Thread: The timeless Test - Everlasting cricket thread Board: The Circus / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=28;t=002078

Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :
 
A brand new shiny thread for all things cricket.
And let's remember to keep it cricket - friendly rivalry and comradely discussion is the order of the day. Now, who's batting first?

[ 14. January 2015, 07:22: Message edited by: Imaginary Friend ]
 
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :
 
Bags I bowl, the wicket's taking spin.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
And I'll bung some leggies down from the other end. Impossible to pick from the hand, mostly because the batsman has forgotten what was going on when I let it go by the time it reaches him!

AG - Proud to be a frog in a blender.
 
Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on :
 
just sit me in the slips please....
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
My forte, honed with many years of practice, is sitting in the pavilion and possibly lightly dozing!
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Just woke after a shitty night of no sleep - don't ask - to see that Australia, ever generous of spirit, have decided to give the first innings to England as a New Year's present. [Mad]
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
So ... It's possible I spoke too early [Hot and Hormonal]
Great performances by Haddin, Smith and especially Stokes. I think Aus had the best of the day, but Stokes single-handedly made sure it wasn't a disaster for England.
Good to see Haddin smack Anderson all over the place. Maybe that will teach him to keep his trap shut. Probably not.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Oh we'll get those runs no trouble, DK. It's just that on recent form it'll take us two innings to do so...

AG
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Good one. [Killing me]
But who knows? Lots of changes in the lineup, and it might be a good thing. Although,I don't really understand keeping Carberry and dropping Root. The former really has been in poor form, and did very little with the bat.
Stokes was very good value with the ball today.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I'll trade your lack of understanding with mine of bringing Borthwick in, then (a) using him as a bowler and (b) batting him at nine. Much as I love to see a leggie it's obvious that the Australian batsmen thought the same - I suspect that most of his overs must have been at Smith and Haddin - and he hardly bowled all summer, he's been opening the batting for Durham instead! I can only assume that he's being played as a spinner who can bat to bolster the tail.

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I think my over-riding emotion about today's play can be summed up by this smilie: [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Clearly my emotions are so heightened that I included a completely superfluous hyphen in my previous post. It's been that kind of morning.

[Disappointed]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I heard the first half hour of day two, when we were 17-4 and tuned in to something completely different.

When one wakes up to hear that not only did Australia make almost as many runs in one session as we did in two, but George Bailey has made 20, you know things are going badly.
 
Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on :
 
My biggest concern during the morning session is there wouldn't be a 3rd day - want to see all the pink.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
5-0!
Australia, you fucking beauty!!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I'm just glad it's all over.
 
Posted by shamwari (# 15556) on :
 
The worst bit is not that England were humiliated.

Its that they capitulated.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well done to Australia, and respect to Boof in particular who took the poisoned chalice in both hands, drank deep, and laughed in the face of the toxins. His next big task is to build on it, because it's still a case of a couple of players holding the rest together.

In terms of sport all round, it's been a pretty miserable ten matches - England somehow managed 3-0 despite never really firing and being rescued by the bowlers time and time again, and as for the return...

On the bright side, we've got the one-dayers to look forward to, with lots of new faces for Mitchell Johnson to whang 'em past. He'll love it, I'm sure.
AG

PS DK - within five runs of equalling Australia's total, but in two innings - what did I tell you?

Wot no sig?

[ 05. January 2014, 10:43: Message edited by: Sandemaniac ]
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Well done to Australia, and respect to Boof in particular who took the poisoned chalice in both hands, drank deep, and laughed in the face of the toxins. His next big task is to build on it, because it's still a case of a couple of players holding the rest together.

Agreed. Our boys have a ways to go before they are ready to face South Africa.
In the meantime, how sweet it is [Yipee]
 
Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on :
 
Not exactly sure why the ECB felt the need to give votes of confidence to Flowers and Cook during Day's 2 and 3 of that match.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The pink all round the SCG was only equalled by the embarrassment on the England team's faces, especially the author of that 82 (read it: eighty-two) page nutrition guide. Don't let that take anything away from Australia though. They knew what to do, looked at what they had available and were pretty ruthless about it.

As for the future, was there ever a better time to play the world #1? If one or two of the young, genuinely quick bowlers can come through to back up Johnson, then Amla won't resume his form of 12 months ago and other South Africans will struggle. Steyn, Philander & co won't be anything like as effective if they don't bowl with 350+ runs in the bank.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
It was the right thing to do, but I bet I'm not the only one waiting for the jokes to start. It's all a bit like the legendary Bay City Rollers story, isn't it?

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Am I the only one who, listening mostly to BBC radio (TMS & 5Live) and reading the BBCs cricket news, is coming to the idea that Michael Vaughan is opening his mouth and letting the wind blow his tongue around? He's like G. Boycott without the tact and diplomacy.

My view is that people will be retiring, resigning or at least taking a break almost from the moment Paul Downton puts his feet under the desk. I don't know exactly who, but I'm sure some will.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Hmmm ... I assumed MV's views were tolerated because of his role in the 2005 Ashes series. Or perhaps he was privy to some insider knowledge.
After all, why would anyone put up with that half-wit Beefy if not for the fact that he was pretty important in a come-back period for English cricket.
Believe me, no one would put up with Shane Warne down here if not for the fact that God gifted him the talent to bowl leg spin better than anyone else ever has. Other than that, he's an idiot.
Prior did well in that Sydney Harbour Bridge situation. Good on him.
 
Posted by Latchkey Kid (# 12444) on :
 
Going to the gabba on Thurs. Hoping it will at least be a contest. In England that was where the Aussies came good.
 
Posted by Tom Day (# 3630) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Latchkey Kid:
Going to the gabba on Thurs. Hoping it will at least be a contest. In England that was where the Aussies came good.

Well after today's ODI it doesn't look like it. I'm hoping that the English women will salvage some pride.

Tom
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Welcome back Tom!

Your return to the Ship has been good for English cricket. We beat Australia!
 
Posted by Tom Day (# 3630) on :
 
I've been watching and reading a bit but real life has got in the way a bit... I was happy Pakistan lost today as 2 of my Pakistani pupils have been having a bit of a go recently!
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:

Believe me, no one would put up with Shane Warne down here if not for the fact that God gifted him the talent to bowl leg spin better than anyone else ever has. Other than that, he's an idiot.

I like Warnie's commentary. It's fun. [Big Grin]

England done well at the Gabba today. Morgan was fun to watch.

I still do a double take every time I see Maxwell - he looks and moves just like Ponting.

I must admit to preferring test matches to ODI's.....more subtle, more skill, more time watching while doing housework. [Smile]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Fuck me, what a finish - I'm sweating just watching the Cricinfo ticker at work!

Nice to see a competitive game at last, and well done to Faulkner for holding it all together, and denying England at the death. I wouldn't like to be in his skull tomorrow morning!

Incidentally, Sioni, I might quotes file your remark on Vaughan when I get a mo, if it was any more acid you could etch glass with it. And you are right too!

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Wonderful effort by England to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory like that. Just like old times!
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Fuck me, what a finish - I'm sweating just watching the Cricinfo ticker at work!

True story!!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Having read this article, I find myself thinking that the ideas in it don't seem to be that sensible. Will having Australia, England, and India holding the reigns really inspire the other Test-playing nations to discover new financial stability? I rather doubt it. And also, South Africa is not mentioned in the entire piece - so what of their status under the proposed rules?

Baffling.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
If this goes ahead I wouldn't expect it to be the end of matters. Hands up all those who expect India to have sole charge of international cricket scheduling by about 2023? If cash generation is the governing factor then that would make at least as much sense as the current proposal, ie none whatsoever. The fat cat associations, broadcasters and limited-overs formats ought to subsidise first-class cricket and the infrastructure, as well as Tests.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Do you mean that money made from a well attended Test between India and Australia should subsidise first class cricket in, say, New Zealand?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Do you mean that money made from a well attended Test between India and Australia should subsidise first class cricket in, say, New Zealand?

If India and Australia want to play Test cricket against the best possible New Zealand team then yes, I do.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Sorry, I wasn't asking to be confrontational - I was just making sure I understood the point you were making.

It's a point that I'm sympathetic to. But the realist in me wonders if it has a cat-in-hell's chance of ever actually happening.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Re-reading my reply, it does look confrontational and I ought to apologise. Maybe we're too willing to be clear, which the ICC doesn't do!

The only way in which the Big Three (in cash terms) and broadcasters are going to hand more money over would be if the ICC becomes more determined to have cricket in the Olympics.

On the actual cricket front Australia are 3-0 up in the best of five ODI's but England's women had a good win yesterday in their ODI*. England have a 8-0 lead on this odd multi-format Ashes series and Australia need to win all of the five remaining fixtures to win the Ashes. That's a long way from impossible although the England women's team is a whole lot more reliable than the men's.

*At the MCG. Props to the Australians for holding all the women's fixtures at Test grounds!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well spank me with a prize leek and call me Lionel! Where did that come from?

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Sorry Lionel but I charge for spanking. [Big Grin]

I'm glad they managed to win a game, hopefully this victory will put some fight back into them and they'll win the next one, too.
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
Good to see England doing better in the ODI's. Yesterday's match was another nail biter!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
We had Celebrity Cricket on the box yesterday - the kindest thing I can say is that what they lacked in skill they made up for in enthusiasm. There was some really appalling fielding, some dire batting and some bowling that was just an embarrassment - but it was good fun.

p.s. the umpiring was pretty bad, too.
 
Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :
 
We had the same in Adelaide. By both teams. More importantly, my beloved Cadel lost by a second.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
If you can get past the absolutely tortuous wording of the second paragraph, I'd be interested in your take on this article by Mike Selvey.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Apparently, Andy Flower has been relieved of his duties as England's head coach. Can't say I'm shocked.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Apparently, Andy Flower has been relieved of his duties as England's head coach. Can't say I'm shocked.

Any guesses who'll be next in Paul Downton's office for an interview without coffee?

I'm sure there will be an Essex connection.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Goochy to take the next step then?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
India lost again to the Kiwis - one tie and 4 losses in the one-dayers is pretty dire. Great catch in the stands off a six, by a guy who looked distinctly Indian was the highpoint of the day.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I think England are playing India next, aren't we? Further potential for embarrassment...

It could have been worse, though. No-one (yet...) has released a song about the captain's average.

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
That is so brilliant!

On the subject of cricket-related music, I assume you've heard Neil Hammond's group 'The Duckworth-Lewis Method'? Their highlight is probably this little number but some of their other songs are rather charming.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Oh yes, I have both albums! As a blonde leggie I try to model myself on Warnie*, but I don't seem to be having a lot of luck getting my leg over Liz Hurley. Ho hum.

*well, I would if my action wasn't so redolent of Moulinexed amphibia.

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
So there was another T20 - not that it made the slightest bit of difference, except to Dernbach's international career. Why does he keep getting picked?

I enjoyed an article in the week by Atherton on how New Zealand were punching above their weight - with Jesse Ryder back in the side, that's a lot of weight! A friend is a big fan (in more ways than one) - he reckons Jesse proves that "Fat bastards can still be sportsmen!".

AG
 
Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :
 
Sachin's just been awarded the Bharat Ratna .

Well done, him!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
So, KP has been put out to pasture in the fertile fields of the IPL. I can't help but think that this might be the best thing for England in the medium term. What do you think?
 
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
It was coming.

Yes, in some ways the Botham of his generation, but even IB got that, at some point, you had to consider the team - KP doesn't seem to have worked that out.

Of course, if the MCC fail at all over the next couple of years all the KP fans will blame it on his exclusion...
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
It will certainly make for a quieter life for England captains over the next couple of years. His batting will be missed - I believe even after the Ashes debacle his test average was still 47 - especially in the shorter games, but I think it'll be a much more stable team without him.

From what little I've heard he seems quite philosophical about it as well, which seems out of character. All rather interesting.

AG
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
It all seems so enigmatic, so now the tea-leaves are being read by various pundits - we read that Cook got fed up with KP, or he was a nuisance in the dressing room, etc.

Don't the fans deserve a fuller explanation? I feel cheated really; he was one of few English batsmen I would pay to watch, maybe Bell as well.

Scapegoat?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Amazing.

2006-07. We lose an Ashes series, investigate, change things and recover to win three series in a row and, briefly, become #1 Test team (mostly it has to be said by changing the players).

2013-14. We lose an Ashes series. New Chief Exec sacks coach then, acting with under-pressure captain, new chairman of selectors, coach pro tem, previous coach and senior players discards our best batsman for at least twenty years in wake of a leading bowler's retirement, a top batsman's ill-health, loss of form by long-term first-choice wicket keeper and all round poor performance.

KP didn't have a good tour of Australia, but no England batsman did. He played some awful shots, but he was in company there too. Didn't all the batsmen, including the openers, persist in giving Australia's legside fielders catching practice?

It might turn out to be the right thing, but it is lousy timing with ODI & T20 tour of the West Indies coming up followed by the World T20. They could have been just the thing to regroup peacefully. The whole business, and I don't like to say it, looks like the new CEO and chairman of selectors throwing their weight around.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Well, I find it bonkers, unless there is some major trauma which has not been revealed. It's always possible.

But it's all so secretive. Does it have to be like that?

I read Boycott saying that KP played some stupid shots in Australia - hello, Geoffrey, so did all the other England batsmen.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Geoffrey himself played one or two in his career!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
Geoffrey himself played one or two in his career!

Yes, I remember Geoffrey playing about that many shots. [Snore]
 
Posted by shamwari (# 15556) on :
 
Peterson was a greatly talented misfit. He antagonised those in every team he played for, whether in SA or the UK.

The Telegraph carried an illuminating article describing his demise as a modern morality play. Basically that modernism with its emphasis on the individual and celebrity means that subordinating ones ego to the team is out of order.

KP is the cricketing equivalent of a tele-evangelist. They make pots of money. And they all inevitably bite the dust.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
Peterson was a greatly talented misfit. He antagonised those in every team he played for, whether in SA or the UK.

Not quite: I'm reliably informed they'd welcome him back with open arms at Surrey. But perhaps that's the exception which highlights your overall point. [Smile]


quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
The Telegraph carried an illuminating article describing his demise as a modern morality play. Basically that modernism with its emphasis on the individual and celebrity means that subordinating ones ego to the team is out of order.

I think you could find plenty of modern sportspeople who have no problem "subordinating" themselves to the team.

quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
KP is the cricketing equivalent of a tele-evangelist. They make pots of money. And they all inevitably bite the dust.

Yeah... No.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:



quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
The Telegraph carried an illuminating article describing his demise as a modern morality play. Basically that modernism with its emphasis on the individual and celebrity means that subordinating ones ego to the team is out of order.

I think you could find plenty of modern sportspeople who have no problem "subordinating" themselves to the team.


Then again batsmen are a special case. To be remotely effective in top-class cricket means that they have to play their own way and that is a mixture of the physical and mental. After all, how many chances does a batsman get? A bowler gets about a hundred opportunities to dismiss a batsman while for a batsman, one error and you're sat there for hours, unable to score a run.

I'd suggest it's for the team to adapt itself to the best players available. Cricket has had its share of primadonnas and utter bastards for that matter but plenty of teams have been successful despite animosity - by all accounts the Yorkshire dressing room in the 1960's wasn't a pleasant place, shown by many players moving on or quitting the game, but it didn't prevent the team from winning stacks of trophies.

As for The Telegraph, it ought to do a bit more journalism and a bit less po-faced, fourth form philosophy.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
So, KP has been put out to pasture in the fertile fields of the IPL. I can't help but think that this might be the best thing for England in the medium term. What do you think?

It's not bad for KP personally either : I gather that he has just today pocketed a million quid for working a dozen or so afternoons in the IPL.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Meanwhile in South Africa, Sean Marsh, who was picked against all form (first class average of 25 in past 2 years),bobs up to make a century.

Not that I saw any of it, owing to timezones, more's the pity.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Plus, MJ has ripped into the SA top order. Hosts have already lost four wickets. Aus on top, but very early still.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
That's very impressive stuff - SA did well to keep Australia to below 400, especially given how many runs Marsh and Smith made, but now they're in a nasty puddle left behind by the England team.

A thought - has Johnson been getting Siddle's meat ration as well as his own?

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I'm not one to enjoy Australia playing well but it's reassuring to see another side's batsmen and bowlers struggle. Puts things in perspective. Maybe Carberry isn't such a bad player after all.
 
Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :
 
And in more important news, India is 100-2 at stumps having sent off NZ quickish for 192. Sharma got 6 wickets! on the first day of the second test in Wellington.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PeteC:
And in more important news, India is 100-2 at stumps having sent off NZ quickish for 192. Sharma got 6 wickets! on the first day of the second test in Wellington.

Sharma! There's a name from the past. I thought he was little more than a net bowler nowadays.

Meanwhile, from the department of "Anything you can do, I can do better", South Africa are 206 all out, Johnson 7 wickets.

(edited for S.A all out)

[ 14. February 2014, 08:55: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
I haven't see any of the NZ-IND match. Have India been that good? Or have NZ been that bad?
Apparently our selectors knew by consulting the entrails of sheep that Shaun Marsh was ready to start scoring again. Bizarre. Aus will probably declare soon after he gets his half century (which looks likely, but of course is not guaranteed). SA are up shit's creek.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
I haven't see any of the NZ-IND match. Have India been that good? Or have NZ been that bad?
Apparently our selectors knew by consulting the entrails of sheep that Shaun Marsh was ready to start scoring again. Bizarre. Aus will probably declare soon after he gets his half century (which looks likely, but of course is not guaranteed). SA are up shit's creek.

Selecting Alex Doolan looks inspired too. Took his time then got stuck in. It might not be a great Australian side but right now it is very Australian, very together and enough people are in form to make it successful.
 
Posted by shamwari (# 15556) on :
 
SA well and truly walloped.

I wonder why Smith chose to field first on a wicket that was bound to deteriorate? Not that it would have made much difference as things turned out.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
SA well and truly walloped.

I wonder why Smith chose to field first on a wicket that was bound to deteriorate? Not that it would have made much difference as things turned out.

He probably hoped that the wicket would better on days 2 and 3 than on day 1. Problem was that SA's bowlers and especially their fielders weren't on form. Australia, in the field, are such a powerful unit that their opponents do well to pass 250, which isn't enough in Test cricket.

If I were Smith I'd instruct his batsmen to play the ball wherever Mitchell Johnson is fielding. They might not get so many runs but if he has to save one or two every over, it will affect his stamina and that will affect his bowling. After all, he bowls short spells. Heck you've got to do something about him and bowling to injure the guy isn't on.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
The NZ-IND match really turned around! 302 for McCullom! Extraordinary in the second innings.
 
Posted by McChicken (# 2555) on :
 
Unfortunately I couldnt get to the Basin to watch McCullum's 300 cos I had to work, but it's been a great day and a fantastic summer for NZ cricket.

Taylor's 3 centuries vs the Windies. Anderson's WR century. Beating both the Windies and India. And now this.

It feels good to be a Kiwi cricket fan for once. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
*desperately searches for Kiwi relation so he can claim NZ as his own*

No, seriously, NZ deserve huge respect for what they've achieved this summer, as does McCullum and, of course, the rest of the team who have stood around him.

AG
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
]Selecting Alex Doolan looks inspired too. ....... It might not be a great Australian side but right now it is very Australian, very together and enough people are in form to make it successful.

It no longer seemed that way in the second test!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Indeed - that last-session collapse (prolapse?) was straight out of the England Team Handbook!

I await the third test with considerable interest.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The entire England team, with more coaches, analysts, managers than players and that damn diet book couldn't beat Australia, but I big them up and they underperform (at last).
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Indeed - that last-session collapse (prolapse?) was straight out of the England Team Handbook!

I await the third test with considerable interest.

AG

I with considerable apprehension.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Warner's performed well, despite all the bullshit.
And Clarke has fought admirably against a brutal pace attack.
Aus in good shape.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
The series in SA really is shaping as a Battle of the Giants. Test cricket at its best.

Example: It takes a very good ball to dismiss Amla once he's set (ask the England lot against which he got 300!). So Ryan Harris bowled him with a beautiful fast inswinger, as good as some of Steyn's in the previous test.

A pity (for spectators though not for Aussie batters!) that Steyn has been hamstring for much of the deciding match of the series.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Granted, it was looking that way for a while. Aus are well and truly on top now. I hear Steyn will be back in the attack today. Let's see what he can manage. I think the damage has probably already been done.

[ 03. March 2014, 23:07: Message edited by: Dark Knight ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Another ton for Warner! Maybe the guy's a Test batsman after all.

South Africa looked doomed at tea. 15/3, Smith gone, nearly 500 still needed and four sessions to go. Boy are they missing Jacques Kallis. It'll be one heck of a save to draw this match, and the series.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
It would be awe-inspiring if they managed somehow to win, impressive if they managed to draw. It's been a proper rollercoaster of a series! I'm guessing that DK is a bit less apprehensive now? [Big Grin]

In rather more bizarre news, Abdur Rehman records figures of 0-0-8-0.

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Over the last few days we've been watching the Asia Cup from Fatullah in Bangladesh and although some of the cricket has been rivetting what has been more entertaining has been watching the reactions of the crowd - particularly the Rubenesque and conservatively dressed Pakistani and Bangladeshi matrons screaming their support for their team of choice - or screaming imprecations at the umpires!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
...and Australia finally clinch victory, and 2-1 in the series, with 27 balls remaining after a dramatic, hard fought, resistance from the South African tail.

How's the bum, DK? Must have been getting pretty squeaky!

AG
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Just happy it's over. In Rhino we trust. [Yipee]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
And England have won a series!

OK, it's only three ODI's against the Windies (without Chris Gayle) and we blew one and nearly another but a win's a win.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
I didn't recognise some of the names I saw on the roster. Where were they during the Ashes? Is the English one day team completely different from the Test side?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
I didn't recognise some of the names I saw on the roster. Where were they during the Ashes? Is the English one day team completely different from the Test side?

There are certainly a few who haven't played Test cricket (Parry, Jordan, Lumb) and others who haven't played Tests for a while, like Bopara and Morgan, who seem to be regarded as limited over specialists. Maybe the absence of "the defeated" has raised morale, though that could be a dead cat bounce.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I think that, given the T20 World Cup follows the Windies series so closely, that they've sent out the T20 squad rather than the full one-day squad, so it's even more unlike the Test squad (except that they've just lost, in which the resemblance is spot on).

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Oh boy. If you're going to punch something, at least keep your batting gloves on!
 
Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :
 
One of today's 20/20 matches was Ireland v. Zimbabwe. Ireland won, but in my opinion, didn't really deserve it. Zimbabwe made them work for it - the game was tied at 49.5 and the last ball was a Hail Mary kind of bowling and a Glory be from Ireland.

Ah, well, the lads will celebrate Patrick's saint's day tonight.
 
Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :
 
And today the Nederlands battered their way into the "Super 10" by defeating Ireland, and not only defeating them but doing it in 13.5 overs. A successful chase of 190.

It was an amazing game and Myfield got man of the match for his 62 off 28 balls*

*I may have the figure wrong, but not that wrong
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Did I mention that I've had the Dutch captain dropped off my bowling?

I did?

[Hot and Hormonal]

AG
 
Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :
 
Pakistan bowled Australia out for 175. What a shame! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
This edition of the Twenty20 World Cup has produced some real nail-biting cricket - long may it continue.

On other matters: in six years time we face the prospect of:

Twenty20 2020 World Cup

sounds like fun!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
This edition of the Twenty20 World Cup has produced some real nail-biting cricket - long may it continue.

Permission to be a grumpy old curmudgeon and point out that wondering whether the final over is going to produce a MEGA-SWITCH-HIT-SUPER-BOUNDARY-POWER-SHOT doesn't count as nail-biting.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
This edition of the Twenty20 World Cup has produced some real nail-biting cricket - long may it continue.

Permission to be a grumpy old curmudgeon and point out that wondering whether the final over is going to produce a MEGA-SWITCH-HIT-SUPER-BOUNDARY-POWER-SHOT doesn't count as nail-biting.
And I've seen backward points placed deeper than some ODI/T20 bounderies. #HarrumphHarrumph
 
Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :
 
The Windies beat back the Ozzies with 6 wickets and two balls to spare. This is a happy house!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
...and, unsurprisingly, India beat Bangladesh and are now assured of a place in the semifinals.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Thinking of the Australia - West Indies match: James Faulkner was on record as saying, prior to the match, that he doesn't like the West Indies - will he like them more or less now?
 
Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :
 
Interesting that Australia curled up and died last night versus India - all out for 86!

It will be interesting semi-finals in the T20!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Collapses seemed the order of the day yesterday with England rolling over and dying for The Netherlands and then New Zealand doing the same for Sri Lanka thanks to an amazing five-for by Herath - what a gem he was!

Today we have the race for the Wooden Spoon between Australia and Bangladesh, which could be fun, then the "quarter final play-off" between West Indies and Pakistan - that should be an interesting match.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
I'm a little bemused to see all this comment on the T20 tournament here. Y'all know this is a cricket thread, right?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Yes, of course, I'm sorry - I forget it is a game that the Aussies don't [can't?] play.

[Biased]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well, y'know, any cricket is better than no cricket...

AG
(could have had that Dutch captain. Argh!)
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Too right. Here is a list (probably not exhaustive) of sports we can't play:

Now there are probably others. What these items have in common is not just that Aussies don't play them well, but that they barely qualify as sports at all.

(x-post - the point is, T20 ain't cricket)

[ 01. April 2014, 08:35: Message edited by: Dark Knight ]
 
Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :
 
I note with interest that the Australian women have won the T20 World Cup - for the third time.

Pity about the boys, eh?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
So when an Aussie coach shouts "You're playing like a girl!" it is a compliment.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
p.s. - it probably always is.
 
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :
 
[Big Grin]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Poor old Trotty. It seems his attempt to come back to first class cricket have been put on hold due to a relapse in his stress related condition.

All the best to him and his family.

But, on this subject, I find the difference in tone between Nick Hoult in the Telegraph, and Mike Selvey in the Guardian quite amazing.
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
We had our first game of the season on Saturday. A 40-run defeat suggests we may have another long, hard slog ahead of us, but on the plus side I got a wicket* and scored 57 [Smile] .

.

*= I'm normally the 'keeper. But I'm also the only bugger in the first team who can bowl spin, so who knows what's going to happen this year... [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
We had our first game of the season on Saturday. A 40-run defeat suggests we may have another long, hard slog ahead of us, but on the plus side I got a wicket* and scored 57 [Smile] .

.

*= I'm normally the 'keeper. But I'm also the only bugger in the first team who can bowl spin, so who knows what's going to happen this year... [Roll Eyes]

Lots of byes, missed stumpings and dropped catches I expect. Put a Fat Lad behind the stumps, get him to keep his legs together and he might block some just by being there.

Good luck!
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Lots of byes, missed stumpings and dropped catches I expect. Put a Fat Lad behind the stumps, get him to keep his legs together and he might block some just by being there.

I'd normally agree, but the pretender to my keeping crown is my own dear brother so I'll demur on that count!

[ 24. April 2014, 15:54: Message edited by: Marvin the Martian ]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Pity about the loss, but that's a decent start for you, Marvin. I took 1-28 off 6 (it was 1-16 off 5, but someone decided to have a slog...), having heroically watched the, guy at the other end last two balls... We did win, though.

The forecast for tomorrow looks shocking, though. I just hope that if we lose the match to rain we lose the whole thing - the one thing I dislike about cricket (bar my level of ability) is having to play half a , get drenched, and abandon it. I'd rather the whole game or not at all.

AG
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
We got 30 overs in, and were 147-3 (M T Martian 33) (and well set for a 250-plus score and a probable win) when the rains came. Such is life.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
We got called off mid-morning. Given that it royally threw it down at about 2.30, the right call. So I still haven't faced a ball this season.

Anyone else think that CSK's yellow trousers add new pyjamaness to pyjama cricket?

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I'm a CSK fan but would still prefer them all to wear whites - but then where would the advertising stickers go? I hate Punjab's strip, it is beyond tacky!

Mumbai come back to India still win-less - they have Zaheer Khan, Lasith Malinga, Harbhajan Singh, Pragyan Ojha and Kieron Powell, some of the best bowlers in the world, so their batsmen must be really crap! Actually I think their problem is that they play as 11 individuals and not as a team.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
...and, shock horror, I've just realised there is no match tonight! What on Earth will I do all evening?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Eat? [Devil]

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
[Killing me]

Thanks for the suggestion!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I'm almost minded to arbitrarily exercise my hostly powers and ban all mention of the IPL from this thread on the basis that it isn't really cricket.

Only almost though. [Smile]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
I'm almost minded to arbitrarily exercise my hostly powers and ban all mention of the IPL from this thread on the basis that it isn't really cricket.

Only almost though. [Smile]

We'd need someone to look after "legal and commercial" matters as bankers, lawyers and multi-millionaires appear to be the main players in the IPL.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I agree it is not really cricket, I'm not totally convinced that it is even sport, but I can't see what other category it could be placed under - sometimes it is barely entertainment!


eta: particularly when a certain Pouting Tasmanian is on screen!

[ 02. May 2014, 07:22: Message edited by: Welease Woderwick ]
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
...we may have another long, hard slog ahead of us...

...or not. This weekend we were playing against one of the teams who came down last year, and after restricting them to 188 from their 50 overs we won by seven wickets with 17 overs to spare [Big Grin] .

We were 41-3 at one stage, but I was coming in at five so there were never any real worries [Biased] .

How did your weekend go, Sandemaniac?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Other things happening in life made it a bit hairy, but did get a match in (sadly said other things will limit that for a while).

We made 195-9 on a slab of mud with a crust, very slow pitch, so slow that the opening bowler appealed for LBW twice, only to be defeated by then hearing bat on ball!

They started so slowly they were never going to get near, though they weren't losing wickets, until with ten overs to go and 120ish to get (!) they finally started to tumble. I took 1-18 off 5 (four bad balls - each clubbed for 4...) but was wildly upstaged by a youngster of 66 who took 5-7, all bowled, and his figures would have been even better without a four off his last ball!

All out for 91 in the end.

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
In my paper the other day was a report from UK about Wirral CC [Wirral is my old stamping ground] getting Haslingden all out for just 3 - and two of those were leg byes! One guy got 7-1.

Quite impressive figures, I suppose.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Blimey! My works team (largely makeweights) has just won a game despite making just 113 in 20 overs! Twas a dank and dismal evening, and the outfield has only just got its first cut (twenty-odd tons of top dressing still sat on the boundary!), so it was horribly horribly slow going, hardly a boundary in the innings. I made 27 before being run out (by the bloke at the other end, of course, I guess it's karma for the number of times I've done it!).

Funnily enough, we caught superbly - I think the darkness mean lots of reflex catches, I know the one I took was! The opposition switched their order (lots of "Bugger! Trying to keep him there! when people got out), and their last pair were going famously (not helped by my bowling like a drain - I blame having the wind behind me) when with six to win off the last ball, batsman missed and keeper stumped!

Right, having said all that I can drunkenly slope off to bed...

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
What kind of numpty organises an international cricket match in Aberdeen on May 9th?

Guess what? It's raining and it looks like it will do all day.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
True, but Cricinfo's coverage has been hilarious. They should do it more often! Currently looks like 22 overs starting at 4pm which is a bit of a travesty, but if you will play in Aberdeen in May...

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Beg pardon, 23 overs...
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
That crucial 23rd over which turns it from a money-making farce to a genuine sporting occasion. [Biased]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
You could be right...

Just good to see it finally get under way - on a ground closer to Stavanger than St John's Wood!

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Just a brief mention of IPL, if I can claim the indulgence of IF for a minute:

I have got much malicious enjoyment this season from KP's complete disaster of captaincy of the Delhi Daredevils - a complete pig's ear, I doubt I could have scripted it better.

That's all.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
What is happening to England? We are winning ODIs! OK, it's early in the season, but any ODI win is good and a couple against Sri Lanka in a decade is good, let alone in a single series.

The gloomy part of me suggests this is another bowler-led dead cat bounce, and as soon as we get 500-run pitches, we'll be stuffed.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
What is happening to England? We are winning ODIs! OK, it's early in the season, but any ODI win is good and a couple against Sri Lanka in a decade is good, let alone in a single series.

The gloomy part of me suggests this is another bowler-led dead cat bounce, and as soon as we get 500-run pitches, we'll be stuffed.

Yes, you wonder if it's an early season phenomenon, whereby some English bowlers are able to exploit the conditions, dampness, and so on. Later on, if the sun shines, and SL pile up the runs, what then? I'm all agog.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Bugger the IPL final, I'v just watched from the other end while a good mate took


(wait for it)


(you will not believe this)


10-21 in 7.4!

Once in a lifetime stuff, and it couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Great figures, indeed.

But the IPL final was good as well - swung both ways, Gambhir chewing his nails. I had no horse in the race but it was an exciting spectacle.
 
Posted by Tom Day (# 3630) on :
 
Well the England test squad for the series against Sri Lanka has been announced (on the BBC here) and it looks quite exciting. I think our fast bowling with Jordan and Anderson should be dangerous, and Plunkett has looked good this year.

The batting line up also has some interesting choices - Obv Cook will open with Robson, but Bell, Root and Ballance will be middle order but in what order? Our weak link is going to be the spinner - no real out and out spin bowler but then we are preparing the pitches!

I'm looking forward to going to the second test at Headingley/

Tom


[Edited to include a link to click, because clicky links are nice. [Smile]
iF, Circus host]

[ 06. June 2014, 07:07: Message edited by: Imaginary Friend ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
With 12 in the squad I think Chris Woakes will carry the drinks. That gives England Anderson, Broad, Jordan and Plunkett to bowl with Prior and six batsmen, Moeen Ali joining the five Tom Day mentions.

I reckon Moeen will be asked to bat at 3, because Bell will throw his toys out of the pram if asked to bat there, though he is the obvious choice. Root will be at 6 and he can share the spinning duties with Moeen Ali.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I confess I haven't followed England's summer so far. I vaguely heard that we looked like we would do okay in the one-dayers, then lost. C'est la vie!

Does anyone hold any hope for the Tests?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
For those who can get it (I suspect that Wodders might struggle, for one!), I've managed to get my mate's feat into the Cricket Paper - they phoned him and have ran quite a nice little piece. Pages 37 and 38, I think.

Tests? I think "Hmmmm..." is my view there!

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Sandemaniac, I'm pleased for your teammate. Tenfers are very rare, even in schools cricket where there may be one outstanding bowler in an otherwise mediocre team.

As for England's prospects, I reckon the bowling looks good, especially with two genuine quick bowlers, but only two of the top six batsmen have much experience in Test cricket.

England need "sporting" wickets to prevent the opposition scoring a mountain of runs, because I don't think we are going to score 300+ reliably.
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
Ah, June, when a man's thoughts turn inevitably to that most anticipated of weeks...

Tour [Big Grin] .

Just two more days. I can't wait.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Do report back in when the hungover wreckage staggers home, Marvin!

AG
 
Posted by Tom Day (# 3630) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

England need "sporting" wickets to prevent the opposition scoring a mountain of runs, because I don't think we are going to score 300+ reliably.

We haven't scored 300+ for a long time... I'm kinda hoping that the new players dig in and show what they are made off. Bell needs to bat at 3/4 and be the linchpin - If he plays well we should do ok.

Tom
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Tom Day:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

England need "sporting" wickets to prevent the opposition scoring a mountain of runs, because I don't think we are going to score 300+ reliably.

We haven't scored 300+ for a long time... I'm kinda hoping that the new players dig in and show what they are made off. Bell needs to bat at 3/4 and be the linchpin - If he plays well we should do ok.

Tom

I don't think Sri Lanka or India pose the threat Australia did last winter. If Cook and Bell can do well, then the others will rise to it, but I don't see us doing well without those two getting plenty of runs, often. Then again, Lancashire, also under Peter Moores, won the County Championship three years ago with good bowling and out-cricket and just two class batsmen - the others were pretty run of t'mill.
 
Posted by Tom Day (# 3630) on :
 
A pretty good first day. Shame about the top 3 but the others have done well. Good to see Root in the runs and Prior back to what looks like his best with the bat. He always has been good in the 3rd session at plundering the runs!

Hopefully we can get to 450 by tomorrow lunch and then have them 5 down by the end of the day. Good game this cricket!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Having been put into bat, I would say that 340ish-5 is a decent day's work. Nice to see Lord Bell get a few. It'll be interesting to see if the pitch flattens out on day 2 and 3. If it does, then there's no reason Sri Lanka couldn't get a lead. Then it'll be all to play for. Bring it on!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
At 120-4 Sri Lanka must have thought that the decision to put England in was a good one. It doesn't look like that now, and the SL 'attack' has just about bowled England's middle order into form!
 
Posted by Tom Day (# 3630) on :
 
The wicket though is not helping a result. I don't know why we prepared such a docile pitch. If we can get a lead of 120 or so, we could force a result and put pressure on the Sri Lankans on Monday afternoon.

From what I saw on the highlights and listened to during the day our bowlers were ok, although Plunkett may have been a little short at times. We are in desperate need for a new world class spinner, but I cant think of any in the county game at the moment either. Jordan looks a good find though.

Tom
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Plunkett always bowled short in his earlier incarnation; like too many England bowlers he is scared to pitch it up in case he gets driven. While top batsmen can play spin bowling off the pitch they can only do that with quicker bowling If. You. Bowl. Too. Short. Do they want to be pulled and cut instead?

I reckon England did pretty well today. In the first half Sri Lanka made about 140-1, as they did yesterday then in the rest a bit less for five wickets! That ought to be worth a lead of about a hundred, so bat until an hour into day five and give Sri Lanka 75 overs to make about 400.

Armchair Captain signing off.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
The game was nicely poised, it still is, but then I realised I had nodded off and missed probably 2 overs so I am chickening out and heading for bed - it could go any way tomorrow - cricket at its best.
 
Posted by Tom Day (# 3630) on :
 
A good day of Test cricket that could hopefully give a result tomorrow. Hopefully Cook will Declare in the morning and give us 3 sessions to bowl out the Sri Lankans.

Well played Ballance - we needed someone to hold the innings together and he stepped up to the plate. In actual fact, the way we lost the wickets probably have helped us get the match into this position. Still worried about Cook's form - he needs to get a score soon.

Looking forward to checking the score during the day tomorrow.
 
Posted by TheAlethiophile (# 16870) on :
 
That was some finish! Well played Sri Lanka for just seeing it out, but it shows that by being sentimental and allowing Ballance to get a maiden test century, England should have delcared last night, giving them 40 minutes to bat.

Jolly exciting stuff, though.
 
Posted by Tom Day (# 3630) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:
That was some finish! Well played Sri Lanka for just seeing it out, but it shows that by being sentimental and allowing Ballance to get a maiden test century, England should have delcared last night, giving them 40 minutes to bat.

Jolly exciting stuff, though.

But then, the other side to that is that 40 mins previous to Ballance's century England had a lead of about 300 instead of 390. That extra 90 runs could have been different and Sri Lanka would prob have thought if we are 180/190 for 2 or 3 at Tea we could do it.

At 0-0 in the series at the first match, knowing that the pitch at Headingley is probably going to less of a pudding Cook's first thought is to bat them out of the game totally. Which we did. I think you always look back at declarations and think that they came 1 hour or so too late, or 50/60 runs too late but then that is hindsight. And if the target was different Sri Lanka would have a different mind set...
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Ah, yes, Headingley.

Not to the same extent as in days gone by, but this is a result wicket, provided the weather holds. England may well be tempted to play a spinner but why do so at Headingley? One needs another swing bowler there, or someone who can hit the seam reliably, rather than a spinner or a hit-the-deck merchant like Plunkett (though his runs are useful).

To keep the Tykes happy would Tim Bresnan be worth a recall or maybe Jack Brooks is worth a chance? He's no kid (age's 30) but he knows his craft.
 
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on :
 
I gather that England managed to bowl far fewer overs than they should or could have. It seems to me that this is very much shooting yourself in the foot. Does anyone think that the last Sri Lankan pair would have batted out another 30 balls - it didn't look likely, they only just survived the over. It seems very curious not to get on with it when you are needing wickets, given that there was no chance of the batting side getting the runs, certainly not after lunch.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
England's dull, defensive and unadventurous captain (according to a certain Australian) puts Sri Lanka in and his team dismisses them for just over 250. One of our better days.
 
Posted by Tom Day (# 3630) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
England's dull, defensive and unadventurous captain (according to a certain Australian) puts Sri Lanka in and his team dismisses them for just over 250. One of our better days.

With a hat trick for Stuart Broad as well, and 5 forLiam Plunkett.

I'm quite happy that we are batting and Cook and Robson are unbeaten as we are heading down in the morning for the day. Looking forward to taking the eldest mini day for his first day of test cricket. And the weather is looking fair!
 
Posted by TheAlethiophile (# 16870) on :
 
New film: The Muppets take to the crease at Headingly.

We bowled badly. The captain didn't direct his bowlers where to bowl. We played some right daft shots, including the night watchman.

It's not so much that Sri Lanka deserve to win. But the abysmal display we've put on since the last session of day 2, we deserve to lose. [Mad]
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Ugh! Defeat looks to have been snatched from the jaws of a possible victory. England really have been poor for the last two days.

Rebuilding will take some time, I guess. I also suspect Cooke's goose is cooked, and he might even prefer to lose the captaincy.
 
Posted by Tom Day (# 3630) on :
 
From around 5.30 on Sat, when we were 280 odd for 3 we have managed to throw away a seemingly easy victory. I think we have just lost that ruthlessness - pressing home the advantage. 2/3 yrs ago we would have won, probably in 3 days. We had the winning mentality.

We actually batted very well for the majority of Sat. Robson and Ballance looked in no trouble and the crowd were in shock really when Ballance went.

I don't think it is anyone's fault, we just need to win a few matches and then hopefully the players will remember what it is like to win, and know when to put the pressure on etc.
 
Posted by TheAlethiophile (# 16870) on :
 
The whole cricketing world knows Cook has a problem outside the off stump. The Sri Lankans have just continued what the Australians exploited in the winter. He needs to hand over the captaincy to Bell for the rest of the summer and concentrate on his technique with a good batting coach.

Joe Root will be England captain one day, but not for another five or more years.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Captaincy by a combination of inaction and I-haven't-a-clue! IF cook is still captain in the series against India I see great prospects for an Indian victory.
 
Posted by Tom Day (# 3630) on :
 
Wow. What an ending. I switched the radio on at 4ish expecting to find TMS finished for the day and have been hooked following the cricket and the football. Well played Sri Lanka - over the last 3 days they deserve the win, but credit to the English lower order today. Ali staying in all day and Anderson with an almost match saving 0 from 54 balls. He must have been devastated when he fended one off with 2 balls to go in the day.

The 2 tests have been an advert for test cricket, 2 teams both with some good players, but also some areas for development showing that the game is still well and truly alive. England should have won the first match, and had chances in the second. And sri Lanka saved teh first match and remained calm when it mattered. Well played!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
That was an incredible finish last night, I felt so sorry for Anderson and he looked so dejected - Moeen Ali was a star performer for England. Sri Lanka, as Tom Day said, deserved the victory that, quite frankly, I thought had passed them by.

Test cricket at its very best.
 
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on :
 
It was a very exciting series actually. Two excellent Test matches. Between - I would say - two rather average teams.

The Sri Lankan bowling is modest, I feel. England should have scored more against them. I think the England batting would look rather fragile against a more hostile attack and I'm not convinced by Robson in particular, despite his century - his footwork looks a bit slow. Ali and Ballance look more promising.

The England bowling is better, I think. Plunkett bowled very well at times, Anderson and Broad are reliable (though how much longer can Jimmy keep going?) and Jordan was OK too. They really need a good spinner though. Shame Monty seems to have lost the plot.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Can anyone explain to me just what the Trent Bridge groundsperson is smoking? Thanks. [Smile]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Can anyone explain to me just what the Trent Bridge groundsperson is smoking? Thanks. [Smile]

Just like the pitch: the wrong kind of grass.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
You're sure it wasn't anything stronger?

But having said that, India just lost four wickets for two runs. I didn't see it, but that sounds potentially like it'll let England vaguely into the game.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
If we can shift the last pair, who have already made 43 for the last wicket. England seem to have a bit of a blind spot when it comes to shifting numbers ten and jack!

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
If we can shift the last pair, who have already made 43 for the last wicket.

Make that 71...

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
If we can shift the last pair, who have already made 43 for the last wicket.

Make that 71...

AG

I reckon that has evened out those four soft wickets.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Especially with India's number ten biffing Anderson to the sightscreen for six to bring up the hundred partnership.

AG
 
Posted by TheAlethiophile (# 16870) on :
 
Cooooooooook!!!! [Mad]

Surely with form like that he is cannot be deserving of a place in the team. Forget whether or not he is captain for the time being, a batsman needs to be there on merit.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:
Cooooooooook!!!! [Mad]

Surely with form like that he is cannot be deserving of a place in the team. Forget whether or not he is captain for the time being, a batsman needs to be there on merit.

On that basis Mike Brearley would have played just two tests against the West Indies and England would have lost their best captain ever. I think he averaged 25 over forty-odd tests and never made a hundred.

Cook's different. He's not such a great captain (neither were Strauss or, IMHO, Ricky Ponting) but he is a top-class batsman who has been through bad form before and recovered. The main problem is that England has lost three of the top five batsmen in two years (two in the last six months) and Cook's poor form is very noticeable. Oh, and our most dependable bowler has quit, so the team needs more runs, especially in the first innings.

