Page 1 of 1

2nd Test

PostPosted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 2:57 pm
by dog rout 21
disgraceful!

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:18 pm
by Sky Blue Strawberry
What's happened?

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:23 pm
by dog rout 21
abandoned after 10 balls because the outfield is essentially a sandpit which theyve known about for weeks

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:24 pm
by Sky Blue Strawberry
Just heard it on radio - how pathetic is that. Shocking

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:37 pm
by Lloydy
Thats disgraceful. The ground staff have (or should have) been preparing for this for a couple of months easily, to not have a pitch fit enough to play is simply not good enough in todays day and age. Whoever was in charge of the grounds operations needs to start looking for a new career. Why wasnt the match just moved to another venue if they new they'd fucked up the pitch?

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:51 pm
by dog rout 21
you seen the pictures? its basically a beach with an inch of turf on top! something somewhere has gone pretty majorly wrong

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:32 pm
by Lloydy
Yeah i've seen em, funny pics of them ripping up the turf, the pitch is in a shocking state, and doesn't get like that over a few days of bad weather and flooding. Best part for me is the fact they attempted to re-lay one end of the pitch thinking it would fix the problem :shock: . Try making it ten time worse, that head groundsman must surely get the boot.

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:55 pm
by skybluesplit
So is this tonight the re-arranged sham of other day - im confused?

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 8:12 pm
by Timbo
Its a hastily arranged new test. Its officially the third test in the series. I believe its now a five test series instead of four and that the result of the second is abandoned.

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 8:15 pm
by skybluesplit
Cheers Timbo - wondered what was happening & why.. i've only started gettin into crickt last year or so! I'm not always understanding bein a silly girl & all that ;-)

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 9:53 pm
by AD
Must be a decent pitch for batsmen if even three England players can get over 50! Is this the ground Lara scored his 300/400's on?

EDIT: Should really proof read these - just put it was a good pitch for batsemen :oops:

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 10:03 pm
by billythefish
Would expect the pitch to get a lot worse over the 5 days and a few balls are starting to keep low. With the pitch only being prepared in two days then strange decision to bowl first and England should equal the series here.

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:19 pm
by Sky Blue Strawberry
Think we got tactics wrong in this test - not so much in not enforcing the follow on but more to do with sending Anderson in as night watchmen on 3rd day. Meant we couldn't score quick runs next morning

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:24 pm
by skybluesplit
Doesnt a currythe night before help with that?..



Sorry :oops:

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 5:32 pm
by The Yid
Should have followed on.. that way you control your own destiny on Day 5 when you are batting. It probably wouldn't have gotten to Day 5 that way, as all the momentum was with England.

I also think that Swann is NOT good enough for England, he'll get found out next test.

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 5:37 pm
by bolix
What sbs ses. Cannot believe the negative tactics. Stupid at best.

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:56 pm
by Sky Blue Strawberry
I can see why Strauss didn't follow on - 2 front line bowlers ill or injured and the thought of batting last on a potentially difficult pitch - think he basically just got his tactics all wrong

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:59 pm
by skyblue
I'm not sure Strauss did get it wrong. If your 2 main strike bowlers need a rest there is no point making your opponents follow on, also with the way the pitch was falling to pieces it would have been a gamble to bat last.

We had 130overs to bowl them out, and should have been able to do it in far less on that pitch. I think Swann should be dropped and either Monty or Rashis come in. They don't have the same control as Swann, but they are far more likely to take wickets.

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:48 pm
by Timbo
Having Anderson come in as nightwatchman was one thing but the morning after he should have been told to slog from the off. If he wasn't making quick runs he might as well have been out. Apart from that I don't think England and Strauss did too much wrong.

Re: 2nd Test

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:20 pm
by AD
Timbo wrote:
Having Anderson come in as nightwatchman was one thing but the morning after he should have been told to slog from the off. If he wasn't making quick runs he might as well have been out. Apart from that I don't think England and Strauss did too much wrong.


Agree entirely. He should have been told he'd done his job, now get slogging because we need runs quickly. If you score runs brilliant, if not a proper batsmen will come in and push the run rate up.