After all the talk about spinners, england decide on 4 pace attack
plus stokes and root. I would have picked woakes, but i can see
why theyve gone for mr T, becos they want him to bowl all the short
stuff, so the big 3 can do their own thang, and cos stokes probably
cant do much. I did think that T looked a lot better against ireland
in the 2nd dig when he bowled his natural game.

Of course tother reason T is in, is that Wood is still not ready for
a 5 day match, he was on as sub in the last match, and perhaps
they might risk him for the 3rd, but it will need a miracle if all these
invalids can suddenly rise up like phoenix and get us back the ashes
from here on. Lewis the womens coach, advice is 'go harder', whatever
that means.

Crawley, Duckett, Pope, Root, Brook, Stokes, Bairstow, Broad, Robinson, Tongue, Anderson.

I spose Oz will keep as they are unless they bring in Starc for Boland.
That strengthens their tail, while mr T for ali weakens ours.

mike

On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 08:28:55 -0700 (PDT), mike <dmike204@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

>
>After all the talk about spinners, england decide on 4 pace attack
>plus stokes and root. I would have picked woakes, but i can see
>why theyve gone for mr T, becos they want him to bowl all the short
>stuff, so the big 3 can do their own thang, and cos stokes probably
>cant do much. I did think that T looked a lot better against ireland
>in the 2nd dig when he bowled his natural game.
....
>I spose Oz will keep as they are unless they bring in Starc for Boland.
>That strengthens their tail, while mr T for ali weakens ours.

My, my, how pessimistic.

This is a Lord's Test. Ignoring the village idiot's protestations
about Hedley Verity, spinners are usually superfluous at Lord's.

If one has a top-class spinner, then by all means pick him. If you're
thinking of people who are 70% fit or have not so far demonstrated
that they will bowl as accurately and with as much guile as Bazball
requires, a good fourth pace bowler seems a better option.

Cheers,

Mike

On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 1:28:57 AM UTC+10, mike wrote:
> After all the talk about spinners, england decide on 4 pace attack
> plus stokes and root. I would have picked woakes, but i can see
> why theyve gone for mr T, becos they want him to bowl all the short
> stuff, so the big 3 can do their own thang, and cos stokes probably
> cant do much. I did think that T looked a lot better against ireland
> in the 2nd dig when he bowled his natural game.
>
> Of course tother reason T is in, is that Wood is still not ready for
> a 5 day match, he was on as sub in the last match, and perhaps
> they might risk him for the 3rd, but it will need a miracle if all these
> invalids can suddenly rise up like phoenix and get us back the ashes
> from here on. Lewis the womens coach, advice is 'go harder', whatever
> that means.
>
> Crawley, Duckett, Pope, Root, Brook, Stokes, Bairstow, Broad, Robinson, Tongue, Anderson.
>
> I spose Oz will keep as they are unless they bring in Starc for Boland.
> That strengthens their tail, while mr T for ali weakens ours.
>
> mike
what happened to Bazball and batting friendly wickets?

England again wins the toss and will win the test because of this

On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 8:12:34 PM UTC+10, wlsut...@gmail.com wrote:
> England again wins the toss and will win the test because of this

Should have batted.

On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 11:15:38 AM UTC+1, jack fredricks wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 8:12:34 PM UTC+10, wlsut...@gmail.com wrote:
> > England again wins the toss and will win the test because of this

didnt work out like that last time

> Should have batted.

i agree, but i expect they thought either the pitch or conditions would help
the bowlers more.

i dont think bairstows man carry was necessary. strangest way to pick up
an injury perhaps, but it looks like popes might be serious. i dont think they can sub
in another batter just for a shoulder injury. unless he tests positive
for covid too, or is that rule invalid now?

JSO say "how can we enjoy the Ashes when much of the cricketing world is
becoming unfit for humans to live in?" i hope oz supporters feel suitably
ashamed if they go 2-0 up ;)

mike

10 no-balls so far.
It's driving me bonkers.

On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 4:55:06 PM UTC+1, jack fredricks wrote:
> 10 no-balls so far.
> It's driving me bonkers.

maybe they should play less golf and practice more cricket.

