2nd Test.

[Pete McCluskey.]

Tim I heard that the English fans were lining up to pat the umpire's seeing eye dog after the game. Funny they go to the video when an English wicket is doubtful but the Aussie gets the shaft without the benefit of the replay.:sad:

From the Mail.
Departing star Flintoff (2-49) earlier inspired his teammates with a rousing performance even if he had a helping hand from Koertzen.
The South African somehow missed Flintoff clearly overstepping the mark on the delivery that claimed Katich's wicket prior to the more dramatic dismissal when Strauss claimed a dubious catch off Hughes.
Hughes edged a ball that Strauss claimed at first slip and the little left-hander initially stood his ground, then, having received confirmation from the English players, started to walk off the field.
But skipper Ricky Ponting told him to go back to his crease.
Koertzen checked with square leg umpire Doctrove about whether it had carried and the West Indian said it had.
Without asking for help from upstairs, which he has done with previous decisions this match, Koertzen lifted the finger.
Replays showed the ball touched the ground at the same time as Strauss tried to wrap his fingers under the ball.
To add to Australia's woes, Hussey caught at slip off a sharply-turning Graeme Swann (2-62) delivery that the batsman missed.
The sound of Hussey's bat hitting the ground must have convinced Doctrove.

Anyway it won't matter when we get the runs tonight.:thumbsup:

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

Here we go lads the last day of a fascinating Test Match. 209 runs required and five wickets down...From my point of view I hope the umpires regain their eye-site and Freddy's pain killing injections don't work.
BTW are not pain killers used like that performance enhancing drugs? O.K. that's for another time and place.
It has been a Great Game so far and if you Poms win I think it will be the first time at Lords since 1934.
Good Luck.

 

[Malcolm]

Pete, I agree you guys had some bum calls from the umpires this game. We've suffered from them in the past and it hurts as it can knock confidence from a team. But hey

WE WON!



this time.....

 

[David Morton]

Deep Joy..........epper:epper:epper:

 

[Jimmy P]

I checked the score and lo and behold England did it. I can't believe what I'm reading. 115 runs! Fast Freddie took some scalps also. His last hurrah since he's announced his retirement? Still a few Tests left lads. (See previous post about Englands history)

 

Cricket ???? Was there a game on somewhere??? ..............

(clenching teeth): well done Pommies.

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

A superb effort by England, first win at Lords for 30+ years. Well done lads.
I especially acknowledge the great contribution by man of the match R Koertzen who bagged three wickets for England....

Hmmm that sounds a bit like sour grapes..:lipsrsealed: Guess what, it is!

Aw well I will now humbly go and pay my gambling debts to the smirking Poms at work. What joy!

Bring on Birmingham

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

A superb effort by England, first win at Lords for 30+ years. Well done lads.

Err, it was actually 75 years the 30 came from 1934 the last time England won at Lords.
Once again well done.

 

[David Morton]

We knew Pete. We were just allowing you just a bit of self pity.
Not much but just a little. You obviously know how well England perform at Egbaston? I think it might be another drubbing.
Apparently there is an Australian Team bat for sale on Ebay.
Little used. :lipsrsealed: :shocked:
:lol::lol::lol:

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

Not only a team bat but a couple of bowlers and an unused trophy cabinet.:furious::cry::cry:

 

[Malcolm]

Trophy cabinet? Ashes? Can't be a very big cabinet

 

[Jimmy P]

I think Malcolm brings up an interesting point. In the land of "bigger is better" I think a lot of Americans/and others would be beside themselves with laughter if they saw what all this dialogue is about. Does anyone have a picture showing the actual Ashes trophy? Anyone who knows Cricket and has heard of the Ashes knows this is about a lot more than the trophy but it would certainly make for some interesting comments I would think.

 

[Keith]

Erm,

 

[David Morton]

I beg to differ. That is only the urn that the ashes are contained in.
What are the ashes from??

from wickepedia:
The series is named after a satirical obituary published in a British newspaper, The Sporting Times, in 1882 after a match at The Oval in which Australia beat England on an English ground for the first time. The obituary stated that English cricket had died, and the body will be cremated and the ashes taken to Australia. The English media dubbed the next English tour to Australia (1882–83) as the quest to regain The Ashes.
During that tour a small terracotta urn was presented to England captain Ivo Bligh by a group of Melbourne women. The contents of the urn are reputed to be the ashes of an item of cricket equipment, possibly a bail, ball or stump. Some Aborigines hold that The Ashes are those of King Cole, a cricketer who toured England in 1868.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-0>[1]</SUP> The Dowager Countess of Darnley claimed recently that her mother-in-law, Bligh's wife Florence Morphy, said that they were the remains of a lady's veil.
The urn is erroneously believed by some to be the trophy of the Ashes series, but it has never been formally adopted as such and Bligh always considered it to be a personal gift.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-1>[2]</SUP> Replicas of the urn are often held aloft by victorious teams as a symbol of their victory in an Ashes series, but the actual urn has never been presented or displayed as a trophy in this way. Whichever side holds the Ashes, the urn normally remains in the Marylebone Cricket Club Museum at Lord's since being presented to the MCC by Bligh's widow upon his death.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-2>[3]</SUP>

 

[Keith]

Anyway, I think the next test should be played under "Duxford Dingbat" Rules to make the game simpler for Johnny Foreigner to understand .. :blank:

 

[Garry]

Keith,
Whatever rule you play under, it will still be a crazy game to most of us yanks. I'm also sure that our american baseball is just as stupid to all of the cricketeers. The nuances escape the uninitiated in both sports.
Garry

 

[David Morton]

Yes - I think the rules (actually laws in the MCC) should be changed to the
afore mentioned Duxfords if only to avoid a draw. If there is anychance of a draw
then the light meter should be invoked as well and whenever the light is good enough play should be halted. The batsmen should not be allowed any privileges at all until the light has faded completely and then they will be only be allowed lamps on the helmets - much like the coal miners used.