5th Test Showdown

Wibble said:
Boycott came close to calling England cheats/bad sportsmen.

They should stay on. If they win due to the weather it will be a hollow vistory.
Click to expand...
If it wasnt for the rain in the third test England would have won this already.

Remember Australlia scrapping for the draw then? Every little delaying tactic they could pull out of the hat.

No different.

And remember that the Aussies were the ones who accepted the light the other day and set a standard/precedent for light levels.
 
Melbourne Red said:
They're charging 60 quid for a day's play? feck me.
Click to expand...

That was a bit of an exageratio methinks. My mate bought his tickets for less than £30 I beleive. Certianly I've got into tests for about £25. Whether the posh seats are more expensive I don't know, but if you were able to buy ticets when they went on sale last year you could get them for less than £30 I'm sure.
 
What didn't look particularly bright was the clump of artificial hair at the crown of Warney's head which has no doubt sprouted during the last month and hasn't been bleached like the rest of it.

Stands out like dogs bollocks.
 
VanNistelrater said:
If it wasnt for the rain in the third test England would have won this already.

And England won one by 3 runs when they should have lost. So what?

Remember Australlia scrapping for the draw then? Every little delaying tactic they could pull out of the hat.

No different.

Very different. Australia have nothing to prove. England have everyhting to prove.

If England win for the Ashes for the first time since ???? It will be devalued of this one is a draw due to the weather. Doubly so if they keep taking the light when it is offered.

And remember that the Aussies were the ones who accepted the light the other day and set a standard/precedent for light levels.
Click to expand...

Eh?

The umpires offer the light. Nowt to do with precedence.

If England win by creating a draw then they will have undone a great deal of what they have achieved this summer. It would be a shame if they win the ashes but are viewed as cowards who won by default.

Go out and show the world that you deserve it would be my advice.
 
Melbourne Red said:
What didn't look particularly bright was the clump of artificial hair at the crown of Warney's head which has no doubt sprouted during the last month and hasn't been bleached like the rest of it.

Stands out like dogs bollocks.
Click to expand...

Maybe that is where they got the new hair from?

If so where did Peiterson get his from?
 
I think the precedent does count Wibble. They're required to offer the light whenever it reaches the level on the meter that was originally accepted.
 
WHat are you going on about you English/Aussie spaz??

If England win the Ashes they'll have deserved it. The Australians are supposed to be the best team in the world, and yet they're scrambling to try and tie the series to retain the Ashes

As has been said, if it were not for the weather it would be all over already. The impact of the weather would not lessen a series victory. And obviously the precedent set earlier in this match, in which the Aussies used the light rule to their advantage, is relevant.

Only bitter Aussies would view them as cowards...
 
Wibble said:
Eh?

The umpires offer the light. Nowt to do with precedence.

If England win by creating a draw then they will have undone a great deal of what they have achieved this summer. It would be a shame if they win the ashes but are viewed as cowards who won by default.

Go out and show the world that you deserve it would be my advice.
Click to expand...

Wibs - Your talking out of your Arse.

England have been the best team in 3 out of the 4 tests completed so far. The convicts got away with a draw at Old Trafford because most of Saturday was lost due to rain.
England this summer have proved that they are more than a match for Australia. If this last game ends in a draw then England winning the Ashes will be thoroughly deserved. It is Australia who will be getting away with one if they win this match and retain the Ashes.
 
Melbourne Red said:
I think the precedent does count Wibble. They're required to offer the light whenever it reaches the level on the meter that was originally accepted.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. The decisive factor is "danger". Since Ponting was only playing slower bowlers, unlike England when Australia decided to take the light, they should have kept the sides on the pitch.
 
Wibble said:
I don't think so. The decisive factor is "danger". Since Ponting was only playing slower bowlers, unlike England when Australia decided to take the light, they should have kept the sides on the pitch.
Click to expand...

The Aussies took the light previously no matter who was bowling. England deserve a consistent approach

Which is of course, obvious
 
Melbourne Red said:
I think the precedent does count Wibble. They're required to offer the light whenever it reaches the level on the meter that was originally accepted.
Click to expand...

No, the umpires should take into account the bowling. England were bowling fast when the light was offered. Why shouldn't they the more time that is lost the better.
Australia are unlucky. The umpires told Ponting to put 2 spinners on because of the light, he did and they still offered it.

