Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

Sciver out for 58, after Australia had halted the bleeding.

As Alfie said, in an ODI, would be easy, but in a test keeping that rate up is hard.

England have thrown this away...


Nine down now as they just kept going for it. Australia two overs left to take the tenth...

So a draw...but not boring !

The right result , probably. Neither side really deserved to lose.

But I do think England probably ought to have nailed that when Sciver and Dunkley were together : they both got out going for boundary shots when they had brought the target down far enough that singles would have just about done the job. Some great outfield catches by the Australian fielders effectively did for the chase.

Cross kept her nerve well at the end to make sure Australia didn't take the last wicket.

Lot of credit to players on both sides : a really fine Test Match

Knight presumably PoTM ?

Well, that was a collapse worthy of the men's team. From 218/3 needing 40 off 50 odd, England were cruising. Then a couple of tight overs (helped, it must be said, by some generous decisions not to call wide on balls about a foot wide of leg...), and they panicked - kept trying to hit boundaries, slog, reverse sweep etc. when all they needed to do was nurdle the singles and punish the odd bad ball. Instead they lost 6 for 24 in about 7 overs and had to block the final two out.

Still, an entertaining finish to a good test match. At least the women made a game of it. More than can be said of the men.

yes, seems to have been a good test match

credit Australia for what appears to have been a brave declaration, giving enough of an incentive to persuade England to go for it rather than just block it out. Nearly worked too. England will be frustrated that having got so close they couldn't get over the line. 11 runs or 1 wicket...... something for the spectators right to the end

alfie wrote:The right result , probably. Neither side really deserved to lose.

True. A fine game of cricket, right throughout, but the end was very good.

Any test when going into the last over, all three results are a possibility, is a mighty fine test, imo.

Yes, England were in the running, then in control, (and were looking like they were going to take the game easily), but they had luck on their side at that stage. It evened itself out, and then Lanning (with good help from Perry) really played to their advantage. I think Lanning captained very well this test.

It would have been a predictable draw without her boldness, instead we got an exciting draw.

Without a doubt, Knight for player of the match.

Remind me why women play one less day?

Remind me why women play one less day?

GarlicJam wrote:Any test when going into the last over, all three results are a possibility, is a mighty fine test, imo.

I realised just after posting that all FOUR results were a possibility.

Four?

win/predictable draw/exciting draw/lose?

Durhamfootman wrote:Four?

win/predictable draw/exciting draw/lose?

Tie ...

of course...... how thick am I?

thanks SP

sussexpob wrote:Remind me why women play one less day?

Would someone also remind me why they only play one test a series?

I guess because it's the only red ball format that they seem to play. I'm not even sure that they play red ball domestically either. Perhaps that's something that should change going forward

There are currently no (zero) women's test matches planned, anywhere, between anyone.