I wonder if Anderson and Robinson are really fully fit. They dont look even half
the bowlers they were last summer. Sorry to say it, but i find the way oz
play their cricket so far, much more admirable. They wernt boring today.
And personally i wouldnt care how boring england were if they could
win back the ashes.

mike

On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 8:15:38 PM UTC+10, jack fredricks wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 8:12:34 PM UTC+10, wlsut...@gmail.com wrote:
> > England again wins the toss and will win the test because of this
> Should have batted.

England squandered a huge advantage with the toss and the dropping of Warner was pivotal in this. Getting the
Crazy Brothers in early may have made a huge difference.

Was England scared to bat first and lose so many wickets that bazeball would be deem BS ?

They can still bowl Australia out for less then 400 and will then have the best batting conditions ( allowing for the weather ) of the
match and can then go Bazball crazy....

On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 2:34:53 AM UTC+1, wlsut...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 8:15:38 PM UTC+10, jack fredricks wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 8:12:34 PM UTC+10, wlsut...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > England again wins the toss and will win the test because of this
> > Should have batted.
> England squandered a huge advantage with the toss and the dropping of Warner was pivotal in this. Getting the
> Crazy Brothers in early may have made a huge difference.
>
> Was England scared to bat first and lose so many wickets that bazeball would be deem BS ?
>
> They can still bowl Australia out for less then 400 and will then have the best batting conditions ( allowing for the weather ) of the
> match and can then go Bazball crazy....

I think SS is key today. If he stays and the tail stays with him, oz should get 500. Well he made 215 last time.

I heard someone say that Tongue was the first to dismiss both openers
in the ashes out bowled since John Snow. True? Did he do it in the same innings?

mike

Tongue makes the breakthrough again, but its england who are in a pickle.
And just to show that nothing is going right today, Anderson drops the ozman.

mike

On Friday, 30 June 2023 at 15:59:05 UTC+1, mike wrote:
> Tongue makes the breakthrough again, but its england who are in a pickle.
> And just to show that nothing is going right today, Anderson drops the ozman.

As I read / heard somewhere - wonder whether this might be the last Test we see Broad and Anderson together.

Barring a bazmiracle, this game is long gone.

On Saturday, July 1, 2023 at 8:05:34 AM UTC+10, Richard Dixon wrote:
> Barring a bazmiracle, this game is long gone.

I've not given up hope yet.

But if we are to win, the only way we can is bazball.

We could chase 400. Which means we need to take 180/8 tomorrow.

The chase is made easier by Lyon's injury. Although we'd probably gift Smith and Head 5 wickets between them.

On 29/06/2023 11:20, mike wrote:
> On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 2:34:53 AM UTC+1, wlsut...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 8:15:38 PM UTC+10, jack fredricks wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 8:12:34 PM UTC+10, wlsut...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> England again wins the toss and will win the test because of this
>>> Should have batted.
>> England squandered a huge advantage with the toss and the dropping of Warner was pivotal in this. Getting the
>> Crazy Brothers in early may have made a huge difference.
>>
>> Was England scared to bat first and lose so many wickets that bazeball would be deem BS ?
>>
>> They can still bowl Australia out for less then 400 and will then have the best batting conditions ( allowing for the weather ) of the
>> match and can then go Bazball crazy....
>
> I think SS is key today. If he stays and the tail stays with him, oz should get 500. Well he made 215 last time.
>
> I heard someone say that Tongue was the first to dismiss both openers
> in the ashes out bowled since John Snow. True? Did he do it in the same innings?

Yes, at Headingley in 1968 (Inverarity and Cowper). That was the record
- the first England bowler to get both Australian openers out bowled in
the same innings.

Devon Malcolm bowled Slater in the 1st innings and Taylor in the 2nd at
Sydney in 1994/95. Snow himself also bowled Stackpole in the 1st innings
and Eastwood in the 2nd at Sydney in 1970/71.

--
David North

On Friday, June 30, 2023 at 11:42:25 PM UTC+1, jack fredricks wrote:
> On Saturday, July 1, 2023 at 8:05:34 AM UTC+10, Richard Dixon wrote:
> > Barring a bazmiracle, this game is long gone.
> I've not given up hope yet.
>
> But if we are to win, the only way we can is bazball.
>
> We could chase 400. Which means we need to take 180/8 tomorrow.
>
> The chase is made easier by Lyon's injury. Although we'd probably gift Smith and Head 5 wickets between them.

