The Ashes

[TheFaQQer]

Oh I see. Have you got a shed or something you could screw it to instead?

Not really that bothered - it'll probably come to YouView at some stage soon.

[minestrone]

Australia can't be trusted to make anything more than 200, there is absolutely no focus in their batting, they got away with it this time but the faults from the last ashes can be seen again, Watson should have been told to try and get to the second day when he started the innings, instead he was throwing the bat around.

[Alias]

Australia can't be trusted to make anything more than 200, there is absolutely no focus in their batting, they got away with it this time but the faults from the last ashes can be seen again, Watson should have been told to try and get to the second day when he started the innings, instead he was throwing the bat around.

they are still in 20/20 mentality....

[Doggy Styles]

Australia can't be trusted to make anything more than 200, there is absolutely no focus in their batting, they got away with it this time but the faults from the last ashes can be seen again, Watson should have been told to try and get to the second day when he started the innings, instead he was throwing the bat around.

I'm not writing them off until they are all back in the hutch. A lot of cricket is in the head, and that last wicket stand gave them a big lift.

[Doggy Styles]

What a lot of tosh is being talked about Broad not walking.

Put the boot on the other foot. Could he have stood his ground and continued batting if he had missed the ball but been given out? No.

Walking is a mug's game because you are then disadvantaged by all umpire's mistakes, both for and against you, and the fielders win all ways.

Leave it to the umpire. I'd have absolutely no problem with Michael Clarke doing the same thing in the last innings.

[minestrone]

Making up imaginary scenarios whereby the same crime was done to yourself is not a defence.

There has been quite an unsavoury element to England's manner on and off the field in recent years, much of it can be traced back to the Fletcher's time in charge.

[Doggy Styles]

Making up imaginary scenarios whereby the same crime was done to yourself is not a defence.

There has been quite an unsavoury element to England's manner on and off the field in recent years, much of it can be traced back to the Fletcher's time in charge.

It's not imaginary and the point has gone right over your head.

On Thursday Trott could not 'stay' when he was erroneously given out, so why should he 'walk' when he is erroneously given in, such as against New Zealand? The point is that he would get the rough end of all umpire errors, and the fielders would always be advantaged.

Let's get one thing straight. There was no crime as you put it, Broad broke no rules. He simply left the decision to the umpire. The fielding side will be appealing for things they know are not out, so it's not as if the batsman is a devil amongst saints.

At the end of the day nobody can complain about decisions going this way and that, least of all the Australians (and to be fair to them, few have moaned about Broad not walking, it's mainly British hand-wringers who are moaning).

Furthermore this kind of thing has always happened, going back to the days of W.G. Grace. If you think it is only since Fletcher was in charge, that's the point at which England became a successful test team. Perhaps you just object to England actually winning.

[Troll]

3 wickets to win.. should be wrapped up soon

[Troll]

Correction 2 wickets to win

[Troll]

Scandalous that these matches aren't on terrestrial TV