Cricket

Truth is probably somewhere in the middle, as always. I supported a declaration at lunch. England would probably have been closer to victory, but not there yet, by the time the rain came. I think the forecast at the time of the declaration was no play Sat (we got a session) and 1 maybe 2 sessions max on Sun.

McGrath is being his usual self, provocative as ever. He's about as right about this as he was the 5-0 prediction. It might have been meant as a broadside at Stokes/McCullum. But it's not that complimentary about the Aussies either - implying they would have folded under the pressure?

Stokes trying to shut the conversation down by saying the majority of commentators* don't understand the game is a bit sad really. You've got us all hooked, Ben, because of your brand of cricket and the fantastic entertainment. Don't spoil it now! Taking a chance and throwing the dice isn't a bad thing in sport.

*(I've not read anyone who doesn't at least say "what if..." about at least one of his declarations this series)

Anyone who thinks you can lose close to two full days to rain and still get a result having “done something a bit different” is kidding themselves or being deliberately provocative for clicks. If Stokes had declared at lunch McGrath would have said the opposite.