The Ashes 2006/07: The Perth Test Thread - Days Four And Five

[south beds mikey]

Yep. Clarke the pick of the seamers again today. Bowled well without much luck.

[Seamer]

What a difference those two late wickets made. Australia was/is starting to wane and losing the test looked a possibility. At the end of yesterday's play i gave England 20% chance of winning. Now maybe 2% and only because while Petersen is there anything is possible.
Great innings by Cook. Gutsy effort under pressure, well deserved,though he would be extremely upset at getting out so close to the end.

[Trescothick]

Why do we send in Hoggard as nightwatchman?? I think G O Jones would do that role very effectively.. Prior to this test he has never had a duck so he is clearly talented at being able to survive the first 10-15 balls and he wouldn't feel the need to go for a rash shot as he always seems to do...

Ah well, Good day but not enough

[KennyG]

They put Hoggard in because he has one good shot.
The forward defence.(usually)

If Jones had came in he would have gone also so it lucky for the poms they put in Hoggy.

That was a very good day of test cricket today.
England batting consistantly and patiantly making our bowlers work hard.
Our bowlers and fielders were nice and tight also.

And to top it off the old boy came in late and tipped the odds back more our way.

[Collyisamackem]

For once we didn't deserve that, but McGrath clearly has a few performances left in him. Cook was brilliant and so was Bell, but Fred should have been a man and came out when Cook went - in situations like that a captain needs to inspire people and be brave, as Fred is supposed to be when he is touted as a great captain, and he hid behind Hoggy - what was Hoggy supposed to do against McGrath? Fred had better bat all day tomorrow really, along with KP who looks like he really could once he gets through the first half hour.

[first change]

Originally Posted by Collyisamackem

Fred should have been a man and came out when Cook went

Absolutely right. Thing is, losing Cook would have been a blow. Losing another wicket put Aus within touching distance - even if it was only Hoggard. When a nightwatchman is necessary (very rarely in my book) I would always prefer someone who a t least had some ability with the bat the next morning. How often has Hoggy hung around for an hour in the morning for one or two, stalling England's progress in the process? I would have prefered Mahmood or Monty, but Flintoff should have come out - why expect bowlers to do a job the batsmen don't want to?

[Collyisamackem]

I don't believe in nightwatchmen any more, it's often an excuse for captains/batsmen to be lazy and send some fodder to block a few balls, not realising that there's an initiative to be taken the next morning! Hoggy is much better frustrating people at the tail end of an innings when the fielding team think they're home and hosed - how many times did Hoggy and Giles/Harmison wind up the South Africans, West Indians and Aussies over the last few years like that? I recall a number of occasions, especially against the South Africans, where Hoggy held up an end against a very tired Ntini, Nel and Pollock whilst the other two slogged key runs. I don't recall many occasions where he has done much overnight!!!

[first change]

absolutely, good point.


Time to pray for rain ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/5day.shtml?world=3077/

Sadly, I don't care that its unsporting and wrong. Either that or GoJo saves his career by batting for five hours and doesn't look much like Fred will be hanging around.

[KennyG]

Just like a British weather report to forecast rain.
Sorry to tell you poms,but it hasn't rained here for ten years.

[Mike]

Can someone please explain why a nightwatchman who is supposed to do a blocking role has a batting stance with the bat held in a high backlift position? The reason Hoggard got out was that he was late in bringing the bat down to a fullish delivery by McGrath. Surely, a blocker would keep the bat down somewhere near his pads so only short movements were needed.