´óÏó´«Ã½

A great test match, and while most people think that Strauss should have declared earlier, you'd like to think that 130 overs is enough to bowl a side out on a 5th day pitch. Especially a side of the 'quality' of the West Indies.. This is a team we demolished in 2004, which was a much better side! A quick point.. When England were the best side I've seen, between 2000-05, we didn't have 'great' players but magnificent 'team' players, e.g Giles, Thorpe, Hussain, Butcher, Gough, Tresco, Hoggard, Vaughan etc.. Is it a coincidence that since Pieterson has joined we have won absolutely nothing!! (apart from his match-winning 158 against Oz at the Oval way-back in 2005, and a little forgotten fact that Strauss got 129 in the same match..) England seem to be fragmented and not playing as a team! Players seem to be split into certain camps, and there's no unity. Whether Pieterson is part of the problem I don't know, but it is a big coincidence don't you think??

what a pathetic attempt to win a test match!
the last 10 overs, we can excuse Swann, not the others. 1 wkt needed against tail enders! what do Harmison and Flintoff do with 30 balls? 2/3 at the wkts, the rest? bouncers!! at tail enders! pointless balls 2ft wide of off stump and deliverys down the leg side. why did these 2 have the ball? ego's! Harmison should never play for England again, plainly not good enough. Flintoff should be dropped immediately. his job is to take wkts and score runs, he does neither. nevermind this talisman nonsense, he isn't doing is original job. his ego had him on the field when he wasn't even fit. that brings me to Strauss. demoted from the cataincy, again, immediately. to let these 2 bowlers bowl and then send down dross ball after ball without having a word, well he's as culpable. the England cricket team are an exact copy of the football team under Eriksson and Mclaren, it's a closed shop with the players in control. i just hope a "Capello" is around the corner.

Andrew Strauss was right to bat again if he only had three or four fit bowlers at the time, and 130-odd overs to bowl the West Indies out again should have been more than enough - he was unlucky with Flintoff.

It should be noted that the ´óÏó´«Ã½ news chiefs, while the match was reaching its climax, appeared to be moving heaven and earth to keep if OFF the News at Ten - an "Exclusive Report" and "Special Report" plucked from nowhere. Why?

I watched the period up to the declaration and was thinking we'd batted 15-20 minutes too. We were losing wickets which wastes time, and we weren't adding many runs.
I agree that Harmison bowled poorly at the death - anderson or broad would have tested the batsmen more. West Indies time-wasting tactics were not in the sprirt of the game and it's about time that batsmen had to be ready when the bowler is ready. Ramdin was just staring into space when Broad was running in - deliberatly wasting time.
Ultimately poor decision making on Strauss' part prevented England from winning the test. We needed those extra 15-20 minutes and we needed the bowling choices to be correct to get that last wicket.
Our bowling attack needs a couple of changes as it's too one dimensional.

Is throwing jellybeans on the wicket within the spirit of the game??..not sure England can preach about spirit of the game etc. Time wasting happens all the time in 4th innings survival fights so get on with it.

As for this Windies team being worse than the class of 2004 then you really need to think again. The Windies team up until about 2 years ago would have capitualted in 50 overs given such a target. I also use the term team very losely as back then they were just a bunch of individuals playing under the umbrella of Windies cricketers.

We now have a team unit with set targets and a very good team spirit + ethic and England have clearly underestimated us and not noticed the improvements made by this team over the past couple of years.
We may have lost 2-0 at home to the Aussies last year but we took every all 3 test into a 5th day and should have one at least one of the tests had it not been for the umpries deciding Symonds couldn't be given out for knicking behind!!We also got a very creditable draw with a well drilled Sri Lanka team afterwards.

This team is still inconsistant and some players lack brains (Dev Smith, Ramdin & Powell mainly) but there is some talent being pushed in the right direction and we are seeing the fruits of that now.

I look forward to the "4th" Test now in a week. Hopefully a bowler will be drafted in who can support Edwards and Taylor better than Powell with the ball.

I really wish everyone would stop these knee-jerk reactions whenever they don't like the result. Strauss was right to bat again with two bowlers unfit; likewise he was right not to declare earlier - it was demonstrated that 130 overs was ample time to bowl the West Indies out, as the final pair were at the wicket for over half an hour. The fact that they weren't bowled out says more for their hard work in blocking than anything else. None of the bowlers bowled particularly badly on what was, by the fifth day, a relatively dead pitch. It seems everybody apparently knows better than the captain who is out there and whose job it is to decide. Stop being so silly. Especially you "aliteneleven"; your comments read like the rabid rantings of an individual suffering from near-terminal unreasonableness. Sometimes, no matter how hard you try, and how well you perform, the opposition can just keep blocking and not get out. That's the nature of the game. Relax, have a drink and a lie down, and wait for the next test match.

I can't abide sitting here reading posts from people who want everyone dropped, and Strauss stripped of the captaincy, because that's exactly the sort of unhelpful, ill-considered attitude that got the England team into the mess they were in in the mid 90s. People who come on here and submit barely coherent, badly punctuated, stream of consciousness rants against all and sundry just because their team didn't win really should try and exercise a little common sense and reason once in a while.

Why cant we view the full score card via the red button on digital TV! comon Adam, sort it out!

gajcook

- well said.

It was a great game, England were a bit unlucky: on another day it wouldn't have rained, or Daren Powell would have gloved one down the leg side, or been bowled by one of Swann's spinners, but bottom line, the Windies showed real guts, and deserved the breaks they got. I still would back England to draw or even win the series.

As a cricket lover, I'd take a game like the one we had any day over one side thrashing the other, even if England are doing the thrashing (well, unless they are playing the Aussies, of course ;*) )

England have positives to take from the game - Most of all, Broad is becoming a good player for England.

Early in his career some people on blogs and the like have suggested that he shouldn't get in the side, but I think he is now starting to show his real worth. (He reminds me of a young Shaun Pollock: nagging line and length and a reasonable lower order batsman to boot.)

Lets hope he really comes to the top of his game later this year, against the Aussies.

To point 9 Adam. I don't understand why they wouldnt let you do it online & not digital TV. Please explain? Maybe you forgot to add it in when you were negotiating the contract?

Didn't you have it there on digital tv for the 1st Test anyway? was that a mistake or did you get told off for that?

Please answer!

Re 9. (Adam Mountford)

I sit and watch the scorecard (when it's on), and get funny looks from my mother.

I would get funnier looks if I sat there and watched the static graphic.

If there was a problem with the contract, why bother broadcasting a static graphic on Freeview 301/2?

I did not know that Sir Allan Standforth had said that Test Cricket is boring. Had I known that I'd never have tried to invest my savings in his bank. Luckily they said 52 quid wasn't enough to open an account, (which upset me anyway), so I took my cash elsewhere. I am now doubly delighted to know that he will have absolutely nothing more to do with English (and Welsh?) cricket.
What beats me is that cleverer people that me couldn't see through his tissue of lies into which he blew the nose of limited overs before discarding it in the trash can of the Bank of Antigua.

can i get the interactive scorecard wired directly to my eyeballs? c'mon adam sort it out. i am a licence payer.

Sterling job by the TMS team in the Caribbean, ..... thanks guys.

Terrific banter in the box, as always. Great to hear some of those former West Indian legends again ... King Viv, Mikey, Crofty, Curtly, Courtney.

Is it me or does Sky's vapidly commercial cricket coverage pain the eyes? Test match cricket and Test Match Special - nothing beats it. Wish the wickets had a bit more pace and bounce though, makes the cricket more interesting.

I'm planning on getting a goldfish and calling it Aggers.