Having said that England deserve to get out of this game with a draw. The way we bowled was way ahead of anything the Aussie fast bowlers have managed in this series
 
Wibble said:
I don't think so. The decisive factor is "danger". Since Ponting was only playing slower bowlers, unlike England when Australia decided to take the light, they should have kept the sides on the pitch.
Click to expand...
Aussie were downright stupid to take the light the other day, if they had played on, umpires would have never offered light to English today. And once offered batting side is under no obligation to continue playing if its not in their favour.
If english win ashes, it would be well desreved.
 
Looking Busy said:
He was comparing the atmosphere at the Oval to that of a Rugby World Cup final.
Click to expand...

Yeah but he was saying "That this is the best atmosphere I've experienced even more than the Rugby World Cup final" clearly he was showing off about being there. Not the first time either, he mentioned it a few times last summer. I just generally think he's a twat.
 
Looking Busy said:
Wibs - Your talking out of your Arse.

England have been the best team in 3 out of the 4 tests completed so far. The convicts got away with a draw at Old Trafford because most of Saturday was lost due to rain.
England this summer have proved that they are more than a match for Australia. If this last game ends in a draw then England winning the Ashes will be thoroughly deserved. It is Australia who will be getting away with one if they win this match and retain the Ashes.
Click to expand...

And England got away with a win when they were 3 runs away from defeat by that logic.

It doesn't matter if England were the better side if they win the ashes by copping out. They not only need to finally win but they need to do it by playing cricket.
 
crappycraperson said:
Aussie were downright stupid to take the light the other day, if they had played on, umpires would have never offered light to English today. And once offered batting side is under no obligation to continue playing if its not in their favour.
If english win ashes, it would be well desreved.
Click to expand...

Yes they were stupid

And yes, it would be well deserved
 
Wibble said:
And England got away with a win when they were 3 runs away from defeat by that logic.

It doesn't matter if England were the better side if they win the ashes by copping out. They not only need to finally win but they need to do it by playing cricket.
Click to expand...
England were the better team in that 3 run win match, I won't exactly call it a lucky win.
 
Wibble said:
And England got away with a win when they were 3 runs away from defeat by that logic.

It doesn't matter if England were the better side if they win the ashes by copping out. They not only need to finally win but they need to do it by playing cricket.
Click to expand...

Copping out? Suicide more like...

The Aussies would do exactly the same in the circumstances.....as shown previously in this match
 
Wibble said:
And England got away with a win when they were 3 runs away from defeat by that logic.

It doesn't matter if England were the better side if they win the ashes by copping out. They not only need to finally win but they need to do it by playing cricket.
Click to expand...

5 matches
1 of which we were well beaten
3 of which we were the better side (won 2)
1 that has been even so far. Both teams scored about the same runs.

England aren't winning by copping out they are winning by playing the better cricket over the summer
 
Davo said:
WHat are you going on about you English/Aussie spaz??

If England win the Ashes they'll have deserved it. The Australians are supposed to be the best team in the world, and yet they're scrambling to try and tie the series to retain the Ashes

As has been said, if it were not for the weather it would be all over already. The impact of the weather would not lessen a series victory. And obviously the precedent set earlier in this match, in which the Aussies used the light rule to their advantage, is relevant.

Only bitter Aussies would view them as cowards...
Click to expand...

And Geoffrey Boycott who was harsher than the Aussie commentators.

England need not only to win the series but also be seen to deserve the win given their decades of underachievement. They have been the better side so far but that will be mostly forgotten if they now lack the confidence to face Warne et al.
 
Wibble said:
Eh?

The umpires offer the light. Nowt to do with precedence.

If England win by creating a draw then they will have undone a great deal of what they have achieved this summer. It would be a shame if they win the ashes but are viewed as cowards who won by default.

Go out and show the world that you deserve it would be my advice.
Click to expand...
Why did the Aussies accept the light yesterday? In doing so the Umpires have to be consistent with that decision.

If England win they will have deserved it, and I think alot of the Aussie bitterness is coming from their pride being stung, they thought they would come here and stroll it 5-0.

England and Australlia both want to win, Australlia delayed the play as much as possible when they were trying to scrap a draw, and if the situation now was the other way around then the Aussies would be doing exactly the same thing.
 
Davo said:
The Aussies took the light previously no matter who was bowling. England deserve a consistent approach

Which is of course, obvious
Click to expand...

