Test career over? I reckon so.

Hopefully on his own terms, after he's seen us home in our 2nd innings!!



Steve Smith is batting down at 7 for the Aussies, yet hasn't bowled a single ball yet, another sign of Australia's confused selection policies.

Great day - nice to see the Aussies public show some class with the reception cook got when finally out - not buying warney saying they weren't appealing

Looked like Bell got away with one to even it up.



Seems odd that on this occasion so much faith was put in hotspot whereas in the last test the view was rightly taken that it can get things wrong. There was a fairly clear noise as the ball passed the bat, once the replay proved the ball couldnt have hit anything but the bat they should have stuck with the original decision.

What a shame this series has to end, brilliant stuff from England, after all those years of watching various Aussie teams giving us the run around it's great to see them squirm.

Great stuff from England ... let's get a few more rather than chuck wickets away in some mad thrash.

We should be quite happy with running time down, such that the Aussies can't possibly win.

The same class they showed again when booing Bell's century





Morgan in for Collingwood for the Sri Lanka series, I reckon. He should still be one of the first names on the teamsheet for 1-day games though.

to be honest i didn't hear that until I was listening to the 5live xtra stuff coming in to work.

Brilliant, another two centuries and a 500 + score in the offing!!



Hopefull we will get a lead of 250-300 and then bowl them out without having to bat again. Pleased to see Bell get his first Ashes ton.

It was fairly limited and the aussie players seemed to be applauding.



I think an aussie player, playing in england, would have received a fairly mixed reception in those circumstance. Any batsmen that needs to have a discussion with his partner over whether to ask for a referral to establish if he has edged the ball is surely playing the system?

don't write him off just yet - he's a class player who is having a bad time - it happens to them all from time to time - saying that,it would be nice to see Morgan given a chance

But at 34, and having a bad series, it's time for the selectors to look to the future and look at giving the likes of Morgan a go in the next series. Bell upto 5 and Morgan in at 6.

Don't think the Aussies can have too much scope for complaint after the ridiculous appeal on the catch by Hughes.



Crowds here seem to have funny standards. Ricky Ponting was booed everywhere in the last ashes series, whereas Shane Warne didn't get any stick from the crowd when coming back from his suspension for performance enhancing drugs.

Punter is a (bad tempered) Panto villain, i think he knows there was a fairly healthy level of respect in the booing.

IIRC wasn't Warne's ban for using a diuretic which is on the banned list because it can be used as a masking agent for performance enhancing drugs, rather than for failing a test due to performance enhancing substances?



Job done in this game - bat on as long as we can then see if the Aussies have the stomach for batting 4-5 sessions to save the game when the series has already gone.

I watched Clarke, on the news, try to defend Hughes against Botham's assertion of cheating.

Made himself look a complete c*nt.

Botham was right.

The thing is Collingwood has made some comments almost alluding to retiring from Test cricket so I would not be surprised to see him announce his decision after this match and just continue with Limited overs cricket.

yes

Saw Warne doing likewise after the close of play - clutching at straws, and missing them, when have you ever seen someone leap up and fling the ball in the air when they know they have dropped / grounded a catch?



NEVER

Warne's comments on twitter are unusually fair-minded though - "England are just too good"?

I think Warney talks a lot of sense, and i like him, but his and clarke's defence of Hughes smacked of old pro's just trying to save a young player from being buried under a pile of (justifiable imo) abuse.

A shame that Botham makes himself look like a xenophobic fool again with his attack on Hughes, yet defending Bell for similar 'cheating'.



I have sympathy with Hughes having fielded in that position myself.....Any chance of a catch in that type of position is usually a reflex one, with little knowledge of how clean a catch actually is, unless it lands plum in the breadbasket...Your own appeal is usually influenced by the reaction of those around you, and with Haddin and co going up, it was little surprise that Hughes followed.



I'd probably say that Bell actually 'cheated' more than Hughes.....He will have felt that nick, and by his reaction I'd say he probably was guilty....Asking your partner, 22 yards away, whether to review or not is a big giveaway and in his interview, after the close of play, he was decidedly sheepish.



Fair play to Bell on using the system, but shame on Botham for again resorting to 'down the pub' analysis.

I don't think so.

This is not about what someone else did ... but what Hughes did.

As for accusations ... yes you are right it depends on what side the perpetrator is as to what view some commentators will take.

And yes it is also true that sometimes fielders lose sight of the ball at the moment before it enters their eager hands ... so they can convince themselves it was a direct catch not a rebound.

Apart from the fact that in general our brain can perceive a mismatch between direct flights and rebounds both on timing and the direction being up not down when the ball enters the hands.

But in this particular case it seemed to me that Hughes watched the ball all the way as well and actually saw it bounce before his hands. This along with both the two other brain signals he got.

So in this particular instance, not in general, I think Botham was right and that Hughes did not have the sense to own up to it. Even though he did appeal, he could have actually said, sorry I was wrong, it wasn't a legitimate catch quite quickly afterwards and he would have gained immense respect for it. However he went through with the charade, did not own up and it was tantamount to trying to cheat someone out.

To some extent its an inevitable consequence of the referral system. The players " appeal" in a half hearted sort of way for everything and then let the technology sort it out. Neither Hughes or Bell were making firm declarations that they had caught the ball or not nicked it. They weren't saying "trust me I caught it/didnt hit it" just "lets see what the cameras say".



If the referral system didnt exist Hughes would have had to say "yes I caught it" for the dismissal to stand, knowing that the cameras would have shown him to be a liar and without the defense "I wasnt sure".



There are obvious teething problems with the referral system mainly due to the time it takes to arrive at a decision. Future investment in the technology should mean that eventually decisions are made instantly, without the need for a referral. But we'll only get to that stage if we persist with the currently flawed system.

That's a good call.....All the referal system does in its present guise, is to encourage players to chance their arm, whether as a fielder, bowler or batsman....Michael Clarke in Adelaide is a perfect example of a player simply clutching at straws, and, similarly, I believe Bell was doing the same and , luckily, got away with it.



I don't agree with the present format, simply because it gives the idea that the referal system should be used as some sort of tactical ploy, rather than what it should be and that is as a back-up aid to the on-field umpires.