If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   England's selection gamble looks to have backfired and Watson has finally found a big score. He's gone, but the tourists are still in a great position. How many more can they get? It's Day 2 of the final Ashes test   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 25
    More: Cool, England, Bank of England, V Australia, rain delays, Test Match Special, Michael Vaughan, wickets, Nottinghamshire  
•       •       •

181 clicks; posted to FarkUs » on 22 Aug 2013 at 8:02 AM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



25 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-08-22 08:10:27 AM
But then there was rain.
 
2013-08-22 08:22:00 AM
england turned on their weather machine again when they were looking bad
 
2013-08-22 08:26:48 AM

Dead for Tax Reasons: england turned on their weather machine again when they were looking bad


Shhh, the Aussies aren't supposed to know about the weather machine.

(It works by taking Shane Warne over the ground in a light aircraft, showing him video of Cook's captaincy and making him cry moar)
 
2013-08-22 09:11:49 AM

ThunderChild: (It works by taking Shane Warne over the ground in a light aircraft, showing him video of Cook's captaincy and making him cry moar)


images4.wikia.nocookie.net

"I've got a problem here."
 
2013-08-22 09:18:08 AM
Welcome to sunny London!

/In the meanwhile, Yorkshire are 407 all out, and have Notts at 59/6. A resounding victory here, and the County Championship is theirs for the taking - in their 150th anniversary year, to boot.
 
2013-08-22 09:29:42 AM
game on
 
2013-08-22 10:49:08 AM
Nothing there. Wasted review.
 
2013-08-22 11:11:06 AM
Only able to follow the cricinfo commentary occasionally today. Seems like the ball was moving a lot early and it was pretty hard going for the Aussie batsmen. But things seem to have settled down a bit recently.

I'm guessing after the rain the pitch was pretty lively and conditions overcast, giving the bowlers something to work with. But what are things like now? Did the ball get wet and stop assisting the bowlers, or have conditions just evened out?
 
2013-08-22 11:26:49 AM
Trott's second over: 6 0 0 1 W 0

According to wiki, that's his 5th Test wicket.
 
2013-08-22 12:12:07 PM
Aussies playing much more aggressively after Tea. There's a wicket here very soon, methinks.
 
2013-08-22 12:15:07 PM

jonathan_L: Aussies playing much more aggressively after Tea. There's a wicket here very soon, methinks.


Always going to happen. But probably a declaration not too far away too. Probably settle for 450+ at this point.
 
2013-08-22 12:18:50 PM

chakas: jonathan_L: Aussies playing much more aggressively after Tea. There's a wicket here very soon, methinks.

Always going to happen. But probably a declaration not too far away too. Probably settle for 450+ at this point.


I think the declaration with 15-20 overs left in the day is most likely.
 
2013-08-22 12:22:30 PM

FrancoFile: chakas: jonathan_L: Aussies playing much more aggressively after Tea. There's a wicket here very soon, methinks.

Always going to happen. But probably a declaration not too far away too. Probably settle for 450+ at this point.

I think the declaration with 15-20 overs left in the day is most likely.


How is the light? If it's bad we might already be in that range as far as actual play goes.
 
2013-08-22 12:28:00 PM

chakas: FrancoFile: chakas: jonathan_L: Aussies playing much more aggressively after Tea. There's a wicket here very soon, methinks.

Always going to happen. But probably a declaration not too far away too. Probably settle for 450+ at this point.

I think the declaration with 15-20 overs left in the day is most likely.

How is the light? If it's bad we might already be in that range as far as actual play goes.


Slightly overcast, but seems OK.  Good lights at The Oval.
 
2013-08-22 12:29:36 PM
Wicket!  Smith still in on 126, his maiden century.
 
2013-08-22 12:31:38 PM
Kerrigan and Woakes don't have their "number" stitched into their shirts yet. They must need to wait until after their debut Test match has completed.
 
