ThePortForum.com

I think what we need to remember is that I am never wrong. Like Andy Flower. I am guaranteed not to be wrong before 2015.
What is clear as day is that the problems this team faces are the batting, the batting and the batting, as I mentioned earlier. The bowlers have if anything been vindicated not only by the wickets they've taken but also by their batting.
Thank you everybody. That's all for now.

I vote Daniel for Captain.

DRT wrote:I vote Daniel for Captain.

Thanks. I'd like to state that I have complete faith in Derek as head coach and I think he needs to still be here when the rebuilding takes place.

djewesbury wrote:

DRT wrote:I vote Daniel for Captain.

Thanks. I'd like to state that I have complete faith in Derek as head coach and I think he needs to still be here when the rebuilding takes place.

Thanks, Daniel. I think if we also have Owen driving the little cart with the drinks on it we will be a formidable team. I would love to have AHB on board but my sources tell me TMS have him lived-up to replace Boycott.

Now that i think if it I did see AHB donning a fedora and a loud shirt, yes. And speaking out of one corner of his now-triangular mouth.
More Gatorade please Owen.

I am considering my position as head misery for the team. Alex has shown promise but I think he needs more time around our set up to soak up the atmosphere of blame and neediness before he can be considered for a central contract.

I should like to claim half a point for correctly guessing Derek would be right.

This is a very promising thread and Daniel's cunning spin has the variation and accuracy to build a team around. Now we are near the end of this debacle of a tour I think we need to consider awards.

My nomination for men of the series is Daniel and Stokes.

My nomination for the champagne moment would be Alex's surprise double hundred on the future of England cricket.

Ahem, I happen to have a Comtes de Champagne 98 in the fridge should I be nominated. I need to get on with this wine, it is becoming a little too 'gout anglais', even for me. I think it might have been the storage.

LGTrotter wrote:My nomination for the champagne moment would be Alex's surprise double hundred on the future of England cricket.

Ahem, I happen to have a Comtes de Champagne 98 in the fridge should I be nominated. I need to get on with this wine, it is becoming a little too 'gout anglais', even for me. I think it might have been the storage.

My nomination goes to you for the "batting batting batting" line that I inspired you to write.

djewesbury wrote:

LGTrotter wrote:My nomination for the champagne moment would be Alex's surprise double hundred on the future of England cricket.

Ahem, I happen to have a Comtes de Champagne 98 in the fridge should I be nominated. I need to get on with this wine, it is becoming a little too 'gout anglais', even for me. I think it might have been the storage.

My nomination goes to you for the "batting batting batting" line that I inspired you to write.

I think that it should be given to the man who used it first with a different word. This is not a day for soundbites but Daniel; do you feel the hand of history on your shoulder?

LGTrotter wrote:

djewesbury wrote:

LGTrotter wrote:My nomination for the champagne moment would be Alex's surprise double hundred on the future of England cricket.

Ahem, I happen to have a Comtes de Champagne 98 in the fridge should I be nominated. I need to get on with this wine, it is becoming a little too 'gout anglais', even for me. I think it might have been the storage.

My nomination goes to you for the "batting batting batting" line that I inspired you to write.

I think that it should be given to the man who used it first with a different word. This is not a day for soundbites but Daniel; do you feel the hand of history on your shoulder?

Thanks Tony. May I just say that here in Belfast we lap that kind of talk up. Yes. Accepted.

As the originator of the thread I feel like a Grandfather watching his progeny achieve moments of greatness.

Perhaps a lifetime achievement award is in the offing? I had better start on my speech.

I'm going to cry. Let me know when the photographers arrive and I'll start.

My pink tutu for tonight's cricket has shrunk. I can hardly squeeze into it.

Position after Day 2: Australia 140 for 4, leading by 311 runs

Tonight's prediction: How many overs will be played before Australia to declare?

DRT says 45.

DRT wrote:Position after Day 2: Australia 140 for 4, leading by 311 runs

Tonight's prediction: How many overs will be played before Australia to declare?

DRT says 45.

So you think about 1.5 sessions. I wonder hat they really think they can bowl England out for. Why don't they declare straight away and put England in, but not let them know till about five minutes before the start of play? Or play half an hour - say 7 overs - and send England in? Why bother farting around, they've got nothing left to prove. Be ruthless. Kill. Make a real statement that they do not believe England could get anywhere near three figures. Let alone 300.

Good reasoning, but they have three days left so why take the risk that it blows up in their face by giving England a target that a good team could achieve? I think they will put the target beyond doubt and then skittle the completely demoralised and hopeless England out for next to nowt.

LGTrotter wrote:My pink tutu for tonight's cricket has shrunk. I can hardly squeeze into it.

I just got this.

The cause is worthy, the image quite disturbing.

He looks in slightly better shape than me.

DRT wrote:I think they will put the target beyond doubt and then skittle the completely demoralised and hopeless England out for next to nowt.

Me too, Daniel says 'kill' and I'm sure they will. I think 45 overs is overkill. I would say another 150 to 170 runs, which taken at a canter will be about 20 overs, although looking at how they were leaking runs last night 15 overs might be nearer.

And can we have a guess at the winning margin? I go 220, Australia wrap it up tonight, after tea.

