Cricket in the Playground

[JohnK]

Phychological advantage to England with 38 run first innings lead.

With 23 overs remaining a possible overall lead of 120 tonight. Another 120 runs before lunch tomorrow and it leaves Australia 240 to win in 60 overs. Clearly achievable. England cannot win and need to bat at least until tea tomorrow to ensure a realistic chance of a draw.

 

[simongr]

Not sure what the rationale is for australia to be 8-1 and england 23-1 - I dont think either outcome is likely. It could be an exciting day tomorrow but is likely to be tedious...

 

[JohnK]

Not sure what the rationale is for australia to be 8-1 and england 23-1 - I dont think either outcome is likely. It could be an exciting day tomorrow but is likely to be tedious...

I think those odds are just about right! The boookmakers also want your money so they make it enticing.

It is quite possible that England could be bowled out by lunchtime tomorrow with a lead of around 240. This would give Australia 60 overs to achieve the runs. Very achievable.

 

[simongr]

Hmm - lead for England was 50. Assuming that you expect Australia to need 240 to win, that assumes that ENgland are all out for 190. I just dont think based on this performance in this test that ENglad are three times as likely to be bowled out for 50 runs less than the aussies.

The odds are as well just a reflection of betting spreads as well. The bookmakers set them so that no matter the outcome, they make a profit. So everyone has bet on a draw and now they want people to put money on an aussie win - no aussie will bet on england to bowl out the aussies for 180 so the bookies wont make an england win attractive.

 

[JohnK]

Actually the lead was only 38! There is a remote possibility that England can be bowled out for 201 and leave Australia 60 overs to chase 240 runs to win. England is the one under pressure now to keep their wickets intact and avoid any batting collapses.

Agree that the most likely result is still a draw.

 

[simongr]

I guess comments like "Only australia can win this" on the baggy green website annoy me. Given that england bowled Oz out for less than england scores means that it doesnt have to be that OZ will score more in their second innings than england.

Just a touch of arrogance - but maybe I am over-sensitive to it

 

[JohnK]

Australians, journalists included, love to be arrogant when Australia is on top!

Just because England made a better score in the first innings does not guarantee that they won't collapse in the second innings. To be realistic England cannot win the test match now but can still lose it. If you know what I mean.

Many years ago Australia was set 117 to win against South Africa and was bowled out for 111 and lost by 5 runs. South Africa scored 169 and 239 whilst Australia scored 292 and 111. Australia had the highest score of the match yet still lost.

For the sake of competition I am hoping that it is a draw with the advantage and bonus points going to England.

 

[NM]

I guess comments like "Only australia can win this" on the baggy green website annoy me. Given that england bowled Oz out for less than england scores means that it doesnt have to be that OZ will score more in their second innings than england.

Just a touch of arrogance - but maybe I am over-sensitive to it

Its not just about who score more runs. The only way the game is likely to end in a result is for the team batting last to be given a target and to reach it. If Australia cannot bowl England out in their second innings for a low score, then the game will be drawn. There is not sufficient time remaining for England to post a large enough target to have enough time to get 10 Aussie wickets. So the chances of England winning are practically zero. However, if Australia was to be able to blwn England out for a low score (say a lead of 240 as was mentioned earlier) and Australia had a run chase and say 50-60 overs available, they could possibly win. But if they looked unlikely to make the target they just shut up shop and play for the draw knowing they remain 1-0 in the series.

So I don't think it is commentator arrogance, but just reality of the time remaining and the odd now favouring the team batting last. The same conclusion would be drawn if it was England to bat last.

But with England only one wicket down and now almost 100 in the lead, any result is unlikely. Freddy will not declare while the Aussies have any hope of making a run chase because he cannot afford to go down 2-0 in the series.

 

[simongr]

Ouch 73/4 Pietersen valid - sadly bell didnt hit the ball ...

 

[JohnK]

Oh oh!

Someone is under pressure! A lead of 240 is looking good right about now.

 

[JohnK]

Flintoff gone!

England 5/77 now.

 

[NM]

Game On! :shock:

 

[simongr]

Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. If only Panesar had played - we might have gotten the Ozzies out for a little less :'(

 

[NM]

Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. If only Panesar had played - we might have gotten the Ozzies out for a little less :'(

Or if only Giles had held the catch, or if only the weather had been different, or ...

 

[SF&]

Or if only Giles had held the catch, or if only the weather had been different, or ...

a lot of what if's but is going to be a long lunch for the poms

 

[JohnK]

If only England had not declared at 6 wickets down....

 

[SF&]

england have the speed wobbles up

is there enough time for an aussie win?

 

[JohnK]

Enough time for Australia to win....

Can England survive?

 

[simongr]

Not at 95/6 - sheesh

 

[kpc]

Enough time for Australia to win....

Can England survive?

Not at 95/6 - sheesh

now it is 7/97:shock: ...the Q is can the Aussies chase it down without losing 10 wickets