Ashes are done, now for the ODIs

[Ringo]

Just letting you know Dudge Australia bowled 89 overs today with England really doing all they could to slow the rate down.

[PowerBug]

Was a tough wicket early on, Australia gave them nothing all day. Also considering England have been completely outplayed this series, they are just trying to restore some pride, and batting for a long time will do that, even if it is really slowly. What happens now if Australia get rolled for 150 batting at 3.5 per over? Does England still look silly for batting slowly? I wouldn't think so, if anything Australia would for not watching how Pietersen batted. If Pietersen is batting slowly, and still around, then it must be a tough wicket.


Look, I don't want to stick up for England all the time, but they've been so poorly outplayed I think they have tried their hardest to just bat for as long as possible. I also agree that there looked like chances of turning the strike over mroe than they did, but that's cricket. We aren't the ones out there, these guys have to make a decision in 0.2 of a second and then apply that in the next 0.2 seconds for the whole day. It ain't easy. ;)

[tbagrocks]

Just letting you know Dudge Australia bowled 89 overs today with England really doing all they could to slow the rate down.

I would expect a fine for KP, haven't umpired officially and not sure on the ruling but, surely a fine for what was 5 odd minutes of bull sausage after being dropped? Then the next ball hit for four but then more holding up play again?

[JBs-Hawks]

Was a tough wicket early on, Australia gave them nothing all day. Also considering England have been completely outplayed this series, they are just trying to restore some pride, and batting for a long time will do that, even if it is really slowly. What happens now if Australia get rolled for 150 batting at 3.5 per over? Does England still look silly for batting slowly? I wouldn't think so, if anything Australia would for not watching how Pietersen batted. If Pietersen is batting slowly, and still around, then it must be a tough wicket.


Look, I don't want to stick up for England all the time, but they've been so poorly outplayed I think they have tried their hardest to just bat for as long as possible. I also agree that there looked like chances of turning the strike over mroe than they did, but that's cricket. We aren't the ones out there, these guys have to make a decision in 0.2 of a second and then apply that in the next 0.2 seconds for the whole day. It ain't easy. ;)

And what if Australia scored 500 at 5 an over? How is batting slowly restoring pride? Winning cricket will restore pride.

[PowerBug]

Was a tough wicket early on, Australia gave them nothing all day. Also considering England have been completely outplayed this series, they are just trying to restore some pride, and batting for a long time will do that, even if it is really slowly. What happens now if Australia get rolled for 150 batting at 3.5 per over? Does England still look silly for batting slowly? I wouldn't think so, if anything Australia would for not watching how Pietersen batted. If Pietersen is batting slowly, and still around, then it must be a tough wicket.


Look, I don't want to stick up for England all the time, but they've been so poorly outplayed I think they have tried their hardest to just bat for as long as possible. I also agree that there looked like chances of turning the strike over mroe than they did, but that's cricket. We aren't the ones out there, these guys have to make a decision in 0.2 of a second and then apply that in the next 0.2 seconds for the whole day. It ain't easy. ;)

And what if Australia scored 500 at 5 an over? How is batting slowly restoring pride? Winning cricket will restore pride.

If they do that, then it'll show the difference between the two teams this summer, which everyone can agree, is huge. So you are telling me that you can't win by batting slowly, what silly logic. You can win batting slowly, it's jsut that everyone expects quicker run rates as the game is evolving into the shorter formats where teams go hitting more. There will always be the odd slow test here and there, this might be one of them.

[JBs-Hawks]

Was a tough wicket early on, Australia gave them nothing all day. Also considering England have been completely outplayed this series, they are just trying to restore some pride, and batting for a long time will do that, even if it is really slowly. What happens now if Australia get rolled for 150 batting at 3.5 per over? Does England still look silly for batting slowly? I wouldn't think so, if anything Australia would for not watching how Pietersen batted. If Pietersen is batting slowly, and still around, then it must be a tough wicket.


Look, I don't want to stick up for England all the time, but they've been so poorly outplayed I think they have tried their hardest to just bat for as long as possible. I also agree that there looked like chances of turning the strike over mroe than they did, but that's cricket. We aren't the ones out there, these guys have to make a decision in 0.2 of a second and then apply that in the next 0.2 seconds for the whole day. It ain't easy. ;)

And what if Australia scored 500 at 5 an over? How is batting slowly restoring pride? Winning cricket will restore pride.

