The Ashes Thread

[GB-Hack]

If you've clicked on this without knowing what the heck it was about, congratulations.

In 1882, England was defeated by tourist Australia in the only test match of the tour. Legend has it, in memoriam of the colony, as it still then was, of beating England, two bails were burnt, and the ashes were cased in an urn.

The mock obituary for the death of English cricket was published in 'The Sporting Times".

------------------------------------------------------

In Affectionate Remembrance
of
ENGLISH CRICKET,
which died at the Oval
on
29th AUGUST, 1882,
Deeply lamented by a large circle of sorrowing
friends and acquaintances
----
R.I.P.
----
N.B.—The body will be cremated and the
ashes taken to Australia.

--------------------------------------------------

On the eighth of July (tomorrow) the battle resumes. Australia, while still considered the foremost cricket team in the world, has come back to the pack in recent years, and the last time England hosted the series they won 2-1. All-time, Australia leads the series 31-28, with five series having been drawn.

This is one of the most heated rivalries in all of sports. Follow it, won't you?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/8138022.stm

 

[RickStain]

I know there's at least a couple other fans out there.

I've been wussing out on getting at 4 a.m. to watch each morning, but imagine my shock when I got up this morning and the headline on cricinfo said "Strauss and Cook dominate Australia."

Then when I saw that it said Cook had reached his 50 in something like 80 balls and was setting the pace, I was sure I was still asleep.

Watching now and feeling hopeful for England, although until we see how they bowl, there's no way to tell if they are in good shape or not.

 

[EE94]

I've heard of the Ashes - my father is a huge cricket fan - but I had no idea why it was called that
I love that kind of stuff

 

[93Devil]

England finished day one of the 2009 Ashes series on 336-7 after Australia hit back with late wickets in Cardiff.

England were 90-3 before a 138-run stand between Kevin Pietersen (69) and Paul Collingwood (64) saw them recover.

Positive batting from Andrew Flintoff (37) and Matt Prior (56) sparked some life out of a generally quiet crowd.

But Peter Siddle ended their 86-run stand by bowling both inside the last four overs, leaving Australia with some momentum going into the second day.

Andrew Strauss's decision to bat first on winning the toss was expected, and he made a positive move in going with both spinners - it was the first time England had done so in a home Ashes Test since 1993.


Prior batted with great intent in the final session
The big surprise was Ricky Ponting's decision to leave out seamer Stuart Clark, the leading wicket-taker in the 2006-07 Ashes and man of the match in the final Test at Sydney.

Australia's four-man attack had just 35 Test caps between them, with none of them against England.

I have no idea what any of this means.

 

[RickStain]

Take a few minutes on wikipedia and learn. You won't be sorry

It's like baseball, but more strategic.

The rules and strategy aren't hard to understand at all, really. It's pretty straightforward: Runs (similar to baseball, but you get one per base), wickets (like an out in baseball) and time (or overs, which are just sets of six balls thrown) are all that matter.

The hardest part is learning the fielding positions. I've been watching faithfully for about two years now, and I still don't get them all without having to reference a chart like this one:

In the match, England have reached 300/3. It's a very crucial time now, they need to push on to a declaration, but there's still a chance they fall apart and have a very similar first innings to the first test, which to be fair seemed decent at the time.

 

[RickStain]

Proving that jinxes cross oceans, not 30 seconds after I posted the score update, Collingwood throws away his wicket. 302/4 and looking wobbly now.

 

[Sea Bass]

I thought this was about Frank McCourt being on death's door.

 

[GB-Hack]

Proving that jinxes cross oceans, not 30 seconds after I posted the score update, Collingwood throws away his wicket. 302/4 and looking wobbly now.

With the way things are going, Strauss may end up with a double-century, and run out of batting partners.

Mini-collapse to 364-6 after Flintoff and Broad go cheaply.

 

[RickStain]

I'm really learning to feel the angst that is being a fan of an English athletic team.

At 170-0, I was thinking "Man, they are going to put up a massive score, refuse to declare, then refuse to enforce the follow-on and blow it all in a stupid draw."

It never occurred to me that a few hours later I'd be worried about their total. What a waste of a fantastic opening partnership.

Not that it was all bad. They played nice and positive, four runs per over on the first day is nothing to sneeze at.

 

[RickStain]

Not quite ready to give up on this yet. Got to be a few other fans out there.

England with a fan-freaking-tastic day today. More wickets in less than a full day's bowling than they got in the entire first test.

