EB1 - so do you think that Bairstow would have given Marnus a warning had he hit the stumps and was out of his crease? (moot point as it didn't happen). Or that was a bad look for the game? Carey let go of the ball before Bairstow had left his crease - he didn't wait for him to leave and then trhow it.
My concern is that in park cricket this is tried 10 times on a Saturday afternoon. Haven't seen it work yet. This will only encourage the keepers and that will double to 20 times!
Yes, Bairstow tried it on Marnus. Brendan got Murali. If a keeper can't do that, then stumpings are gone. Carey let go of the ball the moment he got it - he didn't wait for Bairstow to go out of his crease.
The more I see Starc's catch, the more I kind of get why it wasn't given out.
Whingeing sore losers (like the previous test that they felt they won.). I haven't always liked the Australian test sides, but this English one is revolting.
It's interesting - score a big score in the first innings quickly, give yourself time to bowl the other side out twice (without enforcing a follow on) and there is less chance to lose the test. Hence the declaration was a bad one in the first.
Batsmen are able to score more quickly for longer now, and there is more inventiveness in the cricket. Bowlers, however, aren't used to the toil of test matches and this is where the fatigue comes in and a raft of quality bowlers is required. Apart from Wood, I am not sure if England have much in reserve - not way can Broad and Anderson play 5 tests in 6 weeks on flat decks.
But if you prepare pitches so that bowlers don't have to toil as hard, the batsmen can't cope, as they don't have the techniques to play swing/cut, or patience if it gets a little hard, which defeats the purpose of Bazball.
Englands best chance is with the first, but it may well backfire, as we have the bowlers and batsmen that can cope with flat tracks and a better spinner.
Nothing in the first test - be interesting how the nerves hold for both teams - can't see Australia doing much different. England has to tweak their team but don't think they will change their game plan either.
I suggest you have a holiday - from Carlton as well. Watching or listening to the game will only ruin things for you. Eat the Pasteis de Nata, drink the espresso and port and enjoy yourself.
What a household - ex vice chancellor of Uni of Melb married to ex Vice chancellor of Monash Uni.
Things have to be going pretty pear shaped if the Gov is reporting to the palace. Other correspondence is really a box ticking exercise. Not really an issue - still need to be able to give consent to legislation and a huge ceremonial role.
As was posted in the in game thread, some Pies run, dare, positioning and ball use was (date I say it) good to watch.
We played cateful, defensive, static football. This skews stats.
What has happened to the electric running, ball movement and hitting forwards lace out - what we saw from our opposition? We tried half way through the third, didn't work, but the crowd noticed and finally started getting interested.
What is the change - shifting the balance too far (we lament lack of defensive effort while playing attacking footy), structure of the side, confidence or confusion of message to the players? Certainly don't have forward pressure.
I think we miss a player who is super quick that can chase an opponent from 50m away or who can get the footy, put on the jets and dispose of it to advantage.
