patterson is good but hughes isn't good enough and is 30 years old

I think more batsmen should take this batting approach to Hazelwood, and just look to tonk him from length. 
 Even when he is seaming it like he has been.. that is duelling with danger. Stokes tonked him because the deck was slow and there was little seam nibble. So was safe to hit thru and across the line. Stokes tonked all our bowlers even Lyon who was so so average when again we needed wickets from him

Just tonk Hazlewood, that is what Hazlewood wants, that's how he gets most of his wickets, Hazlewood bowls a line 2 foot outside off, just let him go through to keeper, play the line of off stump for any that seam back. 

Utter rubbish even when Hazlewood is the pick of our bowlers in this match and perhaps the last.. at least in the first innings.. you still bag him.  His first innings new ball spells here and at Edgbaston were outstanding. The Pommie comms  said it was among the best new ball Ashes bowling they had seen. Are you even watching the game? He has 12 wickets @18 from his two games. You said you wanted him taking wickets.. he does and puts us into a position to win the test and retain the Ashes.. yet you continue to take a pot shots at him. You are unbelievable Mike.

Report Card: 
Warner 6
Harris 4
Khawaja 4
Labuchagne 8
Head 4
Wade 4
Paine 5
Cummins 6
Pattinson 5
Hazlewood 8
Lyon 4.

Hazlewood and Cummins had no idea how to bowl to him. He had already start to hit out against Lyon when Pattinson was bowling, he couldn't get him away. Over 118 Pattinson bowled to Stokes, and Over 120 Pattinson bowled to Stokes, Stokes couldn't get to him, they then took Pattinson off and bought Hazlewood on Over 122... 4, 6, 6, 2, 1, 0. Perfect batting from Stokes. Gets to the other end to face Lyon, just taking a single to then face Cummins, it was perfect last wicket batting. Stupidity from Australia.

As for the lbw decision, if it was Pattinson he wouldn't have reviewed it, but it was Cummins who was adamant for the review. Paine should have shown more strength but it was Cummins, don't go against Cummins if you want to keep your job.

Just tonk Hazlewood, that is what Hazlewood wants, that's how he gets most of his wickets, Hazlewood bowls a line 2 foot outside off, just let him go through to keeper, play the line of off stump for any that seam back.

Gday Paddles,
jaszyjim - ends 28th March 2020

Smith back for either Khawaja or Harris. Frankly I'd be sacking almost all our top six.. Other than Labuchagne their figures are deplorable. This is after three matches. Two in Smith and Labu case.

Smith 378 @126
Labuchagne 213 @71
Head 160 @32
Wade 151 @25
Khawaja 122 @20
Warner 79 @17
Paine 77 @12
Bancroft 44 @11
Harris 27 runs from the one game.

That first 50 by Stokes was his most mature innings in Test cricket..that I have seen. His second 50 was brute force borne of his white ball background. Did he caste his mind back to the WC final and copycat that. Congrats to England they remain in the Ashes race. Brickbats for Lyon for poor bowling when we needed him to win it for us and for missing that run out that cost us victory. Our batsmen need to take a good look at themselves. Most are under performing.

Smith still has 1 more year ban on captaincy positions iirc. 

Stokes was always going to hit out, so I think Paine was worried about Patto. The bigger issue for me, is whether Haze and Patto were scared of bowling yorkers to stokes, cos he was prepared to pull (not quite short enough) and drive (too short for) off length. 

Bowling Lyon was okay, cos he kept going aerial, and you have to think eventually one will goto hand - like Archer's dismissal. Lyon did get the wicket - but no review left as Paine made a terrible call on the lbw review off Cummins. 

I think more batsmen should take this batting approach to Hazelwood, and just look to tonk him from length. 

I think Paine at 35 years of age is probably going to retire soon, when that is will probably be decided by CA as they will pressure him and elevate Carey, they did that to Healy, rightly so, because they wanted Gilchrist in so Healy retired.

