What do England do now?

[Tommy Smith]

We don't accept losses. You don't become a good sporting nation by accepting losses. You find the problems and fix them.

You dont have to accept losses. By all means try and rectify the problems you can see from a loss. But dont whinge and moan like the biggest bunch of sore losers in history when you do lose.

It makes you look really, really bad. Its easy to be gracious in victory but not so easy in defeat is it? As we are seeing.

 

[Tommy Smith]

We don't accept losses. You don't become a good sporting nation by accepting losses. You find the problems and fix them.

So let me guess, the problems are poor umpires and substitute fielders?

Not over the hill opening batsmen, over the hill bowlers, poor fieldsmen, a lack of talent to replace them, etc etc.

 

[disco1]

Australians seem to forget sport is only a sport and not something a nation builds its self on. Its only big to Australia because it is the only thing you can challenge the big countries at. You have over emphasised the meaning of sport a take it far too personally when you fail hence the naff replies since losing the 4th test. Life goes on

For 30 years you have gloated, strutted around and turned from the closest friend of the UK to being very insular, stubborn bunch.

 

[Tommy Smith]

Australians seem to forget sport is only a sport and not something a nation builds its self on. Its only big to Australia because it is the only thing you can challenge the big countries at. You have over emphasised the meaning of sport a take it far too personally when you fail hence the naff replies since losing the 4th test. Life goes on

For 30 years you have gloated, strutted around and turned from the closest friend of the UK to being very insular, stubborn bunch.

There is certianly truth to that.

I remember before the NZ-AUS Rugby Union WC semi-final in 2003, a reporter asked an England fan in attendance who he wants to win. And he said Australia, to which the reporter was surprised.

Im guessing the reporter thought that, like Aussies, we despise the 'old enemy' and would hate for them to win. But thats not the case, sure we dont like to lose and definately want to win, but in the overall scheme of things most English fans take the contest between England and Australia with great spirit. Its still all in good fun...they can have a laugh with the opposition.

Every Aussie fan id spoke to wanted England to lose at every turn. Even to the South Africans who give the Aussies alot of sh*t when they travel there. They wanted the French to win the semi because they couldnt stand for England to win anything. NO particular reason why, just that they would hate it if those bloody poms won anything". Which is taking it too far IMO. Somewhere down the line the friendly rivalry disappeared amongst SOME Aussies.

 

[Purtell The Turtle]

Yes Tremlett is named 12th man but as the Aussies often do when they are playing at home they release him to his state side so he can play for them and then use local state players as subs, so I don't see the problem?
Simon Jones was in hospital for crying out loud and Hodge also has taken more than one catch for the Aussies in this series as a sub and spent quite a bit of time on the field also; is that cheating?

What country have you been living in over the past 4 years of cricket? Australia do NOT send their 12th man away from the side to play state cricket. That is how B.Lee did not play many 1st class games over the past 2 years because he had a mortgage on the 12th man position.

Hodge was used in the 3rd test as a fielding replacement for Michael Clarke. I think you will find the Aussies actually lost something in that respect, as Clarke would be one of the top fielders in that side.

But all in all, the poms have bowled brilliantly and deserve the ashes at this point. To shut up shop and bat defensively will see Warne come into his own and they will get the shakes. They have thrice almost lost the unloseable game, so the Poms sure know how to crumble. Looking forward to the last test.

 

[Twizzle]

Sub Fielders can field anywhere. The only things they can not do are bat/bowl or wicketkeep.

bullsh*t

read the rules

http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/

 

[Front-Rower]

bullsh*t

read the rules

http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/

Did you read the laws?

2. Objection to substitutes
The opposing captain shall have no right of objection to any player acting as a substitute on the field, nor as to where the substitute shall field. However, no substitute shall act as wicket-keeper. See 3 below.


3. Restrictions on the role of substitutes
A substitute shall not be allowed to bat or bowl nor to act as wicket-keeper or as captain on the field of play.

http://www.lords.org/laws-and-spirit/laws-of-cricket/laws/law-2-substitutes-and-runners-batsman-or-fielder-leaving-the-field-batsman-retiring-batsman-commencing-innings,28,AR.html

And My I suggest the Official ICC Test rules and Regulations PDF file. In there it talks about length of time players can spend off the field before time penalities apply etc, but nothing on where sub-fielders can or can not field

http://www.icc-cricket.com/rules/test_playing_conditions.pdf