Seeing how inept england were yesterday, and how impressive 10 man oz were,
i think 300 will be more than enough lead, but i expect they will bat on
if they can til just before tea or after. I'm not against bazball per se, but they need
to adapt their play to the conditions and bowling. it does seem that they
really believe they can and should only play 1 way all the time. thats daft..

mike

On Saturday, July 1, 2023 at 8:10:04 AM UTC+1, David North wrote:
> On 29/06/2023 11:20, mike wrote:
> > On Thursday, June 29, 2023 at 2:34:53 AM UTC+1, wlsut...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 8:15:38 PM UTC+10, jack fredricks wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, June 28, 2023 at 8:12:34 PM UTC+10, wlsut...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> England again wins the toss and will win the test because of this
> >>> Should have batted.
> >> England squandered a huge advantage with the toss and the dropping of Warner was pivotal in this. Getting the
> >> Crazy Brothers in early may have made a huge difference.
> >>
> >> Was England scared to bat first and lose so many wickets that bazeball would be deem BS ?
> >>
> >> They can still bowl Australia out for less then 400 and will then have the best batting conditions ( allowing for the weather ) of the
> >> match and can then go Bazball crazy....
> >
> > I think SS is key today. If he stays and the tail stays with him, oz should get 500. Well he made 215 last time.
> >
> > I heard someone say that Tongue was the first to dismiss both openers
> > in the ashes out bowled since John Snow. True? Did he do it in the same innings?
> Yes, at Headingley in 1968 (Inverarity and Cowper). That was the record
> - the first England bowler to get both Australian openers out bowled in
> the same innings.
>
> Devon Malcolm bowled Slater in the 1st innings and Taylor in the 2nd at
> Sydney in 1994/95. Snow himself also bowled Stackpole in the 1st innings
> and Eastwood in the 2nd at Sydney in 1970/71.
>
> --

Thanks.

mike

On Saturday, July 1, 2023 at 9:44:42 AM UTC+1, mike wrote:
> On Friday, June 30, 2023 at 11:42:25 PM UTC+1, jack fredricks wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 1, 2023 at 8:05:34 AM UTC+10, Richard Dixon wrote:
> > > Barring a bazmiracle, this game is long gone.
> > I've not given up hope yet.
> >
> > But if we are to win, the only way we can is bazball.
> >
> > We could chase 400. Which means we need to take 180/8 tomorrow.
> >
> > The chase is made easier by Lyon's injury. Although we'd probably gift Smith and Head 5 wickets between them.
> Seeing how inept england were yesterday, and how impressive 10 man oz were,
> i think 300 will be more than enough lead, but i expect they will bat on
> if they can til just before tea or after. I'm not against bazball per se, but they need
> to adapt their play to the conditions and bowling.

it does seem that they
> really believe they can and should only play 1 way all the time. thats daft.
>
> mike

Then it wouldn't be Bas Ball...

The way they are playing is self evidently nonsense. They are saying that in an immensely complex and varied game they can play one way regardless of the state of play. That is ridiculous.

If England do not change we could be heading for a 5-0 whitewash... RH

RH

In message <4c4788fa-8140-4f8c-9540-dff28f3b6d04n@googlegroups.com>,
Richard Dixon <richsdixon1975@gmail.com> writes
>On Friday, 30 June 2023 at 15:59:05 UTC+1, mike wrote:
>> Tongue makes the breakthrough again, but its england who are in a pickle.
>> And just to show that nothing is going right today, Anderson drops
>>the ozman.
>
>As I read / heard somewhere - wonder whether this might be the last
>Test we see Broad and Anderson together.

Given the conditions, Anderson has been disappointing. Whether that's
his age or because he's still a bit rusty, it's hard to say. Broad has
bowled OK without much luck. It didn't help that Stokes decided not to
review an lbw that would have been out. OTOH, Stokes did correctly
decided not to review two earlier balls that Broad was convinced had
taken wickets. Maybe Broad suffers from the "boy who cried wolf"
syndrome.

