budgetmeansbudget wrote:Bloody hell the way they're scratching around they probably should have enforced the follow on.
SaintPowelly wrote:budgetmeansbudget wrote:Bloody hell the way they're scratching around they probably should have enforced the follow on.
I guess we didn't want to risk them getting a lead of 150 or so and us facing Panesar on day 4.
SaintPowelly wrote:Leicester just lost both their set batsmen in the space of 4 balls ( neither to Ajmal ), but a 1st innings lead looks unlikely.
SaintPowelly wrote:Vince moves onto 41 off 46 balls, incredible considering it took him 17 balls to get off the mark.
budgetmeansbudget wrote:SaintPowelly wrote:Leicester just lost both their set batsmen in the space of 4 balls ( neither to Ajmal ), but a 1st innings lead looks unlikely.
Thankfully they're building a bit of a partnership again.
SaintPowelly wrote:budgetmeansbudget wrote:SaintPowelly wrote:Leicester just lost both their set batsmen in the space of 4 balls ( neither to Ajmal ), but a 1st innings lead looks unlikely.
Thankfully they're building a bit of a partnership again.
240/9, lead by only 3 runs and will have to bat last vs Ajmal, not good signs.
SaintPowelly wrote:99 balls for Vince to reach 102
Our 5th ton this season ( 3 for him, 2 for Carbs ), lead by 332

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests