Australia v England Second Test Adelaide

[1910]

Interested that you waited until the game was won to come in with your 'Told you so's'. If we are so stupid to be 'panicked' I'm surprised you weren't on here telling us that when the game was in the balance...

Yeah true I didn't comment on the England run chase but if I had I would've said what this guys said.

They'll be 4/86 at stumps tonight chasing 350.

If we enforced it the 215 lead could become a 150 chase under lights on day five. We have avoided a chase in difficult circumstances.

This way bowlers are rested, we will have two lights sessions and England will need a record to win. It creates scoreboard pressure.

England have never chased more than 332 to win a Test and haven't chased more than 250 to win in Australia since 1928.

Are they going to get 350 under lights against four quicks and Lyon?

I don't understand this.

Wouldn't mocking them and assuming you're going to get them out for under 215 be more disrespectful? How is saying we need more because you're a good batting side disrespectful.

Dravid and Laxman felt disrespected and mocked.

Apart from the lights it was identical. Margin in Kolkata- 285. Not too different from the 215 in Adelaide. I think it's very relevant if you're going to debate follow ons.

I agree completely. Too much emphasis and focus on these decisions and the toss. The WI won in Adelaide after bowling first and sent Australia in- because they played well after that.

West Indies won all over the world, sent in or batting first. Steve Waugh's team same- well not in India because they bowled badly after sending them back in and then batted badly.

If Australia bat better in the first innings and get another 100 they can enforce the follow on probably. if they bowl better Monday night they're not in this position. If they bat better when going back in England are chasing 450.

 

[roo-ted]

Now now boys we all go for the same team here I'm pretty sure, at the end of the day we won so let's all Be happy

 

[1910]

India might have something to say about that given they never play away from home anymore.

That's not true. Although it seems like it.

I only did Tests series since 2010.

Home: Australia, NZ, West Indies, New Zealand, England, Australia, West Indies, South Africa, New Zealand, England, Bangladesh, Australia and Sri Lanka.

Away: Sri Lanka, South Africa, West Indies, England, Australia, South Africa, NZ, England, Australia, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, West Indies, Sri Lanka.

In the next 12 months they go England, South Africa and us all away. Huge year for them.

They've had 7 series losses- 6 away 1 at home in that time, 16 series wins and three drawn series.

 

[Sproj]

That's not true. Although it seems like it.

I only did Tests series since 2010.

Home: Australia, NZ, West Indies, New Zealand, England, Australia, West Indies, South Africa, New Zealand, England, Bangladesh, Australia and Sri Lanka.

Away: Sri Lanka, South Africa, West Indies, England, Australia, South Africa, NZ, England, Australia, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, West Indies, Sri Lanka.

In the next 12 months they go England, South Africa and us all away. Huge year for them.

They've had 7 series losses- 6 away 1 at home in that time, 16 series wins and two drawn series.

Well in actual fact as well, they are one gun quick and replacing ISharma away from being nigh on unbeatable. They bat to 10, their top six are all guns with genuine all rounders in Ashwin and Jadeja at 8 and 9.

They are the opposite of Australia really -
India - gun bats and spinners, weak pace attack.

Australia - gun quicks and spinner + BradSmithman, weak batting order.

 

[Dexter]

Interested that you waited until the game was won to come in with your 'Told you so's'. If we are so stupid to be 'panicked' I'm surprised you weren't on here telling us that when the game was in the balance...

Yeah true I didn't comment on the England run chase but if I had I would've said what this guys said.