The Ashes 2013

[David Robertson]

Things we know to be true about Ian Bell

* he can't score runs under pressure
* he only scores 100 when everyone else has scored a ton
* of his 18 tons, the vast majority have been scored against Bangladesh or Zimbabwe
* of his 6000 Test runs, 5346 have been scored in dead 'rubbers', usually against Bangladesh or Zimbabwe

In short, he just isn't good enough. Time to drop him, and bring back Owais Shah/Rob Key/Sami Patel or anyone who can actually bat!

[Andrew Bak]

Things we know to be true about Ian Bell

* he can't score runs under pressure
* he only scores 100 when everyone else has scored a ton
* of his 18 tons, the vast majority have been scored against Bangladesh or Zimbabwe
* of his 6000 Test runs, 5346 have been scored in dead 'rubbers', usually against Bangladesh or Zimbabwe

In short, he just isn't good enough. Time to drop him, and bring back Owais Shah/Rob Key/Sami Patel or anyone who can actually bat!

Sadly satire doesn't have quite the same impact on a forum compared to a real life conversation...

[David Robertson]

You may be right. Although much of the time, this entire Forum resembles a satire on a real conversation

[Mick Norris]

I don't think anyone has doubted Bell's talent, the doubts have been about his mental strength, but he has answered all of those now

Although he may have acquired a vulnerability when he's on 109

[Andrew Bak]

You may be right. Although much of the time, this entire Forum resembles a satire on a real conversation

I wouldn't disagree with that!

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Lucky Bairstow!"

I think you're lucky if you are given not out when you're out. He wasn't out as the ball was illegal, as the bowler was practically standing on Bairstow's foot when he delivered the ball. That may be an exaggeration. Meanwhile, oop north, a Yorkshire opener makes runs...

[Ben Purton]

England continue to be useless at getting over 300. This was an extreme batting wicket

We might get 320 if we play ok this morning.

[Sean Hewitt]

England continue to be useless at getting over 300. This was an extreme batting wicket

We might get 320 if we play ok this morning.

342/9 currently.

[Phil Neatherway]

Good to get a wicket just before lunch. How do the Bresnan critics account for that?

[Ian Kingston]

Australia still not getting the hang of DRS:

• Watson given out LBW, reviewed, decision upheld
• Rogers given out LBW, not reviewed, replay showed ball missing leg stump
• Hughes given out caught behind, reviewed, decision upheld

No more reviews left!

[Alex Holowczak]

Australia still not getting the hang of DRS:

• Watson given out LBW, reviewed, decision upheld
• Rogers given out LBW, not reviewed, replay showed ball missing leg stump
• Hughes given out caught behind, reviewed, decision upheld

No more reviews left!

I'm all in favour of technology in sport. However...

What's the idea of DRS? Presumably it's there to:
(1) Get rid of the "howler", the one where you're given out but blatantly you're not out, or where a batsman is not out when he clearly is.
(2) Overturn incorrect decisions made by the human umpires with factually accurate decisions.

So far in this session, we've had:
(1) Watson reviewing a fairly plumb lbw
(2) Rogers not reviewing an lbw he was adjudged Out on, presumably because he only had one review left
(3) Hughes reviewing when he was adjudged to be caught behind, but there was no evidence to overturn the decision of Out (as opposed to any evidence that he hit the ball) [According to Cricinfo]

So each of the three wickets so far has been impacted by technology to some degree, and at least one of the wickets to fall shouldn't have fallen. (I assume also that Hughes didn't hit it, else why would he review?)

Add in the fact that they check for no balls for every wicket to fall, and the umpires themselves review all the time, and I wonder if the ICC have implemented DRS correctly. I think this innings is showing that it isn't achieving either aim. Watson shouldn't have reviewed. Rogers shouldn't have been Out, but was. Hughes probably shouldn't have been out, but was because the technology couldn't find any evidence.

All of that said, I realise that the problem fundamentally is the Australians' inability to use it properly!

[Ian Kingston]

BBC live text says replays did indicate a faint edge for the third wicket.

Fourth wicket was a skied catch to Pietersen. One wag tweeted: 'Pretty sure Khawaja would have reviewed that if they had one left'.

[Alex Holowczak]

Fourth wicket was a skied catch to Pietersen. One wag tweeted: 'Pretty sure Khawaja would have reviewed that if they had one left'.

Now that Smith is out, Haddin joins Clarke at the crease. So we're into the batsmen now!

[Ian Kingston]

BBC Live text:

Michael Clarke plays all around Stuart Broad's attempted yorker and is pinned in front. As the umpire raises his finger, Clarke considers whether to review. And remembers he can't.

[Mick Norris]

BBC Live text:

Michael Clarke plays all around Stuart Broad's attempted yorker and is pinned in front. As the umpire raises his finger, Clarke considers whether to review. And remembers he can't.

I liked

This has been one of the worst hours by an Australian cricket team I can remember in my lifetime.

However, until they are all out, they remain dangerous