NPR

One brings two as they say. 158/8, Holder gone lbw.

174/9

181 all out. Holder and Shepherd put on more than I would have liked in the middle part of the innings but a very good effort.

Now, let’s keep the head and knock these runs off. Too many times I’ve seen Scotland get themselves out for 120 or something similar in these situations.

McBride chips a leg stump full toss straight to square leg first ball. FFS.

Right....England need a wicket so I am logging on to watch the game live.

Thor Sedan wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 10:59 am Right....England need a wicket so I am logging on to watch the game live.

You're welcome.

Anderson drops a sitter, Head on 0.

Smith goes next ball.

So Bairstow missed another much earlier, although not seeing it and from the text only, a looping over the head one to take going backwards, it wasn't an easy one

Collapse!

Are the Aussies as dumb for taking on the short ball as England were?

Any thoughts on injury subs in cricket? You wouldn’t want to end up with a situation where say a team could fiddle replacing a bowler with a batsman for a last innings run chase but not having subs at all seems harsh. Well no subs except fielders.

Biffer wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 11:55 am Are the Aussies as dumb for taking on the short ball as England were?

One wonders. First time they've had the easier conditions this Test and they appear hell bent on blowing it.

GogLais wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 12:06 pm Any thoughts on injury subs in cricket? You wouldn’t want to end up with a situation where say a team could fiddle replacing a bowler with a batsman for a last innings run chase but not having subs at all seems harsh. Well no subs except fielders.

It's been an issue forever. Neil Foster never spent any time in the field for Eng except when bowling his overs.

I can't see any way of restricting teams from having a Rhodes/Randall as sub to try and abuse the situation but I thought the batting side was allowed to object to where the sub fielded?

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 12:11 pm

GogLais wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 12:06 pm Any thoughts on injury subs in cricket? You wouldn’t want to end up with a situation where say a team could fiddle replacing a bowler with a batsman for a last innings run chase but not having subs at all seems harsh. Well no subs except fielders.

It's been an issue forever. Neil Foster never spent any time in the field for Eng except when bowling his overs.

I can't see any way of restricting teams from having a Rhodes/Randall as sub to try and abuse the situation but I thought the batting side was allowed to object to where the sub fielded?

That sounds familiar re sub fielder positioning. Perhaps you could have designated batsman/keeper/slow bowler/seam bowler subs and only substitute like for like. Or maybe injuries aren’t frequent enough to be worth the complications and possible abuse.

GogLais wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 12:20 pm

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 12:11 pm

GogLais wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 12:06 pm Any thoughts on injury subs in cricket? You wouldn’t want to end up with a situation where say a team could fiddle replacing a bowler with a batsman for a last innings run chase but not having subs at all seems harsh. Well no subs except fielders.

It's been an issue forever. Neil Foster never spent any time in the field for Eng except when bowling his overs.

I can't see any way of restricting teams from having a Rhodes/Randall as sub to try and abuse the situation but I thought the batting side was allowed to object to where the sub fielded?

That sounds familiar re sub fielder positioning. Perhaps you could have designated batsman/keeper/slow bowler/seam bowler subs and only substitute like for like. Or maybe injuries aren’t frequent enough to be worth the complications and possible abuse.

Cricket can't afford that kind of subs system: especially when it's not really (ab)used that often. Personally, I'd go with no subs. Sub can't bat or bowl anyway so why should fielding be an exception?

Scotland progressing nicely at 113/1, looks like the West Indies are not going to the World Cup.

Worth remembering that the only reason they went to the last World Cup was because of this absolutely shocking decision

Scots in full control and cruising.

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 12:53 pm Scots in full control and cruising.

Not watched Scotland play any kind of sport before then? We’re never in full control and can set ourselves on fire in a fucking heartbeat.

Meanwhile it's tense in the real cricket. It's very quiet from the Bazball cultist. Very quiet.......

Biffer wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 1:04 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 12:53 pm Scots in full control and cruising.

Not watched Scotland play any kind of sport before then? We’re never in full control and can set ourselves on fire in a fucking heartbeat.

Scores now level, so I’m reasonably confident we won’t fuck it up.

So the Prime Minister and two Prince of Wales, helicopter s, green lines, and hubris. At the moment still not good enough.....

