titan_uranus

Well, still a fair bit of work to do tomorrow, with 5 wickets still needed (maybe 4, given Broad didn't look great practicing in the nets). The evening session was definitely our worst bowling of the series. We didn't build the pressure we've been usually building, our lengths were also generally too short. If we keep bowling like that, we'll struggle to bowl them out. Nonetheless, they'll have to bat most of the day to make the remaining 253 runs, and you'd think we're good enough to take those wickets. I've seen stranger things happen, though, and with Bresnan still to come, you never know.

Huge moment, lucky it was close to the 80th over to encourage the use of the review from Clarke. Just need to keep chipping away; this pitch is cracking up, it's not going to be pleasant to bat on last.

I think this has to be the case. This article suggests that, where a sound on snicko comes in the frame or two after the ball passes the bat, it can still be the ball hitting the bat. Which is rather confusing, really. And if Hot Spot isn't reliable in the heat, or if there is tape on bats, or whatever, then it's not worth using. I think the doctrine used by Hill here was to not disturb the on-field umpire's decision unless the evidence goes conclusively against it, and that is a fair doctrine. In the end, Erasmus gave Root out, so the real beef should be with him as much as the DRS. The issue facing cricket, though, is that there is no point having the DRS if it can't get rid of bad decisions due to flawed technology. That appears to be the situation at the moment, which is far less than ideal. I don't think it's being misused anymore. In England it was; we continually used it to review LBW decisions where we thought there might have been a chance it was outside the line or missing the stumps, which is not what it's there for. However, I think that's been stopped now (case in point - in Adelaide, last ball of Day 2, Johnson hit Carberry on the pads, was given not out, we didn't review it because it looked like a decent enough call, but turns out if we had reviewed it it would have been out. Umpire thought it was going down the leg side, which was fair enough). Mind you, there haven't been many LBW appeals this series (one LBW wicket all series so far in fact), so it might heat up as we keep going.

On the Root DRS issue, if the lack of a hot spot and the lack of anything on real snicko is not considered conclusive evidence, then what is? What would have been required for the third umpire to overturn that decision? A visible gap between bat and ball? It seems that not out decisions are easier to overturn than out decisions (compare Smith with Root), which flies in the face of cricket's mantra that the benefit of the doubt rests with the batsman, doesn't it?

Interesting tactics from England. They've gone very slowly with their batting today, when they're still 200-odd runs behind and 2-0 down in the series. Maybe they're trying to force our bowlers to spend a long time in the heat, and at least get out with a draw, but if we can get Bell early tomorrow we'll put ourselves in a good position to have a decent lead before we bat again. As you say though, it's all Bell. If he gets in, we might be behind on first innings.

Our form in this series has masked the fact that we're carrying sub-standard batsmen, and Watson heads that list. That shot was awful, and was almost identical to his dismissal in Adelaide where he bunted it back to Anderson. Playing the big drive though the ball wasn't close to full enough for the shot. He's an immensely limited cricketer, his best isn't good enough, and whether we win this series or not, he's a weakness in our batting line up. Nonetheless, England's got two wickets but we've given them both away (Rogers' stupid running and Watson's stupid batting). Some calmness from Warner and Clarke, and we can still do alright, especially with 72 runs already on the board with 40 minutes before lunch.

Only the one change for England, with Bresnan replacing Panesar. We're unchanged, and Clarke's won the toss for the third time so we're batting first.

Also a shout out to Quinten de Kock who, in a three-match ODI series against India, hit three 100s.

NFC North is so hard to read. Detroit should have sewn it up over the last few weeks; the Tampa Bay loss was huge. If Rodgers is back this week, the Packers, only 0.5 behind Detroit, are a chance. I don't rate the Patriots; they can't keep coming back from deficits all the time, especially without Gronkowski. Mind you, I also worry about Denver in the playoffs, they concede way too much even to the lesser sides. So I'm not sure how the AFC is going to go down. I took a fair bit out of us beating Seattle. Obviously we'll have to beat them in Seattle to progress in the playoffs, but now we have a bit of belief that we can in fact do that. Our defence really stood up when it needed to, and we found some ways through on offence. Confidence booster more than anything (also an enormously handy win).

It's a very awkward position for them. They've made Sammy captain, they don't seem to have a suitable replacement, so they can't change that, which means they can't drop him. He's not good enough to bat in the top 6, nor is he a very good bowler, so he shouldn't be playing I don't think.

Wow, interesting to look back on those. I have Cheteshwar Pujara, who's had a great year, plus Ian Bell (enough said) and Shivnarene Chanderpaul, who's also been OK. I got Brad Haddin at bargain-basement prices, for clear rewards, as well. Boult and Herath have been OK this year. However, I also had Dean Brownlie, Steve Finn and Mohammad Hafeez, who have all fallen out of favour with their respective sides. Jackson Bird looked promising in England but would be fifth or sixth in line now. So just so-so from me.

Should be no change for us. Every year going into Perth someone out there says 'let's go with four pacemen' but our current trio plus Lyon are doing a great job of bowling as a unit, and Perth's pitch suits Lyon's bowling anyway. As for them, they need a true batsman at 6, so I'd be replacing Stokes with Bairstow or Ballance. They'll have to drop a spinner, and it will probably be Panesar, with Bresnan coming into that spot. Surely England's bigger issue is their batting, not their bowling? If I were England I'd be far more worried about getting runs out of Cook, Carberry, Pietersen, Prior and whoever bats at 6 (Stokes, Ballance or Bairstow). I'd also be worried about their inability to play long innings and their struggles with pace and bouncers. Their bowlers, though, should still be thereabouts given our batting. It really only takes one batting collapse from us to shake the series up, and we're a side with Rogers, Watson, Smith and Bailey in the top 6, none of whom are in any particular form at the moment.

