From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

England had one of their better days on the first day. It's supposed to
be a good batting pitch and, although apart from Archer they didn't bowl
very well, they somehow finished up taking eight wickets. The absence
through illness of Steve Smith was of course a big help. If they can
take the last two wickets cheaply, something that has often proved a
problem, and bat well, which of course has also often been a problem,
then they could be well placed by the end of day two. That's a
formidable Australian attack they are up against, though, even though it
still is missing Hazlewood.
--
John Hall

You can divide people into two categories:
those who divide people into two categories and those who don't

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

On 12/17/2025 10:44 AM, John Hall wrote:

England had one of their better days on the first day. It's supposed to
be a good batting pitch and, although apart from Archer they didn't bowl very well, they somehow finished up taking eight wickets. The absence through illness of Steve Smith was of course a big help. If they can
take the last two wickets cheaply, something that has often proved a problem, and bat well, which of course has also often been a problem,
then they could be well placed by the end of day two. That's a
formidable Australian attack they are up against, though, even though it still is missing Hazlewood.

England is really disappointing in this ashes series.

They just couldn't figure out how to get Starc and Carey out.

This will be the end of Ollie Pope's career and most likely last series
as coach for McCullum, deservedly.

England prepared for this series for so long and yet didn't deliver the
goods.

England is 175/8 now on a good batting pitch at Adelaide.

I don't see how England can win this test and keep the series alive.




--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 18:44:16 +0000, John Hall <john@jhall.co.uk>
wrote:

England had one of their better days on the first day. It's supposed to
be a good batting pitch and, although apart from Archer they didn't bowl >very well, they somehow finished up taking eight wickets. The absence >through illness of Steve Smith was of course a big help. If they can
take the last two wickets cheaply, something that has often proved a >problem, and bat well, which of course has also often been a problem,
then they could be well placed by the end of day two. That's a
formidable Australian attack they are up against, though, even though it >still is missing Hazlewood.

Not quite how the day's panned out so far
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

On 12/17/2025 10:44 AM, John Hall wrote:

England had one of their better days on the first day. It's supposed to
be a good batting pitch and, although apart from Archer they didn't bowl very well, they somehow finished up taking eight wickets. The absence through illness of Steve Smith was of course a big help. If they can
take the last two wickets cheaply, something that has often proved a problem, and bat well, which of course has also often been a problem,
then they could be well placed by the end of day two. That's a
formidable Australian attack they are up against, though, even though it still is missing Hazlewood.

Real Time Snicko (RTS) used by Australia is imperfect compounded by the
fact the operator made a mistake in Carey's not out decision on 72.

Carey himself admitted in the evening that he edged it.


"This technology that we are using here is simply not as good as
technology that's used in other countries," Ponting said while
commentating on Channel 7. "You talk to the umpires, they'll tell you
the same thing. They can't trust it.
- Ricky Ponting



Don't understand WHY Australia uses RTS instead of Ultraedge used by the
rest of the world.





--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

John Hall wrote:

England had one of their better days on the first day. It's supposed to
be a good batting pitch and, although apart from Archer they didn't bowl very well, they somehow finished up taking eight wickets. The absence through illness of Steve Smith was of course a big help. If they can
take the last two wickets cheaply, something that has often proved a problem, and bat well, which of course has also often been a problem,
then they could be well placed by the end of day two. That's a
formidable Australian attack they are up against, though, even though it still is missing Hazlewood.

Good to see this group still going. I thought everyone must have topped themselves after T2.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

On 18/12/2025 06:13, Mad Hamish wrote:

On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 18:44:16 +0000, John Hall <john@jhall.co.uk>
wrote:

England had one of their better days on the first day. It's supposed to
be a good batting pitch and, although apart from Archer they didn't bowl
very well, they somehow finished up taking eight wickets. The absence
through illness of Steve Smith was of course a big help. If they can
take the last two wickets cheaply, something that has often proved a
problem, and bat well, which of course has also often been a problem,
then they could be well placed by the end of day two. That's a
formidable Australian attack they are up against, though, even though it
still is missing Hazlewood.