I am not one that believes in "conspiracy theories" but there is one that is going around presently that will be very interesting to see if it happens. You mentioned the upcoming tests for Australia Pakistan in Australia (Australia should win based on the last series) New Zealand (Australia expected to win) Bangladesh away (probably should win) then India in Australia (India still not playing that well away from home though they just won against WI) before we play SA in SA.  The theory is that both Daniel Hughes and Kurtis Patterson have already been pencilled in for the Pakistan warm up games. After this Ashes series, there will be a big push from the NSW dominated media for the inclusion of Daniel Hughes. They tried it 2 years ago. This is one of the theories behind the non-inclusion of Joe Burns. There doesn't seem to be the belief in Harris or Bancroft to perform but if they do succeed so be it. Burns is the one more likely to succeed so they don't want him around to prove it. This theory does sort of supply the answer to the question why CA did not give the incumbent test opener a CA contract, an opener that scored 180 in his last test. If anyone deserved a contract based on onfield performances it was Burns, 4 centuries from 16 tests, can't do more than that.

There is massive pressure on Khawaja and Wade currently and if their form continues and Labuchagne does continue to perform both will be dropped and Labuchagne will be moved up to No 3. Ideally Labuchagne slots nicely into No 5 position with Head moving to No 6, but where is Patterson going to play? Make no mistake Patterson will play. Khawaja will be axed, he needs a big score, but that is difficult to do against English seam bowlers especially when he has to come in so early, thanks to David Warner. Wade may replace Paine as keeper initially, but highly unlikely, and most probably Wade has now played his final test.

But more than likely Hughes and Patterson will play the first test against Pakistan. I suppose that the captaincy will go to Smith with the all is forgiven attitude.

guttered tbh.
Great for the series and cricket but not for us.
This hurts - you can point the finger to many but wasting that review was way wrong call.

Gday all,
jaszyjim - woke this morning to find we had lost the unlooseable test.
I saw a reasonable amount and Mike has summoned it up perfectly.
CA has dug themselves a big big hole & what is interesting is after these last 2 tests is
the upcoming tests series following - later this year & early 2020 - 2 x Pakistan, 3 x NZ,
followed in February by 3 x Bangladesh.
I mentioned that Paine as a keeper, I see is starting to tire.
He is coming up very early, usually a sign that the legs/knees are starting to go & is at that
age it starts to happen. As a keeper will he be able to hold up for all the above tests?

What a disappointing result! 

England chase down 359 after being dismissed for 67! 

Cricket is the winner. 

Have to go to work. Thankfully, there will be no English cricket fans there. 

I cannot believe England won this match. I called England stupid in the 1st innings, but that was the dumbest use of bowlers I have seen, is Paine to blame? Or does someone else make the call?

Open the days play with Pattinson and Hazlewood, no runs scored, smart move if Hazlewood not given new ball
Take Hazlewood off for Lyon to allow Hazlewood 3 overs to prepare for the new ball , wicket of Root for Lyon Pattinson's first 4 overs 0/2 great bowling

New Ball taken and wasted by Hazlewood and Cummins.... Hazlewood smashed first 3 overs 23 runs Cummins first 3 overs 10 runs, they take Cummins off and allow Hazlewood to continue????? stupidity
They then give Pattinson 2 overs then he's off? Cummins comes back on 1st ball gets smashed for 6 by Stokes gets 3 more overs..... Idiotic should never have taken Pattinson off

96 overs Labuchagne and Lyons are bowling......Hello the ball still has something where's Pattinson?
98 overs (new ball losing effectiveness) Hazlewood back on. Hazlewood bowls a terrible delivery Bairstow goes for it..... wicket, pure luck
103 overs run out

110 overs  the ball is now 30 overs old... a piece of soap may be more effective or maybe a piece of sandpaper is required, I see Warner has his hands taped again after South Africa questioned that one. I don't recall him with tape in the first test, but with Hazlewood back in the side tape reappears....Hmmm) Finally we get to see Pattinson who has only bowled 2 overs of those 30 that's the same as Labuchagne
Finally he gets 6 overs takes 1/9 That's what he can do if gets an opportunity    England are 9/286

Lyon gets smashed for 3 sixes and they take Pattinson off????  He has 1/9 off 6 overs and guess who they bring back on Hazlewood and Cummins
Over 121 Cummins gets smashed for 11 runs
Over 122 Hazlewood gets spanked and embarrassed for 19 runs
Over 123 Lyons for Cummins 1 run
Over 124 Cummins for Hazlewood  smashed for 9 runs
Over 125 Lyon 6 runs 5 runs to win
Over 126 Cummins 5 runs England win

England had to score nearly 80 runs with just 1 wicket.....Just 1 good delivery wins it for Australia. At no time even with 11 runs to go did they consider Pattinson. They tried to make the big hero out of Hazlewood or Cummins and it failed. Don't get me wrong it is not a criticism of Hazlewood who had a good match, but history has proven once the 2nd new ball is taken Hazlewood has very little left. At the start of the days play Australia's best new ball bowler in Pattinson had only bowled 20 overs for the match. He's fresh yet was never given the opportunity, they went with Hazlewood who gave a lot of runs away, IMO he had done his job taking 7 wickets at that point so give Pattinson the new ball and a decent opportunity, don't stroke Hazlewood's ego you lose test matches which is exactly what happened.

