This entry is now closed for comments.
@997No it is not more like 200-4.... overton actually is a half decent bat and would have had more value batting in his normal position. It is most definitely 200 for 5.If you are going to send out a night watchman then do it properly. Should have been Leech
@984. bmthjamboSo EXTRA is your 3rd highest scorerHeart of Midlothian supporter eh?No wonder you're on a cricket hys, anything to avoid the reality of the dirge they serve up I guess.Looking forward to Russia spanking you soon. A whole different century since you qualified for anything. Well done.
Grrrr....So your new to the crease, the light is poor and its late in the day. What the hell Roy..... WHAT THE HELL!!!Im sorry but hes got to go. Even if we make it to the Oval he has got to be dropped.
A new ball ready in 6 overs with a refreshed seam attack. Australia don't normally enforce a follow-on; even chasing 100 on the last day can be tricky.Still feel Starc will have a big say in this Test.Stoke could tee-off again if he loses Bairstow and Buttler.It's more like 200 for 4 as one wicket was a bowler.
Lyon really is a dinosaur remnant of a repulsive era of Australian cricket. What was he doing fiddling around with the bails? Leave them alone and bowl, that's your job butter fingers.Roy was painful to watch until being castled put everyone out of their misery.Stokes and Bairstow will have to get the majority of the 98 still required to avoid the follow on or England are done.
No bias 992 just obvious. If we don’t get another 98 here then you’re taking the urn home.
Mr 50-and-out strikes again. You wouldn't catch Smith, Kohli or Williamson missing a straight ball when in the 70s.
Ed Smith should be sacked for his selecting of Roy and Overton for this Test.Smith is clueless and out of his depth.
I'm obviously biased but Roy's technique is truly awful....decent bowlers will continue to pick him apart...
22 runs from the the useless Roy and Denley, swapping them around worked then.
We're having some problems displaying the comments at the moment. Sorry. We're doing our best to fix it.
You must sign in to rate comments