Not quite how the day's panned out so far

Indeed. Just as well I put those caveats in.
--
John Hall

You can divide people into two categories:
those who divide people into two categories and those who don't
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

On 18/12/2025 06:33, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:

On 12/17/2025 10:44 AM, John Hall wrote:

England had one of their better days on the first day. It's supposed
to be a good batting pitch and, although apart from Archer they didn't
bowl very well, they somehow finished up taking eight wickets. The
absence through illness of Steve Smith was of course a big help. If
they can take the last two wickets cheaply, something that has often
proved a problem, and bat well, which of course has also often been a
problem, then they could be well placed by the end of day two. That's
a formidable Australian attack they are up against, though, even
though it still is missing Hazlewood.

Real Time Snicko (RTS) used by Australia is imperfect compounded by the
fact the operator made a mistake in Carey's not out decision on 72.

Carey himself admitted in the evening that he edged it.

"This technology that we are using here is simply not as good as
technology that's used in other countries," Ponting said while
commentating on Channel 7. "You talk to the umpires, they'll tell you
the same thing. They can't trust it.
- Ricky Ponting

Don't understand WHY Australia uses RTS instead of Ultraedge used by the rest of the world.

Presumably because RTS was developed by an Australian company - which
isn't a very good reason, of course. At least the company behind it was
honest enough to admit that it was their system (or at least its
operator) that was at fault.

One thing puzzles me, though. If the sound producing the spike was
mistakenly picked up by the bowler's end mic rather than the batter's
end mic, surely the spike should have been delayed wrt what we saw on
the video feed rather than being in advance of it, because of the time
taken by the sound to travel the lengh of the pitch?
--
John Hall

You can divide people into two categories:
those who divide people into two categories and those who don't
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

On 18/12/2025 08:41, alvey wrote:

John Hall wrote:

England had one of their better days on the first day. It's supposed
to be a good batting pitch and, although apart from Archer they didn't
bowl very well, they somehow finished up taking eight wickets. The
absence through illness of Steve Smith was of course a big help. If
they can take the last two wickets cheaply, something that has often
proved a problem, and bat well, which of course has also often been a
problem, then they could be well placed by the end of day two. That's
a formidable Australian attack they are up against, though, even
though it still is missing Hazlewood.

Good to see this group still going. I thought everyone must have topped themselves after T2.

Anyone who was going to react like that to an England failure would
surely have done so decades ago (or are too young to be likely to be on Usenet). Those of us who remain are probably inured to it.
--
David North
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

On 18/12/2025 10:18, John Hall wrote:

On 18/12/2025 06:13, Mad Hamish wrote:

On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 18:44:16 +0000, John Hall <john@jhall.co.uk>
wrote:

England had one of their better days on the first day. It's supposed to
be a good batting pitch and, although apart from Archer they didn't bowl >>> very well, they somehow finished up taking eight wickets. The absence
through illness of Steve Smith was of course a big help. If they can
take the last two wickets cheaply, something that has often proved a
problem, and bat well, which of course has also often been a problem,
then they could be well placed by the end of day two. That's a
formidable Australian attack they are up against, though, even though it >>> still is missing Hazlewood.

Not quite how the day's panned out so far

Indeed. Just as well I put those caveats in.

At least the poor outcome with the bat seems to have been more to do
with high-quality bowling than careless batting on this occasion, Pope
aside. On the other hand, it's impossible to tell whether attacking more
would have produced better or worse results.
--
David North
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 10:27:33 +0000, John Hall <john@jhall.co.uk>
wrote:

On 18/12/2025 06:33, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:

On 12/17/2025 10:44 AM, John Hall wrote:

England had one of their better days on the first day. It's supposed
to be a good batting pitch and, although apart from Archer they didn't
bowl very well, they somehow finished up taking eight wickets. The
absence through illness of Steve Smith was of course a big help. If
they can take the last two wickets cheaply, something that has often
proved a problem, and bat well, which of course has also often been a
problem, then they could be well placed by the end of day two. That's
a formidable Australian attack they are up against, though, even
though it still is missing Hazlewood.

Real Time Snicko (RTS) used by Australia is imperfect compounded by the
fact the operator made a mistake in Carey's not out decision on 72.

Carey himself admitted in the evening that he edged it.


"This technology that we are using here is simply not as good as
technology that's used in other countries," Ponting said while
commentating on Channel 7. "You talk to the umpires, they'll tell you
the same thing. They can't trust it.
- Ricky Ponting



Don't understand WHY Australia uses RTS instead of Ultraedge used by the
rest of the world.

Presumably because RTS was developed by an Australian company - which
isn't a very good reason, of course. At least the company behind it was >honest enough to admit that it was their system (or at least its
operator) that was at fault.

One thing puzzles me, though. If the sound producing the spike was >mistakenly picked up by the bowler's end mic rather than the batter's
end mic, surely the spike should have been delayed wrt what we saw on
the video feed rather than being in advance of it, because of the time
taken by the sound to travel the lengh of the pitch?

0.06 of a second must look like ages on a visual representation, I
didn't see much of the debate. The mic will pick up the sound at the
moment the sound is made and close enough to hear it is close enough.
By the time you have matched what you can hear at 343 m/s with what
you can see (or think you can see) you have plenty of room to make a
blunder.

max.it
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

On 18/12/2025 11:08, David North wrote:

On 18/12/2025 08:41, alvey wrote:

John Hall wrote:

England had one of their better days on the first day. It's supposed
to be a good batting pitch and, although apart from Archer they
didn't bowl very well, they somehow finished up taking eight wickets.
The absence through illness of Steve Smith was of course a big help.
If they can take the last two wickets cheaply, something that has
often proved a problem, and bat well, which of course has also often
been a problem, then they could be well placed by the end of day two.
That's a formidable Australian attack they are up against, though,
even though it still is missing Hazlewood.

Good to see this group still going. I thought everyone must have
topped themselves after T2.

Anyone who was going to react like that to an England failure would
surely have done so decades ago

The first time I might have been tempted to do that was during the
1958-9 tour, when I was ten.

(or are too young to be likely to be on

Usenet). Those of us who remain are probably inured to it.

Yes, subsequent to 2010-11 we've had plenty of practice.
--
John Hall

You can divide people into two categories:
those who divide people into two categories and those who don't
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.sport.cricket

John Hall wrote:

On 18/12/2025 11:08, David North wrote:

On 18/12/2025 08:41, alvey wrote:

John Hall wrote:

England had one of their better days on the first day. It's supposed
to be a good batting pitch and, although apart from Archer they
didn't bowl very well, they somehow finished up taking eight
wickets. The absence through illness of Steve Smith was of course a
big help. If they can take the last two wickets cheaply, something
that has often proved a problem, and bat well, which of course has
also often been a problem, then they could be well placed by the end
of day two. That's a formidable Australian attack they are up
against, though, even though it still is missing Hazlewood.

Good to see this group still going. I thought everyone must have
topped themselves after T2.

Anyone who was going to react like that to an England failure would
surely have done so decades ago

The first time I might have been tempted to do that was during the
1958-9 tour, when I was ten.

-a(or are too young to be likely to be on

Usenet). Those of us who remain are probably inured to it.

Yes, subsequent to 2010-11 we've had plenty of practice.

Yep, The Eng record in Oz since then is appalling and only one man is responsible. Joe Root. He's now in his 4th Ashes series in Oz and his
teams record in the 16 Tests he's completed is; L 14, D 2. And just
about every one of those losses have been by substantial margins.
Clearly he is the albatross around the neck of English supremacy and
must be dropped immediately.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2