We won the game by a comfortable margin in the end. The poor shot selection in our second innings was a bigger factor in them getting a bit closer then the non follow on.
I don’t understand the obsession people have with enforcing the follow on.
If we had and they got to 3/169 in the 60th over (like they did in their 2nd dig) our bowlers would have been bowling for 136 overs and still needing 7 wickets, so i’d say we would have been in a bigger spot of bother then, then we ended up being in over the last 2 days
It’s not comparing apples with apples there. Their 2nd dig was against a 30 over old ball in the night session.
When we faced the new ball in the night session and it was more muggy IIRC & it was moving all over the shop. Our batsman we’re struggling big time. We went down 4/56 or something at stumps and it could have easily been 5 for or more.
With the way Starc and Cummins can move the ball and Hazelwood for that matter we might have had the Poms 4/5/6 down for very little.
Then had a nights rest to clean up tail next day and win the game with an innings to spare.
The issue was our bowlers had already done a mountain of work. And such short time between tests meant worries about breaking them down.
Might be a bit Captain Obvious, but if Woakes and Overton hadn’t held us up early Monday, so the bowlers were still fresh, we may well have enforced the follow on.
But then, we’d have given them 90 minutes before the evening conditions kicked in. Ball would have been a bit older.
And if my auntie had balls, …well…who the ■■■■ knows these days?
Shaun Marsh can bat, no doubt about it — when he manages to concentrate, that is — it’s his inconsistency that has had him dropped in the past, not his inability to bat.
But it seems you can’t have one Marsh without the other, so we’re stuck with little brother Mitch yet again. As a bowler, he should be restricted to a tennis ball; as a batsman he’s a frigging club No.8, and a mediocre one at that.
Look at Mitch’s Test Match record:
He’s batted in 21 Tests (yes, that many!) for a total of 674 runs: that’s an average of 21.74. Two 50s, NO centuries — a highest score of 87.
As for bowling: 1,897 balls bowled for 29 wickets at an average of 37.48. He’s never had a 5-wicket haul — his best bowling is 4/61.
He’s utterly ordinary - in fact he’s downright mediocre, just like his old man, Swampy, was.
The way Pat Cummins is batting, we’ve already got an all-rounder in the team — but If they really need another allrounder, a Sand-groping one, Stoinis is the real deal.
The sooner we get Swampy’s bosom buddies out of the selectors’ seats, the better.
Gee that bowling unit, has to be close to the best in the world.
It’s the batting line up that is a real concern, I can see us getting 20 wicks for the remaining 3 tests - but I can also see being skittle for under 200 in those innings.
Some of the batters are raw and out of form, but I would back them in for the experience.
I agree. Smith had no idea that the ball would hoop around like in did during the last session on Day 3. Some cricket balls
swing more than others - it’s the same with the red ball- but it aeems that it might be more pronounced with the pink ones. The ball Australia picked when England began their 4th innings didn’t swing that much, but when we took the new ball yesterday it was swinging all over the shop. The pink ball is still in an experimental stage and they are putting a lot of lacquer on it so it retains its pinkish hue, and I suspect it affects some balls more dramatically than others. England may have giot lucky with a good ball. Having said that, you still need the skill to make it ‘talk’ and the Poms did it well.
Also, not having to back-up may benefit us going forward. Our quicks need to be looked after and we’re not even halfway through the series. Best pace attack in the world and we need to do everything we can to keep them as fresh as possible and on the park.
yep - England only fell short by 15 runs to avoid the follow on. A few more runs and there would have been no decision to make. Australia has to bat again and the rest could have played out the same.
And if Woakes and Overton can put on 60+, then their openers could have put on a hundred. And then where would we have been?
In a much dicier position than we actually ended up being, that’s for sure.
Almost as predictable as Shaun not making another half century this series. In fact going on his history he should be raising his bat if he gets to 25. Yes I’m still a knocker, there is a reason he’s maligned and it’s his lack of consistency.
We’re lucky the english batting is worse than ours this series because that’s the difference
Which is fine.
Unless you realise Maxwell has hit about 100 more runs in the same period, and taken about the same number of wickets.
I’ll bet folding money mitch Marsh doesn’t bowl more than 8 overs in any innings. I get the want for a bit more bowling, but whenever MMarsh plays, he bowls a couple of change-of-end spells. Just the same as Maxwell.
2 FC centuries. He’s been in FC cricket for 6-7 years now. some guys have to make 1500 a year for 3-4 years to get looked at - C Rogers, Voges, Hodge to name a few - others get in based on 2 measly centuries. How do we expect Sheild cricketers to know where they stand?