Though Robinson did manage 3 first innings wickets, he too has been
disappointing, with his speed being in the high 70s rather than the low
80s that he normally reaches. I wonder if he's carrying a slight niggle.

I imagine England were always intending to rest one of Broad and
Anderson after this Test, as the third Test follows very close behind.
It now looks like it will be Anderson who is rested, with Woakes, Wood
and Moeen all possible replacements, depending on conditions and
fitness.

>
>Barring a bazmiracle, this game is long gone.

Yep. I imagine Australia will be looking to set us something over 400 in
the best part of four sessions.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

On Saturday, July 1, 2023 at 10:10:04 AM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> In message <4c4788fa-8140-4f8c...@googlegroups.com>,
> Richard Dixon <richsdi...@gmail.com> writes
> >On Friday, 30 June 2023 at 15:59:05 UTC+1, mike wrote:
> >> Tongue makes the breakthrough again, but its england who are in a pickle.
> >> And just to show that nothing is going right today, Anderson drops
> >>the ozman.
> >
> >As I read / heard somewhere - wonder whether this might be the last
> >Test we see Broad and Anderson together.
> Given the conditions, Anderson has been disappointing. Whether that's
> his age or because he's still a bit rusty, it's hard to say. Broad has
> bowled OK without much luck. It didn't help that Stokes decided not to
> review an lbw that would have been out. OTOH, Stokes did correctly
> decided not to review two earlier balls that Broad was convinced had
> taken wickets. Maybe Broad suffers from the "boy who cried wolf"
> syndrome.
>
> Though Robinson did manage 3 first innings wickets, he too has been
> disappointing, with his speed being in the high 70s rather than the low
> 80s that he normally reaches. I wonder if he's carrying a slight niggle.
>
> I imagine England were always intending to rest one of Broad and
> Anderson after this Test, as the third Test follows very close behind.
> It now looks like it will be Anderson who is rested, with Woakes, Wood
> and Moeen all possible replacements, depending on conditions and
> fitness.

Ever cricketer has a sell by date and Anderson is showing increasing signs that he has passed his.... RH

> >
> >Barring a bazmiracle, this game is long gone.
> Yep. I imagine Australia will be looking to set us something over 400 in
> the best part of four sessions.
> --
> John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
> like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
> its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
> Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

And who in the ng has been pointing out that Baz Ball is a nonsense from thew word go ..waiting...waiting . RH

On Saturday, July 1, 2023 at 10:10:04 AM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> In message <4c4788fa-8140-4f8c...@googlegroups.com>,
> Richard Dixon <richsdi...@gmail.com> writes
> >On Friday, 30 June 2023 at 15:59:05 UTC+1, mike wrote:
> >> Tongue makes the breakthrough again, but its england who are in a pickle.
> >> And just to show that nothing is going right today, Anderson drops
> >>the ozman.
> >
> >As I read / heard somewhere - wonder whether this might be the last
> >Test we see Broad and Anderson together.
> Given the conditions, Anderson has been disappointing. Whether that's
> his age or because he's still a bit rusty, it's hard to say. Broad has
> bowled OK without much luck. It didn't help that Stokes decided not to
> review an lbw that would have been out. OTOH, Stokes did correctly
> decided not to review two earlier balls that Broad was convinced had
> taken wickets. Maybe Broad suffers from the "boy who cried wolf"
> syndrome.
>
> Though Robinson did manage 3 first innings wickets, he too has been
> disappointing, with his speed being in the high 70s rather than the low
> 80s that he normally reaches. I wonder if he's carrying a slight niggle.

I dont think either he or anderson are fully fit. hes always picking at
his boots or ankle, got a lot of strapping there it seems.

>
> I imagine England were always intending to rest one of Broad and
> Anderson after this Test, as the third Test follows very close behind.
> It now looks like it will be Anderson who is rested, with Woakes, Wood
> and Moeen all possible replacements, depending on conditions and
> fitness.

what about Pope? I question the sense of letting him field after
he injured his shoulder on the first day. Surely it would have been
better if he'd sit it out and just bat. But it seems the officials said
becos he batted as normal, he had to field or england were only
allowed 10 on the field. I've never heard of this before. which
regulation is it under? Given that the 3rd test starts next thursday
he doesnt have much time to recover.