If they do that, then it'll show the difference between the two teams this summer, which everyone can agree, is huge. So you are telling me that you can't win by batting slowly, what silly logic. You can win batting slowly, it's jsut that everyone expects quicker run rates as the game is evolving into the shorter formats where teams go hitting more. There will always be the odd slow test here and there, this might be one of them.

Ok so all the commentators opinions mean nothing, even Ian Botham just condemned their slow batting. But no PB the ultimate expert says its ok.

[PowerBug]

Was a tough wicket early on, Australia gave them nothing all day. Also considering England have been completely outplayed this series, they are just trying to restore some pride, and batting for a long time will do that, even if it is really slowly. What happens now if Australia get rolled for 150 batting at 3.5 per over? Does England still look silly for batting slowly? I wouldn't think so, if anything Australia would for not watching how Pietersen batted. If Pietersen is batting slowly, and still around, then it must be a tough wicket.


Look, I don't want to stick up for England all the time, but they've been so poorly outplayed I think they have tried their hardest to just bat for as long as possible. I also agree that there looked like chances of turning the strike over mroe than they did, but that's cricket. We aren't the ones out there, these guys have to make a decision in 0.2 of a second and then apply that in the next 0.2 seconds for the whole day. It ain't easy. ;)

And what if Australia scored 500 at 5 an over? How is batting slowly restoring pride? Winning cricket will restore pride.

If they do that, then it'll show the difference between the two teams this summer, which everyone can agree, is huge. So you are telling me that you can't win by batting slowly, what silly logic. You can win batting slowly, it's jsut that everyone expects quicker run rates as the game is evolving into the shorter formats where teams go hitting more. There will always be the odd slow test here and there, this might be one of them.

Ok so all the commentators opinions mean nothing, even Ian Botham just condemned their slow batting. But no PB the ultimate expert says its ok.

They got slammed for throwing their wickets away, now they get slammed for batting too slowly? I don't get it to be honest. Let's wait for Australia to bat, also let's wait for the completion of the innings. And you need to stop twisting my words, I have mentioned a couple of times already I was hoping for them to score more, and it wasn't ideal. But they have been completely flowered up this series, so this is an improvement on the first three tests. Do you agree with that at least? They batted out a day and only lost 6 wickets, better than every other day this series.

[JBs-Hawks]

Same is every other day this series, one player has got runs and the rest block around til they get out.

[PowerBug]

Have you got anything other than one liners in your arsenal of insults? I would find a way to listen and try to believe things you say, but all you do is take the weakest part of every post I make and insult me about it. I'm really sick and tired of it your know.

England batsmen valued their wickets today, they haven't so far this series.

[JBs-Hawks]

There was hardly an insult there?

Look at most of their innings one batsmen has done well whilst the rest have gotten out cheaply after getting bogged down.

Pieterson today, Stokes in Perth, Root in second innings of Adelaide and Bell in first innings of Adelaide.

[tbagrocks]

England just aren't good enough on these pitches against top bowling

Besides, they have batted slowly for 150 years, why change now ???

[Nails]

Slow batting doesn't win tests PB, it gets you draws

At this rate if England can hold onto their bat slow tactic without getting bowled out they'll be 9/440 at stumps declared tomorrow.

You aren't going to bowl Australia out for under 440 within 3 days. Australia will most likely score 240+ at least and then England need 2 bat 1 more day to get a 400 run lead then they have like 10 minutes to bowl Australia out

It's flowering retarded what they're doing. There's batting slow and batting like spuds. There was plenty of opportunity for them to LIFT the run rate without increasing risk of dismissal.

[Justin Bieber]

Batting under 3 an over in test match cricket is a disgrace.

England need to learn how to bat.

[Bill Manspeaker]

great start Mitchy.

spewin Broad didn't bat yesterday... imagine the massive boooooo  :o

[tbagrocks]

Batting under 3 an over in test match cricket is a disgrace.

England need to learn how to bat.

No. You kids are just used to slap and giggle cricket

Mitchy is fired up but so was KP, so it ends, bye KP :P