The Ashes First Test Lords Thursday 21st July..Day 2.

[Ernest]

Well Aussie had the better of day one, despite some good aggresive bowling from England, the pitch was poor, I think, the Aussies read that, hit out and rode their luck, fair play.

Pietersen and the tail, could get us near that not so large 190, then it's game on again.

Post here please for the second day comments.

[Bring back Merv]

Mc Grath and Lee to knock over the last couple of wickets in half an hour. Australia to then bat for the next two days for a lead of 550 giving the bowlers plenty of time to wrap up the test.

You just have to love Australia.

[Aussie-Yank]

Well day 2 should be fun.

By the way, for all the people who thought pieterson played McGarth well - Of the 69 balls he faced, only 13 of them where from McGrath for a total amount of runs of 1.

Most of his 29 runs came from Dizzy - 18 runs.

So unless Australia opens the bowling with Dizzy tomorrow I can not see England getting much closer to Australia's total - unless of course they decide to chance there hand against Lee and McGrath with an old ball.

[Bring back Merv]

Can see a big hundred for Langer. He loves Lords and will be out to perform after the first innings.

[Seamer]

Originally Posted by Aussie-Yank

By the way, for all the people who thought pieterson played McGarth well - Of the 69 balls he faced, only 13 of them where from McGrath for a total amount of runs of 1..

Yes if the ball is short of a length outside off, Petersen is incapable of doing anything but leaving it. If one jags back on him - LBW. Warne will sort him out if McGrath does'nt get him. Was a diciplined performance by him though.

[Victor Frankenstein]

I'm desperately hoping that hoggard, jones and harmison can hang around and support KP and push the score on to within 30 or 40 runs of the aussie total, at least then it wouldn't be a complete disaster. However, realistically, with an scuffed up ball starting to reverse swing at 90mph+ from Lee, I can see him picking up the last few wickets with mcgrath for probably less than 10 extra runs, England 102 all out.

I think it was basically a case of lack of experience and tactics on show from our bowling attack, i'm not sure the batsmen can take much blame as the pitch showed it should really only be about 120 as a par score, we let australia get 70 runs too many, it looked like a stunning bowling performance by us, but on reflection of both innings it turns out it was actually just average, the only positive being that we did get them out at least.

I actually think England should bowl Ian Bell if the wicket stays like it was yesterday, he's actually a pretty accurate bowler and the pitch has shown that it doesn't really need pace, it needs accuracy.

I thought Vaughan, Bell, Flintoff and Giles got themselves out and let the team down badly, you can complain about the pitch but they were in the wrong place to play those shots so only have themselves to blame, and giles getting out hitting his own wicket is just shameful given our situation.

It's not over yet though, whilst pieterson is in there is hope, hoggard is a decent enough tailender for holding an end up whilst the batsman rotates the strike and scores (well, he is against other bowling attacks, obviously against mcgrath and lee it might be different), jones and harmison are capable of swinging for it and getting a number of runs too. If it was me i'd see how the pitch is reacting first up, if it's gone back to being a flat pitch then bat properly, if it's still two paced then just go for it, if you hole out in the deep or miscue a hook who cares, you'd be out lbw next ball anyway so what's the point in waiting?

Being an English pitch I actually agree with Seamer on the other thread, it should have all the life drained out of it and become a flat track, i can see the aussies bowling us out quickly then batting till lunch without losing a wicket, accelerating after tea and setting up a total tomorrow, what's important now is how our batsmen put the first innings behind them.

[greg]

If we get 120 i will be amazed.

[DaveGillespie]

If England are to have any chance, Pietersen must score at least a further 40 runs with the tail and Mr. E X Tras contributing maybe 25-30. I can't see England getting out of this particular hole unless the pitch turns into a featherbed this morning, which it probably won't.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Victor Frankenstein

it looked like a stunning bowling performance by us, but on reflection of both innings it turns out it was actually just average, the only positive being that we did get them out at least.