Plus the two Kiwi commanders. Shameful....

Another gone to a dim shot off the short ball.

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:09 pm Another gone to a dim shot off the short ball.

Are you French?

Technique one way or another, by both teams, off the short ball has been pitiful. Another reminder of how, despite all it's big bats and bish-bosh variations, technique is much poorer than it once was.

Yes, standards are diminished.....

Deepsouth wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:21 pm Yes, standards are diminished.....

Fitness is much better.... as it is in any pro sport. And average fielding standards too: few cripples like Willis or Aloo these days.

Lloyd and Zaheer, both tall men, batted with glasses and no helmets. Lloyd against Lillee and Thommo. Zaheer had to face the Windies quartets too. No limits per over on chin music then. Take away the helmets and their Fred Flinstone clubs, most of these guys wouldn't last 2 minutes.

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:26 pm

Deepsouth wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:21 pm Yes, standards are diminished.....

Fitness is much better.... as it is in any pro sport. And average fielding standards too: few cripples like Willis or Aloo these days.

Lloyd and Zaheer, both tall men, batted with glasses and no helmets. Lloyd against Lillee and Thommo. Zaheer had to face the Windies quartets too. No limits per over on chin music then. Take away the helmets and their Fred Flinstone clubs, most of these guys wouldn't last 2 minutes.

It's test cricket, innit it.....

But now with limits. Not like Trumper on a green sticky one...

Well, Eng will now have to go past a certain CGG and Gomes' efforts to win this one now.

Deepsouth wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:37 pm But now with limits. Not like Trumper on a green sticky one...

A bit before my time but yes, a reputed legend on bogs.

Don't get Aus tactics. At least Eng were trying to score runs with their blaze of dismissals against the short pitched stuff but all Aus have been doing is effectively waiting to get out.

{EDIT}
3-187 (Usman Khawaja, 61.6 ov), 4-190 (Steven Smith, 62.4 ov), 5-197 (Travis Head, 67.3 ov), 6-239 (Cameron Green, 87.3 ov), 7-242 (Alex Carey, 89.1 ov), 8-261 (Pat Cummins, 95.2 ov), 9-264 (Josh Hazlewood, 96.4 ov)

7 for not much and questionable whether eating overs is of any real value.

GogLais wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 12:06 pm Any thoughts on injury subs in cricket? You wouldn’t want to end up with a situation where say a team could fiddle replacing a bowler with a batsman for a last innings run chase but not having subs at all seems harsh. Well no subs except fielders.

Actually, the issue of Lyons coming out injured reinforces what I was saying. No runners allowed for batsmen now so, again, why are sub fielders allowed?

Get the feeling an Ashes miracle is about to occur in England's favour.

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:48 pm

GogLais wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 12:06 pm Any thoughts on injury subs in cricket? You wouldn’t want to end up with a situation where say a team could fiddle replacing a bowler with a batsman for a last innings run chase but not having subs at all seems harsh. Well no subs except fielders.

Actually, the issue of Lyons coming out injured reinforces what I was saying. No runners allowed for batsmen now so, again, why are sub fielders allowed?

The corollary is if sub fielders are allowed then why not batsmen and bowlers? I’ve no idea.

Thor Sedan wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:51 pm Get the feeling an Ashes miracle is about to occur in England's favour.

Yes you would

GogLais wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:53 pm

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:48 pm

GogLais wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 12:06 pm Any thoughts on injury subs in cricket? You wouldn’t want to end up with a situation where say a team could fiddle replacing a bowler with a batsman for a last innings run chase but not having subs at all seems harsh. Well no subs except fielders.

Actually, the issue of Lyons coming out injured reinforces what I was saying. No runners allowed for batsmen now so, again, why are sub fielders allowed?

The corollary is if sub fielders are allowed then why not batsmen and bowlers? I’ve no idea.

Agreed. And it runs against the theme of pretty much everything else the authorities have done over the years to load the game in the batsman's favour.

Lyon is done for the series and so the commentators talking about protecting him is irrelevant.

Presumably Oz happy that Lyon isn’t going to damage himself further.

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:57 pm Lyon is done for the series and so the commentators talking about protecting him is irrelevant.

Ah, ok.