The Ashes 2013

[Phil Neatherway]

We have to have a thread on the Ashes, don't we?

As I write, England are in trouble at 124/4. Bad shots from Cook, KP and now Trott indicate that England are over-confident.

[Phil Neatherway]

Oh dear, a paltry 215 all out.

[Alex Holowczak]

215 suddenly looks like plenty!

[Phil Neatherway]

And the pup made a duck. I'm sure we all feel for him.

[Andrew Bak]

I would have never expected 14 wickets to fall on the first day, bearing in mind how the pitch looked!

If Broad can't bowl today, England will be majorly handicapped.

[Richard James]

I would have never expected 14 wickets to fall on the first day, bearing in mind how the pitch looked!

If Broad can't bowl today, England will be majorly handicapped.

The news of Broad is that he has passed a fitness test and is available to bowl straight away this morning, which is obviously a huge relief for England who were stuck with two seamers yesterday.

[Mick Norris]

I would have never expected 14 wickets to fall on the first day, bearing in mind how the pitch looked!

If Broad can't bowl today, England will be majorly handicapped.

Just said on 5Live that Broad looked less than 100% at the fitness test, so although fit can only be used sparingly

Edit - thanks to the Burnley Express, looks like Broad might not be needed - 114/8 with 5 for Jimmy - doesn't look likely to be a long match

[Jonathan Bryant]

Edit - thanks to the Burnley Express, looks like Broad might not be needed - 114/8 with 5 for Jimmy - doesn't look likely to be a long match

Thanks for that Mick.

[Andrew Camp]

The last hour and a half has been nothing short of embarrassing.

[Ian Kingston]

The last hour and a half has been nothing short of embarrassing.

I prefer to think of it as part of the magic of Test cricket.

[Andrew Bak]

I think Hughes and Agar showed how easy batting ought to be on that pitch with no cloud cover. Finn was really poor but Swann and Anderson had little to work with and the batsmen were taking advantage.

I don't mind seeing an Australian do well as long as England win

[Alex Holowczak]

The last hour and a half has been nothing short of embarrassing.

I think that's a little unfair.

Yes, Agar was batting at number 11. But Agar can bat. In his 16 first-class innings before this match, he averaged 33.60 with three 50s and a top score of 71. By contrast, Nick Compton averaged 31.93 from his 17 innings in Test cricket, but averages 43.15 with the bat in first-class cricket.

If you look at the 4 main bowlers for Australia (i.e. excluding Watson), you find the following first-class batting averages before this match:
Mitchell Starc: 24.53 in 41 innings (HS 99)
James Pattinson: 20.29 in 34 innings (HS 66)
Peter Siddle: 17.81 in 104 innings (HS 103*)
Ashton Agar: 33.60 in 16 innings (HS 71*)

How does this compare to England? (I included Bresnan for reference)
Stuart Broad: 23.58 in 146 innings (HS 169)
Graeme Swann: 25.89 in 329 innings (HS 183)
Steven Finn: 7.58 in 104 innings (HS 56)
James Anderson: 10.02 in 183 innings (HS 37*)
Tim Bresnan: 27.27 in 161 innings (HS 126*)

Batting average isn't a very accurate indicator of batting ability (particularly if you've just had 16 innings), but I think you can say Starc and Pattinson are in the same league as Bresnan, Broad and Swann. Siddle is almost there, and his batting average in the last 2 years is likely to be higher than his career average. We've not seen enough of Agar to know if this is class or a one-off moment of genius.

The reality is that we shouldn't be surprised if Australia's tail wags in these Ashes series. They can bat from 1 to 11; there's no Courtney Walsh, or Phil Tufnell, or Chris Martin.

Agar can bat. It remains to be seen if he can bowl.

[Paul McKeown]

Hmmm. I would say that England's tail batted well during the team's Golden Era. That period has passed; Broad is unlikely ever to get another century, whilst Swann and Bresnan have forgotten which end is the handle.

What I find embarrassing is the one-eyed English commentary about England having nosed ahead, whereas a more sober reflection would consider that England is effectively 15 for 2!

[Andrew Bak]

Hmmm. I would say that England's tail batted well during the team's Golden Era. That period has passed; Broad is unlikely ever to get another century, whilst Swann and Bresnan have forgotten which end is the handle.

What I find embarrassing is the one-eyed English commentary about England having nosed ahead, whereas a more sober reflection would consider that England is effectively 15 for 2!

I also thought this, although it was probably mainly relief because at one point we were actually at 15/2! (Anyone for Cribbage?)

I don't see why England couldn't achieve a score of 400+ on a pitch like this, the ball didn't seem to be doing much at all yesterday.

[Paul McKeown]

Is it just me, or does "Blowers" not knowing the score, the name of the bowler, the name of the batsman, the name of the fielder, the name of the wicket-keeper, the batsman's score, the size of the partnership, the team's score, the number of wickets fallen, &c, get a little grating at times?