Wow. First over of the day and Broad pulls straight to deep square leg. Edit: We'll take it.

Clarke is as good a tactical captain as there is in the world right now. Far, far better than Cook. This was no different in the winter, when the team was playing pathetically. He's our best batsman too, as his form shows. Making up some conspiracy theory about his back injury is a sign that you really don't have an argument to defend here. Oh, and how about Haddin's fantastic catch yesterday to get Root out? Great keeping, to go with his great batting too (batting which has put us in winning positions in both Tests). I don't think they want to go with four quicks. That would mean Anderson, Broad, Bresnan (surely) and one other, but the other would be Tremlett, Finn or Rankin, all of whom are out of form and struggling in Australian conditions (and each of whom lengthens the tail compared to Swann). If they keep Stokes at 6 (I don't think they can afford to, but they might be inclined to persist with him), they'll have their fourth seamer anyway.

Crazy, crazy cricket. We still have our work ahead of us taking the remaining 8 wickets, but with 5 sessions to go, there should be enough time. Taking a 2-0 lead is huge, and probably not something anyone expected. We'll need some more of Johnson's firebolts, as clearly England can't play that pace well. England will have to look at dropping Prior and/or Swann for Perth. Panesar outbowled Swann in this Test, so there might be a change-up there. They'll also have to bring Bresnan in, as well as getting another batsman in the side instead of Stokes, who isn't good enough.

Dropped catches and a wicket off a no-ball. Small things can change a series; those kinds of things going against England may just help us. Also, Clarke - what a captain.

And now Bailey too. Four out of five batsmen to get himself in then get himself out. Each should have made more runs than they did, and we're now tracking for a sub-par first innings total on this wicket.

Interesting team selection from England. They've given a cap to Ben Stokes, who bowls a bit of pace, which suggests they're bringing Panesar in for Tremlett (instead of Bresnan, which I expected). That leaves them with only Anderson and Broad for the pace bowling, and Stokes to come on and, I expect, be treated in a similar manner to how we dealt with Woakes at The Oval.

On a related note, why does CA put the Perth test right after the Adelaide test? Surely we learnt from last year and the week off should be between Adelaide and Perth instead of between Brisbane and Adelaide.

I reckon if we're going to rest the fast bowlers, rest them in Perth where the replacements will do fine because of the pitch. If we rest them in Adelaide, we significantly increase our chances of losing. Faulkner and Siddle with the new ball are toothless compared to Harris and Johnson, and the last thing we can afford to do is let them bat themselves into form at Adelaide. I'd rather play a good game in Adelaide, hopefully win it, and then rest in Perth if absolutely necessary. Lyon's bowling very well, so give him good spells in Adelaide, rotating the pace bowlers and using Watson and Smith (even Warner and/or Clarke too if possible) to keep the pressure off. We need to keep the pressure on. The longer it takes them to square the ledger in the series, the more likely they are to keep making mistakes and playing poor cricket.

Marcus North scored another tonne too, he now has three from four Shield games. Cameron White is also unbeaten overnight on 110, adding to his three 50s in the Shield, plus his five 50s in six innings in the Ryobi Cup. For once, there is form in our domestic batting.

It goes further for England, 18 consecutive innings without reaching 400. It's all about Cook and Bell for them - if they get out, England doesn't make runs (Pietersen will always end up getting himself out). Whilst England might be inclined to play Panesar, I don't think they can. They'd be down to two pacemen if they drop Tremlett, leaving Broad and Anderson with too much workload on a short break going into Perth. That means they'd have to drop a batsman to play an all-rounder, but the closest thing they have to an all-rounder in their squad is Ben Stokes, who batted at 8 in the recent ODI series we just played against England (they left Woakes at home). Would be an enormous risk to bat him in the top six on debut in Test cricket, I think, whilst I think Trott could get his form back on an Adelaide deck that probably won't cause him as much trouble on the pull as Brisbane did. So I think England's stuck with just the one spinner, though Swann will bowl better at Adelaide than in Brisbane. It's going to be a massive test in Adelaide - keeping Harris, Siddle and Johnson fit and ready to go for Perth is vital, whilst getting some runs into Rogers, Watson, Smith and Bailey is also crucial - Johnson's not going to bail us out from 8 every test, nor is he going to bowl as well as he did in Brisbane.

Well I guess I was right. Getting Cook out has led to 4 wickets in 4 overs, the innings falling apart. Getting a 1-0 lead is huge.

Now that both Bell and Cook are gone, it's a lot easier to see the light at the end of the tunnel. It was always going to be a miracle for England, but they've defied the odds before. Lyon's bowling very well, much better than Swann has in this Test. Good to see us put our faith in him and that he's helped us immensely in this Test. He and Siddle don't need to take bags of wickets to show their worth. Edit: And Lyon gets Prior now too! Wow, he's in shocking form. Who'd have thought we have the better keeper and the better spinner?

Only one wicket that session. Bell and Cook are the biggest obstacles, we really need to get one of them out sooner rather than later, expose Root and Prior who are woefully out of form. England has a habit of being insipid for the first three innings of Tests but batting out a draw (Cardiff 2009, Durban 2009, Auckland 2013). If it rains a bit here and there, cuts out a few hours, you never know.