Apart from all that, if Cook doesn't deserve a place, who does? Do you want two rookie openers?

[ 10. July 2014, 17:01: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I wonder if someone else shouldn't take the captaincy for a while.

Also, I missed his dismissal. How was he out?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
According to Cricinfo, he was bowled leg-stump having moved too far across. [Frown]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Oh boy.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Oh Jimmy Jimmy,
Jimmy Jimmy Jimmy Jimmy Anderson!

What a morning. Highest ever tenth wicket stand by England, Jimmy gets his maiden First Class fifty, Joe Root gets another ton, and the Indian fielders look as ragged as England's did early in the match.

I'm sure it'll all end in a draw, but this has been a thoroughly entertaining session. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
...on a really terrible example of a test match pitch!

I was sorry Anderson didn't get his hundred but also relieved that we can move on a bit. Like IF I think a draw the most likely outcome - anything else would amaze me!

Test match cricket really is the ultimate - fascinating stuff.


[speeling]

[ 12. July 2014, 13:45: Message edited by: Welease Woderwick ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Is it me or does Jimmy Anderson suffer from missed catches more than other England bowlers? Matt Prior did his best feet-of-clay, gloves-of-iron act today, and not for the first time.

I'm not sure why this should be: maybe he deceives fielders behind the wicket just as he does batsmen.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Friendly bowling conditions, and two quick wickets. England have a tiny smidgeon of an outside chance here...
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Another wicket and we'll be into their batting.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Well, I won my bet - a draw with some positives for both sides, but few for the curator!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Brave decision by Captain Cook to put the Indians in. Pitch looks very, very green. But still...
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Can't Matt Prior give an Indian a shove, please?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
So long as we don't see him shirtless in a nightclub, I don't really care what he does.

Except, perhaps he could snaffle his chances like Ballance snaffles his twelfth pint.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
It's a very long time since I've seen a pitch as green as that for a Test Match - I find it quite heartening and it certainly seems to have been a bit lively!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
It's a very long time since I've seen a pitch as green as that for a Test Match - I find it quite heartening and it certainly seems to have been a bit lively!

My impression is that not only does it benefit bowlers (when they pitch it up) but there's also a bit of pace about it, which helps batsmen once they get in. Still, it's often reckoned that pitches are better on day 2 - let's see if England can make it pay.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Cook out for 10 this time.

Back in the sixties and seventies John Edrich spent most of his career playing outside off-stump and missing. More recently Marcus Trescothick did so almost as much. In between Graeme Fowler, all the time. All lefties, all openers.

David Gower on the other hand wasn't an opener but he was a very good batsman. He played and missed as much as any of the above but by going in at four it didn't matter so much as the ball wasn't moving as sharply.

Maybe Cook's problem is that he alone is good enough to get a touch. In addition to moving his feet should Cook consider moving down the order?
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
I think Cook will be given the rest of this series to prove himself with the bat, and as captain. If India win several tests, and England fail to win any, presumably he will be gone.
 
Posted by TheAlethiophile (# 16870) on :
 
He's had plenty of opportunities. In my view, selection has to be based on current form, not past glories or future potential.

Time for him to be given a break from the side so he can go and get some practice at county level, sort out his gremlins with a batting coach and, if his form merits it, come back on the winter tour.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Problem with that is that we're into that part of the summer where there's no Proper Cricket™ for him to take part in. It's all T20 and so on for the next little while. So perhaps there's a Second XI game he could play, or a club game, but is that really the answer?

I think it might be better for him to drop down the order. But the question there is who should open, and who to drop if that person is not already in the team?

I don't fancy being a selector grappling with that one!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
At least we have one left-hander who can lay bat on ball. Well done Gary Ballance!

And oh bugger, Moeen goes for 32. He's got everything but keeps getting out instead of kicking on.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Proper Test cricket in India's second innings: 169-4 in 63 overs. India got something like that in the last session of Day 1 so England have improved in at least one respect.

I'm wondering if South Africa shouldn't have batted Sri Lanka out of the game: SL have made 110-1 in pursuit of 370 and they are probably as good at chasing totals, even on Day 5 pitches.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well, the spin demon hasn't been seen much this year, but there were definitely mephitic odours and sulphurous whiffs about today - 2-50 may not sound great, but I was bowling at a County U17 player for most of it. Bowled the guy at the other end round his legs (always satisfying, even if I'd tried to bowl him a googly), then caught and bowled his replacement two balls later with an absolute blinder, full length across the strip and just got it in my fingertips. I also hit my second six in a week - straight over the bowlers head into the sightscreen, very satisfying. Pity I then conspired to run myself out and we lost, but that's cricket...

As for England, well, they needed Gus Fraser, they got Private Fraser.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:


As for England, well, they needed Gus Fraser, they got Private Fraser.

AG

As in "We're doomed, I tell ye. Doomed!"
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
The Fat Lady may be warming up in the wings but there are a few hours yet before she breaks into song and I'm not about to start counting any chickens when the eggs are showing no signs of cracking yet despite the [oh so supportive] doom and gloom on the ECB website.

Lots of stuff in the press here today about the ECB saying they have no plans to replace Cook and all that - so much so that if I were him I'd be really worried! I reckon he'd better watch his back walking through The Long Room today.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I have to say that I really felt for Joe Root when he played that really, really stupid shot! I would bet that will figure in his nightmares for a while.

I was surprised with the speed of England's surrender and wonder if/how it will affect the team selection for Southampton, to be announced tomorrow.

Meanwhile well done MSD and the boys.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Shambolic.

And sacking Cook won't make the slightest difference. This is collective failure from one to eleven. Illustrates perfectly the hubris of the England team. Stuck inside their bubble with their pseudo-psycho-babble and their fake Zimbabwean accents. It's not about "it just didn't quite go our way" or "on another day we would have done alright". It's about batting properly and bowling to the conditions. Cricket is, fundamentally, not rocket science, no matter how the England management and players would like to dress it up that way.

Ridiculous.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Screw talent. Let's get a few hard bastards in: think Brian Close, Peter Willey, Ken Higgs and, more recently, Paul Nixon. Can't understand why Glen Chapple didn't get more chances, especially in ODIs.

Ask around the county circuit and the coaches know who these guys are. There will be some surprises. James Taylor anyone?
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Yeah, none of my business but I agree with SS. Probably some hard bastards needed. If your lads capitulate to some genuine pace (our boy Mitch) or someone bouncing the ball around a bit (like Sharma just did), y'all probably need someone to put the fear of the many and various gods into the fielding team.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
When I heard yesterday that England's captain had quit I was surprised but thought there's an opportunity to turn things round.

Alas no. Steve Gerrard has retired as captain of England's football team. Cook is, as of 12:15 BST, still in place and regarded as "too stubborn to quit" by G Boycott, no stranger to stubbornness himself.

In other news Matt Prior is out of the rest of the Tests due to injury, but if the injury was as bad as it seems, why was he playing?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Denial?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
It's all a bit peculiar, isn't it? England win, win, win, then suddenly there's a precipitate collapse followed by an apparent total inability to drag themselves out of the hole. Admittedly there were signs last summer in the Ashes, which had "How the flip did we get that result" written all over it, but the magnitude of the ensuing collapse and the resultant shambles is startling. DK and Sioni might just have a point. I don't know if they were representative, but the Sharma bouncer I saw was only about 81mph - fast enough to cure me of constipation but surely that should be meat and drink to an international player?

As for Prior... I can only assume that England were backing him to play through the injury and come good, keeping is such a specialized role that he's the guy you surely should take fewest risks with injuries with? I hope he doesn't get replaced by Foster because I want Essex to go up this year!

AG
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
England win, win, win, then suddenly there's a precipitate collapse followed by an apparent total inability to drag themselves out of the hole.

I'm sure it's got nothing whatsoever to do with the tendency among the English sporting press (and many supporters) to start screaming about how shit the England players, coaches, selectors, etc. are as soon as they lose a single match, regardless of how many wins preceded it. That sort of thing can't possibly put any extra pressure onto them at exactly the time when they least need it, can it...
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Oh gods, no, Marvin, whatever makes you think there might be any connection at all?

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
England win, win, win, then suddenly there's a precipitate collapse followed by an apparent total inability to drag themselves out of the hole.

I'm sure it's got nothing whatsoever to do with the tendency among the English sporting press (and many supporters) to start screaming about how shit the England players, coaches, selectors, etc. are as soon as they lose a single match, regardless of how many wins preceded it. That sort of thing can't possibly put any extra pressure onto them at exactly the time when they least need it, can it...
Not a single match though, is it?

As Sandemaniac suggests, the Ashes win last year was the least-deserved 3-0 of all time and at least three first choice players have since left the squad, either long-term or permanently (Trott, Swann and KP). Prior is now out for a bit, Cook and Bell are out of form, Broad is injured, Anderson faces possible suspension leaving rookie batsmen and Liam Plunkett.
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Not a single match though, is it?

Not any more, no.

quote:
As Sandemaniac suggests, the Ashes win last year was the least-deserved 3-0 of all time and at least three first choice players have since left the squad, either long-term or permanently (Trott, Swann and KP). Prior is now out for a bit, Cook and Bell are out of form, Broad is injured, Anderson faces possible suspension leaving rookie batsmen and Liam Plunkett.
That's eight out of eleven players from a year ago who have either left, been injured or have other problems. So why are people so surprised and outraged that the result didn't go our way?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I think some of the surprise and outrage is about the manner of the defeats. It's one thing to try your best but get beaten by a better team. But some of the completely brainless capitulations in recent games (typified most obviously by that half-hour after lunch yesterday) is something completely different.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
You beat me to it, IF.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I suppose the most depressing aspect of the summer has been that it nearly started so much better. Instead of losing the Sri Lanka series 1-0 we came within one wicket and two balls of winning the series by the same margin. I'm sure the mood in the dressing room would have been entirely different in those circumstances.

It wouldn't of itself have improved Cook's captaincy or his batting but it would have given the team a lift and they would be far less afraid of failure, which is where they are now, IMHO.
 
Posted by iamchristianhearmeroar (# 15483) on :
 
So, Boycott, Botham, Atherton, Stewart and Vaughan all reckon Cook should jump before he's pushed. Only Aggers seems to think he should stay.

He's got to take a break surely? England need him too much as a batsman and he's just hopelessly out of form. Playing on and on and on doesn't seem to be doing the trick.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I wonder what they are saying now that Cook is in the 80s and England are 186/1. The boy has been playing well - I bet Jedeja will kick himself all night for that drop when Cook was on 15!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Is that "chomp, chomp, chomp" the sound of hats and humble pie being eaten by pundits?

England were pretty turgid at times, but anything-2 is a good days work in Test cricket.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
I'm not sure about that - there is still plenty of negativity heading Cook's way. If they don't win this test, wait for the missiles heading his way.
 
Posted by iamchristianhearmeroar (# 15483) on :
 
He has to prove he's still got it as a captain, as well as a batsman...
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Yeah, some of the pundits last night were very quick to go from "all is lost" to "all is good". One score does not a summer make for a top quality batsman, and if the pitch is slow and flat then there's absolutely no reason why India couldn't bat for two days on it. Especially if the English bowling is as insipid as it has been at times this summer.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Gotta love small village cricket. Back in the ancestral village at the weekend, played for the visitors as they were short, and with one ball removed both my third cousin and my third cousin once removed! Pity he's already got 109 but you take what you can get.

AG
 
Posted by iamchristianhearmeroar (# 15483) on :
 
Wickets falling. Good good.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
47 required to avoid the follow-on, with two wickets remaining. Looks a tall order but you know what last wicket partnerships have been like this summer. [Biased]

But, if we get them out quickly tomorrow, would you enforce the follow-on? Seems like a tough one to me. Trying to bat and score quickly for two sessions has it's appeal as it probably puts the game beyond India and gives the bowlers a short break. But perhaps the more aggressive thing to do would be to put them straight back in and try to finish it off. Tough call.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I think enforcing the follow-on would be the way to go, it's the only way that England can hope to win.

As for me, I'm hoping for a freak thunderstorm over Southampton.

Not really - if England do get a win it makes the next two matches even more exciting.
 
Posted by iamchristianhearmeroar (# 15483) on :
 
I think they've got to make a judgement based on the conditions. Is the ball swinging about a lot? Is spin taking in any foot holes? How confident do they feel about a fourth innings run chase on what could by then be a very deteriorated wicket?

The most important thing is to skittle the last two in very short order so that at least we have the *option* of enforcing the follow on!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
It's clear that England are doing better than India but the umpires are having a shocker. The two in the middle are seeing edges wher none exist, and when they unnecessarily called on the "man in the van" for a TV replay that went wrong too. I think there have been four outright errors involving top-six batsmen.

At this rate England could have to bowl India out, not merely take ten second-innings wickets.
 
Posted by TheAlethiophile (# 16870) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
I think enforcing the follow-on would be the way to go, it's the only way that England can hope to win.

It would have been. Cook's decision to bat was a very poor one, another nail in the coffin of his captaincy.

To bat again shows he has ambitions only to not lose this test. Winning has become such an alien concept to him he doesn't know how to aim for it.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Surely, Cook is being considerate to the moaners and whingers, by not following on. Now they have all afternoon to have a rest, and then they will be able to come back, moaning and whinging either later today, or tomorrow morning. I tip my hat to the Chief!
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
India 42/2 chasing 444. This is starting to look good for England!
 
Posted by iamchristianhearmeroar (# 15483) on :
 
As someone remarked on TMS over by over on the BBC website, Cook is only being true to English form - they beat sides by bowling them out, not making fourth innings run chases...
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Doubtless tomorrow the papers here will be baying for blood when last week they were saying how wonderful the Indian team was this time.

It was a just result, roll on Old Trafford!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
Doubtless tomorrow the papers here will be baying for blood when last week they were saying how wonderful the Indian team was this time.

It was a just result, roll on Old Trafford!

Yes, a good result for England, but India have a good chance at Old Trafford for two reasons: Anderson is likely to be missing and England might well do a like-for-like replacement, rather than bring in a spinner. If India bat first, Moeen's arm will be hanging out of its socket by teatime on day 2 and he won't do anything heroic later on.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
It usually turns a bit at Old Trafford doesn't it? Perhaps India will pick their spinner and we all know what will happen then...
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well, I'll bask in the glory for a few days, and wait and see what happens at Old Trafford. England are a bit like Stingray - anything could happen in the next half-hour!

Meanwhile it's back to watching the weather forecast - supposed to be playing Brendan from Strictly's side tomorrow, but the forecast is pants!

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Storm in Teacup officially over.

I reckon M S Dhoni and the India management can join the Third Test umpires in that humble pie eating banquet.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Aye. Man up the lot of you and get on with the cricket!

Speaking of which... the heavens opened after six overs, but the pitch was so dry that an hour and a half's rain was slurped up within a few minutes. Every other shower cloud just squeezed past the ground, and we got a full game in! Oh, and I got 3-11, the spin demon is back!

AG
 
Posted by TheAlethiophile (# 16870) on :
 
For anyone new to cricket, if you win the toss, opt to bat and lose 4 wickets for 8 runs in the first hour, you're not doing particularly well. [Two face]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Has to be said, that's more to do with the beautiful bowling from Jimmy and Broad, more than bad batting from the Indians.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I think Dhoni is trying to lull England into a false sense of security!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
I think Dhoni is trying to lull England into a false sense of security!

I'd like to thank him for motivating our bowlers [Biased] If we had held our chances India would have been out for less than a hundred.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
England now ahead, although they have lost two more wickets. Some gloomster suggests that if the partnership between Root and Moeen fails, England will be on the back foot.

I'd be happy for England to be out for 250. 300 would be great. With rain around we can't afford to waste time waiting for Cook to decide when to declare.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
On the other match: what inspired someone to schedule a Tast at Galle in August - the middle of the south west monsoon?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I meant Test, of course - sorry.

[Hot and Hormonal]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
On the other match: what inspired someone to schedule a Tast at Galle in August - the middle of the south west monsoon?

The same people who organised, IIRC, a Champions Trophy tournament in Bangladesh in the monsoon season there. That was beyond Duckworth-Lewis.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Decent morning for England, but worrying that Broad has a broken nose. What is the point of a faceguard on a batting helmet if it doesn't guard the face, ie by keeping the ball out?

This isn't the first time I've seen this. I suppose batsmen need a clear sight but a bit of improvement is needed.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Perspex face mask. [Biased]

But now the Indian middle order has done an excellent impression of the English middle order. Most amusing. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Super Mo has done a fine impression of Graeme Swann too. Plenty of spin, loop, pace variation; all he needs is a good arm ball.

A word for the umpires too: I wasn't impressed with them in the Southampton match, but here after the Anderson/Jadeja hearing they had an important job and while there were errors*, they had the players' confidence.

*What would Gary Ballance's average be without the three wrong/unlucky decisions in this series? I'm impressed with how well he takes them.
 
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on :
 
Very pleased to have managed to finish a match today! It had been pouring down but was just drizzling at about 2pm, so we decided to play a 20 over game. They scored 124, and we got the runs in the 16th over, 30 seconds later the heavens opened. Great timing! We would have got them quicker but our first three batsmen retired once they'd got to 30. Very satisfying to huddle in the pavilion watching the rain beat down and scoffing tea and cakes.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
In the current England Women's Test match, early in Day two, England are 25-1 in their second innings. In the first innings thirteen of the twenty wickets fell lbw, so I take it that the ball is "doing a bit".

Has anybody seen that many go lbw in a match?
 
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on :
 
Looks like a very low scoring match indeed, I wonder why?

92 and 43/2 plays 114.

If this were a man's match there would no doubt be lots of speculation about the pitch, weather conditions, application of the batsmen etc. As it is, cricinfo's commentary seems to consist entirely of
14.6 Bisht to Edwards, no run
14.5 Bisht to Edwards, no run
14.4 Bisht to Edwards, no run
14.3 Bisht to Edwards, no run
14.2 Bisht to Edwards, no run
14.1 Bisht to Edwards, no run

and similar, without any further detail. Which is a bit annoying as I'd be interested in the why as well as the what.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JonahMan:
Looks like a very low scoring match indeed, I wonder why?

92 and 43/2 plays 114.

If this were a man's match there would no doubt be lots of speculation about the pitch, weather conditions, application of the batsmen etc. As it is, cricinfo's commentary seems to consist entirely of
14.6 Bisht to Edwards, no run
14.5 Bisht to Edwards, no run
14.4 Bisht to Edwards, no run
14.3 Bisht to Edwards, no run
14.2 Bisht to Edwards, no run
14.1 Bisht to Edwards, no run

and similar, without any further detail. Which is a bit annoying as I'd be interested in the why as well as the what.

It's commentary like that which gives people the idea that cricket is boring.

btw, England 73/3, lead by 51 with 7 wickets in hand. Another lbw making 15 of 23!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Meanwhile India's men are 4 down already. Bloody hell!

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Happy independence day!!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Situation normal in the Fifth Test at the Oval. India 28-4 having been put in. G Boycott in usual form saying that

"Kohli is a really good player but in this form, even Chris Woakes could bowl him out".

What has he against Woakes? At this stage of his Test career he has a better record than Paul Collingwood.

England's women meanwhile are digging in, as Boycott loves to see. Barely two runs per over, and slowing down, but now 162 ahead in an exceptionally low scoring match (lbw count now 17 of 27!).
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
India five down. Good ball from Woakes and Vijay probably the only Indian batsman good enough to lay bat on ball.
 
Posted by TheAlethiophile (# 16870) on :
 
Worst Indian batting lineup I've seen in my lifetime.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:
Worst Indian batting lineup I've seen in my lifetime.

I can't agree. In the 1960's, their outstanding batsman was Mansoor Ali Khan, aka the Nawab of Pataudi jnr, who had lost the sight of one eye in a car crash. Most of the others were pretty ordinary. Then in the first World Cup in 1975 they made 132/3, (Gavaskar 36*) in response to an England score of 300+. Oh, and in those days innings were 60 overs per side.

[ 15. August 2014, 15:27: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by TheAlethiophile (# 16870) on :
 
1975 doesn't fall within my lifetime.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:
1975 doesn't fall within my lifetime.

You're very fortunate! Anyone who thinks cricket is dull now should have seen some of what passed for top-class cricket not so long ago.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Can anyone explain to me why Dhoni has a leg slip in so much of the time? I can't find a logic for it. [Confused]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Can anyone explain to me why Dhoni has a leg slip in so much of the time? I can't find a logic for it. [Confused]

I reckon it's a defensive ploy. India bowl at the body quite a bit and it discourages leg-glances.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Huh. I guess that makes sense, but I'd have him as a shortish fine leg to stop runs, since the chances of a glance going straight to the fielder have to be pretty small.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Whatever the plan is it hasn't worked this morning. Robson missed a straight one to be bowled, which isn't a good sign for a test batsman, but England have levelled the scores by lunch.

I'm missing Pankaj Singh. Not as threatening as Ishant Sharma but he has a great attitude and I think he can bowl longer spells than Ishant, which India might find useful today.
 
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on :
 
England 385/7 at the close of play, India utterly down and out. But you never can tell with cricket................

In other news, the Indian women polished off their target, a good win for them after a gap of several years. Wish they played a few more tests!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Joe Root is a player.

And India are falling apart at the seams. Heads gone.
 
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on :
 
India have gone, seams and all. 94 ao. Shambolic. What a disappointment, it's one thing to lose (and heaven knows all teams do), it's another not to show any fight at all.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Seams gone, India gone.

These last two test matches have finished in less than three days, within half of the scheduled playing time. The ECB can't be pleased and the county clubs that pay the ECB a small fortune to host a test can't be pleased to see two blank days thanks, not to weather, but to one side throwing the towel in. England were poor in Australia, but they weren't that bad, surely?

Really, India were pretty bad and I wonder if their performance was a reaction to the perceived unfairness of the disciplinary proceedings against Jimmy Anderson?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Dismal, dismal, dismal.

I suppose not unexpected but not good for the game at all. Could the current India side beat Zim or Bangladesh?

Joe Rootm ay look to be about 14 but what a player!

England's rebuild seems to be going well though I am still unconvinced by Cook - but who is the alternative?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I would say that the alternative is Root, but the issue is that the opposition captain would probably mistake him for the work experience kid at the toss.

I expect that Cook will continue with the Test captaincy right the way through the Ashes. If that goes badly, it'll be someone else's turn. If it goes well then he'll probably have (through necessity) matured into a decent skipper.
 
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on :
 
The England vs Indian women ODI is being live-streamed - interesting to see.
On cricinfo here (I don't know if this is available everywhere, but I think it's on youtube as well).
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
So the men's ODI is rained off without a ball being bowled. Where's the second match in the series? That well-known dry part of Britain, Wales. Hmm...

