4th Test Old Trafford 19th July

Nothing is ever "guaranteed" in cricket. But England will probably not win the series and it will largely be because of their crazy selection policy of pig headedly picking underperforming players: Bairstow, Moeen, Crawley (has improved slightly) and I'm afraid Anderson. There should be no room in sport for sentimentality or it seems a pick my mates policy . We still have no settled top 3, and have left out Foakes & Tounge. Robinson clearly can't play for 5 days and Moeen seems to pick and choose what he feels like. And why oh why Root is not told to move to 3 or in my view open, I fail to understand.
But the weather may well decide this series.

One of the weaknesses of central contracting is that it tends to militate against selecting on form or merit, in favour of picking on reputation or past glories, because the guys are already being paid the big bucks. It is a recipe for complacency and "cliques".

Totally agree re Root. I was rewatching the 1980s "Bodyline" mini-series this week, and I wondered what Douglas Jardine would have made of his star batsman Wally Hammond telling him where he would - or rather wouldn't - bat.

Looking at the Manchester weather on Saturday and Sunday, I struggle to see any other outcome than a draw.

Only consolation is that at least that will ensure a tied series is in play at the Oval, meaning I won't have paid in excess of £250 to attend Friday, Saturday and Monday for the pleasure of watching a dead rubber (although one could argue that with the Ashes unwinnable, it would be either way).

England’s toss decision virtually admitted they’re playing the weather; a draw’s no good to them so they simply had to bowl.

Apparently the Aussies would’ve inserted us.

RB wrote:England’s toss decision virtually admitted they’re playing the weather; a draw’s no good to them so they simply had to bowl.

Yes although maybe if they had batted first and got a big score and tried to bowl them out twice. Trouble is we don't have a bowler under 32 I believe, so not a viable option perhsps.
Wickets soon though or Head and Marsh could take the game away. They are packed with batsman for this scenario.

Chinaman wrote:

RB wrote:England’s toss decision virtually admitted they’re playing the weather; a draw’s no good to them so they simply had to bowl.

Yes although maybe if they had batted first and got a big score and tried to bowl them out twice.

But you need a first innings lead of minimum 200 to follow on and do that. Batting second, even a lead of 150 and you could still win by an innings.

Looks like England could level this weather permitting. Australia missed a trick yesterday on a pretty good track as no one went on to make a ton. But you never know and I'll give Crawley his due as he seems at last to be developing into a very good opener. It's Ducket I'm not sure about.

Granted, England probably wouldn't be scoring at this rate were it not for the weekend forecast, but if there were three clear days ahead one would think this would be in the bag now.

While I don't want England to declare too early and squander their advantage, it looks as though there will be at most 50-60 overs of play tomorrow, and then Sat/Sun will be washed out.

Fantastic performance by Crawley and England.

One thing I note though: just 163 overs have been bowled (rounding up for the end of an innings). In comparison, there have been 192 overs (again rounding up) in the Middlesex vs. Surrey match.

A few hats being eaten as a result of Crawley's demolition job. Credit to Moeen as well for giving England the base from which to launch. He knows as well as we do that he should not be batting number 3 but he did a good job today.

Duckett was the opener being lauded not that long ago. Both Crawley and Duckett are going to fail more often than yer average opener so I don't really see any more doubts about Duckett (or fewer about Crawley) than a fortnight ago.

Interesting and rather good that there has only been 10 comments on this T20 type "test". As it should be most are mainly interested in Surrey. But you know whatever your view on this type of crash, bang, wallop Test cricket, with it all over in six weeks, you can't savour a proper Ashes series played in this way.

Chinaman wrote:Interesting and rather good that there has only been 10 comments on this T20 type "test". As it should be most are mainly interested in Surrey. But you know whatever your view on this type of crash, bang, wallop Test  cricket, with it all over in six weeks, you can't savour a proper Ashes series played in this way.

Oh do people ever stop whingeing?

We score 592, our highest score at home vs Australia since 1985, and have completely battered them, and you’re STILL whingeing!?!?

