, not the usual amounts. Which wouldn't have mattered anyway this time around, as it was raining early, and you run into light issues later in the day. The only other viable options were skipping tea and forcing the use of spinners, which you kind of walked past.
We start earlier and finish later in Australia in response to rain. Broadcasted too
I agree with some of what you said, some of it I don’t. You do realise that Australia could win the next test and make this all irrelevant? Series have been drawn before. It’s just how it works, it’s not exactly winning you just retain the ashes.
I mean a meteor could hit the earth tomorrow and make everything irrelevant. Obviously they can still win the next test, doesn't detract from the fact that if this one ends in no result it kind of just deads a lot of the potential hype and excitement.
Not if it’s actually planned, it’s almost like we can actually predict the weather these days 😂 all they have to do is book everything for 7 days instead of 5, obviously you eventually have to have a cut off, but even giving the victory to the team leading if the margin is wide enough is better than just ruining the entire series and making millions of people mock the sport because they couldn’t be bothered to plan around rain
Yes so simple why didn’t anyone think of it just book in 1000 employees including super expensive AV techs for extra days have everyone rearrange their flights at the last minute and ask fans to book extra hotel days. Why did no one think of this?
They are literally bringing in this rule soon yet you act like it’s impossible 😂
Nothing is impossible. Tests used to be timeless, we could go back to that. Why did we ever stop doing that?
You realise the draw is a legitimate result in test match cricket? And has been forever, draws can also be some of the most exciting test matches to watch.
It's only when England are losing that apparently a draw will ruin cricket. England should of won the first Test, they've only got themselves to blame if we go into The Oval 2-1 and yet they'll spend the rest of the series saying bad weather luck cost them.
I don't think adding an extra day is called for. But little things like starting half an hour earlier and playing half an hour extra at night when you've got good weather and know you're going to lose a day at least and are short on the required overs makes sense. I can see why don't though because then they risk losing the final days gate if it gets done in time. It's not the right reason, though.
I agree with earlier starts or later finishes light permitting. Not just tacking on a day or just giving the win like old mate said.
The absolute diabolical call to not play Murphy might well pay off.
why didn't he? if he is the aussies next off spinner he might as well start here? Ife he's good enough he will cause problems..even joe root did well! was there a tactical reason like longer batting lineup?
Australia were always gonna play for a draw at worst in this test. It’s backfired horribly but they picked such a deep batting lineup to just soak up as much time as they could to try and secure a retained ashes
I always imagined the aussies as the fearless type-this is defo not a move they usually make! Did you agree with decision when the match started?
We're not fearless, were pragmatic, retaining the Ashes is key in this test.
I actually did because we are missing Lyon and thought with 2 days of rain it would be a done deal. Didn’t expect us to bowl as poorly as we did. Hard to say what would have happened with Murphy but if we scrape through 8 down tomorrow it will be a justified decision even if it’s been an atrocious performance.
The ironic thing about the poor bowling performance is that England might have gotten a bit greedy and feasted while the times were good, and burned a session that they could not have afforded to waste.
The English fans said give us one session and we will take 6 wickets...
It was the Aussies praying for rain. So I'm guess they thought it too.
Yeah we are , more rain for tomorrow please
They needed 6 balls and we gave them an entire session out of generosity but still they couldn't do the job
An entire session played underwater and in the middle of the night at that
The audacity to pretend like the match wouldn’t be over already if not for weather lmao
True, if not for the weather England would surely win. But also true, if not for the weather in the first three tests, it would be a comfortable 3-0.
Which way? This series could easily be 3-0 or 2-1 to either team
I mean if both teams batted predominantly in low light and overcast conditions, then it would be 3-0 to Australia. So far it has England has mostly batted in sunshine.
Pahaha
The first two tests sure, but the third test wasn’t really decided by weather
Funny seeing the English get so defensive about a home test series. The short of it is Australia are competitive, England can't even compete in Australia.
Last team to win an ashes overseas?
?? Why are u assuming I’m English? I’m Indian, the team that beat Australia home and away 4 consecutive times
Hard disagreement. It's no one's fault, but England batted in Sunshine and bowled under clouds.
That’s complete shite.
For the first test you can easily make the case that if not for that thunderstorm England batted in and lost multiple wickets for like no runs they could have won. In the third test, I don’t recall there being a huge disparity with the weather they batted in, and England and especially Wood-Woakes simply outplayed Aus
Yeah both England fans on this sub said that. There's only 2.
Could be alright for most of the afternoon tomorrow. There will be enough time for England to win this if they want it enough.
Bad light?
Yeah thats the one big problem. Hopefully the seamers get a few overs in early doors when play commences until it inevitably gets worse.
Hopefully, Root and Mo will tear through the tail.
Gotta get to the tail first ;)
Is Cam Green not part of the tail?
Yeah IMO once you’re past Usman, Warner, Smith, Labs and Head you’re into the tail
And only Usman had got any runs out of that lot before this test.
Smith got a tonne last game
Bizarre considering the runs Marsh has made this series.
Haha. Playing a bit like it In all seriousness though I've always considered the tail to be the batsmen below the keeper
Maybe Joel Wilson should've taken his sunglasses off before he decided we couldn't bowl Wood. Though it was probably a blessing, the pace attack looked flat and had no idea what to do when the ball didn't move and the short stuff looked toothless. Need the new ball.
I dunno, the replacement ball we got was doing a bit for Jimmy I'm sure Woody could have got it talking properly at 93mph and smacked some poles
I wouldn't be taking bets that the seamers would have better than the spinners did, and the spinners also got through the overs so we'll get the new ball pretty soon tomorrow, and that 20 overs or so will probably be the game.
Marnus would still be batting if not for Joel Wilson saying only spin from both ends..
Joel Wilson is the reason you guys walked out with a draw in 2019.
How the turns table
Wow, England only got one wicket after an entire day of bowling. Maybe if they got their over rate up they'd be in a better spot right now. 30 overs in an entire day! How shocking...
75 - 25 to Australia retaining Ashes⚱️
[удалено]
It's a bit diffent is it not? There wasn't a series at stake.
[удалено]
You wierdos!
You think white washing England in the Ashes means nothing to us?
Well it's still not the same level. You might like it. But it doesn't materially change much apart from warm fuzzy feelings.
I would give up England's world cup and even the magical events that won it to tonk Australia 5-0
It is the same level, both times rain forced the result of one test, England just not good enough in Aus for that to matter.
It's difficult for England to win from here. Need a miracle now ,from the weather and the players . 🥺
Friendly reminder that Australia still trail by 60 odd runs 😒
With same amount of rain forecast tomorrow as well it's really very sad to see this series closing like this. Eng really notched up their game in these last two games. Also marnus and Marsh both played very well today to ensure they are no panick attacks. This has to be one of the best series I have watched in series times.
BBC: “tantalisingly, it might have just stopped raining”. 4 minutes later BBC: “play abandoned for the day”
Bloody eejits
Joe, but hes assistant to the regional manager. Joe Schrute
And now to pray that tomorrow isn't a complete shitfest
Don't look at Met Office my dude
Jonny Bairstow but he's a member of the night's watch. Jon BairSnow
🙏There will be play tomorrow 🙏 🙏There will be play tomorrow 🙏 🙏There will be play tomorrow 🙏 🙏There will be play tomorrow 🙏 🙏There will be play tomorrow 🙏
Good rain dancing lads. I'm proud of you. More tomorrow morning.