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Eyelids drooping, can hardly stay awake - England required run rate 12.85 with 12.5 overs remaining and 2 wickets in hand. Is it safe to go to bed yet?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
[Big Grin]

Now I feel all awake again!

[Big Grin]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
England looking likely victims of a ten-wicket loss at the mo. Good job we'll win the World Cup, eh?

In other news, the last link with a perceived golden era has been broken - Norman Gordon, last man alive to played Test cricket before WW2, last survivor of the last timeless test, and the only Test cricketer so far to reach 100 years old, has died. May it swing and seam off the heavenly turf.

AG

[ 02. September 2014, 15:15: Message edited by: Sandemaniac ]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Close... nine! Dear, dear me...

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
With nearly twenty overs to spare.

The last time I saw England so low was against Sri Lanka in c 2007 at Headingley. At least England scored runs that day, but SL, and especially Jayasuriya, made short work of a target of about 350 runs.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Found it! 1 July 2006, Headingley

England 321-7 in 50 overs (Trescothick 121)

Sri Lanka 324-2 in 37.3 (Tharanga 109, Jayasuriya 152). Bresnan 2 overs for 29, Kabir Ali 6 for 72 and Harmison 10 for 97. It was horrible.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I love the way England are lulling the rest of the world into this false sense of security before the World Cup.

I'm delighted with India's performance but think I'd have preferred them to win the Tests and lose the ODIs.

More interesting this week was Zim beating the Aussies and dropping the Aussies down the rankings.

[Big Grin]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I didn't watch any of the one-dayers because, y'know, it's not proper cricket. But reading about the fallout in the media afterwards makes me wonder:

Is there a single good reason why Alistair Cook should remain as one-day captain?

I can't think of one.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The only good reason for retaining Cook now would be that the ECB would, without doubt, appoint another unsuitable captain.

They should get the team sorted out first, trying some combinations without Cook, then appoint the captain from the eventual starting XI.
 
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on :
 
Yeah, I kind of wish that England had lost the last ODI, thus making his position in the team (even) less tenable. We can surely do better. Not that I care very much about ODIs, but they are better if they are competitive.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I had a very strange dream last night, or was it a nightmare as it involved Geoffrey Boycott?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
We were horrified when my elderly father, recovering from major surgery and still at a point when we didn't know whether he'd ever walk again, agreed with Geoffrey Boycott on something. We thought it was the end. So did Dad. Thankfully it was just a blip, and his recovery has continued apace!

In other news, Essex need 21 to beat Kent in a smidge over two days, which should see them go third. I can't imagine they can make it to a promotion place, but I guess that's life.

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Oh, I think that's a little harsh. I'm not Boycott's biggest fan, but when it comes to Test match batting, I think it's fair to say that his approach of occupying the crease does have some merit. As does his insistence that pace bowlers in English conditions should probe his famous corridor.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
I had a very strange dream last night, or was it a nightmare as it involved Geoffrey Boycott?

If you were batting at the other end, you would be right to be worried! G Boycott was a poor and selfish judge of a sharp single. OTOH, he's as reliable a judge of Test match batting as exists.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
As does his insistence that pace bowlers in English conditions should probe his famous corridor.

That's got to smart...

Funnily enough he was talking about the bowling - England were dropping everything short, and he was (even I agree on this one) adamant that they should be bowling a much fuller length.

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
But he is soooooo BORING!!!!
 
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on :
 
He is often quite predictable, to the point of parodying himself, but equally is is often right (and forthright), and is a good judge of cricket - though not necessarily a great commentator.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Yes, he's definitely a better pundit than commentator. And while he does often bang the drum to the point of obsession, I think that is often the right drum to bang.

And he's not always in favour of the conservative approach, either. I forget which Test it was this summer, but England were batting in the third innings, had a substantial lead, and there was some rain in the forecast. Boycott was adamant that England should get the Indians in, even if it meant setting them a total that they had a chance of chasing.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Boycott has his principles which he has had for nearly fifty years and the top two are:

- If your bowlers can't get a side out in the fourth innings for < 300 you don't deserve to win.

- If five batsmen won't get you the runs you need what gives you the idea six will?

The consequences are that you always have five bowlers and that you must have one or two batsmen that stick around. Like Boycott.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I was a little discombobulated last night by a storm moving in more than halfway through Lahore Lions innings so that we lost TV signal for a while and I didn't get the result until this morning. I have no horse in the race but was amused that Lahore had beaten Mumbai.

Yes, I know Champions League T20 is not really cricket but it will do until something better comes along.
 
Posted by David (# 3) on :
 
Are there any other DBC14 players on the Ship?
 
Posted by David (# 3) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by David:
Are there any other DBC14 players on the Ship?

That'd be nobody, however those that have been scarred in the past by still-born and desperately useless cricket sims need to know that there is finally a game that is like cricket.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I'm afraid that when it comes to cricket sims, this is about as real as I can manage!

[Biased]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Harrumph. Essex won by an innings, but so did Hampshire and as a result Hants get promoted.

Ah well, there's always next year...

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
The Champions League Final tonight was won by Chennai SuperKings which makes me a very happy bunny!

Next week we have an ODI at our local stadium, I will not be going but will watch India v West Indies on the box.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Shut up KP, nobody's interested.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I love Swann's comment quoted in the morning paper here:

The biggest load of fiction since Jules Verne!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
The Bonzo Dog Band's take on KP.

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
In fact, rather than talk about you-know-who, why not read a rather lovely piece of writing?

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Holey moley, can't get tighter than that!

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
A maiden in ODI's is rare enough, unusual 'at the death', but a double wicket maiden to win by one run is exceptional!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Yes, I suspect there are cucumbers that could learn a few things from Glenn Maxwell!

I wonder what "How the fuck did we lose that?" is in Urdu?

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Urdu and Hindi are basically the same language, or very similar, just written differently - the Muslim guy who introduced me to India all those years ago maintains that all the swear words are in the Hindi bit, not in Urdu - but that doesn't stop him using them when driving!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
And did you see this bit of fielding* by Steve Smith? Is that even allowed?!


* That's a link to a vine, in case you don't like that kind of thing.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I can't see anything against in in Law 32 (caught). The only... hang on, what's that creeping up on me, this seems to be pretty good confirmation.

Given how much ODIs in particular seem weighted towards the batsman, it's about time someone started doing something about it...

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Interesting. Thanks for posting that. Do you think Smith knew of a change of interpretation that took place less than two weeks before the game?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
You have to wonder, don't you?

AG
 
Posted by Macrina (# 8807) on :
 
I think I read on cricinfo that the Aussies were aware of it and took advantage.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Of course they'll say that now!
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
Warming up my cricket game for the dry season, what the heck are the Windies trying to pull, backing out of India like they have just done?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I think, Uncle Pete, it is just a little matter of the players liking to get paid, as per their contracts, for what they do.

No Pay, No Play seems fair enough to me.

WICB are not exactly the best organised cricket board in the world. BCCI are now talking about suing WICB [not the players] for breach of contract.

This could be fun.

Meanwhile the Sri Lankans have been offered a five Test Match series, which seems a pretty good idea to this lover of the five day game, or Proper Cricket as it is more properly known.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
p.s. there also seems to be some sort of sentiment or assertion that the players union has or had [allegedly] sold the players down the river or made agreements with the board without consulting the membership - or so I am led to believe by newspaper reports.

I hope, having been an ardent trades unionist for 50+ years, that I am wrong in this.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:

WICB are not exactly the best organised cricket board in the world. BCCI are now talking about suing WICB [not the players] for breach of contract.

BCCI and WICB. Tricky. That's like the Mohammed Fayed/Neil Hamilton libel case in that most reasonable people would want to see both parties lose.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
This morning's paper has amended the upcoming series with Sri Lanka as 5 ODIs which is sad as I was expecting Tests but it is better than nothing.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Sri Lanka just rolled over yesterday in the first of the ODIs, sad really as I was hoping for a bit more fight from them - the Indian openers were superb with a century apiece so a well deserved victory but Lanka needs to work on its batting, bowling and fielding - apart from that they were fine.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Meanwhile, I notice that the Aussies on here have gone a bit quiet. Just a shame it was Pakistan who shut them up.

[ 03. November 2014, 11:47: Message edited by: Imaginary Friend ]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Losing to Pakistan by 356 runs was certainly significant [Snigger]

I think it is the Aussies first series loss to Pakistan in 20 years.

Perhaps not ideal preparation for the World Cup even if it is a totally different format.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well, now we know all England need to do to beat Australia next year is to field some decent spinners.

Oh.

Bugger!

AG
 
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Meanwhile, I notice that the Aussies on here have gone a bit quiet. Just a shame it was Pakistan who shut them up.

Believe me, there's a kiwi who is shall we say struggling to remain quiet! Kiwis rarely have much to crow about cricket-wise, and support anyone who plays Australia.

[Yipee] [Yipee] [Yipee]

On a more sombre note, though, kiwi great Martin Crowe looks to be losing his battle with cancer [Tear]
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Meanwhile, I notice that the Aussies on here have gone a bit quiet. Just a shame it was Pakistan who shut them up.

Do England still field a team?
Pakistan thrashed the team that thrashed the English cricket team in the last Ashes series. That's hardly got to be a great feeling.
Still, good to know people miss our contributions around here.
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
Free to air International Cricket on telly starts in OZ today. [Yipee] [Yipee]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Free to air International Cricket on telly starts in OZ today. [Yipee] [Yipee]

Yay indeed! Congrats to Cricket Australia and Channel Nine.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Free to air International Cricket on telly starts in OZ today. [Yipee] [Yipee]

Well ... 20/20, anyway.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
Do England still field a team?

Given the gap in the test schedule, it's not just you wondering that! Big gap, World Cup (at which, no doubt, we will continue our post-1992 record), then straight into a crazy number of tests. Hmm, can't see anything wrong with that, can you?

About time someone somewhere got to see some free-to-air cricket. Sky's coverage over here drives me bats, it seems like every two overs there's an ad for a bookmakers of some sort.

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I don't think there are many completely free channels over here but there be some national cricket on DD [state run channels] but the international stuff is all on paid packages, mainly Star [Sky/NewsCorp's local equivalent] but Sony and a couple of other channels get a look in for stuff happening elsewhere in the world. Star also sponsor the India team so this arrangement could go on for a LONG time!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
p.s. the series here all seemed to be sponsored by mobile phone companies, one of which has the slogan nothing like anything - having owned one of their products I can surely say that it was nothing like a mobile phone!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Sri Lanka were slightly improved last night but still got hammered - to win the series they have to win the next 3 matches!

Erm, it would be fun but seems unlikely.
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
South Africa thrashed us in the first 20/20 on Wed. We thrashed em today. [Big Grin]

Sunday's decider should be a good un.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
In yesterday's paper Pouting, Border and S Waugh were all supporting Clark and saying how the loss to Pakistan was just an aberration.

Still fun, though.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
In yesterday's paper Pouting, Border and S Waugh were all supporting Clark and saying how the loss to Pakistan was just an aberration.

Still fun, though.

Yup, definitely Pouting. In fact they were all pouting.

(Bad WW. No cake)
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
In yesterday's paper Pouting, Border and S Waugh were all supporting Clark and saying how the loss to Pakistan was just an aberration.

Still fun, though.

Hmmm. They were losses, plural. And big ones. I think they are a major cause for concern.
Plenty of reason to pout. [Frown]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I noted a pop-up today on Cricinfo "Sachin says that England won't win world cup".

In other news from Sachin "Pepsi is not Coke" "Black is not white" "Pope is not protestant".

AG
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
It's a bloody good ball. But it's hardly the ball of the century.
I mean, come on. [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
For one thing, Gatting provides a much larger obstacle.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Larger, for sure. But also less agile and so has a harder time getting in the way of the ball. These two factors cancel each other out to some extent, don't they?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Speaking of Gatting, 51allout had a link to this absolute gem today. I confess I hadn't remembered it happened, but it is truly fantastic.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
It's a bloody good ball.

It certainly turned a long way, especially as his arm is almost over his other shoulder, and it had to because it was bowled from quite wide in the crease, but I think the sheer amount of drift to leg Warne got makes his delivery tops there. There was no way that ball was ever going to get near the stumps, whereas Sodhi's might well have

Still, it's nice to see a leggie in action again! If I could bowl one ball that good I'd die a happy man.

Interesting to see how many balls Pakistan faced for all those runs, too - looks like some grafting going on. Or do they just know they have all the time in the world?

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:


Interesting to see how many balls Pakistan faced for all those runs, too - looks like some grafting going on. Or do they just know they have all the time in the world?

AG

That's Azhar for you. Pakistan have had patient batsmen before and mentally he's in the mould of Hanif or Mudasser. Every side needs one or two and he's a very neat batsman too.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Last night Rohit Sharma acted as if he is keen to retain his place in the side now he is fit again - 264 is an amazing score for one batsman in an ODI!

Sri Lanka are now 4-0 down with one game to play - they don't appear to have a clue at the moment, but then 405 must have seemed a daunting target - Mathews was looking very dispirited - and they dropped Rohit no less than three times!

[ 14. November 2014, 11:08: Message edited by: Welease Woderwick ]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
Last night Rohit Sharma acted as if he is keen to retain his place in the side now he is fit again - 264 is an amazing score for one batsman in an ODI!

Oh good... I thought I'd dreamed seeing that!

AG
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Larger, for sure. But also less agile and so has a harder time getting in the way of the ball. These two factors cancel each other out to some extent, don't they?

No.
Our lads looked like they were in trouble against SA yesterday at the WACA, but Warner and Bailey dragged them to a respectable total which couldn't be matched. Philanderer's stats for the visitors looked impressive to me, as did Coulter-Nile's for Aus. The expected showdown between the express pacers Steyn and Johnson on the lethal Perth pitch never really eventuated.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Our blokes are not making it easy for themselves - 154 is a very small total to defend, even in Perth. But they have two out already, including Amla, who is very dangerous.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Seven down chasing 154 - well, you made 'em sweat, anyway.

AG
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Seven down chasing 154 - well, you made 'em sweat, anyway.

AG

That was never going to happen, was it? You can't give a team of SA's talent the opportunity to chase such a small total.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
No, but taking seven in the circumstances is a bloody good effort.

With the World Cup looming, there'll be plenty of opportunity to watch England bowling at such targets...

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
You think we'll get that many?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well, y'know, I am an optimist.

AG
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
Australia 2-1 up in the ODI series against SA. [Yipee] [Yipee]

It's fun when it seems to be anybody's game.

Smith was entertaining in his unorthodox batting!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
So, I'm trying to convince myself to manufacture some interest in 50 over cricket and the upcoming World Cup. But I must admit that it's a bit of a struggle. So perhaps you guys can help me out: Why should I bother?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Any cricket is better than no cricket?

AG
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
I'm not particularly fond of ODIs, but today's match between Aus and SA was a cracker. SA tumbled under intense pressure from Aus in the last overs, and Smitty and Faulkner finished off what I would have thought almost unwinnable as late as the thirtieth over in the final innings.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Any cricket is better than no cricket?

Yeah, but is it really cricket? I suppose it probably is. Just about. I dunno. Still not really doing it for me.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I'm doing my best for you here! I can't say as I'm that keen either myself which doesn't help. Mind you, Aus-SA does indeed look like a decent finish.

Really and truly I'm waiting for April, and nursing the knees, for when the spin demon can emerge form a cloud of mephitic smoke again.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
I'm doing my best for you here! I can't say as I'm that keen either myself which doesn't help. Mind you, Aus-SA does indeed look like a decent finish.

Really and truly I'm waiting for April, and nursing the knees, for when the spin demon can emerge form a cloud of mephitic smoke again.

AG

The knees and the creaking shoulder remember!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Shoulder's OK at the mo. I s'pose I could get a wheelchair and get wheeled to the crease by someone - it might add a bit of extra pace!

AG

(yes, I really am that slow)
 
Posted by Evangeline (# 7002) on :
 
A really horrible accident at the SCG today, Phil Hughes in critical condition, had to be helicoptered to hospital after being hit in the head by a bouncer in a domestic game.

web page
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
The hospital just tweeted that he's out of surgery but still in a critical condition.

[Frown]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Prayers ascending for Phil and his family, and not forgetting Sean Abbot, who must be having the lowest day of his life.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
[Votive] Phil Hughes and his family
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Phil Hughes died in hospital overnight. Link. What a shame.

[Frown] [Votive]
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
[Tear]
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Well said, IF. I honestly still can't believe it. Horrifying.
[Waterworks]

[ 27. November 2014, 05:57: Message edited by: Dark Knight ]
 
Posted by Evangeline (# 7002) on :
 
I can't believe it either, just so terribly sad [Tear]

[Votive] for his family & friends. May he RIP
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
FFS. It's a sport. Nobody should die at that age for their sport.

[Votive]

And for Sean Abbott as well. His troubles are just beginning.

[Votive]

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I haven't seen all the details of this, so perhaps I could ask: There's no suggestion that Abbott did anything improper, right? The injury was caused simply as an accident when a regulation short ball hit the batsman?
 
Posted by Ad Orientem (# 17574) on :
 
Having looked on YouTube it certainly looks like a regular short ball. It was just shit luck.
 
Posted by Evangeline (# 7002) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
I haven't seen all the details of this, so perhaps I could ask: There's no suggestion that Abbott did anything improper, right? The injury was caused simply as an accident when a regulation short ball hit the batsman?

I haven't seen anything to suggest that Abbot did anything improper. The cricket world is rallying around and supporting him too. Seems as though it was just a really freak accident.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Everyone has already said what I could imagine saying.

RIP Philip Hughes

[Votive] for him, his friends and family and Sean Abbott.

[ 27. November 2014, 11:01: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Okay, that's good to know. Thanks.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I must admit that I'm usually too stony to be affected by this sort of thing, but the 'put out your bats' tribute to Phil Hughes has been very touching. I really hope it is some small crumb of comfort to his family and those who knew him.
 
Posted by Evangeline (# 7002) on :
 
Watching the Fbook tributes etc and there's a lovely tribute with footage of Phil Hughes, who really seemed a lovely, down-t-earth country lad. It makes me cry and yet we can be so indifferent to the deaths of so many others.

Kudos to the classy bats out tribute at the NZ vs Pakistan game. Apparently the game is very subdued.

[ 28. November 2014, 23:19: Message edited by: Evangeline ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The Pakistan v NZ game may be subdued in tone but McCullum has scored a quick 200 and New Zealand have run up 600+ at nearly five runs an over.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Some good cricket news. Let's hope he can keep it up.

The Test matches and ODIs are going so badly either.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
For those like me who think that test cricket is still the ultimate test of cricket skills - including mental fortitude - we've just had a splendid example in the Adelaide Test between Australia and India. This was the first test of the series, as what was to have been the first test in Brisbane last week was postponed to allow the players to get their heads more in less in order after the death of Phil Hughes, especially as several of the Australian team were on the field when Hughes was felled.

One such was Dave Warner, who set the tone with a century on the opening day. Then he got another century in the second innings. So too Virag Kohli, who batted superbly - in contrast to his reported form in England. On the last day, he helped India to 2/200 odd at tea, putting the target of 364 within reach. But Nathan Lyon bagged 6 wickets in the last session to win the match for Australia.

Injury-related changes in both teams may make it even tighter for the second test next week, with Clarke (back and hamstring) out for Australia and MS Dhoni (recovered from broken finger) back in for India.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Yes, well said Tukai. Test cricket at its best. One can see why IF infinitely prefers the Test form to the others - when it is great, like the Adelaide match, it is so much better than ODI and 20/20 that it is like a different sport.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The more I read of Day 5 the more I realise what a great Test match this was. A great finish, and that was mostly thanks to Michael Clarke backing his bowlers to bowl India out.

He's out for the series now, but I hope Clarke can come back soon. I've heard that he might be retiring because of persistent injuries. Chronic back pain just doesn't go with a stop-go, all-day game, especially one played 'bending over'. Hamstring injuries on top don't look good.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Yes, an excellent game - just a shame the good guys lost [Biased]

I'm sad that Clark is out but will be happy to see Dhoni back for the rest of the tour.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Yes, a magnificent advert for real cricket.

Meanwhile England... do you, know, I'd much rather talk about Australia and India than England right now, because it's far more interesting? A great-great uncle was at ANZAC Cove, and I'm fond of a ruby murray, but that's as close as the connection goes, and I still struggle to give a flying one about England's pyjama-clad travails.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I don't suppose anyone is too surprised that Alastair Cook has been replaced as England's ODI captain, especially as the ECB were still publicly backing him on Wednesday. Not that Eoin Morgan is a great replacement, I'd have gone straight for Joe Root (who is also a better captain than Stuart Broad, our odd choice for T20 skipper). And can someone explain why Gary Ballance isn't playing ODIs? He might be a pudding, but he doesn't drop catches, gives the ball a fearful whack and of all England batsmen, he's the one people like to bowl at least.

Still, hail to the Press! Let then select the Team! And someone get Michael Vaughan a proper job, please. If Poundshop sold G Boycott, it would be Michael Vaughan.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Vaughan has slowly been turning into a parody of himself since he retired. His metamorphosis is almost complete.

That said, this is the right decision, if taken seven games too late. I still think Cook can be a world class Test batsman and a decent Test captain. It seems to make sense to let him focus on that. IMNVHO.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Sounds as though Ballance is in now, has Sioni had Paul Downton's ear, I wonder?

The wisdom of picking a captain who's hardly scored a run of late...

And Vaughan just needs a good slap. Preferably with a cricket bat.

AG
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Do we get a new cricket thread? Have I missed it?
I didn't predict Aus' near total domination of India in the Test series down here. India's fielding has been woeful. Australian fielding has also been nowhere up to standard. Thankfully, our lads are batting like the very devil. Smith looks like a batting savant at the moment who can apparently only get himself out - as he did in the third test prior to getting his double century.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
No, I haven't seen one either, DK - perhaps start one once this series ends?

It has looked like a bit of a batting masterclass from over here - much like the one AB DeV handed out to the Windies.

Roll on April... I'll follow the World Cup because it's there, but it ain't the real thing.

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
You can start a new thread whenever is convenient. Or if you prefer I can modify the title of this one and make it an Everlasting Cricket Thread. Whichever you prefer.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I'm sure there's plenty of scope for everlasting gags about cricket... especially with a World Cup coming up!

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Okay, let's go with that then. [Smile]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Finally got around to doing the thread title change. Sorry for the delay.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Good call on the title, IF.

Who are they lining up for England's warm-up matches? It sounds like England vs Ilford 2nd XI!

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
England's 391 in 50 overs is impressive but against opposition that is for the most part 'promising' one would hope to bowl them out for less than 331.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Although a certain G Maxwell did hit 137 off 89 balls. But otherwise agreed.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Just dropped by to say exactly that.

