Nat West Challege Match 2nd of 3 at LORDS!!!!

Bat-PadTogether · #1 July 10, 2005, 10:02 AM

England made 222/3 in 50 overs.Lee took 5/40
Australia Currently 73/1 in the 16th over!Any live Video Feed??

Bat-PadTogether · #2 July 10, 2005, 10:29 AM

96/2 after 20 overs!!

Akib · #3 July 10, 2005, 11:52 AM

England 223/8 (50 ov)
Australia 206/2 (40.3 ov)

Ponting at 103 not out.

Bat-PadTogether · #4 July 10, 2005, 11:52 AM

Aus needs 18 to win!Ponting got his much awaited century!

TheWatcher · #5 July 10, 2005, 12:30 PM

So, Australia saved some grace in this match. Looks like whoever wins the toss wins the match.

Rob · #6 July 10, 2005, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheWatcher
So, Australia saved some grace in this match. Looks like whoever wins the toss wins the match.

Thats the problem with the sub rule. I don't like it at all. You either name for sub after the toss or not at all, the idea of naming your sub before the toss just means that whoever wins the toss has a definate advantage.

I have yet to see what subs and Powerplays have added to the game.

Anyway, no sour grapes - England were outplayed today. Our top order was again dismissed tamely, it was very disapointing from my point of view, after the early collapse though I was happyish with the way we batted. We rebuilt the innings nicely, Flintoff was superb (he played a straight drive and pulled six of Gillespie that left we stunned!!) but the dismissal of Collingwood was key, because it meant we had new batsman trying to slog from ball one, their was too much pressure on Freddie. Collys dismissal cost England about 30-40 runs I thought.

The way England bowled was even more disapointing. Please can we drop Gough now, he is over the hill and just not threatening, we rely too much on Freddie and Harmys bowling - if they have an average day like they did today, then England are screwed, we just are not getting early wickets.

What annoyed me more than anything was that we needed wickets to win that game, and after 11 overs we had Giles and Collingwood bowling with no close catchers, it was as if we gave up because Australia got a good start.

Anyway, these are two evenly matched sides and I look forward to Tuesday with confidence England can bounce back.

TheWatcher · #7 July 10, 2005, 02:37 PM

England lost the toss and were sent to bat first, so they could not use their supersub Solanki, because if they have done it, they would be one bowler short in the second innings. So, basically, if you loose the toss, you loose your supersub. Toss here has become too important which it should not be.

Instead of restricting the substitution to 12th man, ICC should change their rules that anyone from 12th to 15th of the squad can be used as that one substitute during the game. The Toss will be still important, but loosing side can make a better use of substitution by bringing in one extra bowler or an extraordinary fielder, this way it will be little fairer.

Edited on, July 10, 2005, 8:14 PM GMT, by TheWatcher.