Decent day for England, that pitch really was flat - although lets see how our blokes bat on it before being sure about that!
Broad was excellent, Monty decent but too many bad balls, Anderson persevered, Swann OK but not at his best and Stokes did OK.
If we can bowl them out for sub-450 we will have done well - the dropped catches could be the killer, imagine having them 270-7 with Clarke and Haddin out?
i think i heard them say in commentary that you get given two reviews at the start of each day (with a maximum of 2) so the late wasted review was nigh on a free one
No - it's two per ball but they aren't cumulative. So we only have one more for the next 70 0vers or so.
Cook and Prior looked like they were trying to persuade Broad that it wasn't worth appealing but Broad got his way. Once the decision was made you could see Cook swearing under his breath and Broad walking back with rather an embarrassed smile on his face.
They HAD to take that review, a wicket then would have been game changing and it looked so, so close.
Like the Panesar LBW of Rogers earlier it was very, very close.
I agree that it could have been crucial BUT it wasn't "so, so close".
It was missing the bails by a good three inches and even clipping the bails wouldn't have been enough. As stated on Sky the bounce isn't "fast" but "tennis ball" so the likelihood is that anything above the knee roll is going to bounce over.
Reviews are meant to be used for obviously wrong decisions and Broad has a nasty habit (because he is a "winner") of trying to get his way.
You could see that the other two decision makers (Cook and Prior) simply weren't convinced and in reviewing that one we are now in a situation where, we are under pressure not to review anything in the next 30 overs or so unless we think Stevie Wonder is umpiring!
like watching paint dry just not as enthralling .. England bowled well, pity about the dropped catches .. Panesar, who I would not have selected for the tour, was especially good .. Monty .. I take it all back !! ((:>)
They HAD to take that review, a wicket then would have been game changing and it looked so, so close.
Like the Panesar LBW of Rogers earlier it was very, very close.
I agree that it could have been crucial BUT it wasn't "so, so close".
It was missing the bails by a good three inches and even clipping the bails wouldn't have been enough. As stated on Sky the bounce isn't "fast" but "tennis ball" so the likelihood is that anything above the knee roll is going to bounce over.
Reviews are meant to be used for obviously wrong decisions and Broad has a nasty habit (because he is a "winner") of trying to get his way.
You could see that the other two decision makers (Cook and Prior) simply weren't convinced and in reviewing that one we are now in a situation where, we are under pressure not to review anything in the next 30 overs or so unless we think Stevie Wonder is umpiring!
True, it was going over the top but it was on the back foot and it did "look" out on first sighting.
Haddin is a real LBW candidate because he doesn't get forward very well, Broad set him up with the short ones and then pushed one up - it was great bowling.
On pitches like these with chances so rare you may as well use your reviews when they will be effective, no point using them once the opposition are 500-5.
Comments
@Ben Hayes: Cricket on TMS while sleeping gave me some very vivid Boycott-based dreams. #surreal
I didn't even think you liked cricket Ben?
273-5 at close.
Broad was excellent, Monty decent but too many bad balls, Anderson persevered, Swann OK but not at his best and Stokes did OK.
If we can bowl them out for sub-450 we will have done well - the dropped catches could be the killer, imagine having them 270-7 with Clarke and Haddin out?
Cook and Prior looked like they were trying to persuade Broad that it wasn't worth appealing but Broad got his way. Once the decision was made you could see Cook swearing under his breath and Broad walking back with rather an embarrassed smile on his face.
Like the Panesar LBW of Rogers earlier it was very, very close.
Let's try to keep them below 400 .
Might be an idea for England to really attack Lyon.
It was missing the bails by a good three inches and even clipping the bails wouldn't have been enough. As stated on Sky the bounce isn't "fast" but "tennis ball" so the likelihood is that anything above the knee roll is going to bounce over.
Reviews are meant to be used for obviously wrong decisions and Broad has a nasty habit (because he is a "winner") of trying to get his way.
You could see that the other two decision makers (Cook and Prior) simply weren't convinced and in reviewing that one we are now in a situation where, we are under pressure not to review anything in the next 30 overs or so unless we think Stevie Wonder is umpiring!
i wonder if they keep a table of bowlers who waste reviews , he'd be up there
Haddin is a real LBW candidate because he doesn't get forward very well, Broad set him up with the short ones and then pushed one up - it was great bowling.
On pitches like these with chances so rare you may as well use your reviews when they will be effective, no point using them once the opposition are 500-5.
Cook b Johnson 3
33-1
Trail by 537
*Turns Sky Sports off and backs away from thread*
Bat for next two days, get a lead of 150+, win by an innings and 4 runs.......