Of all the wickets to fall Hazlewood bowled a good delivery to Root in the first innings and Cummins got Roy with a jaffa of a delivery in the 2nd innings, but all the others were batsmen mistakes, they should have left the deliveries alone as they were no threat to the stumps, many of which would have been deemed wide balls in ODI's. When England batted sensibly they hit a record win for them, something they couldn't do against NZ and WI. The bowling attack of Australia had no answers and when the pressure was on they curled up and quivered in a corner, with the exception of Pattinson, he just got no opportunity. Hurricane Hazlewood turned into cloudy with a chance of showers. Remembering also that if it wasn't for rain we would have lost Lord's test as well. So we go from winning the first test, changing the side by bringing Hazlewood back in nearly losing the test, and keeping Hazlewood in change Siddle and we do lose. I am not one that believes in coincidence, there is always a reason.

I don't know if it is stroking the egos of certain players by giving them the opportunities, but we lost this test by taking Pattinson off and bowling Hazlewood and Cummins, Stokes smashed 8 sixes and 11 fours, off Pattinson he only scored 1 four. But credit to Stokes it was a great display from him, those 2 sixes in a row off Hazlewood will remain in my mind for a long time.

For the record out of the last 15 tests Australia have won 5 Lost 7 drawn 3. (The 3 drawn test were all heading for losses by Australia and time or weather intervened) The last 3 wins for Australia were without Hazlewood. All the loses except 1 were with Cummins and Hazlewood. In the final washup from this test who will be "rested"? We lost the test because of those 2 overs from Cummins and Hazlewood going for 30 runs and it was poor bowling (full toss on middle going for 6 from Hazlewood PMSLOL) Pattinson at no stage of this game was given any opportunity to do what he does best........bowl with a new ball he was relegated to 3rd position and never given any lengthy opportunity to get a good rhythm and when he was he took wickets. No bowler can take wickets in 2-4 over spells. Remember this is a record run chase by England, the batsmen did their job it was the bowlers fault and Pattinson will cop the blame

Is Paine to blame? Is Paine just fulfilling CA (AKA NSWCA afterall CA can't make any decisions without the backing of NSWCA) requests? Should Paine remain as captain? Options Smith? he too strokes certain egos as he has in the past. Travis Head? maybe a good choice. Khawaja? Labuchagne? Cummins? No way, he went to CA demanding longer contracts specifically for himself Starc and Hazlewood, what would happen if he was in charge?

The scarier thing is that for the next test in all probability Pattinson will be rested and Starc back in. So we go back to that proven losing bowling attack. Can't say we missed Smith because Labuchagne would not have been selected if Smith was OK, Labuchagne's 154 contribution was Smith like anyway.

This is not a criticism of Hazlewood it is a question of captaincy and behind the scenes attitude which certain players are given more opportunity than others, to the extent that other players are not being utilised in their strengths and the result is those players are the ones that suffer in selection, financially and we ultimately lose.

Ben Stokes is a lucky bugger. Missed lbw to win this test. Guptil overthrow finds his bat in the WC final for 5 overthrows...

OMG... So lucky...

mind you we only need 1 more win here to get the ashes with 2 matches (or 2 draws)

2 missed runouts, 2 dropped catches and a wasted review

shocking

Only ourselves to blame with the wasted reivew, missed runout and umpire howler. Immense knock from Stokes

England win :(

heartbreaking we choked

dropped twice, missed runout and burned a review

scores level

ball tracking says that was out

plumb lbw not given but we wasted our review! not out

lyon fumbles a clear run out! That was the game surely

so many lives! heartbreaking

through the hands of long off. Was 6 anyway

mis hit again clears long off and 2 to win

bad review for lbw way outside leg

lyon v stokes for the ultimate over

another 4 england need 9 to win

stokes dropped twice this innings

mishit dropped by harris