Shame the West Indies didn't win this one, because test cricket would have been richer for it. Still, the result was encouraging enough, and hopefully some decent crowds will show up at Antigua on friday.

Cannot believe Symonds was not made man of the match this game, because his contributions (under pressure) in dificult conditions were the difference between victory and defeat. If Symonds had been bottled out for under 10 instead of that 79* in the second innings, W.I would probably have won that test before the tea break


What a player - Symonds continues to make his former critics (Rachel?? )eat their words, that's for sure....

__________________
The thought police are everywhere..............

Really? Has he suddely learnt to play the ball late? Has he suddenly discovered the footwork needed to play the swivel pull? Has he suddenly found the touch to even get close to the masterful batting display that Strauss and Vaughan put on today?

Seems to me that he's more like McCullum: great eye, natural athelete... but a manufactured batsman who's never, ever, going to be worthy of comparison with David Gower, Mark Waugh, Jayawardene and the like.

I don't dispute that such players can become effective... but it's to cricket's detriment as a sport that they can be manufactured into players who can hold their own.

Honestly Rachael what twaddle !

If I offered the English supporters a one off trade Symonds for Vaughan right now, they would have Vaughan's bag's packed and his bum in the seat of an Airbus heading our way within 3-4 hours.

"Twaddle" is right!

Rachael, what makes a manufactured batsman? Is it not batting according to the classical style as practised by Gower, Waugh etc? Or is it just a batsman who doesn't play according to his natural style? Symonds plays according to his natural style. He's probably been batting that way since he was in shorts. If that is the case, then how can he be considered a manufactured batsman, just because you, personally, don't like his style?

These are questions that require more than "Watch Vaughan and Jayawardene bat" as an answer.

The difference between Jayawardene and Sangakkara sums up the difference. Sure, there's little between the two in effectiveness. The difference is that Jayawardene has always had that natural "feel" for the ball: he was capable of playing with remarkable delicacy and subtlety even as a teenager... and has always had the artistry to play late, adjust to lateral movement, use the pace on the ball and so on - where Sangakkara started out with little more than a good eye for the ball that allowed him to open his shoulders and hit through the line... with the rest coming from discipine and hard work in the nets.

Not that Symonds is a patch on Sangakkara: he's just a bully in the mould of McCullum -and of all the international sportmen I've seen in recent times I'd say he reminds me most of Andy "I can belt it" Roddick.Any who did would be most misguided: now he's finally playing without the dodgy knee that plagued him in the middle of his career (including throughout the 2005 Ashes) he's a class above the likes of Hayden and Hussey, let alone Symonds!

For pity's sake... Symonds can't even play a grown up swivel pull (or even get convincingly onto the back foot to pick the ball off the stumps)... and despite Symonds being a front foot player... he's not even able to get close to Vaughan on the cover drive - he manages by going hard at the ball and opening his shoulders... but he ain't got the footwork, balance or ability to make anything like as much use as Vaughan of the pace on the ball.

No Rachael, he's learnt to score runs at test level when the team need it and as a result directly affect the outcome of the game (unlike your beloved Ian Bell). His importance in one day cricket (ever since he scored his marvellous big hundred against Pakistan in the 93 world cup) is now being echoed in the longer version of the game.

It is typical that you post a thread talking up Ponting's ability over the lesser players in the Australian side (because he scored runs on this challenging pitch) but ignored the fact that Symonds also scored well. I actually watched Symonds' innings, you did not - but it doesn't stop you criticising.

Put it to the sword Rachael

Start a poll on the English board.

Empty rhetoric about as productive as a tentative Michael Vaughan prod is to a ball that Symonds would have despatched for six.

Got a new nick-name for your beloved English skipper.

"Captain Hand Brake" while the rest of the team is trying to move forward, he keeps pulling it on

How important is it that a batsman has a classical, Vaughan-like technique? Symonds may open his shoulders a lot, but that doesn't mean that he doesn't have just as much raw natural ability as Vaughan does, and it doesn't mean he's a "manufactured" batsman- not if that's his natural style. If he was naturally an unorthodox batsman who learned to play the swivel-pull and cover-drive the way Hammond did, would that make him a manufactured batsman, and would this then be acceptable? Because if so, then it would seem that all that's really important to you is how the batsman looks, rather than how well he does- a bit like betting all your money on the horse with the shiniest coat.

Exceptional win by the Australian's taking into consideration there was 4 forced player changes from their most recent test, including requiring a non-regular opener to come in at short notice.

Even when the Windies kicked back bowling out the Aussies cheaply in their 2nd innings, our 3 seamers and 1 spinner were able to rebound and get the Windies out for under 200.

My thoughts on the Windies after not seeing them for a while

Batting.....Has dropped off, but they had Lara last time I saw them play us in a test so that is understandable.

Bowling....Great improvement, Edwards looks like the real deal and Powell looks like good support. Showing signs that they may emerge back into something like the 70's/80's golden era pace attack that served them so well.

Hopefully in the shadows of last years World Cup interest in cricket is back up in the Carribean, and we see some young talent coming through.

My prognosis, if the Windies can find about 3 good batsmen (or if 3 current ones step it up a notch) they can jump ahead of England, Pakistan and Sri Lanka in the world pecking order.

Not Lara or Richards superstar types, just good ones like Richardson, Lloyd, Rowe, Haynes, Greenidge, Fredricks, etc

Strauss is getting plaudits for recording a century under immense pressure without once trying to bludgeon the ball. He's not classical... and certainly cannot caress an on drive or cover drive in the manner of Vaughan... but at least he can accumulate runs through late dabs into gaps rather than by opening his shoulders.

I don't mind whether batsmen excel in the classical manner of Vaughan, off the back foot like Strauss or in quite quirky fashion like Chanderpaul or Kirsten: so long as they do it without opening their shoulders and flaying the ball I really don't mind!