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Did anyone else hear Eoin Morgan on the radio this morning? I can only assume he's been working on his accent for the press, because he sounded Scandinavian!

Tri-series... with India and Australia... just before the World Cup... Better stock up on lube, I think this might be painful!

AG
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
...Tri-series... with India and Australia... just before the World Cup... Better stock up on lube, I think this might be painful!

AG

[Tear]

You never know, what with our young boys [Help]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
First match, England bat first and reach 69-5 at one point. Somehow they rally to 230-odd, but Australia are making easy work of the chase so far. More lube, please.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I can take being shown how to play cricket by Australians (lots of practice...), but by an Irishman is what really hurts. I hope Warner buys Morgan a beer, because without his innings Warner would never have had the chance of getting what looks on the Cricinfo ticker like a fairly classy ton, and coming within a gnats knacker of carrying his bat. A few nervy moments at the end, sounds as though Maxwell got a duffer, but far too late.

AG
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Yes, Oz was nervy at the end - but only at getting the runs in 40 overs!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Not something I've seen before - from Ireland vs Scotland in Dubai...

"No result (abandoned with a toss)"

Presumably someone could give a toss about it?...

As for ABDV... the mind boggles!

AG
 
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on :
 
149 in 44 balls? That's insane!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
ODIs are insane. They're just a slogging contest. No balance between bat and ball. Boring.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
After David Warner's spat with Rohit Sharma, in which Warner demanded that Sharma should "Speak English" I wonder if Aussies are going to speak Hindi next time they tour India?

Really, Warner's a heck of a cricketer but he's a yob, or whatever that is in Ocker.
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
Sharma was yelling in Hindi at Warner which was why Warner asked him to speak in English.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
The first words I ever learnt in Hindi, as my friend was driving me round Delhi and explaining to other drivers their shortcomings, were not words that I would have wanted to repeat in English.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
OK, where the flip did that come from?

AG
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
India was asleep at the switch and never got going. A well deserved win for the England team.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
India brillaintly and deliberately allowing England and Australia a false sense of security prior to the World Cup.

Well, it would be nice if I could believe it.
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
Australia is already into the final even if they don't win any more games.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
Sharma was yelling in Hindi at Warner which was why Warner asked him to speak in English.

That's putting a gloss on it. They both looked bad-tempered.
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
Exciting cricket tonight when a seagull was struck by a ball and thought to be killed. It was carried reverently from the ground, but did a Lazarus sometime later and returned to the ground to field as though nothing had happened.
Obviously hoping for a place on the Auusie team.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
A couple of notable ODIs. Austalia beating England with a ball to spare, Steve Smith getting another century, and a New Zealand 6th wicket stand of 267 in 30 overs. That pretty much ruined their match against Sri Lanka; I'm sure Sri Lankans tried, but when you've been battered like that, it's hard to recover.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
It's all a bit of a bat-fest at the moment, isn't it? Having been in a shop yesterday with a few minutes to spare, I investigated the bats, and was startled to discover huge bats with edges like railway sleepers weighing a (relatively) piffling 2lb 8oz. I guess it's no wonder - I tried one last year, knocking up some catches with a team mate's plank, and nearly took someone's head off - the ball just flew off the face like nothing I'd ever encountered before!

Hard times to be a bowler...

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Add in flat wickets, short boundaries, and stupid fielding restrictions, and it's clear what the ICC (or Sky Sports) think is exciting.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well, indeed, IF! I think we've seen at least one century in every game this series, barring India being thumped and not leaving space for one, which surely devalues the achievement?

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
It's all a bit of a bat-fest at the moment, isn't it? Having been in a shop yesterday with a few minutes to spare, I investigated the bats, and was startled to discover huge bats with edges like railway sleepers weighing a (relatively) piffling 2lb 8oz. I guess it's no wonder - I tried one last year, knocking up some catches with a team mate's plank, and nearly took someone's head off - the ball just flew off the face like nothing I'd ever encountered before!

Hard times to be a bowler...

AG

Bats are odd things and the very first time I used a top quality bat it was a revelation. Like drinking 25 year old Talisker after a lifetime on Arthur Bell's Tartan Terror.

This was almost thirty years ago though and the bat wasn't bigger but the shape was different: the effect was that it didn't twist when I hit the ball, so only the very edges behaved like edges, and about half the blade, not the usual six square inches, was good enough to send the ball where I wanted it to go. All I needed was better eyesight and I could have handled the quick stuff!

If bats have moved on since then, I'm amazed any halfway competent batsman ever gets out unless he wants to.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
India doing their very best to roll over and play dead against England who stuttered a bit but now look set to go into the final against the Aussies.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Stuttered a bit is an understatement! Another late panic but, frankly, we owe that win to Butler and Taylor who did all the donkey work. Australia at the weekend, so must stock up on lube...

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
B & T are doing more than their share of this, but I'm encouraged because for a couple of years Bopara and Morgan have been our "go to" men, and if we have four in the middle order who can all do that, plus Woakes and Jordan swinging the long handle, things might not be so bad.

We do need the balls to play Tredwell come what may, and trust Moeen & Bopara to do the fifth/sixth bowler job.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Is there any lube left?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
No, and it still smarts.

AG
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
So return home from being overseas most of January to discover free to air summer of cricket is over. *sigh*.

And none of the world cup is on free to air. *double sigh*.

Any clever Aussie techies know how I might get it streamed on the internets for not too expensive a price....?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Welcome to the UK, Evensong, We've had no cricket on free to air since 2005 and, surprise surprise, participation is falling.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Welcome to the UK, Evensong, We've had no cricket on free to air since 2005 and, surprise surprise, participation is falling.

AG

All we have is TMS on the radio and that is on the brink of self-parody. Another five years and I swear Aggers will turn into Brian Johnston.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I can handle that, just as long as someone shoves Michael Vaughan's golf clubs up his arse!

AG
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Welcome to the UK, Evensong, We've had no cricket on free to air since 2005 and, surprise surprise, participation is falling.

AG

Really? Wow. That really surprises me. Very sad. Some of my fondest memories were of watching the cricket on telly in North London with my grandmother when we visited as kids.
 
Posted by Latchkey Kid (# 12444) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
So return home from being overseas most of January to discover free to air summer of cricket is over. *sigh*.

And none of the world cup is on free to air. *double sigh*.

Any clever Aussie techies know how I might get it streamed on the internets for not too expensive a price....?

Lent has come early. [Eek!]
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
Indeed. A rude shock I tellysa.
 
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
I'm still recovering from hearing Michael Vaughan on TV predicting that New Zealand will do a World Cup double this year - cricket and rugby [Eek!]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Were it from anyone else I'd consider it likely as the Kiwis have been in pretty exciting form in the pyjama game. Trouble is, Vaughan is - and I attempt to quote Sioni Sais here - "like Boycott but without the tact and discretion" these days. He gets on my tits something wicked.

I have to confess that I've bought tickets to see NZ vs England at Edgbaston in June at least partly in the hope of seeing a really scintillating Kiwi performance... speaking of which, anyone else know how fast Edgbaston send out tickets? We bought ours in December, and they've yet to arrive. It will be interesting to see which side Celtic Knotweed roots for - as a Scot watching England - New Zealand!

AG
 
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on :
 
I am looking forward to seeing how Afghanistan do in their first World Cup!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
For the record, my World-Cup-Enthusiasm-Meter has reached about 20%.
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
My enthusiasm for the World Cup had been quite low, but by God Brendan McCullum is raising it up in this first match! A quite extraordinary first 15 overs, especially after losing the toss and being asked to bat!
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
And now he's out. Ah well...
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Set up nicely, New Zealand made 331 with Malinga going for 84!
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Any of that lube left?
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
Now I'm thoroughly confused. The Aus vs Eng match is on free to air Channel 9. But I till can't find any kind of timetable. [Paranoid]

Straya 9/342 at the MCG. Finn got a dramatic fivefer with a hat trick by the last three balls. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Time to start learning Kiwi, I think. Fush'n'chups, anyone?

I s'pose a captain named Morgan should know all about a good shafting... (NSFW!)
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
...and shafted he has been!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I wonder what England's record ODI defeat is? Something spectacular will be needed just to prevent this being a contender...

AG
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
England has been done like a dinner. [Snigger]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well, Australia have every right to be pleased with that.

I think I'm going to be a bad loser and follow the Associates instead.

AG
 
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on :
 
Utterly irrelevant to the outcome, but wasn't the ball dead when Anderson was run out at the end (the umpire having given Taylor out)?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Yes, the ICC have released a statement.

Dismal performance though. I watched about half an hour of Root and Bell chasing seven an over by nurdling the ball down to third man every few balls before getting fed up and doing some work. Ridiculous.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
quote:
The PCT spoke to the England team management and acknowledges that the game ended incorrectly and an error was made.
So does that mean Australia forfeit the game?

[Two face]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
[Killing me] [Killing me] [Killing me]

Can you imagine the look on Mitchell Johnson's face if that happened!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
...and how fast he'd be bowling the next time he got at England? [Help]

Pity - no difference to the result, but Taylor has good reason to be pissed off.

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Before today Pakistan had never beaten India in a World Cup encounter and neither had they ever won a run chase at Adelaide.

Both records still stand.

What will Ireland do to the Windies tomorrow?
 
Posted by Latchkey Kid (# 12444) on :
 
Surprise us. [Razz]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Sadly I missed it as I had to go to do some shopping but I hear it was another poor Windies performace - as Sammy said ...if they bowl like that they're not going to win many matches.

What are the odds on Ireland having to extend their stay again?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
Sadly I missed it as I had to go to do some shopping but I hear it was another poor Windies performace - as Sammy said ...if they bowl like that they're not going to win many matches.

What are the odds on Ireland having to extend their stay again?

I'd give Ireland the edge over Zimbabwe and they ought to deal with UAE, so they should be checking venues.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Afghanistan vs Bangladesh tonight, now that could be quite interesting...

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Except that it wasn't...

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I thought 3/3 in 3 was interesting in and of itself - but then I'm easily amused.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Pathetic Embarrassment!
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
Pathetic Embarrassment!

I am so sorry for your loss, dear friend.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
It is a kindness to relieve one very early of one's very faint hopes for success.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Scotland have got to be looking forward to their game with us with some glee.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
You think you've got problems, my missus is Scottish! I'll never be allowed to forget...

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Congratulations to New Zealand, especially Southee and McCullum but the whole teaam has to be firing to get a result like that.

G Boycott was looking for positives and couldn't find any. I suppose he could have said that it's over.

FWIW it looked like the bad old "fear of failure" days have returned when despite any amount of talent England could not perform reliably. Even with Atherton, Stewart and Thorpe in the team England rarely got enough runs.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Could England somehow contrive to make this World Cup even more embarrassing than 1999? I wouldn't bet against it, have we got a song out yet?

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I think they must be trying to make the footballers look better. [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Could England somehow contrive to make this World Cup even more embarrassing than 1999? I wouldn't bet against it, have we got a song out yet?

AG

No song yet and the 'fat lady' hasn't been seen. In 1999 we won three matches out of five whereas now there are four to go. We have lost to the best two sides in the group and while we ought to beat Scotland, Afghanistan and Bangladesh there's no saying which Sri Lanka will turn up. Four wins and we'll be through, three and we're hoping others also win three and lose four, while our net run-rate improves a lot.

I'd say book your tickets home lads. KP looks well out of it.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
India gave South Africa a very surprising whopping this afternoon - I was hoping for a victory but that really was amazing.

Tomorrow looks fun but I am not getting up to watch something that starts here at 03.30! What are the odds on a victory for the Scots?
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
Hums Scotland the Brave imagining the pipes skirling in the background.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
They may have been brave but they weren't victorious - well done Moeen Ali, an excellent knock and England have some points!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Phew!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Weren't going to live it down in a hurry if that on had gone wrong... Phew, especially as Celtic Knotweed is Scottish!

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Brave stuff from Zimbabwe! Don't ever forget that Gayle was just an umpire's call away from a duck!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Indeed! While the feat is spectacular, and has kept a few cricket statisticians in a job, one cannot help thinking that against a more disciplined bowling attack that it could have been a very different story.

AG
 
Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
... one cannot help thinking that against a more disciplined bowling attack that it could have been a very different story.

AG

Has Zimbabwe ever shown themselves capable of a disciplined bowling attack?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
... one cannot help thinking that against a more disciplined bowling attack that it could have been a very different story.

AG

Has Zimbabwe ever shown themselves capable of a disciplined bowling attack?
They have had far better bowlers in the past. Here's the scorecard of a Zimbabwe v England ODI which they won. Paul Strang, Heath Streak and Eddo Brandes were in that side, Grant Flower bowled too and a bit later Ray Price, Henry Olonga and Doug Hondo were way better than any of their current bowlers.

It's something else Mugabe has wrecked [Frown]
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Ireland are really trying to lose now against the UAE at 97/4 in 25.2.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Despite Ed Joyce being bowled, but the comedy light-up bails landing back in the grooves! Never seen that before (despite my lack of pace...).

First net Sunday - will the knee take it?

AG
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Ireland could still win it with a certain Kevin O'Brien out there...
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
They did, but UAE made 'em sweat!

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Two minnows but a great match!
 
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on :
 
The best thing in cricket is a close match and it doesn't matter if you support one/both/neither of the teams.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Exactly! Bugger all this huge bat flog it round the ground stuff, give us some proper excitement!

AG
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
AFG tenth wicket partnership held to defeat Scotland in a nailbiter in the 49th over.

Sorry to all the Jocks here.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
...and Afghanistan v. Scotland was another perfect example of a really exciting match. More power to the teams that really entertain.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Looks like we all know what Chez Wodders were up to!

Given earlier comments on bats, and field placings, it's interesting to see that Sri Lanka managed to put 332 on the board with just one six in the total.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Looks like we all know what Chez Wodders were up to!

Given earlier comments on bats, and field placings, it's interesting to see that Sri Lanka managed to put 332 on the board with just one six in the total.

AG

Stupidly short boundaries and an absence of outfielders play a part too.

Really, it's got to the stage that the best approach bowling first may be to say "Screw fielding restrictions. Treat it like session one of a Test match; Three slips, two gullies, short leg, point, third man and cow corner", then try to bowl them out for two hundred. Give it a go for the first ten overs anyway.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Oh bugger. There I was thinking it was something unusual. This is what happens when you catch to and a half overs over breakfast...

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Looks like we all know what Chez Wodders were up to!...

AG

With the other pair out two days on the run doing other stuff we have just wallowed in cricket and then a genuine light lunch, prepared by me - if we tell Herself we want a light lunch we still get rice and three curries as a minimum! With me a small salad or a toasted cheese and onion sandwich with a pickle on the side.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
a toasted cheese and onion sandwich with a pickle on the side.

Where's that drool smiley when you need it?

AG
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
Have people come across this proposal to radically alter the game, in particular by making Test Matches shorter?

Comment has not exactly been favourable.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Very ECB in conception - remember when England were the only team in England and Wales playing 50-over matches. Personally I think it's the last thing it needs, but maybe it's an inevitable consequence of having sold cricket's soul to Sky?

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The tradition of five-day Test matches hasn't been handed down from W G Grace, or even Sir Donald Bradman.

Even in soggy old England Tests have been scheduled for three days since WW2. There was often provision for the last match in a series to be six days if it could make a difference to the series outcome and there have been timeless tests, notably in Australia betweeen the wars.

I would simply insist on a hundred overs being bowled in a day, on true pitches with pace that start lively, settle down on day two, then wear to give the spinners help.
 
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on :
 
Well indeed. I remember someone pointing out that when England ran up 903 for 7 in 1938 the Australians had sent down well over 300 overs by teatime on the third day. Catch that happening now.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Yes, I believe it used to be 120 overs in a day. Now we struggle to get 90. Hmmm...

In other news, the Windies have opened a lube franchise and will be recommending brands to England.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
If something like it hadn't happened just a month before, I wouldn't have believed this. Just as well AB doesn't open the innings or SA would have scored 500.

He makes Chris Gayle look a slouch.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
It was quite a listen - possibly the most startling three overs or so I've ever heard (except perhaps for a few England prolapses). I'm not sure I've ever heard a commentary box quite so incredulous, and it's not often Graeme Swann is lost for words.

The bat must help, but there's got to be a shedload of skill in there too, anyone else would sooner or later have middled one directly upwards. There's a great photo on the BBC page with his eyes absolutely on the ball, apparently heading straight for his grille, but the bat is just about to catch it up.

Of late he's been a phenomenon.

AG

[ 27. February 2015, 11:29: Message edited by: Sandemaniac ]
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
I give loud cheers to Holder, defending the 8th and 9th wicket - It was his maiden 50 (his previous best was 23) and he singlehandedly brought the Windies up from a disastrous under 100 runs to 150. A batsman who batted his heart out when it really didn't matter what he did.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Won't disagree with you there, Pete - someone showing they have some pride deserves a plaudit.

AG
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
Reporting in from Cricket Central (India Division)
Australia must be regretting having chosen to bat. 151 all out in just over 30 overs. Their lowest total in World Cup cricket since before colour television. It would have been lower had not Haddin decided to finish the power play on his own.

Onya Boult 5-27.

Go Kiwis!
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
This is the 12 noon report from COUP. New Zealand has beat Australia by one wicket. 152. The bowlers on both sides were hot today. But the good guys won.

In other news, UAE v India has just started. The UAE have won the toss and has chosen to bat.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Woken up by beer on bladder, I popped the radio on to check the score, and dragged it into the bedroom, and didn't go back to sleep again until after the Aus-NZ finish! Wow, who needs 400+ totals for a gripper?

Pity the UAE vs India is a damp squib.

On a personal level I was delighted to discover that, when Scotland played Afghanistan, Majid Haq trundled one down at an awe-inspiring 42mph! Slooooooooooooow bowlers solidarity movement!

AG
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
Spewing. Missed the dramatic finish. Had to leave when NZ were on about 110 for 4. [Waterworks]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
After a post-prandial snooze I stayed up (!) for the NZ v Australia game. What a match! I do feel that Kane Williamson deserved MotM for holding it together.

quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
On a personal level I was delighted to discover that, when Scotland played Afghanistan, Majid Haq trundled one down at an awe-inspiring 42mph! Slooooooooooooow bowlers solidarity movement!

AG

Shows that many supposed slow bowlers aren't slow! Monty regularly bowled 60 mph, Shahid Afridi's quick one (even his legal quick one) was in the low seventies and I saw Phil Edmonds bowl a 'throat ball' at a diminutive batsman off three strides - none of your 'slow-ball bouncer' either!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Decent dig by England there, with Joe Root doing particularly well. Dare I hope that our bowlers will back the batsmen up?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Hope may spring eternal but...

Doing it by nine wickets with 16 balls to spare is, perhaps, rubbing it in a bit.

What price a quarter finals place for England now?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
That was embarrassing. Again. Our record against the Test playing nations is lost by 111 runs, lost by 119 runs and lost by 9 wickets. That reads like Leicestershire in Division 2 of the County Championship last season and they were terrible!

One statistic I have picked up on is that England have lost nine ODIs after scoring 300+, more than anyone else. England play fewer ODIs that many of the top nations, so I would suggest that our batting isn't quite good enough but our out-cricket, bowling, fielding and especially leadership is very ordinary (as the Aussies so neatly put it).

Breaking out of this is difficult but I do have to ask why Jordan and Tredwell aren't in the side, and the more I see of Buttler, the more I think he could do a job as opener. If he's half as good as Adam Gilchrist he'll be twice as good as our current openers.
 
Posted by agingjb (# 16555) on :
 
If a team doesn't take wickets then even a good batting performance will be liable to be overtaken. The most telling part of the final score was "for 1".
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
What is the Urdu for "Oy vey ist mir"? I mean PAK won v. ZIM in spite of a lot of dropped catches. I certainly caught on to a lot of the team miming that phrase.

As for England - words fail me, truly. Not that I was cheering for them - I only do that in an ABA situation.
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
England play fewer ODIs that many of the top nations

And rightly so. Test cricket is the real form of the game, all this short-form nonsense is just for people who haven't got the patience to watch a proper game. It's to be tolerated, but not prioritised.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
This might be a reflection of the fact that I hardly ever watch one day cricket, but I thought England batted quite nicely yesterday.

I had to go to be just after they took their first (and only!) wicket, but there was still a bit of hope then.

Oh well.

And now, we basically have to win both the final games to have a chance of going through. Hoping the weather gods smile on us.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
England play fewer ODIs that many of the top nations

And rightly so. Test cricket is the real form of the game, all this short-form nonsense is just for people who haven't got the patience to watch a proper game. It's to be tolerated, but not prioritised.
Absolutely!

Why live on biscuits when you can have a proper meal?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
[sarcasm]Well, that was exciting, wasn't it?[/sarcasm]

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The lopsided matches are one thing, I just wish they would get on with it! England have a week off between games and thanks to the weather Australia had a two-week break.

The Cricket World Cup started back on February 14th and ends on March 29th. The Rugby World Cup is scheduled to run from 18th September to 31st October. That is six weeks plus two days for both. OK, the finalists in the cricket play nine rather than seven matches but is cricket really so punishing on mind and body that the players can't play two matches a week? There are six more teams at the Rugby World Cup too.

I suppose some of it is dictated by TV schedules but they look odd, with two matches on some days and none on others, and that's at the group stage!
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
India v the Windies today. I hope both teams come to play hard (but the Windies shouldn't play too hard, as I want India to win!) The game is a day-nighter in Perth, so begins at the very reasonable time of noon IT.

[ 06. March 2015, 04:46: Message edited by: Uncle Pete ]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Sadly, once again, only the captain is bringing any respectability to the Windies total. Can't see India struggling to knock off 183...

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
...although at 25/2 off 8...

AG
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
It's even worse now! 63-3. Enough to drive a teetotaler to drink!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
At 134-6 I bet there were some squeaky bums!

AG
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
They lost no more wickets and beat the Windies and the fielders made them work for their final score one run at a time (Mostly)
 
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on :
 
Another superb match. This one between between Ireland and Zimbabwe. Wow! Just, wow!
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
Ireland won that one with 3 overs worth of prayers to St Jude with a final Glory Be from Porterfield. The 7th wicket caught on the edge of the boundary was particularly wonderful. The boundary didn't move no matter that the Zimbabwe coach screamed so much invective from the stands I thought he would have a coronary.

Pakistan v South Africa was a nailbiter as well. The SA powerhouse has fallen flat for at least two matches versus the subcontinent, and I grinned my way through both (first was India).
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
England v Bangladesh starts in about half an hour - should be interesting and I have no idea of the likely winner - nor even of who to cheer for!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Cheer for Bangladesh... If England make the quarter-finals, they'll just embarrass themselves sooner or later. Currently 88-1 chasing 276 - many a slip...

AG
 
Posted by Cod (# 2643) on :
 
Bell! Get a fucking move on!