Us old gits like having a moan! Just switched on,very unlikely there will be any play.In the studio are Sangakkara & Dinesh Khartik.What on earth have they got to do with Eng v Aus? I was at The Oval in 1985 when we beat the Aussies by an innings and plenty.Gooch 196,Gower 157.

RB wrote:

Chinaman wrote:Interesting and rather good that there has only been 10 comments on this T20 type "test". As it should be most are mainly interested in Surrey. But you know whatever your view on this type of crash, bang, wallop Test  cricket, with it all over in six weeks, you can't savour a proper Ashes series played in this way.

Oh do people ever stop whingeing?

We score 592, our highest score at home vs Australia since 1985, and have completely battered them, and you’re STILL whingeing!?!?

I'm not whingeing. It's an opinion. Unfortunately these days a lot of people don't like others having a different view. Of course it's a good score, but these Tests have little of the ebbs and flows of Test cricket, in my view of course!

Surely the end of Anderson’s Test career,three tests this summer and only taken a few wickets . Very a wonderful bowler,but past his best now.

Time for some Joe Root,I think we need a partner ship breaker!

Has there ever been anyone who sprouts more complicated/mumbo jumbo/gobbledegook
than Mr Sangakkara?

Chinaman wrote:I'm not whingeing. It's an opinion. Unfortunately these days a lot of people don't like others having a different view. Of course it's a good score, but these Tests have little of the  ebbs and flows of Test cricket, in my view of course!

The ebb and flow in the first three matches was such that it could have been 3-0 either way. This one is different but one thing is certain - without England's approach on days 2-3 there would have been absolutely no chance of a positive result tomorrow.

Mmm. I think they batted on too long but we shall see. Just about every forecast says rain all day and there is even a flood alert. But they got 30 overs yesterday despite a similiar forecast, but it was Australia's day.

Chinaman wrote:Mmm. I think they batted on too long but we shall see. Just about every forecast says rain all day and there is even a flood alert. But they got 30 overs yesterday despite a similar forecast, but it was Australia's day.

Possibly but every run scored quickly then was another one the Australians have to score to avoid the innings defeat; without that last wicket partnership they might by now be 100 ahead. With a more traditional approach to Test cricket England might have just about got to 400 by close of play yesterday! Or more likely bowled out for much less by an attack which had not been demoralised.

"I love how England are acting like they are the only side to ever miss out on a test match win due to weather. You've had the best luck all series, better conditions, won ALL FOUR tosses plus you are automatically one game fresher because we're coming off the WTC final. So no a hollow victory this will not be. It sucks sure but hey, that's cricket. I think the main disappointment is not getting the decider the series clearly deserves."

All valid points from the Australians' perspective. There is no doubt that the ridiculous schedule has caught up with their bowlers, and with Pat Cummins (the best bowler on either side now that Jimmy is shot) in particular. You have to remember that most of these pace bowlers on both sides are well into their 30s and 5 tests in 6 weeks is pushing it. England have chosen - or been forced - to rotate their bowlers, and the likes of Tongue, Wood and Woakes have benefitted. The only one they haven't rotated is Broad, who looks like he is entering the "red zone". Hell, he couldn't even get Warner out!

Australia are world champions.Had they played all day yesterday and today did they really have no chance whatsoever of winning? I don't think so!

This schedule for an Ashes series is the work of lunatics. If you had 5 Tests in 7/8/9 weeks like we used to, at least it can give a bit of leeway in bad weather. But oh no the idiots at the ECB and ICC want their precious ****ing 100 in August with no interruptions for the Ashes, oh how awful. It's got nothing to do with the football season at all and we all know it.
In saying all that, it's no good all the plebs moaning about play all night (yes really), start at 8 am and add days on. If the situation was reversed they'd be saying " bring on the rain".
An exciting series, if not the best, on many fronts but ultimately ruined by the hit and giggle and shambolic scheduling.

Blame county cricket.