> >
> >Barring a bazmiracle, this game is long gone.
> Yep. I imagine Australia will be looking to set us something over 400 in
> the best part of four sessions.

its looking like that or more if Carey or green gets going. No stokes or root yet.

mike

One thing that I didn't like was the booing from some of the crowd when
Starc and Lyon failed to take what would normally have been easy
singles. They seemed oblivious to the fact that Lyon was physically
incapable of doing any more than hobble very, very slowly.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

On Sunday, July 2, 2023 at 10:51:04 AM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> One thing that I didn't like was the booing from some of the crowd when
> Starc and Lyon failed to take what would normally have been easy
> singles. They seemed oblivious to the fact that Lyon was physically
> incapable of doing any more than hobble very, very slowly.
> --

even more after the mankad. the officials had to have words with the
members! but surely bairstow was run out not stumped? Cant believe
Carey did that on his own initiative; clearly it was a team plan but whos
was it, they all celebrated immediately after.

mike

On Monday, July 3, 2023 at 1:12:52 AM UTC+10, mike wrote:
> On Sunday, July 2, 2023 at 10:51:04 AM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> > One thing that I didn't like was the booing from some of the crowd when
> > Starc and Lyon failed to take what would normally have been easy
> > singles. They seemed oblivious to the fact that Lyon was physically
> > incapable of doing any more than hobble very, very slowly.
> >
> even more after the mankad. the officials had to have words with the
> members! but surely bairstow was run out not stumped?
Not seeing anything in the Stumping rule that makes it not a stumping
"39.1 Out Stumped

39.1.1 The striker is out Stumped, except as in 39.3, if
a ball which is delivered is not called No ball
and he/she is out of his/her ground, other than as in 39.3.1
and he/she has not attempted a run when his/her wicket is fairly put down by the wicket-keeper without the intervention of another fielder. Note, however Laws 25.6.2 and 25.6.5 (Dismissal and conduct of a batter and his/her runner) and 27.3 (Position of wicket-keeper).

39.1.2 The striker is out Stumped if all the conditions of 39.1.1 are satisfied, even though a decision of Run out would be justified.

39.2 Ball rebounding from wicket-keeper’s person
If the wicket is put down by the ball, it shall be regarded as having been put down by the wicket-keeper if the ball:
rebounds on to the stumps from any part of the wicket-keeper’s person or equipment
or has been kicked or thrown on to the stumps by the wicket-keeper.

39.3 Not out Stumped

39.3.1 The striker will not be out Stumped if, after having received the delivery, he/she has left his/her ground in order to avoid injury.

39.3.2 If the striker is not out Stumped he/she may, except in the circumstances of Law 38.2.2.2 (Batsman not out Run out), be out Run out if the conditions of Law 38.1 (Out Run out) apply.

39.4 Runs scored

When a striker is dismissed Stumped from a Wide ball, the one-run penalty shall stand. Note Laws 12.9 (Conclusion of match), 16.6 (Winning hit or extras) and 22.2 (Call and signal of Wide ball) mean that if the penalty for a Wide concludes the match, then a stumping is not possible, but the one-run penalty for the Wide remains."

>Cant believe Carey did that on his own initiative;

I can recall seeing Marsh trying it a few times.

>clearly it was a team plan but whos
> was it, they all celebrated immediately after.

In message <199476d7-e713-42c8-9888-a22e6ab3ab8bn@googlegroups.com>,
mike <dmike204@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>On Sunday, July 2, 2023 at 10:51:040 >> One thing that I didn't like was the booing from some of the crowd when
>> Starc and Lyon failed to take what would normally have been easy
>> singles. They seemed oblivious to the fact that Lyon was physically
>> incapable of doing any more than hobble very, very slowly.
>> --
>
>even more after the mankad. the officials had to have words with the
>members! but surely bairstow was run out not stumped?

One would have thought so.

> Cant believe
>Carey did that on his own initiative; clearly it was a team plan but whos
>was it, they all celebrated immediately after.