2013-08-22 12:36:06 PM

jonathan_L: Kerrigan and Woakes don't have their "number" stitched into their shirts yet. They must need to wait until after their debut Test match has completed.


I could very easily be wrong about this, but I thought the actual numbering also had something to do with where you appear in the batting order. i.e. Woakes should be first, but if Kerrigan was sent in as a nightwatchman in the 1st innings he would actually jump him in player order.

Did I just make that up? I'm not even sure about the answer to that question.
 
2013-08-22 12:42:47 PM

chakas: jonathan_L: Kerrigan and Woakes don't have their "number" stitched into their shirts yet. They must need to wait until after their debut Test match has completed.

I could very easily be wrong about this, but I thought the actual numbering also had something to do with where you appear in the batting order. i.e. Woakes should be first, but if Kerrigan was sent in as a nightwatchman in the 1st innings he would actually jump him in player order.

Did I just make that up? I'm not even sure about the answer to that question.


In case of a tie, they play Mornington Crescent.

/the Australians have a drink-off
 
2013-08-22 12:43:29 PM

chakas: jonathan_L: Kerrigan and Woakes don't have their "number" stitched into their shirts yet. They must need to wait until after their debut Test match has completed.

I could very easily be wrong about this, but I thought the actual numbering also had something to do with where you appear in the batting order. i.e. Woakes should be first, but if Kerrigan was sent in as a nightwatchman in the 1st innings he would actually jump him in player order.

Did I just make that up? I'm not even sure about the answer to that question.


You know what, I am almost certainly wrong, but with some reason behind it. The numbers for the Australian team, and I think English too are assigned alphabetically in the case of co-debuts. But some memory of this confusion: http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia/content/story/107714.html put the whole thing with batting orders in my mind. Sorry.
 
2013-08-22 01:00:07 PM

chakas: chakas: jonathan_L: Kerrigan and Woakes don't have their "number" stitched into their shirts yet. They must need to wait until after their debut Test match has completed.

I could very easily be wrong about this, but I thought the actual numbering also had something to do with where you appear in the batting order. i.e. Woakes should be first, but if Kerrigan was sent in as a nightwatchman in the 1st innings he would actually jump him in player order.

Did I just make that up? I'm not even sure about the answer to that question.

You know what, I am almost certainly wrong, but with some reason behind it. The numbers for the Australian team, and I think English too are assigned alphabetically in the case of co-debuts. But some memory of this confusion: http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia/content/story/107714.html put the whole thing with batting orders in my mind. Sorry.


Yeah, from your post: "from now on if more than one player makes their debuts in the same match, the allocation of cap numbers will be done alphabetically and not by batting order. "

But that's the ACB. Would the ECB fall in line with precedent, or make up their own rules?
 
2013-08-22 01:10:02 PM

jonathan_L: Yeah, from your post: "from now on if more than one player makes their debuts in the same match, the allocation of cap numbers will be done alphabetically and not by batting order. "

But that's the ACB. Would the ECB fall in line with precedent, or make up their own rules?


From this wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_England_Test_cricketers) I think they do use the same numbering system.

"The list is arranged in the order in which each player won his Test cap by playing for England cricket team. Where more than one player won his first Test cap in the same Test match, those players are listed alphabetically by surname. In the text, the numbers that follow the players' names correspond to their place in the chronological list of English Test cricketers."

It doesn't specifically say that's how the ECB numbers players, but I think that's what it means.
 
2013-08-22 01:12:29 PM
Anyway, declaration at 492/9. Really motored along after tea, and still plenty of overs today. Hope they get them all in and light doesn't play a part again.
 
2013-08-22 01:34:34 PM
Looks like it's going to be cautious batting from Cook and Root through end of play.
 
2013-08-22 02:28:37 PM
england running off scared
 
2013-08-23 08:50:07 AM
No Day 3 thread?
 
Displayed 25 of 25 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report