Remember Clarke is the captain who set the sporting declaration at the Oval in August. That said, he had it all to gain then and nothing to lose. I also believe history says that chasing over 300 in a 4th innings is very rare.

So. I think Australia will bat for only another 20 overs and have about 8 overs either side of lunch with the new ball to basically win the game by tea. I expect it all to be over before I get up on Sunday!

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

benread wrote:Remember Clarke is the captain who set the sporting declaration at the Oval in August. That said, he had it all to gain then and nothing to lose. I also believe history says that chasing over 300 in a 4th innings is very rare.

So. I think Australia will bat for only another 20 overs and have about 8 overs either side of lunch with the new ball to basically win the game by tea. I expect it all to be over before I get up on Sunday!

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

I think you are all underestimating the ruthlessness of this Australia team. How better to humiliate the opponents than to swat them like flies? I think this game will be over before I fall asleep tonight.

LGTrotter wrote:And can we have a guess at the winning margin? I go 220, Australia wrap it up tonight, after tea.

I'll go for 280.

djewesbury wrote: I think this game will be over before I fall asleep tonight.

I think you might be right, but then we both seem to be raging insomniacs.

Predictions!

DRT: 45 overs, 280 winning margin
LGTrotter: 15-20 overs, 220 winning margin
benread: 20 overs, ??
djewesbury: 7 overs, ??

Let me say 10 overs, giving them another 40ish runs, so after England are all out for about 115 the margin will be around 230.

Predictions!

DRT: 45 overs, 280 winning margin
LGTrotter: 15-20 overs, 220 winning margin
benread: 20 overs, ??
djewesbury: 10 overs, 230 winning margin

195

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

Predictions!

DRT: 45 overs, 280 winning margin
LGTrotter: 15-20 overs, 220 winning margin
benread: 20 overs, 195 winning margin
djewesbury: 10 overs, 230 winning margin

So, after selecting a young bowler to replace an under-performing has-been they now have Kevin (my-ego-must-be-bigger-than-yours) Pieterson bowling in place of young Ball-on-say. What is going on?

My suspicion is that, as AHB predicted, KP has already decided to retire at the end of this game and has somehow persuaded Cook to give him a chance of a test wicket on his final day. If that is what has happened it says it all about Cook's lack of ambition.

That's not it. KP has plenty of wickets but also doesn't particularly care about them especially. He began his career as a bowler. He's not being bowled for a trophy wicket. He's also not about to retire. I'll bet you a pint in the Bung Hole.

Also Ballance ain't a bowler.

You're thinking Borthwick.

djewesbury wrote:You're thinking Borthwick.

True.

djewesbury wrote:That's not it. KP has plenty of wickets but also doesn't particularly care about them especially. He began his career as a bowler. He's not being bowled for a trophy wicket. He's also not about to retire. I'll bet you a pint in the Bung Hole.

We will know tomorrow.

Do you think Owen has gotten tangled in his tutu and can't get out of his whittling shed to come and join the fun?

DRT wrote:Do you think Owen has gotten tangled in his tutu and can't get out of his whittling shed to come and join the fun?

What a horrible image.
Yes.

Another ton for Rogers. This boy looks promising.

DRT wrote:Another ton for Rogers. This boy looks promising.

Yes yes. Why aren't they declaring? England can't possibly get by them now.

djewesbury wrote:

DRT wrote:Another ton for Rogers. This boy looks promising.

Yes yes. Why aren't they declaring? England can't possibly get by them now.

I think anybody would look promising in these circumstances, correction Bailey still looks rubbish. Four hundred and plenty before declaration.

DRT wrote:Another ton for Rogers. This boy looks promising.

You got the wrong wicket...

Evening tutu you all.

I should have checked earlier. How many overs did England bowl yesterday? In other words, how many have they bowled today?

*shudders*

DRT wrote:I should have checked earlier. How many overs did England bowl yesterday? In other words, how many have they bowled today?

Check Cricinfo. The scorecard will tell you how many overs were bowled at close of play.

djewesbury wrote:*shudders*

Indeed, here comes the bane of England bowling; Haddin.

djewesbury wrote:

DRT wrote:I should have checked earlier. How many overs did England bowl yesterday? In other words, how many have they bowled today?

Check Cricinfo. The scorecard will tell you how many overs were bowled at close of play.

They bowled 30 overs yesterday, so we are currently in the 18th of today.

DRT wrote:

djewesbury wrote:

DRT wrote:I should have checked earlier. How many overs did England bowl yesterday? In other words, how many have they bowled today?

Check Cricinfo. The scorecard will tell you how many overs were bowled at close of play.

They bowled 30 overs yesterday, so we are currently in the 18th of today.

Australia seem to be going slower than I anticipated, not another victory for Derek I hope?

I originally thought they would declare at 500 up, but now think it might be 400 - i.e. within the next 15 minutes.

DRT wrote:I originally thought they would declare at 500 up, but now think it might be 400 - i.e. within the next 15 minutes.

The way Haddin's batting I think you're right.

DRT wrote:I originally thought they would declare at 500 up, but now think it might be 400 - i.e. within the next 15 minutes.

450ish I reckon. Can they do that before lunch? But no rush I suppose. It would be nice if we could get presentations out of the way tonight.

*clears throat* Unaccustomed as I am to public speaking...