I wasn't watching at the time, but it seems unlikely that it could have
been a pre-conceived plan, as surely Bairstow doesn't make a habit of
wandering out of his crease when the ball isn't dead? It seemed pretty
dozy of him to do so o0n this occasion.

I suppose Australia could regard it as pay-back for 1882 when, in the
Test that famously gave birth to the Ashes, in the Australian second
innings a young batsman wandered out of his crease to do some gardening
and WG Grace ran him out. The Aussies were incensed, and a provoked Fred
Spofforth was inspired to produce a spell of bowling in England's second
innings that carried Australia to victory by 7 runs when England only
need 90 or so to win.

Unfortunately Stokes couldn't quite do a Spofforth and carry his side to
victory. As is usual, a player on the winning side (Steve Smith) was
given the player of the match award, but I thought on this occasion they
should have broken away from the convention and given it to Stokes.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

On Sunday, July 2, 2023 at 5:25:07 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> In message <199476d7-e713-42c8...@googlegroups.com>,
> mike <dmik...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
> >On Sunday, July 2, 2023 at 10:51:040 >> One thing that I didn't like was the booing from some of the crowd when
> >> Starc and Lyon failed to take what would normally have been easy
> >> singles. They seemed oblivious to the fact that Lyon was physically
> >> incapable of doing any more than hobble very, very slowly.
> >> --
> >
> >even more after the mankad. the officials had to have words with the
> >members! but surely bairstow was run out not stumped?
> One would have thought so.

i definitely heard the umpire over the speaker say checking for run out.
however who called for the review? wasnt oz, and england still had
3 reviews left after.

> > Cant believe
> >Carey did that on his own initiative; clearly it was a team plan but whos
> >was it, they all celebrated immediately after.
> I wasn't watching at the time, but it seems unlikely that it could have
> been a pre-conceived plan, as surely Bairstow doesn't make a habit of
> wandering out of his crease when the ball isn't dead? It seemed pretty
> dozy of him to do so o0n this occasion.

very. but he does do this quite a bit. its up to the umpires to decide when the
ball is dead, not the batter to tap his foot and walk down the pitch. again
all too casual by england. i think it was preconceived becos Bairs had done this 3 balls
of the over plus none of the oz seemed surprised by careys action. i certainly would
have been if a keeper had done this when i was fielding.
>
> I suppose Australia could regard it as pay-back for 1882 when, in the
> Test that famously gave birth to the Ashes, in the Australian second
> innings a young batsman wandered out of his crease to do some gardening
> and WG Grace ran him out.

your memory is amazing

>The Aussies were incensed, and a provoked Fred
> Spofforth was inspired to produce a spell of bowling in England's second
> innings that carried Australia to victory by 7 runs when England only
> need 90 or so to win.
>
> Unfortunately Stokes couldn't quite do a Spofforth and carry his side to
> victory. As is usual, a player on the winning side (Steve Smith) was
> given the player of the match award, but I thought on this occasion they
> should have broken away from the convention and given it to Stokes.
> --

yes i was astonded at first, but SS 100 did set up the oz victory.

basically england did the same things wrong again, they failed
to score enough runs in their first innings and they missed too
many chances. It could have been 2-0 to england if they had been
sharper and more focused from the start of series. I predicted 4-1
to oz before the start, but i think it might be a Mcgrath whitewash
now.

As for oz, they nearly threw the match away with all the short stuff
to stokes. i spose they will say it worked in the end, but i bet there
were a lot of oz getting nervous when it was 300-6. but they deserve
to be 2-0 cos theyve played better cricket at the important moments
in both matches and cummins has led them brilliantly, although the
tactics today seemed to inspire stokes. If he had pulled off another
miracle, you can bet cummins would have copped a lot of criticism.

mike

On Sunday, 2 July 2023 at 21:57:49 UTC+1, mike wrote:

> basically england did the same things wrong again, they failed
> to score enough runs in their first innings and they missed too
> many chances. It could have been 2-0 to england if they had been
> sharper and more focused from the start of series. I predicted 4-1
> to oz before the start, but i think it might be a Mcgrath whitewash
> now.

I fancied 4-1 largely because I think Aus are better in most departments: I'd have argued against Carey vs Bairstow maybe but I'm not so sure now, the former's had a good series.