I agree. If Australia had been using fats bowlers like England were the other night then the umpires should have offered the light.
 
Wibble said:
And Geoffrey Boycott who was harsher than the Aussie commentators.

England need not only to win the series but also be seen to deserve the win given their decades of underachievement. They have been the better side so far but that will be mostly forgotten if they now lack the confidence to face Warne et al.
Click to expand...

Boycott's critical of the umpires decision, as he wants the game to be played.

He's not critical of the English side, who are doing as they should.....just as the Aussies would/did

If the Ashes comes home, the events of the last test will be forgotten...not the fact that they're the better side.

Cricket's not your strong point is it.....
 
Wibble said:
I agree. If Australia had been using fats bowlers like England were the other night then the umpires should have offered the light.
Click to expand...

England weren't offered the chance to bowl spinners..

Why should Australia be now?

Consistency is obviously key...
 
Wibble said:
Boycott came close to calling England cheats/bad sportsmen.

They should stay on. If they win due to the weather it will be a hollow vistory.
Click to expand...


Boycott's a plonker - I wonder how many times he's appealed against the light when he was batting - whether its spin or fast bowling an appeal against the light cann't be called cheating esp when a light meter verifies insufficient light
As for the Oz didn't they appeal against the light under similar circumstances ever so recently AND I did not hear our Geoffrey calling them cheats OR implying that
 
VanNistelrater said:
Why did the Aussies accept the light yesterday? In doing so the Umpires have to be consistent with that decision.
Click to expand...

Because they were facing fast bowlers unlike Enland at the moment.

Which is by their decision wasn't consistent.

Maybe the umpires have been reading The Sun?
 
nealn said:
Yeah but he was saying "That this is the best atmosphere I've experienced even more than the Rugby World Cup final" clearly he was showing off about being there. Not the first time either, he mentioned it a few times last summer. I just generally think he's a twat.
Click to expand...

I didn't mind him until I read comments from his detractors. It really does magnify his irritating habits, such as his completely exaggerated lauding of every good player, shot, delivery, decision, catch, throw...
 
Davo said:
Boycott's critical of the umpires decision, as he wants the game to be played.

He's not critical of the English side, who are doing as they should.....just as the Aussies would/did

If the Ashes comes home, the events of the last test will be forgotten...not the fact that they're the better side.

Cricket's not your strong point is it.....
Click to expand...

I didn't think so until I found out that I understood the rules better than those who follow the sport but are blinded by partisanship.
 
Wibble said:
I didn't think so until I found out that I understood the rules better than those who follow the sport but are blinded by partisanship.
Click to expand...

You're showing a lack of understanding of both the rules and how this series will be viewed overall...
 
3rd umpire has apparently told the Channel 4 team that it's proving too difficult to pick the flight of the slow bowling in the fading light, reinforcing what Koetzen said earlier.

Or so we assume, he could be discussing the nuancies of tournament hopscotch in that incomprehensible Afrikaaner accent.
 
Davo said:
England weren't offered the chance to bowl spinners..

Why should Australia be now?

Consistency is obviously key...
Click to expand...

Because Ponting asked. Unlike the English Captain.

England kept their fast bowlers on in order to increase the chance of the light being offered. Australia took it because they would only lose 30-60 minutes. A decision which suprised me.

Taking the light might be the sensible thing for Enland but it will devalue the result if the reult is an Ashes winning draw.
 
Miserable and overcast here 40 miles up the road in Herts, but I'm still doing my bit.

I've got the barbecue organised, the washings on the line and the car sun roof is open.
 
Wibble said:
Because Ponting asked. Unlike the English Captain.

England kept their fast bowlers on in order to increase the chance of the light being offered. Australia took it because they would only lose 30-60 minutes. A decision which suprised me.

Taking the light might be the sensible thing for Enland but it will devalue the result if the reult is an Ashes winning draw.
Click to expand...

England kept fast bowlers on because they've only got one spinner - who was bowling at the time.

The Aussies made a mistake by taking the light - but were perfectly entitled to take that option.

They haven't been good enough to amass a lead as they had hoped, and are now struggling to grasp a drawn series that they wouldn't deserve.

A draw won't devalue the series result at all, if anything, a victory for the Aussies - which would see the lesser side of the summer retaining the Ashes - would devalue the Ashes
 
You must log in or register to reply here.