Someone tell the man that this isn't a Test match. Push on, or get out!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Do stop sitting on the fence, Cod, old thing.

I can't help thinking that he knows full well that just one wicket could invoke the collapse...

AG
 
Posted by Cod (# 2643) on :
 
It is better to crash and burn than this Laodicean pootling. Right now, England are making precisely the same mistake that they made against Sri Lanka. Having got off to a bit of a start, they spent the middle part of their innings pootling along to what they (wrongly) thought would be a match-winning total. I can imagine them all prodding away with Boycott's (and perhaps Moores') injunctions in their ears not to give their wickets away, to stay in, not do anything rash. As if they were playing Test cricket in short. No one has played ODI cricket like that for about 20 years.

Hooray! Bell's out! Maybe they'll push on now.

Oh crap. They've sent Morgan in. No they won't.
 
Posted by Cod (# 2643) on :
 
Yes, yes, yes! Morgan's out too!!

I'm so excited!!

Now the real batsmen can come in!!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Given the way he's been playing, Ireland must be pleased as punch that Morgan's playing for England...

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Not quite as embarrassing as the 1999 World Cup, but a decent effort to get into second place.

Good luck to the Tigers!

AG
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
This household, HQ of India Central, World Cup is completely thrilled with the win of our brothers of Bangladesh.

Does England have open tickets to go home? Golf awaits. [Biased]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
[Two face]

Big cheers here in Kerala for the lowliest of the subcontinental teams. England should have nailed that but I agree with Cod et al that they just don't have the guts at the moment.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I have just found this on the BBC site:

"You need individuality, originality, flair, and you need different players. The task is to get the players to play their own way, to their full ability, without fear."

It's from G Boycott. He's right but who associates flair and originality with G Boycott (apart from bowling with his cap on)?

An awful lot of people are opening their gobs and letting their wind blow theiur tongues around. Face it, Bangladesh were better and deserved to win. They had the big, solid mid-innings partnership, England lost wickets at much the same stage.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Poor Ireland today ran up against an India is full flow - but if they [Ireland] beat Pakistan later in the week they could be in the last 8!

Loved the poster held up to the camera today by an Irish supporter that just said Eoin who?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Could someone let me know why Kumar Sangakkara is going to retire after the World Cup? It's one thing to go out at the top, but he is in astonishing form. Four successive hundreds, an average of 124 and a scoring rate of almost 120.

OK, some of the opposition is moderate (at best) but right now he only gets out when he doesn't want to stay in.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I gather that he wants to spend more time with his family and also that although still top flight his body is beginning to protest that he has done enough.
 
Posted by Cod (# 2643) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I have just found this on the BBC site:

"You need individuality, originality, flair, and you need different players. The task is to get the players to play their own way, to their full ability, without fear."

It's from G Boycott. He's right but who associates flair and originality with G Boycott (apart from bowling with his cap on)?

This would be the same G Boycott, who, with Mike Brearley, put on 129 for the first wicket at such a crawl that England collapsed in the search for quick runs, thus losing the 1979 World Cup final?

The man has no shame. But it is true that he had individuality and played his own way. England need more of that, just a different flavour of it. What they need is players with village attitude. I mean players who are able to slog with skill, examples being Botham, Flintoff, Robin Smith, Lamb and Pieterson. English cricket doesn't create many such players. Yet anyone who saw Nathan Astle's innings against England in 2001 knows that other countries have been producing them in droves for years.

quote:
An awful lot of people are opening their gobs and letting their wind blow theiur tongues around.
As well they might. England's efforts in this tournament have been laughable. There is no getting round that.

quote:
Face it, Bangladesh were better and deserved to win. They had the big, solid mid-innings partnership, England lost wickets at much the same stage.
They did indeed. And I'm sure this will be adapted to create a convenient excuse: England weren't crap: Bangladesh were just good: they are a rising force in world cricket, and it is inevitable that they will overtake old man England.

The reality is that England, despite its far superior resources, got hammered by Australia (as usual) and NZ and Sri Lanka. As it stands, they will leave this tournament having only obtained the scalp of the mighty Scotland, over half of whose players are imports.

England's astonishingly poor record is not limited to this tournament. At the last world cup they were beaten by Ireland, a country that hardly plays cricket at all. England have not performed well at a WC since 1992. In fact, in the last 30 years, England have only been even intermittently competitive in a form of the game that is fast becoming irrelevant except in Australia, despite being shored up by a raft of southern African talent.

But it would be unfair to single out the English cricket team for special opprobrium. Let us consider English - British in fact - performances in major sporting events generally. There is the one-dimensional football team, probably the world's biggest underachievers with the possible exception of Russia. There is the rugby team. English rugby has about 7 times as many registered players as any other rugby-playing country, yet they have won precisely one WC. The Scots are no better. They should at least have got to the second round of a football World Cup given the popularity of the game there, and their stodgy rugby team impresses no one where I live. I excuse from my general excoriation of British sport, only the Northern Irish football team and the Welsh rugby team, although even the latter ought to be a lot more competitive than they are.

Even the Olympics should be put into perspective, given home advantage and the huge injections of public money.

There is something about British sports administration that takes talent and turns it into dross. I think it is probably micro-management. Sport in Britain seems to require a five year plan and a multi-million pound budget in order to inform professional players that it is OK to get up half an hour later on Sundays. This sort of approach can sometimes work, ie, the rugby in 2003, and the Ashes tour of Australia in 2010, but it generally fails.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
So will the weather gods conspire to stick one final unmistakeable middle digit up at England?

AG
 
Posted by Cod (# 2643) on :
 
England's failures have nothing to do with the gods.

And barring a further deluge, they should get past Afghanistan in the next hour or so.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I wasn't suggesting they did, just that they could rub salt into the wound.

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Cod:
...I mean players who are able to slog with skill, examples being Botham, Flintoff, Robin Smith, Lamb and Pieterson. English cricket doesn't create many such players...

Indeed. And I suggest the fact that 60% of the players on your were raised in various parts of southern Africa is the final nail in that particular coffin.

The question is, why not? The obvious answers are the English climate, and the English propensity towards longer forms of the game. But I'm not sure that is really it. I would suggest that we have too many people like Boycott, who whinge and whine any time a batsman plays at anything that's not going to hit the stumps. It's cultural, and it's deep.
 
Posted by Cod (# 2643) on :
 
It's a question I enjoy pondering, if "enjoy" is the right word. Sometimes I'm forced to by friends and work colleagues giving me hell after the latest failure. Perhaps one day I will publish a book: Why the British Can't Play Sport, subtitled Cultural Learnings of Nuziland Make Benefit Gloriuos Sporting British Truiumphs . I mention NZ, because it's where I live, and people's approach to sport is far more positive than that of people in the UK

I think soggy English wickets don't help, but there are other reasons that make the pitches unimportant. I say that for two reasons. First, NZ wickets are similar, ie, they favour seam and swing and therefore defensive batting: a reasonably accurate bowler who can swing the ball can expect to take the wicket of a batsman who goes looking for shots. Yet NZ has produced plenty of quick-scoring players: Cairns, Astle, Ryder and McCullum for example. Possibly they bat on the principle that if you're on a sticky wicket, you're best getting your runs before the unplayable ball arrives.

The second reason is NZ's comparative success in other sports. Their success in rugby needs no describing. I will only note that they do it on similar resources to Wales and Scotland and far, far less than England. The All Blacks respect England, Wales to a lesser extent. Scotland are regarded as plucky minnows.

But they also have somewhat similar, perhaps better resources than Australia and South Africa, their true rivals, and also France, the only team they fear. So the picture that emerges is perhaps not NZ overachievement but British underachievement.

And then there is football. It's harder to draw a good comparison. NZ gets few matches against top countries and, in consequence, has a low FIFA ranking. But I think their 2010 outing can be fairly said to be better than England's in 2014. Considering how comparatively small NZ's football scene is, this is astonishing.

In the Olympics, NZ's medal tally per capita comfortably beat Britain's. It also comfortably beat England, Scotland and Wales on a per capita basis in the Commonwealth Games too.

Anyway, back to the cricket. At a grassroots level, it is certainly played to a higher standard. I remember in the 1980s playing for my school: we were only local state school that could put out a half-decent team. Even we generally had to field someone couldn't really play at all. Cricket had by then become a private school game or a club game, and I understand the situation has got worse since then. The Christmas before last, I was briefly back in the UK. I went out one day wearing a traditional cable knit cricket jumper. I got chatting with someone (of Indian extraction), and she excitedly asked me if I liked cricket. In NZ such a question would be absurd. All local schools at all levels here have a team and all their players know how to bowl, bat and field. At my daughters' perfectly normal primary school there are cricket nets and you will see kids of all ages bowling and batting in them with proper technique. But even that would not counterbalance England's sheer numbers.

I think the answer is probably - just like football - old fashioned and very conservative coaching. I remember being told to bowl line and length, to play straight, never to slog, to drive and not hook, to concentrate on accuracy rather than spin, and so on. In other words, an emphasis on discipline, not making mistakes and waiting for the other player's mistake. England's top players seem to have this mindset too. I think it is an approach that can work well if one is playing a Test match on a slow seamer. In an ODI, it doesn't work, because your batsmen won't score quickly enough, and your bowlers will get hit for six because the opposition batsman knows where the delivery is going to go.

Now, for some reason, NZ cricketers collectively figured this out without really talking about it. Perhaps it is because they are coached less and left just to get on it it. Everyone here thinks it is amusing that English cricket and rugby teams have the support teams they do. I think that for the players it must be absolutely stultifying.

I do actually think there is a direct parallel with football coaching which in the UK continues to emphasise physicality and route one. The parallel is that the culture in both sports is to carry on doing things the way they've always been done.
 
Posted by Cod (# 2643) on :
 
An additional thought. I think Boycott's observations are positively unhelpful. I was listening to his commentary on NZ v Aus, and it was all about staying in, batting out your overs, and not doing anything silly.

What that doesn't take into account is just how much run rates have increased. When he was playing tests, 2-3 runs an over was considered fine. The increasing importance of ODI cricket changed this to more like 3-4. I think it is very significant that the result was higher scores, not batting collapses and lower scores.

The advent of T20 has had the same effect on ODI cricket. In this tournament, 5 and over is below par. As we saw against Sri Lanka, 300 (ie, 6 an over) simply wasn't good enough.

The reason why batsmen can now score at that rate is because of changing technique. A good batsman is no longer one who has the full range of traditional shots, but one who can play all those shots, but improvise on them in order to work the field. It's what someone of Boycott's mindset would consider slogging. Actually, what they are doing is far more skilled than that, and it involves a different assessment of risk, ie, less emphasis on the risk of losing one's wicket and more emphasis on the risk of scoring slowly.

So we have every top team with players who can blast the ball around or accumulate quickly. England, by contrast, have Ian Bell. He is a fine player but he scores so slowly that he puts the team under pressure. In the modern game, an innings of 50 off 80 balls is a failure.
 
Posted by Cod (# 2643) on :
 
And I'm going to triple post because I have thought of something else. England's selections have often tended to favour players who have strong records. This might sound like a surprising criticism. My point is that it often overlooks poor form. Stuart Broad, for example, can no longer bat, and his bowling has slowed up. Why was he picked? Why was Alastair Cook picked for the ODI team for so long?

It was the same with the disastrous Ashes tour of Australia. England selected Graeme Swann, even though an injury to his arm meant he was permanently unable to spin the ball? Why pick a spinner who can't spin? Jonathan Trott was in a poor mental state. Why was he picked? His international career is now permanently wrecked. What a waste.

Well, here's my thoughts. If selection decisions had been left to one or two people who were accountable only for their results, they would probably have left them out. They would have checked their form, checked with the physio and the doctor, and omitted them.

But what if you know that such a decision is going to offend a number of people, who, despite not knowing the precise facts, will take it amiss if you leave out such a senior player? What if those people pay your salary? What do you do? Well, you select them and hope that it'll be alright on the night.

I suggest this is precisely the dynamic at the top of the top-heavy ECB.

[ 13. March 2015, 19:25: Message edited by: Cod ]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Zim did well and tried their best but, aided by a couple of dropped catches, it just wasn't enough. India and New Zealand both win 6/6.
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
SA slaughters Lanka innings - (After 113d run, they took 6 wickets, then proceeded in their chase to win by 9 wickets in 18 overs. [Eek!]

Sangakara got a very nice send off by all players at game end.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Sadly Bangladesh didn't put up much of a fight - I wanted India to win but I also wanted a close match - hopefully we'll get that tomorrow between Australia and Pakistan. In this house we'll be cheering for the one that isn't Australia, mainly on principle.

[Biased]
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
Pakistan all out for 213. Smittie looking even twitchier than normal!
#twitchybatsmanexhaustingtowatch
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
No team can afford to drop as many catches as Pakistan did - at times it looked more like they were losing more than Australia was winning!
 
Posted by Carex (# 9643) on :
 
237 against the Windies isn't bad. Especially since the other members of the team scored a few runs, too...
 
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :
 
yeah, it wasn't a bad effort
 
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :
 
.. and not an intelligent response from Johnson Charles
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
From afar, and only looking at the numbers, I don't quite know what to make of Guptil's inings - another ridiculously big score, at well over a run a ball, but on the other hand to stay there for fifty overs and carry your bat... Shit, I'd be chuffed to score that many in a season!

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I heard most of Guptill's innings and it makes sense to regard it as two knocks. A ODI century in 111 balls, which is good for an opener but not outstanding, followed by an end-of-innings assault that brought 137 of 52 balls!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
When we go to Edgbaston to see England vs NZ in June, I just hope NZ bat first so we get at least one 50-over innings!

AG
 
Posted by Macrina (# 8807) on :
 
I'm a Blackcaps fan and have tickets for the final. I think I may lose my fingers on Tuesday.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I hope the Kiwis do it - anyone but Australia!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
At last a classic - Kiwistan into the final, set 298 off 43 by D/L, and they make it by 4 wickets with one ball to spare. 45,000 New Zealand bums squeaked in unison!

AG
 
Posted by Macrina (# 8807) on :
 
45,000? Try 4,500,000!

Blinking HECK! I really really really hope they don't make a habit of last ball 6s, awesome though they are. I might have a stroke next Sunday.

I have tickets!!!!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
That finish shows that Duckworth & Lewis have, again, got it dead right. There are lots of close finishes in ODIs but (this is something I heard a while back) a disproportionate number are D/L targets! They concentrate the mind.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Macrina:
45,000? Try 4,500,000!

Blinking HECK! I really really really hope they don't make a habit of last ball 6s, awesome though they are. I might have a stroke next Sunday.

I have tickets!!!!

Calm down - you had a whole ball to spare.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I suppose this is the moment where I should be thankful that the England team has done my heart a favour by not putting me through such a tension-filled experience.
 
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
When I posted about Michael Vaughan's prediction on 13th February I thought it was a long shot [Eek!] but now I'm not so sure.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Kohli's just done his best to scupper India - out for 1 off 13!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well, it's gone to at least one journalist's head.

[Snigger] [Snigger]

AG
 
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :
 
I'm afraid I won't be able to watch tonight's game (kiwi time). Partly because I am doing minor things like appointing a new Director of Music. Partly because, as Imaginary Friend has hinted, this game comes with health risks. Apart from anything else I can cope with losing to anyone except Australia - and I do think the odds favour them in terms not so much of ball and bat and field skills, but in terms of home ground familiar knowledge of the "G", and that slightly icier psyche that nearly won them (won Starc) the match in Auckland last month.

Happy to be proved wrong. And Macrina - brilliant! but I'd be coming home in a body bag.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Disappointing game. [Disappointed]
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
[Waterworks]

[ 29. March 2015, 10:14: Message edited by: Uncle Pete ]
 
Posted by Evangeline (# 7002) on :
 
Couldn't really call it a stressful game [Biased] I do think New Zealand were a better team than they showed in that game-seemed their batsmen just cracked under the pressure-they made some incredibly reckless shots.
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
Woo hoo!!! Fantastic result.
 
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :
 
But this is why the Black Caps, not these will always be my heroes.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Especially from the QFs onwards, Australia showed themselves to have strength in depth in all the technical aspects of cricket, i.e. batting, bowling and fielding. (Some of their run-outs and catches were outstanding.) Too much so for all the other sides, though none of the other semifinalists had glaring weaknesses in any of these technical aspects. Therefore Australia won the cup. Australia's only glaring weakness was in graciousness, but that doesn't often show in a team's results.
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Zappa:
But this is why the Black Caps, not these will always be my heroes.

Australia's graciousness both in victory and defeat has frequently been noted as severely lacking.

I was pleased on noting the graciousness of NZ both in victory and in defeat. Both McCullum and Elliot were (and are) class acts.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Yup. The pope's still catholic, bears still shit in the woods, and Australian sportsmen are marginally more obnoxious than those from other countries. Very little to see here, IMNVHO.
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Disappointing game. [Disappointed]

Was rather.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I have checked the Aussie touring party and just decided that baseball is definitely the game to follow this summer.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I know it's not REAL cricket but the IPL starts this week - it may not be the real game but it can be quite entertaining at times.

I'm still shouting for Chennai Super Kings - will I be disappointed again?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Richie Benaud has died. I find this really sad, not just because of all the fond memories that I have of listening to Test Match Special, but also because I learned so much about the history of cricket from him. He was one of the good'uns, and he'll be missed.

[Votive] [Frown]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I feel exactly the same about Richie. I never saw him play but my Dad, not usually a fan of Australians, rated him very highly as a player and a man, noting particularly his captaincy. He was a marvellous commentator who never showed off.
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
Richie Benaud was ever the gentleman who believed in treating his audience with respect. I admired the way he always dressed in suit and tie to commentate, explaining that he felt it was discourteous to comee into people's living rooms in any other attire. I also remember with fondness some of his amusing quips eg Glenn McGrath had just got out for 2 when batting. Richie announced that Glenn had been dismissed for 98 short of a century!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
So, does one half-decent innings make Captain Cook's position secure for the rest of the summer?
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
So, does one half-decent innings make Captain Cook's position secure for the rest of the summer?

Yep. Cook will remain captain until the ECB are happy that Root has the right level of experience. Then it'll be a coronation.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
In fairness, Root looks like a proper little player. And personally, I'd prefer to have a skipper who isn't an opening bat - gives them more opportunity to compartmentalise their batting responsibilities from their captaincy.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
So, does one half-decent innings make Captain Cook's position secure for the rest of the summer?

Yep. Cook will remain captain until the ECB are happy that Root has the right level of experience. Then it'll be a coronation.
It's hardly one half-decent innings. I didn't believe it myself but Cook has four fifties from his last seven innings. His problem is that he's not scored a hundred since May 2013, which is twenty tests ago. He gets into double figures often enough but isn't turning enough of them into centuries, which used to be his stock in trade.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Cooky!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I'll give England 6/10 at half-time so far. We are short of a bowler, not to mention variety in that department and we need an opening bat to partner Cook. A lead of 68 runs on a dodgy track shows the opposition has far more serious problems.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
It's a bit of a gripper, isn't it? Trouble is, if we aren't rained off tomorrow, the match could be over before our game!

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well, the Aussies will be crapping themselves at the thought of playing England after that.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I sincerely wish my earlier post hadn't been so accurate: a duff opener, four right-arm fast-medium bowlers and two part-time off-spinners won't win too many matches in the county championship.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Especially if you also bat like numpties. [Mad]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Especially if you also bat like numpties. [Mad]

I hadn't mentioned that, but it tipped the balance in the Barbados debacle.

I'm pleased to see that the West Indies PTB have rammed the words of the latest ECB chairman back down his throat. Colin Graves, the gung-ho ex Yorkshire boss had declared that anything less than a series win would cause the traditional enquiry to sort out English cricket. I wish him luck. Sort of.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
The main problem at the moment is England's senior management. I hate to agree with Boycott, but not picking a "proper" spinner on that pitch was ridiculous. Wanting a settled team is one thing, intransigent inflexibility is another. I don't hold out much hope that anything will change, but that's where the inquiry should focus.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
No doubt they'll look for positives in the data.

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
True story: (It starts with football, but bear with me, it is really about the cricket.)

A friend and I were discussing Chelsea's recent success. She wondered if Chelsea are still in crisis.

"Of course not", I replied, "we're boring now."

"Can't we be boring and in crisis?"

"I don't think so. Crisis is inherently not boring."

"But surely a crisis can be so predictable and repeatable that it becomes very boring?"

At which point I realised I was a supporter of the English cricket team and that my friend was absolutely right!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
tangent/

Everton's league performance between 1996-97 and 2003-04 was boring and the club was in crisis too. Apart from one year in which we finished seventh we were 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th (twice). On one occasion we escaped relegation thanks to goals in two matches in the last five minutes of the season.

It got very wearing.

/tangent
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
On a lighter note, first match of the season for my old department last night. We lost, mostly due to failings with the bat (quite possibly due to looming darkness - it got VERY gloomy!), but fielded very well, lots of new people who got stuck in, and generally good fun despite the result, if that's not being too Peter Moores.

On a personal level, I got my first wicket of the season - I even got it to turn on the yard of lard that is the astro wicket we play on - ran someone out with a direct hit, and thoroughly amused everyone in the team of a certain age when I came back at the end of our our innings to discover that I'd made n-n-n-n-nineteen not out.

Just wish I felt that good in everyday life at the moment...

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Everyone is suspiciously quiet on the KP shenanigans. I thought Mark Chapman summed it up best when interviewing some former Australian Test player by opening with "So, this must be the funniest thing ever for you guys..."
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I think we're just hoping that if we ignore it, it'll go away...

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Posted without comment.

[Biased]
 
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
Thank you, IF.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Very good. I haven't seen a decent Hitler spoof for ages. They should show it to Cook, and he might bat his way to a dreary century.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Meanwhile, my poor Leicestershire, showing such fight. If only Cosgrove had held on to KP on 110...
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
You know what, the fact that KP was dropped five times on the way to his triple ton is a fact that appears to have been conveniently forgotten by his fanboys.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
You know what, the fact that KP was dropped five times on the way to his triple ton is a fact that appears to have been conveniently forgotten by his fanboys.

KP has probably been dropped more often than any top-class batsman of the modern era. Some of that is because he hits the ball so hard but he also hits it to unexpected places.

It's worth remembering that his old pal, Shane Warne, dropped him in the fifth test of the 2005 series. England needed to draw that match to win the Ashes and KP, who went on to score 158 was on 15. If you look at the scorecard it looks like England drew the match comfortably, mostly thanks to a stand between KP and Ashley Giles, but had the catch been held they would probably have been six down by lunch, no KP to bat and no monumental piss-up to celebrate winning the Ashes.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Well, a strong Yorkshire = strong England?

