I think they got a bit hung up on the follow on mark instead of just trying to build a score.
I think there was overcaution, I said England's danger was trying to hit the ball all over and they went to the opposite extreme at times.
Good hundred from Pietersen, poor England effort overall.
Actually a decent chance of England winning this game as Aus will have to set them a lowish target if they want to avoid the draw.
Really can't see the aussies being that rash, nor England really going for anything over 300 very quickly. The morning is key, if the aussies can finish England off in the hour they might not be able to enforce the follow on, but they can knock up 150+ runs to set something around 350+ in four sessions.
England would be foolish to go for any target unless it is under 300, draw the series and retain the Ashes first which a draw here would do. Yes, the aussies would very much like to win this Test, you could argue "need to", but so too England "need to" not lose.
England should set out tomorrow to bat the session, that will do for the England cause. The aussies will struggle to force a win in five sessions with no(t much) more than 150 runs lead. The aussies need to knock over the tail. Can't believe Smith hasn't bowled more than two overs considering the Lyon has been toothless.
If England do hang around I can't see Prior, Broad and then Swann not scoring some runs and getting after the bowlers. Sure they've dug in so far, but as they add 10-20 runs the fear of the follow on will lessen, doubt Lyon will bowl before the follow on is decided one way or the other.
In fact the follow on might be the best path to aussie victory, neither path is looking particularly strong at the moment. My rule of thumb is that if the 1st innings (plural) aren't completed by day three, assuming a relatively normal amount of play and no low totals with weather the reason it has taken three days, then a draw is a strong favourite.
Reason being if you can't take 20 wickets in nine sessions, especially if not much play has been lost, it is not too likely you'll see 20 wickets fall in less than six sessions. Of course sometimes you might have 600+ plays say 250/7 in which case a result can be forced, but with a match where neither side has struggled to post a half decent score..........................
Also would have thought the aussies wouldn't have bowled Watson as much as they have. I still feel the aussies could and maybe should have batted on with two batsmen set on 65no and 66no. Those extra runs could have knocked England back mentally even further, and they could still have had an hour or so to bowl. Sometimes on pitches this good you need to post really really big totals to try and force an innings defeat, or a quick 2nd innings declaration to leave 400+ . The aussies left England a big escape route, only bowling them out for 250-300 and maybe a bit faster would have left a really good chance of winning. What odds that on this pitch?
----------
Bell,Bairstow and KP all gone with Prior out of form follow on is still a possibility
I think time will save England, possibly the weather. Their attritional approach has wasted time, while it may not have sped them to a strong reply total, it has used up the amount of time needed to compensate the slow run rate.
15 sessions in the match, aussies batted what five, England four and counting, that leaves six between two innings in which the aussies may only need maybe 1/3 of the runs, but equally may take 1/3 of the remaining sessions, but to bowl England out in 2/3 of six could take some doing - especially if Lyon doesn't roar into action