As long as they aren't idiots and refuse to enforce the follow-on, they'll break their 75-year streak of not beating Australia at Lord's.

 

[deskslave]

The follow-on can be dangerous, because your bowlers will typically be tired, but England's have only been on for two sessions, and it was raining for part of the first one.

Unless Australia's tail-enders can pull something out of the hat tomorrow, I'd expect they will enforce it. If they can get them bowled out by tea on day four, they should be in good position to pick up the win.

And I'm sure if it gets to day 5 and England need, say, 50 to win that Ricky Ponting won't be rearranging his fielders every over.

 

[Inky_Wretch]

I just wish Setanta would air this. I know it's available on DirecTV's CricketTicket. But I'm not paying to watch it.

 

[deskslave]

Things that don't happen in most other sports:

The afternoon session began 10 minutes late to account for the fact that the players had been presented to the Queen

The BBC live text commentary had an ongoing discussion over what would happen if the Queen streaked during a rain delay, including whether her bodyguards would be required to protect her from the security guards.

It also included this:

"God save our gracious Queen/ Long live our noble Queen/ God save the Queen:/ Send her without her kit/ Over the mid-wicket/ Long it rains over us/ God save the queen.'"

 

[RickStain]

The follow-on can be dangerous, because your bowlers will typically be tired, but England's have only been on for two sessions, and it was raining for part of the first one.

I still think England can be too timid for that. You have to play positively if you want the win, and I'd have way more confidence in England to chase down a final-day total if need be than to try to squeeze out 10 quick wickets.

Especially since a draw in the series goes to Australia. England has to win eventually, and they just can't risk a draw after this start.

 

[RickStain]

"God save our gracious Queen/ Long live our noble Queen/ God save the Queen:/ Send her without her kit/ Over the mid-wicket/ Long it rains over us/ God save the queen.'"

Fan-****ing-tas-****ing-tic. That completely made my day.

 

[GB-Hack]

The follow-on can be dangerous, because your bowlers will typically be tired, but England's have only been on for two sessions, and it was raining for part of the first one.

I still think England can be too timid for that. You have to play positively if you want the win, and I'd have way more confidence in England to chase down a final-day total if need be than to try to squeeze out 10 quick wickets.

Especially since a draw in the series goes to Australia. England has to win eventually, and they just can't risk a draw after this start.

The feeling over there is that England will enforce the follow-on, since they have five bowlers at their disposal. What an amazing day, you don't expect that kind of collapse from the Australians.

 

[RickStain]

I'm glad to hear it.

I know it probaby makes me the equivalent of the newb fan at hockey games yelling "shooooot!" during the power play, or at basketball games yelling "three seconds!", but not enforcing the follow-on just seems nuts to me.

Unless your bowlers are just absolutely dog-tired, you are forcing yourself into a very difficult decision of when to declare, and giving your opponent a very easy decision on whether to chase or defend. I'd rather it be the other way around.

 

[GB-Hack]

I'm glad to hear it.

I know it probaby makes me the equivalent of the newb fan at hockey games yelling "shooooot!" during the power play, or at basketball games yelling "three seconds!", but not enforcing the follow-on just seems nuts to me.

Unless your bowlers are just absolutely dog-tired, you are forcing yourself into a very difficult decision of when to declare, and giving your opponent a very easy decision on whether to chase or defend. I'd rather it be the other way around.

That pretty much always was the way it was done, because a lot of teams would enter a game with five true batsmen, one all-rounder, four dedicated bowlers, and a wicket keeper.

Then a move took place where teams would just employ four bowlers, add an extra batsmen for six and the wicket keeper, making it more arduous for the quartet to hold up their end, especially when the second innings came around.

There were exceptions to that rule, with the West Indian pace quartet in the 70's and 80's of Joel Garner, Michael Holding, Andy Roberts and Colin Croft just devastating opposing line-ups with their ferocity.

That was the era when the helmet became a regular piece of equipment for batsmen, such was the danger players were in of serious injury (broken ribs, concussions) against those guys, and then again with Curtley Ambrose, Malcolm Marshall, Courtney Walsh and Patrick Patterson after them.

 

[deskslave]

Australia all out for 215 ... and England don't enforce the follow-on.

I'd say England need a lead of 450.

If they don't win, or if, God forbid, they lose, Strauss is going to be strung up.

 

[buckweaver]

Link to watch this live, desk?