Adam Lyth.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Interesting. Also of interest is that Liam Plunkett, another who went to the West Indies but didn't play, wasn't considered because of some breach of discipline at Yorkshire. This reminds me of the Good Old Days at Yorkshire when they would win the county championship year after year, while having in the team players and cliques that would barely converse off the field. Trust wasn't a problem, because it was accepted that between certain parties there simply wasn't any and wouldn't be until Hell froze over.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
I don't want to talk about Leics, or the 'heading to' 7th best test team... 30/4 and counting.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Bit hard to tell whether England were undone by good bowling in favourable conditions, or by poor batting. I think you could argue that they weren't positive enough. But the ball was moving around a lot, and I figure you're going to have a few mornings like that early in the summer when you lose the toss and get put it.

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm not quite panicking yet.

Yet.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
If my Dad was around he would be comparing Stokes to Bob Barber's big hundred at the WACA in 1965-66. He hit 185 in five hours (on day one) helped by a lightning fast pitch and better over rates. Oh, and he was batting with G Boycott, who could make Chris Tavare look recklessly fluent.

Still, if England lose the rest of their wickets for no runs, I think we can safely say that a positive approach is better. It's what McCullum would have done.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Well played Rooooot and Stokes. They've given me some hope again.

That's bad.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I think the Kiwi batsmen will thrive on this pitch.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
England's best hope is that NZ treat it as T20 and go for everything, getting about 220 all out. Otherwise I expect them to play out Anderson then attack the others.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
New Zealand 523 all out. Ouch.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Well Bell owes us about 200 runs so today he will make good on his debt?

I was hoping for more bad weather yesterday.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
'Fraid not.

But Captain Cook and Rooooooot are giving us a long shot at an outside chance of a slim hope.

[ 24. May 2015, 11:49: Message edited by: Imaginary Friend ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Captain Cook looks set to bat for a week, if others can hang around with him. England lead by nearly three hundred and I don't expect any declaration. The second text begins on Friday and as that's at Headingley there will be a result, so England ought to bat as long as possible in an effort to wear out the Kiwi bowlers. [Snigger]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Plus, I know this is stating the obvious, but the World Cup shows that these Kiwis can bat. I'd fancy them to chase down 400 in two sessions. [Biased]
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
Made it to the ground. Surrounded by kids and rahs on the lower Mound Stand.

The bowling's been excellent, with Moeen Ali the only one to show skill with the bat. Looking forward to the afternoon session. If a partnership gets going, I may head off in search of gin.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Go England!!!

NZ 197/7 with 19 overs to go.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
YES!!!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
What a game!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Been thinking about the Test, and I think England should give a big thank you to the New Zealand team for taking the last four England wickets fairly quickly on Monday morning. Had it been left to Captain Cook there's every chance he would have "played safe" and batted until lunch which would have made winning all but impossible.

[ 27. May 2015, 10:53: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I think you're probably right. As McCullum pointed out this week, it will be interesting to see if England persist with their buccaneering style when the Second Test starts today.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
No buccaneering needed! The second test is at Headingly so unless a day and a bit are lost to the weather I expect a result.

I'll be interested to see England's team. Plunkett is in the squad so will he come in and who will make way?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I can't see Broad or Anderson being dropped. And it's impossible to leave Stokes out. So I guess the only options are Moeen or Wood. Personally, I'd be inclined to give Wood another go. So I guess it comes down to whether they think it will turn.

But, slightly tangentially, why should Plunkett get the nod ahead of Jordan? I thought Liam was only brought in as possible injury cover.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Oh, and it's raining in Leeds. [Frown]
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
I can't see Broad or Anderson being dropped. And it's impossible to leave Stokes out. So I guess the only options are Moeen or Wood. Personally, I'd be inclined to give Wood another go. So I guess it comes down to whether they think it will turn.

The advantage of Moeen is that he can bat quite reasonably well. Given the fairly fragile top order, a quick 40 from him could be rather valuable. Wood is a potential replacement for Anderson, who can't be more than a year or two off international retirement (my prediction is he'll call it a day at the end of the Ashes).
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Oh, and it's raining in Leeds. [Frown]

Isn't that a permanent state of being?

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Oh, and it's raining in Leeds. [Frown]

Isn't that a permanent state of being?

AG

Not quite. It explains why fewer tests are held at Manchester nowadays though. Leeds is a desert by comparison.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Well done, Cook, quite a milestone.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I can't see that England have much hope of making these runs.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Agreed.

The Kiwis have held their chances whereas we have dropped them.

In other news, come on Leics, don't let this chance go!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I shall be very miffed if Leicester do, being as I is an Essex boy, innit?

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
In the First Test New Zealand gave us just enough time to get them out, so we shouldn't complain that they have left us time to get the runs this time round. We won't get them, but the Kiwis have kept their side of the bargain.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I'm not sure there's any bargain. The New Zealanders need to win the game, so well done to them for batting positively and leaving enough time to get the wickets they need.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Aware that the weather isn't brilliant, NZ have taken four wickets before the drinks break this morning. Now is definitely the time for Cook to get into his "batting all week" mood and Stokes to show he can bat all day, which will be something he hasn't done before.

Alternatively, we can pray that the light showers forecast for this afternoon are heavier and prolonged.
 
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
Rumours that the England team have been seen dancing around a totem pole waving tomahawks are apparently unfounded.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Rumours that the England team have been seen dancing around a totem pole waving tomahawks are apparently unfounded.

Why not? They may as well.
 
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
I was darkly amused by the fact that the gentleman out for a big feathery duck was Mr "We can win this" Root...
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
In fairness, he was a bit unlucky. Caught off the middle of the bat at short leg? Doesn't happen often.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
In fairness I think a drawn series is an okay result. A good couple of games which both swung a bit from side to side. It wasn't boring cricket.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Yeah. England played well in the first game and deserved to win. Then they played poorly in the second game and deserved to lose. Can't really say fairer than that. The only pity it is such a short series.

So, bring on the Aussies, and for Goodness' sake, bowl a proper length!
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Yes, a fair enough outcome.

There were 2 batting English milestones. Cook scored his 9000th test run and Jimmy scored his 1000th!

Meanwhile, in more important matters, not that I fear a Leics batting collapse or anything, but I had hoped Leics wouldn't have to bat again. Still, 163 to win... Now 154...
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Clingford:
Meanwhile, in more important matters, not that I fear a Leics batting collapse or anything, but I had hoped Leics wouldn't have to bat again. Still, 163 to win... Now 154...

And they've done it. Somewhat to my discomfort as an Essex boy, but well done the Foxes!

Most amused by a comment on TMS's Facebook page - "They'll be painting the Belvoir red tonight!" (for the hard-of-UK-geography, "Belvoir" is pronounced "beaver").

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
It's not the longest period between wins (their neighbours Northants still hold that record) but it's a welcome win, owing something to a new coach, captain and chief executive plus a few new players. Leicestershire has historically been a bolt-hole for the discarded and disaffected but this might help them keep home-grown talent at the club.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Woo hoo!!

I could only find out the result about 6:30 this evening.

There's really quite a good Leics 11 found amongst other clubs, including a Broad and Taylor, for instance. Although we have achieved this with the help of some thunder from down under I will take anything. I haven't lived in my home county for over 12 years and have been surprised at the strength of my attachment to the home of pork pies, Stilton and Walkers Crisps.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
MMMMM, Stilton!

[sorry, nothing to do with cricket but it is a glorious cheese!]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Clingford:
Woo hoo!!

I could only find out the result about 6:30 this evening.

There's really quite a good Leics 11 found amongst other clubs, including a Broad and Taylor, for instance. Although we have achieved this with the help of some thunder from down under I will take anything. I haven't lived in my home county for over 12 years and have been surprised at the strength of my attachment to the home of pork pies, Stilton and Walkers Crisps.

And Everard's Tiger! Some of the country's best beer is brewed in Leicestershire.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I'm pretty certain large amounts of the country would disagree with that statement!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
8-0-39-4, and top wicket taker for the team so far this season!

I particularly enjoyed deviously working out what ball the new batsman would least expect, having been no doubt told by the outgoing man that I was turning it a lot both ways... and bowling him neck and crop first ball with a dead straight seam-up delivery. If only the hat-trick ball had been as good!

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
...though for balance's sake I probably ought to mention that I was out hit wicket for a golden duck. Still not sure what happened there...

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Excellent!

(On both counts. [Big Grin] )
 
Posted by Ann (# 94) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
...though for balance's sake I probably ought to mention that I was out hit wicket for a golden duck. Still not sure what happened there...

AG

A bit of Jiggery-pokery?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Are you accusing dear Sandemaniac of letting a cheese roll get past him?! [Eek!] [Eek!] [Ultra confused] [Eek!] [Eek!]


(And, as a side note, that is a superb video. Hadn't seen it before. Emile Heskey as "easily defended" had me in stitches!!)
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
[Big Grin] There aren't many cheese rolls get past me, though you wouldn't believe it to see me in the flesh!

Usually it's me doling out the jiggery-pokery, with my notorious washing machine action*...

Given that it's a 2pm start tomorroaw at Edgbaston, catching the last train at 22.04 might be interesting.

AG

*a Dutch interpretation of the frog in a blender.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Who are you, and what have you done with the real England team?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The final total and result were very un-English but we did manage traditional mid-innings collapse. Recovering from 202-6 is quite something.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
All in all a good day to have been at Edgbaston. Even Celtic Knotweed enjoyed it - in fact, it was her idea!

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Looks like the conditions are a bit more conducive to seam bowling in Southampton today. Might make for an interesting game.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
It's got to the stage where England need a wicket: Williamson and Taylor, as in the last game are far too comfortable.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Too little, too late. Still, I expected us to get absolutely walloped in this series, so it's nice that we're making it competitive.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Really missed Jordan and Plunkett, mostly for their tailend batting and Jordan's amazing catching.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Australia in ominous form in West Indies. (Won both tests in a total of 6-1/2 days). All bowlers firing to the point where they are wondering if they can leave out Harris against England, who could manage only a drawn series against WI.

England are in for a hiding in the Ashes, unless the English summer is even wetter than usual.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I think the English may just be rediscovering a bit of optimism. Not that I think this will be enough to make the Ashes competitive, mind, but it may add to the preseries hype.

Fundamentally, I think England have to be at their very best to even make it close. Australia's bowling is clearly better, and the batting (while closer to being equal) probably tips Australia's way too. But if Cook can get a lot of runs, if the middle order can avoid collapsing, if we get some conditions that are conducive to swing, and if we can somehow find a spinner who can hold up an end, then we have an outside chance. [Biased]

[ 22. June 2015, 20:45: Message edited by: Imaginary Friend ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
England's best hope is that Australia underperform and this sort of thing does happen. Back in 1958/59 (my Dad and Wisden disclosed this to me) England took a near world-class team to Australia to defend the Ashes. May, Cowdrey, Graveney in the middle order, Trueman, Tyson and Statham to bowl quick and Lock and Laker to supply the spin. England never got going and lost 4-0, by 10, 9 and 8 wickets twice.

Cricket's a funny game, but I don't think it's going to be quite that funny this time round.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
...And so it begins...
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
...with a fifteen-minute delay for razzamattazz on a day when losing play to rain is entirely likely. Dear gods!

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
That was toe-curlingly awful. Three national anthems (when have there ever been anthems at the cricket?!), buglers, mascots, you name it. Embarrassing.

But when the play did finally begin, it was an interesting day. I would have Australia leading by a short head at the moment. A lot will depend on how well England bowl.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
410 is not too dreadful but then England have to bowl and they have to bat. I don't often shout for England but against the Aussies I can make an exception.
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
OI! [Big Grin]

Loved hearing the Welsh singing Guide Me O Thou Great Redeemer yesterday. That would never happen here!

Lovin the cricket back on free to air.

#christmasinjuly
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Except for Old Man River [Rogers], the Australian batsmen all played on the Shane Watson model: bash a few fours, get to 20 or 30 and then get out to a silly stroke. Perhaps England deserve a bit more respect than that!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
So far this summer the emphasis in England's play has been on uninhibited batting. Today it was the bowling that delivered the most disciplined performance since last year.

Someone mentioned on the BBC TMS feed that this is the first England team in years to feature no South Africa born players.

eta: Rogers deserved better a ton!

[ 09. July 2015, 22:52: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Indeed - it's poised very interestingly at the moment. A bit of application either way could make the difference.

I guess the last team without an SA-born player must have been before Strauss appeared on the scene - 2004? It will be interesting to see how long we can keep a team together of largely homegrown players - while England has had some fantastic players over the years born in all corners of the globe (and it's most infamous captain was born in India to Scottish parents), it did sometimes seem to be getting a bit silly. Mind you, Ballance was born in Zimbabwe, so we're still a bit League of Nations.

AG

PS I'm desperate for rain for the allotment. So why the flip does it look as though it'll come on my cricket day? Grr!
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
I wonder if the Oz are finding this pitch peculiar, quite slow, with uneven bounce. It sure nullifies the quicks, but rewards people like Wood, and I suppose, spin.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Well, I notice that Geoffrey is saying that Australian batsmen are staying back in their crease, because their pitches are faster, and are getting trapped by the slower pitch (and ball). But then, this is probably bollocks and totally ad hoc.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
England lead by 122 runs on first innings. Let's not get carried away, it's not like anyone has won anything, but you would have got long odds on that yesterday. Longer odds this morning though as Australia lost their last five for 44 runs this morning.

If Australia's batsmen were done by anything today it was sideways movement. It does for them as surely as persistent outside-the-off-stump does for England's batsmen.
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
Cardiffo collapso! [Big Grin]

Wonderful morning of cricket so far. We showed we're better at mopping up a tail than the Aussie's are.

If we can get 220+ by the close of the play with the loss of no more than 4 wickets, then we'll have the game by the throat.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Oh help me Lord. What is it with modern cricket followers? On the BBC's TMS feed someone (name removed to protect the ignorant) suggested that after dismissing Gary Ballance "Australia's gander will be up".

It's *dander* you pillock. Leave geese out of it. They are dangerous.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
"Australia's gander will be up".

After Wood's imaginary horse, maybe they know something you don't? [Devil]

Personally I blame predictive text.

AG
 
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, I notice that Geoffrey is saying that Australian batsmen are staying back in their crease, because their pitches are faster, and are getting trapped by the slower pitch (and ball). But then, this is probably bollocks and totally ad hoc.

My late mother (try growing up in a household where the mother is the dedicated TMS listener) always maintained that the infuriating thing about Sir Geoffrey is that he's an angry loon, but 2 days later you realise he was right. Pretty well always.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
England now seven down with a lead of 360ish. I think Aussie can still chase that. Need a few more. I had been really Zen about this match because I thought we had no chance. Then I started to hope. Now I'll be disappointed if we lose.

It's a funny old game.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, I notice that Geoffrey is saying that Australian batsmen are staying back in their crease, because their pitches are faster, and are getting trapped by the slower pitch (and ball). But then, this is probably bollocks and totally ad hoc.

My late mother (try growing up in a household where the mother is the dedicated TMS listener) always maintained that the infuriating thing about Sir Geoffrey is that he's an angry loon, but 2 days later you realise he was right. Pretty well always.
Looks like we had a mother in common! G Boycott also committed the unpardonable sin of being born on't wrong side of Pennines. And yes, when it came to batsmanship the bugger was right and still is.

I do wish England had another fifty runs though.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
It's hope, indeed, that is the killer, because we have a real hope of winning and have actually been good.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Bricking it.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Yay! Smith out, three down.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
FIVE down!

106/5

[Yipee]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Not sure what I was worrying about. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
And they've passed the 200...
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
And that's all folks. A good counterattacking innings by Mitchell Johnson didn't affect the outcome. See you at Lord's on Thursday.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat in Purgatory:
As a New Zealander I take some pride in the way NZ has contributed to the renaissance of English cricket.
The recent series with the kiwis has shown that there is a new way of thinking positively about test cricket. I am deeply sorry, of course for Australia (as if) but am confident they will get with the faster batting programme that the kiwis taught the English. Let's just hope for everyone's sake that England wins the ashes though!


 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I don't think slow batting or defensive attitude were Australia's problems. Most fundamentally, they didn't adapt their bowling to the low(ish), slow pitch. And then they were undone by some superb English bowling: I haven't seen England bowl that well, that consistently for a very long time.

I'd also argue it's not really New Zealand who have stimulated this. Getting rid of Moores (who more and more appears to have been a millstone around the team's neck) and encouraging the players ignore the numbers and play the game like it's 2015 has been enough.

In fact, I think the only parut I agree with you about is that I won't be losing any sleep over Australia's discomfort! [Biased]
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
Well anytime is a good
time to celebrate an Aussie defeat.
All credit to the Brits. I wonder if the extra swing of the English ball as opposed to the Aussie kookaburra as well as a pitch that became a bit 2 paced and gave a bit of help to the spinners made the toss a good one to win
Re kiwis, they gave Cook's boys a terrific lead in to show quick scoring was the way to put pressure on opposition attack.
Cheers
Jamat
 
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:


It's a funny old game.

But we love it. Especially if the pattern of last week can be repeated this week. [Smile]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
OK, so why were antipodean parents all calling their children Mitchell 25 or so years ago?

The Aussies have Starc, Marsh and Johnson in the side today, and the Kiwis have McClenagan and Santner.

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Tough day in the field so far.
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
Rogers on 97, Smith on 87. So exciting, much stress, many doge.
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
Sheeyat! And Smith going for a 6! [Yipee]

97 and 97. Fun. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Absolutely what the series needs!

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I suppose the good news for England is that Australia didn't make 400 on the first day. They have batted sensibly and at his rate will declare an hour before COP tomorrow with c 650 on the board [Frown]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
The only other bit of good news is that the pitch is so placid that we have half a chance of batting for three days if we apply ourselves.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
The issue now is tactics. Cook needs to attack and forget about the score as on day 2 Clarke will go for quick runs so he can declare at lunch. This could bring quick wickets but if not, so what the score is irrelevant. When they bat the Brits need to dig in, not panic and frustrate the Aussie attack. They only need a draw out of this and the Aussies need a win.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
Strike that. Aussie will only want to bat once so no point in declaring.
 
Posted by agingjb (# 16555) on :
 
Some parallels:

Manchester 1964 - Australia batted for over two days (Simpson completed his 311) and declared on 656 for 8; England with Dexter (174) and Barrington (256) batted out virtually the rest of the match.

Adelaide 2006 - England declared at 551 for 6 on the second day (Collingwood had made 206, Flintoff still batting on 38*; Australia handily avoided the follow-on with 513; England were skittled for 129; Australia cleaned up.

Apart from heroics, (Hanif, Atherton, Laxman), runs are usually best accumulated in the first innings.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Right. There's an outside chance that Aussie will give England an hour or so tonight, but perhaps even more likely is that they'll wait for the pitch to get more agreeable to Lyons' top spinner.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
A lot depends on the pitch now. If it holds up then the Brits can draw. Aussies still have to take 16 wickets. Dig in lads!
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Ha! A draw is wishful thinking. Our boys will bat for awhile on day 4, and then have most of two days to bowl out England again, probably on a deteriorating pitch.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Yup.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Is it wrong to hope for a draw not to save England but to keep the series alive? I want a gripper, none of this over in a blink crap.

AG
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Wow. In my wildest dreams I didn't expect a capitulation like that [Yipee]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
In some ways, it's quite reassuring to have the old England back. A bit like a comfy old sweater that you can feel relaxed in. You know where you stand.


(Somewhere in the middle of a mixed metaphor, I think.)
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Right, time for James Taylor in place of one of the Bs.

Oh, and ouch.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
In some ways, it's quite reassuring to have the old England back. A bit like a comfy old sweater that you can feel relaxed in. You know where you stand.


(Somewhere in the middle of a mixed metaphor, I think.)

I hope that they are as unpredictable as they were in that great first test performance, and make a series of it.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Are you quite sure you're Australian, DK? [Devil]

I agree with you, but don't tend to associate that sort of sentiment with coming from the antipodes! Mind you, I do remember standing next to a guy in a yellow shirt when Australia played Oxford University at egg chasing and as an Oxford player intercepted the pass on his tryline and set off up the pitch, he was jumping up and down and screaming at him, and cheered when he touched it down. As he said, it was too good a move not to. So perhaps I'm just being unfair?

AG
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
So it's Ballance out and Bairstow in. Oz don't have the same top 4 to knock over.

Lyth has a contract too. So hopefully he can relax and look ahead and not over his shoulder.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
South African allrounder Clive Rice out for the final time, aged 66.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
South African allrounder Clive Rice out for the final time, aged 66.

AG

Clive Rice was overshadowed by Richard Hadlee in county cricket but not by cricketers or the regulars at Trent Bridge. Rice could bowl quicker than Hadlee, was as skilful and scored more runs, faster. He hardly missed a catch and captained Notts for years. They loved him in Nottinghamshire and he's a shoo-in for the Heaven XI.

We're losing far too many cricketers too young.

[ 28. July 2015, 14:41: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
Australia are doing a jolly good impression of England here. [Two face]

James Anderson currently has bowling figures of 10-2-22-5 [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Indeed. Anderson is kicking our arses.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Of course, the myriad Mitchells still have to bowl at England on it, that could be interesting.

Edgbaston has sold out four days - if England wickets start to tumble as well, there'll be some worried faces in the boardroom!

AG
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
Whoopee! 136 all out.

Will England collapse even more spectacularly?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Not yet... three behind, three wickets down. Tomorrow's forecast doesn't look very swing-friendly, it could all be jolly interesting...

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Who won the toss?
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Clarke
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Interesting.

I'm travelling for work at the moment, so I'm in a horrific time zone (as far as cricket goes, at least) and working on limited internet access so I haven't been able to follow the game much. So consider that a disclaimer on any opinion I dare to venture. But...

To be bowled out for 130-something in the fourth innings when you're chasing a massive total is one thing. To win the toss, bat, and do the same is something else. So, were Jimmy et al really on form, or did Australia play with Geoffrey's proverbial stick of rhubarb?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The pitch has something in it for bowlers but mostly the Australians batted like they were in Australia. Jimmy & co moved it just half or quarter a ball's width and that was enough. Two batsmen were out trying to leave the ball and another bowled playing no shot.
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
What do we reckon? Is Root going to carry on the form of his life today? Can Bairstow carry his domestic form into the Test arena? Or are England going to fold and be all out for 210 shortly after lunch?
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
Can Bairstow carry his domestic form into the Test arena?

That'll be a 'no' then.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Johnson takes two in his first over of the day... I sense a thriller!

AG
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Johnson and Lyon are the only two keeping our heads above water.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
It's edge of the seat stuff, isn't it? Even if England could scrape a lead of 150, just a change in the weather could make the difference...

Holey moley, first 408-9 against the Kiwis, now this, who writes Edgbaston's scripts?

