Ashes 2nd Test: Australia Vs England - Eternal Allegiance

Besnit · 11-21-2002, 12:01 PM

Well the 2nd test in the ashes series started yesterday in Adelaide and after the first day England are doing well, especially Vaughen.

Englanf again won the toss and elected to Bat and at the close of play this is the score card.

England, 1st Innings - Batting

ME Trescothick B GD McGrath 35
MP Vaughen C S Waugh B AJ Bichel 177
RWT Key C R Ponting B Warne 1
N Hussain C Gilchrist B Warne 47
MA Butcher NOT OUT 22

Totel 295/4 89.3 Overs

Chewie · 11-21-2002, 02:28 PM

Yeah... gotta give credit to the English - they played well. Good to see a bit of competition now anyway.

Vaughen is nearly good enough to be an Aussie!

Bring on Hayden.

JammieJam · 11-21-2002, 08:24 PM

At least they chose to bat first this time.

ForeverInLoveWithJus · 11-22-2002, 06:53 AM

Despite Michael Vaughan appearing to have been caught by Justin Langer during the second Ashes Test, the third umpire decided against dismissing him.

Langer's low catch appeared valid, but the cameras failed to provide a definitive answer as to whether the ball had touched the ground. Vaughan, on 19, got the benefit of the doubt, and went on to make 177.

While cricket has embraced technology as an aid in making crucial decisions, football has been far less receptive, and many fans believe it should be more widely used.

Is technology a help or a hindrance?

Chewie · 11-22-2002, 07:53 PM

The third umpire is very good for run-outs where it is clear-cut and harder for the umpire to judge... in the catching instance like above though it is impossible for the video replay to tell, so it shouldn't really be used for catching.

And the Aussies are back on top after day 2 and so far on day 3.

Chewie · 11-23-2002, 08:27 PM

Australia wins the second match - not even the rain could save the poms!

JammieJam · 11-24-2002, 11:18 AM

yeah, another great result. i fortunately got to watch the end.

As for technology, bad decisions, can make or break a batsmen's or bowlers career, because, for instance, the batsmen is really struggling, and he has maybe one innings to prove himself, and in that innings he gets a shocker and is dismissed for a duck, then he probably will get dropped, and there goes his career for the time being. In the end of the day, i think the players want the correct decisions, and if that is gonna take another 30 seconds or a minute, i don't see why not.

In the case of decisions where the video evidence is inconclusive, then the benefit of the doubt should really go to the batsman.

ForeverInLoveWithJus · 12-04-2002, 03:20 AM

Australian prime minister John Howard calls for England to hand over the Ashes urn - but others couldn't care less.

A matter of principle, or a fuss over nothing?

John Howard's plea for England to relinquish the Ashes urn follows Australia's eighth consecutive Ashes series win over England.

Casting matters of Australia's economy, security, and international policy aside, the Premier has spoken out on England's stubborn refusal to hand over the relic.

Howard claims that his country's 'sustained supremacy' in the series merits the removal of the urn from Lord's in London.

But many feel that the urn's location is irrelevant - and Tony Blair is not thought to have responded to his Aussie counterpart on the issue.

Should the Ashes urn be moved? Could you care less?

Chewie · 12-04-2002, 02:59 PM

Yes, the winner should have it!

And yes it is a big deal.

And lol, that is just like Howard to make a big deal out of sport... that's why he's prime minister.