Stick with your first judgement: it WAS a good bowling performance. A few too many loose deliveries.. but given that the Aussies were clearly not coping very well... it was one of the few times in Test cricket that such things didn't really matter: would have been an average performance if Langer and co had buckled down and started building a big total... but it was entirely right given the way they were capitulating.

Originally Posted by Victor Frankenstein

I think it was basically a case of lack of experience and tactics on show from our bowling attack, i'm not sure the batsmen can take much blame as the pitch showed it should really only be about 120 as a par score, we let australia get 70 runs too many

I'm quite sure that pitch is good for 300. Langer batted OK on it, as did Katich... and if you take McGrath out of the equasion... all the English batsmen did OK on it (Gillespie didn't thrive, did he?). It's not the pitch that made Tresco try and clip a ball through midwicket (stupidest dismissal of the day). It wasn't the pitch that made Vaughan go back and look to give himself room to a pitched up delivery. It was brain failure not the pitch that had G O Jones hooking with England needing him to bat for the close of play.

Langer was out to a slog.. as was katich. Gilchrist didn't move his feet and swished with his bat so far from his body you could have got a bowler (or 8 balls side by side) through the gap. THAT was the story of the day: a complete lack of application.

Sure, the ball's doing stuff... but on days 4 and 5 of ANY Test match you enxpect Test batsmen to cope with that. Why shouldn't they cope just because it's day one

ps. Why worry about the 1st innings total? worst case scenario is that Australia start the second innings with <100 advantage. I'm damn sure most punters would have taken that before the start of play. If the Aussies bat no better in the second innings than they did in the first the game's going to be there for the taking.

Just not if the batsmen play like schoolkids.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Victor Frankenstein

I actually think England should bowl Ian Bell if the wicket stays like it was yesterday, he's actually a pretty accurate bowler and the pitch has shown that it doesn't really need pace, it needs accuracy.

I thought Vaughan, Bell, Flintoff and Giles got themselves out and let the team down badly, you can complain about the pitch but they were in the wrong place to play those shots so only have themselves to blame, and giles getting out hitting his own wicket is just shameful given our situation.

Ok that's a reasonably terrifying point regarding Ian Bell's bowling. Matthew Hoggard is presumably pretty accurate, otherwise why the hell would he be in the side - not because he's an English conditions swing bowler, as eight overs for forty proved.

But that said, if Hoggard is yer-achul accurate seamer who gets biffed through mid-wicket because he's too darn slow, then what would happen to Ian Bell.

I did think Flintoff's ball kept a bit low. I'm not sure you can exactly blame Bell for the ball that he got, it's not as though he under-edged a poorly judged cut onto his stumps... you might say he was a little crease bound I suppose, but it was only as good as the ball that removed Matty Hayden.

I have the terrible feeling that now that the "Legend of Michael Vaughan" is truly forgotten, he's going to be the sort of captain (Hussain-like) who always gets out to deliveries that do unspeakably unpleasant things: "Wow did you see how low that one was?" Vaughan stands aghast with his heels together, toes pointing outwards (as he does in the field) bent in half with his arms outstretched and his bat horizontal and inches off the deck. "I couldn't have got to that one if I'd been a couple of inches high."

Giles' dismissal was absolutely appalling. I wonder what his best mate thought of that.
Ahh but in the "Legend of Michael Vaughan" Ashley Giles has magical powers, so doubtless no argument ensured between the pair that Nasser Hussain referred to as "the lovers."

"Now Ashley, it's the last ball of the day... it'd be frightfully useful - all things considered - if you were still in at the drawing of stumps. It's Brett Lee, he's probably going to bowl fast at you... 'cos that's what he does. If it's short, stay where you are and duck. If it's straight, remember Angus Fraser and Robert Croft v. South Africa, and defend like hell. If it's off-line, then leave it, the hell, alone.

"Ashley, Ashley, what have you done?"

It's like a line from Psycho.