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
*wonders whether he should get clean pants*

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Looks like Finn v Warner at the moment.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
This is England's test, now that Warner is gone. Unlikely that Nevill and Johnson can last much past catching the first innings total, let alone build any kind of lead.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
...but Anderson goes off with a side strain - sounds like a bad one (having had one, I can confirm they are horribly painful). Could there still be a twist?

You know what, I very nearly don't care who wins this - it's just been such a - so long as the tension keeps up!

AG
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Prolly doesn't matter, Sandy. Jimmy seems to bowl really well about once a year or so, and that happened in the first innings. It's Finn that is destroying Aus in the second.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
Bob Willis maintains that Aussie will always prevail in a flat track.
What's the temptation to juice it up and does this wreck the tradition?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Bob Willis maintains that Aussie will always prevail in a flat track.
What's the temptation to juice it up and does this wreck the tradition?

That helped in 2005. The sole flat track was for the Fifth Test at the Oval, where Warney dropped The Ashes.
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
Anderson has now been ruled out of the 4th Test.

I'm now imagining the Australian tail will wag, they'll set a target of about 110 and England will be reduced to 95-9. Jimmy will have to come out and hold up an end, hoping that Broad can knock off the final few runs in a nail-biting climax.

However, I still won't get home in time to watch any of the highlights.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Currently considering opening a bottle of champagne. Not to celebrate, for the cork.

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
121 should be doable but...
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
The commentators on Sky are talking like this is all but over. Which will no doubt annoy the sporting gods. Squeaky bum time.
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
Captain Cook gone. We need every batsman to get 11, not for every partnership to be worth 11.

[ 31. July 2015, 12:54: Message edited by: Sipech ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I don't know what Ian Bell had for lunch but I've never known him start like this, even in limited over cricket.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Maybe they found Mitchell Johnson's meat ration?

He's slowed up a bit now, but he's still there...

AG
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
2/106 on day three. Only 15 to go.

*sigh*

Ah well. Two to go! If our batsman can hang in a bit, we should be right.
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
Nice to see the crowd excited but [Smile]

[ 31. July 2015, 14:44: Message edited by: Evensong ]
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
*does a little dance*
[Big Grin] [Angel] [Axe murder] [Yipee]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Never in doubt. [Biased]
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
Hardly a stutter. Woohoo!
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
Looking forward to the next one. Hopefully more than a three dayer! TV is atrocious in Straya.

[Yipee]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
TV's no better here - audience figures are a fraction of that in 2005 because it's on Sky.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I can't find the numbers but it seems that BBC Radio's Test Match Special is losing listeners, and with the current crew I don't hold much hope for improvement.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
If they just talk amongst themselves a little less and describe the cricket a little more...

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
15/4!! Are Cricinfo serious?
 
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :
 
well, this is going well....
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
21/5! Holy crap!

AG
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
29/6 - Unless Australia turn it round and win this and the final test match, with Clarke scoring unbeaten centuries in his 3 remaining innings, then he's toast.
 
Posted by Legodude_uk (# 5671) on :
 
Is it possible to make them follow on before we bat???
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
Or make two declarations and all go to the pub?

However their lowest Test Score of all time has apparently been exceeded (36 in 1902).
 
Posted by Legodude_uk (# 5671) on :
 
46-8 !!!

[Overused] Stuart Broad [Overused]
 
Posted by Legodude_uk (# 5671) on :
 
make that 47-9!!!

[Killing me] [Killing me]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Legodude_uk:
Is it possible to make them follow on before we bat???

I think you can forfeit a first innings, though I'm fairly certain it's never been done in a test - or, if it has, down to weather rather than bowling the opposition out for stuff all.

AG
 
Posted by Legodude_uk (# 5671) on :
 
60...!!! [Killing me] [Killing me] [Killing me]

Broad 8-15 [Overused] [Overused] [Overused] [Overused]
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Given the time zones, from here in Australia I usually watch only the first session of each day. But never in my wildest nightmares did I expect to see Australia all out by lunch on the first day. What a disgrace!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
The pitch has something in it for bowlers but mostly the Australians batted like they were in Australia. Jimmy & co moved it just half or quarter a ball's width and that was enough. Two batsmen were out trying to leave the ball and another bowled playing no shot.

Broady and co today but again the Australians batted like they were back home. Nevill appears to be a walking wicket - bowled twice off-stump now with the ball cutting back.

Let's see how England fare before we get carried away.
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
What a pleasant dream for the ABA fans And at the hands of England! The only thing that would have made it better would have been at the hands of India. In Austrailia, of course! However, I digress.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Legodude_uk:
Is it possible to make them follow on before we bat???

I think you can forfeit a first innings, though I'm fairly certain it's never been done in a test - or, if it has, down to weather rather than bowling the opposition out for stuff all.

AG

I believe some very early declarations have been made, usually on drying "sticky dog" wickets in Oz where the ball would do anything it damn well pleased after pitching. Turn, stop, shoot low, lift, anything. The bowler didn't know, let alone the batsman.

A wet jute matting wicket can do something like it under a hot sun, as did the celebrated Derbyshire v Lancashire match at Matlock in 1975 when Derbys were bowled out twice for very few after it had snowed the day after Lancs made about 500.
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
I think you can forfeit a first innings, though I'm fairly certain it's never been done in a test - or, if it has, down to weather rather than bowling the opposition out for stuff all.

SA v England, fifth test of the 99/00 tour. Both sides forfeited an innings due to rain in order to "make a game of it". England won.

The decision appears somewhat dubious in light of the subsequent match-fixing allegations (which resulted in a life ban) against South Africa's captain Hansie Cronje.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Mitchell Johnson made the highest score [apart from Mr Extras] so should he be promoted to #3?

It was great to watch England holding their catches after a lifetime of butterfingers.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well spotted Marvin, how could I forget that one?
(probably wanted to forget it... though I remember at the time saying "If it gives England a win I'm all for it..."

AG
 
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :
 
surely there's an argument here to move Mr Extras higher up the order than his current last man in?
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
Now this is a bit cruel.
 
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
Now this is a bit cruel.

although, full marks to the chap who said "an aggressive 10* by Geoff Boycott"!
 
Posted by Jammy Dodger (# 17872) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
surely there's an argument here to move Mr Extras higher up the order than his current last man in?

Totally. This is my personal favourite fact of the innings that Mr Extras scored more than his team-mates for the first time in Ashes history [Killing me]
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Legodude_uk:
60...!!! [Killing me] [Killing me] [Killing me]

Broad 8-15 [Overused] [Overused] [Overused] [Overused]

Dear oh dear. Never heard of such a bad innings. Was out for the evening, blinked and I missed it. [Frown]
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
England 250 for 3 (or the other way round if you like) - and Joe Root bags another excellent century.

Think I'll check the weather forecast ... well it looks like it's set fair until Sunday.

Now 260-odd for 3, Root and Bairstow still going strong. If it was a fight, the referee would stop it.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Shame about Bairstow, but the situation is where a game would normally be at the end of day 3! Australia's hope is that if England are bowled out tomorrow, there is enough time to make six hundred+ and have a day to bowl at England!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I suspect the psychology in the Aussie dressing room might make that a bit tricky!
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
Surely England can't lose from here but the Aussies are great pride players. To bat 2 days in a second innings the'd need Faf Du Plessis. I think Aussie lacks a good all rounder as Mitch Marsh was not picked so their bowlers face a huge mountain.
 
Posted by Legodude_uk (# 5671) on :
 
England collapse this morning... [Frown]

[ 07. August 2015, 10:56: Message edited by: Legodude_uk ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
England have already lost as many wickets today as they did yesterday: four for 68 v four for 264.

The forecast today is for partially cloudy, then cloudy: anyone for a two-day Test match?
 
Posted by Legodude_uk (# 5671) on :
 
Declaring just before lunch, couple of overs at the Aussies - will we need the afternoon session??? [Smile]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
btw Legodude, Welcome Back!
 
Posted by Legodude_uk (# 5671) on :
 
Thanks [Smile] it has been a while
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Looks like England forgot to wipe the butter off their fingers after lunch
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Well done Australia for forcing the match into a third day!
 
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on :
 
So, where do the Aussies go from here?

Harris, Haddin and Watson are gone. Clarke may not even make it to the 5th Test (I'm betting he will just graciously step down and let Smith take over at the Oval). Rogers is gone after the Oval. Johnson probably hasn't got much left in him. The Marsh brothers look busted. Voges hasn't convinced and is mid 30s. As for the rest of the squad, none have looked very good. Smith has been found out. Hazelwood doesn't look like Test material.

So, what is the future for Aussie Test cricket?

Not that I care. I'm a Pommie Bastard. As far as I'm concerned, they deserve all the mockery they get.
 
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on :
 
Also....

Why bring Peter Siddle on tour if you're not going to play him, even when he's the ideal guy for the conditions? With a ball seaming and swinging, Siddle is probably the one most likely to get England into a sweat. If he's not good enough to replace the likes of Hazelwood, why bring him?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I wonder how secure Darren Lehmann is feeling this morning.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
Totally with that Oscar. Yet Aussie kicked serious butt at Lords. All about the conditions perhaps. This current wicket seems like NZ in the 90s before drop in pitches happened! I think in conditions where swing and seam movement are happening then winning the toss is critical and Cook's decision to put them in on this wicket was obviously inspired.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I wonder what odds are being offered on it being over by lunch.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I think they'd give you money to leave the bookies, Wodders, as it's now nine down and 87 behind!

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Seam and swing have played a part but the Australian batsmen haven't taken the conditions into account. They have looked as out-of-sorts as England often do at Brisbane and Perth. The different balls used (the Duke in England and the Kookaburra in Australia) play a part too.

Not only do some of the Australians appear to be at the end of their careers, I'm afraid some of the umpiring has, as Australians say, been pretty ordinary, but then a couple of them are short of experience in tests, let alone Ashes tests.

[ 08. August 2015, 10:30: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Jammy Dodger (# 17872) on :
 
Wow. You would not have predicted this at the outset. England regaining the Ashes with a test in hand and in the most emphatic way possible. Still can't get my head around Thursday. Astonishing. But also the whole match over in less than 2.5 days? The test matches keep getting shorter. Will the Oval just be a Two Day International?
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Congratulations to England. Deserved it a hell of a lot more than our lads.
All out for 60. That is a frothing tinny of fucked up. I still can't believe that actually happened.
Let the purge commence. Pup has just fallen on his sword.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
Congratulations to England. Deserved it a hell of a lot more than our lads.
All out for 60. That is a frothing tinny of fucked up. I still can't believe that actually happened.
Let the purge commence. Pup has just fallen on his sword.

England's players do sound pleased but not over the top. Clarke was very emotional after the match as the facts of retirement are dawning on him.

While Australia have been poor except for the war of attrition at Lord's (which their extra pace giving them the advantage) I'd hesitate to ditch half the touring squad as Punter suggests. They are getting on in years but are there plausible alternatives? Is the Academy system less effective at bringing on talent the old Sheffield Shield and Grade cricket? There seems to have been a lot of unfulfilled talent recently.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I still can't wrap my brain around how well England have played, and how poorly Aussie have batted.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Yes, Australia will have to retreat, lick their wounds and regroup - but they seem to regroup a lot faster than the other nations - they'll be back!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
That is a frothing tinny of fucked up.

If I can just think of somewhere appropriate to use that I might just nick it!

I am a bit concerned that England have papered over the cracks - I don't think we ever batted for a full day's worth of overs - and have been flattered by whoever it was who has kidnapped the real Australia. Presumably Cricket Australia will be blackmailed by the result into paying the ransom.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
That is a frothing tinny of fucked up.

If I can just think of somewhere appropriate to use that I might just nick it!

I am a bit concerned that England have papered over the cracks - I don't think we ever batted for a full day's worth of overs - and have been flattered by whoever it was who has kidnapped the real Australia. Presumably Cricket Australia will be blackmailed by the result into paying the ransom.

AG

The "Real Australia" will show up as soon as they play in conditions that don't allow seam and swing, ie, back home.

England just have to be more hard-nosed about Tests in this country and prepare the pitches to suit our skills and preferences; after all, every other country does!
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
Just enjoying the moment. No pressure for the Oval. Clarke stole the after match by announcing his retirement. Stokes performance makes one want to claim him as a kiwi!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
England just have to be more hard-nosed about Tests in this country and prepare the pitches to suit our skills and preferences; after all, every other country does!

That's true, but it would also be nice if we could show a bit more flexibility in how we play, and adapt to different conditions a bit better. Otherwise, we'll never win away from home.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
England just have to be more hard-nosed about Tests in this country and prepare the pitches to suit our skills and preferences; after all, every other country does!

That's true, but it would also be nice if we could show a bit more flexibility in how we play, and adapt to different conditions a bit better. Otherwise, we'll never win away from home.
It's true that England don't adapt well, but we bend over backwards to make things as easy as possible for visiting teams by preparing pitches so bland that their own batsmen's limitations aren't shown up. If we make our pitches suit us, we shouldn't lose many series then, provided we do adapt and select with care, we can get a few wins overseas that, overall, improves our position and rating.
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
What do we reckon is going to happen at the Oval over the next few days?

I pass the ground on my commute and if I catch the traffic right, I can watch the match for a few minutes from the top deck of the bus on the way home. It was pretty overcast, so I'd be expecting a swinging air to the place.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
It appears that, for the first time this summer, a Proper Test Match™ has broken out. I have to confess, I didn't see that one coming!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
There seemed to be an attempt at the same sort of thing in Colombo at the moment - India made 393 all out but then Sri Lanka lost an early wicket. Hopefully things will pick up later.

It is Kumar Sangakarra last Test so I hope it's a good one - I also hope India win, of course.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Agreed - while Trent Bridge was something else I like my drama to finish well after tea on the fifth day, so I get as much cricket as possible!

AG
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
It's good to get a proper Test Match and I'm strangely glad the Australians have had a good day. A contest is better to win than a walkover.

Annoyingly, though, in the hope that the game might go to 5 days I booked Monday off in the hope that I might get a ticket on the gate, as I had done for the New Zealand Test at Lord's earlier this summer. But I've got to be housebound, waiting for the gas man cometh.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
My dad was born Sarf of the River, poor thing, and I often asked him why the final Test was always at a Minor Counties ground - he rose to it year after year!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I've not seen Mitchell Johnson being bowled by Moeen Ali but it could be that the ball is gripping already! That means Australia could have had the best of the batting conditions, England erred in not selecting Rashid, and Nathan Lyon could have a field day in England's second innings.

As others have said, proper Test cricket: balanced sides, remember you have five days to play, one poor shot and you'll be sat in the dressing room for a day or two.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
So, Sioni, what do you reckon the lottery numbers will be?

Somehow I don't think England will make this 4-1. Will be 4-1, quite possibly, but not win 4-1.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
So, Sioni, what do you reckon the lottery numbers will be?

Any of these numbers from our opening partnerships (half way down the page).
quote:

Somehow I don't think England will make this 4-1. Will be 4-1, quite possibly, but not win 4-1.

AG

We'll be lucky to make this match last into day 4, session 1.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
I honest to fucking Ganesha do not know what is happening here. If anyone can explain the fact that our lads were all out for 60 in the last test, and now have not only piled up 481 runs, but also have England at 107/8, please do so. I've lost faith in reality.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
If you weren't so far away we'd meet up in a pub and thrash it out. It's been the most bizarre series of reversals imaginable. We don't know what the flip has gone one either.

As an Englishman I'm delighted with the result of the series, but as a sportsman who wanted five five dayers I'm utterly bemused.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
England's problem yesterday was "poor shot selection" according to G Boycott, but I've heard that expression from him so often that it applies to any error made by any batsmen, especially attacking shots that go to hand. Didn't he say the same after Australia were out for 60 (and England for 103)?

At least Moeen and Wood made 57 for the ninth wicket. After what had gone before that was good but they make as good a ninth wicket pair as you will find.

England are following on. Let's see if Lyth can redeem himself.

eta: Australia have only three slips and one gully. With a lead of 300 and an innings in hand?

[ 22. August 2015, 10:53: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
I honest to fucking Ganesha do not know what is happening here. If anyone can explain the fact that our lads were all out for 60 in the last test, and now have not only piled up 481 runs, but also have England at 107/8, please do so. I've lost faith in reality.

Pressure's gone?

I sometimes play my best sport when there's no pressure.

#shrug
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
will the weather somehow conjure a draw for England?

Meanwhile Sri Lanka are hoping they can play all day tomorrow with just eight wickets left and 341 runs required - and the weather could interfere here, too.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Oh well, all over but The Ashes back where they belong!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
And as the Ashes slid to a somewhat ignominious end, another of the Invincibles died.

RIP Arthur Morris

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
And as the Ashes slid to a somewhat ignominious end, another of the Invincibles died.

RIP Arthur Morris

AG

That leaves just one of the side, Neil Harvey.

To give an idea of how "Invincible" that side was, they played 31 matches of which nine were drawn and the others won; fifteen by an innings, two by ten wickets and another by 409 runs. They won the Tests 4-0 with one draw.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Frank Tyson has died. What with Morris, Close and Tyson going in such close company, it'll be busy at the pearly bar.

AG
 
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :
 
anyone following today's events? As an England and Moseley rugby fan let's just say a test against Pakistan is welcome distraction (for now)...
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
...Until their spinners start bowling, at least. [Biased]

I watched a grand total of 1 ball. That ball happened to be a jaffa from Jimmy, which slightly left the batsman and went past very very close to the edge. The fielders went up, thinking they'd heard a noise which the commentators said was clear. Ump gives not out. Skipper reviews. TV umpire has to adjudicate without the help of snicko or hot spot!! For some unfathomable reason, they don't have them in Abu Dhabi. It took him about five minutes of going back-and-forward, frame-by-frame, until he could convince himself that there was no daylight between bat and ball as it went past the edge and so the on-field decision should be reversed.

It was one of the most bizarre things I've ever seen in sport: Officials asked to use technology to make a decision, without the technology! Play was held up for ages, the batsman was clearly frustrated, and (IMNVHO) the on-field decision should never have been reversed because after seeing the same evidence as the TV umpire, I thought it was clear as mud!!

I thought reviews were there to make sure the howlers were corrected. This wasn't that.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
For Abu Dhabi four down on day 1 is good. Seven down, as it should have been, would have put England in the driving seat.

It does mean that England have the necessary. The quicks have been cheap as chips and it's too early for a part-timer and a debutant to achieve much.
 
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
For Abu Dhabi four down on day 1 is good. Seven down, as it should have been, would have put England in the driving seat.

It does mean that England have the necessary. The quicks have been cheap as chips and it's too early for a part-timer and a debutant to achieve much.

I'm with Sir Geoffrey on the part-timer (and not just as a Worcestershire partisan) - it oughtn't to make sense, there's nothing obviously threatening, and he's not a Test class spinner - but he has this infuriating-for-the-pundits habit of taking test wickets...
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
It looks as though a couple did eventually stick in Bell's mitts. Pity the two batsmen made 247 between them, mind.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
On the BBC website someone observed that Shoaib had not played Test cricket for five year and he now looked like he was going to bat for five more. Eventually he was dismissed "Tired out".
 
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on :
 
And now Cook has replied with his own double hundred. Difficult to see this as being anything other than a draw now, barring the usual miracles (=England cock up badly).
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
This is looking like it could have been a Timeles test. Just gone tea on Day 4 and England are five down in their first innnings having just overtaken Pakistan's first innings. IIRC, most tests in England are over by teatime on day four, unless the weather intervenes.

nb Cook has hit a FOUR, his first for 36 overs!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Meanwhile in Galle it looks as if West Indies will lose by an innings plus against Sri Lanka - 8 wickets down in their second innings and still 49 runs to get! But Jermaine Blackwood is being very obstinate.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
In the end an innings and 6 runs.

Is the Eng - Pak match being played on a billiard table? They might as well be playing on the old ground in Antigua!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I'm pretty sure a billiard table would have a bit more bounce than this pitch.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I've certainly played pool on tables with more variable bounce, but England have taken five Pakistan wickets including a couple for Rashid. It won't make for a result but they will be the better going into the remaining tests with a strong performance behind them.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
England have, amazingly got a chance, but they probably have 45 minutes to make 99. Pakistan OTOH will bowl as few deliveries as possible! It could be tricky for the umpires.

I doubt England will do it unless there are a couple of very big overs, say twenty plus.
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
Bad light closed the Test down ... [Mad]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I think a draw is probably a fair result but we need more competitive pitches!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
I think a draw is probably a fair result but we need more competitive pitches!

We need to hang on to chances too!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Proper Test cricket in Sharjah. 90 overs, 218 runs, four wickets. If England can plod on into the afternoon tomorrow they should have a useful lead, even though Ben Stokes looks out of the match.
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
I think the aim should be for a lead of about 150, rely on Anderson & Broad to get the first 4 wickets and then Rashid will come into his own, have them out for 200 and then even on a deteriorating wicket that will turn and bounce, we should be able to get 50 runs to win.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Ah well. Nobody really expected that England could win in the Emirates, did they? I'm just glad we were vaguely competitive for some of the time.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Meanwhile at the Gabba (Brisbane) Australia in their second innings are already leading NZ by 400+ near the end of day 3, with no wickets lost. This match could become some small revenge for the Rugby World Cup (where NZ beat Australia in the final).
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
...and after a dismal performance in the short format toy cricket India thrash the South Africans in the first Test at Mohali.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
...and after a dismal performance in the short format toy cricket India thrash the South Africans in the first Test at Mohali.

Opinions about the pitch seemed to be divided until Sunil Gavaskar reported on its dryness and cracked appearance. Amazingly the match lasted almost three full days and of the 40 batsmen dismissed 25 were out in single figures.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The second Test between Australia and New Zealand appears to be no less painful than the first. They are 416-2 at the close, with David Warner just failing to score 250 on the first day! If he takes some care Lara's record is in sight by about teatime tomorrow.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
The second pyjama game in the Emirates is looking tasty - Pakistan chasing 284 are 29-3.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
104/6 in 32, Pakistan need exactly ten an over. I wouldn't call it impossible but they don't have Shahid Afridi any more.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
A good stand in the middle order should have made a game of it, but it didn't happen. Ah well, England aren't complaining!

AG
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
Warner finally out for 253 Day 2 Aus v NZ test match.

Good on him but rather yawnworthy watching such one sided cricket. Hopefully things will get more interesting now.

Smith looking (rightly) a bit more measured and conservative this morning. Been a bit gung ho.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Looking at the scorecard, it almost looks like limp subsidence after Warner and Kawaja went!

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Gobsmackingly, despite Mitchell Starc in particular, the Kiwis are within forty runs of a lead with four wickets in hand!

AG
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
The WACA ground has long been renowned as a fast bowlers paradise, with teams rarely making much more than 300 in an innings and matches often all over in 3 days.

But this time, we have had both sides scoring over 500 in their first innings, with one batter on each side making a double century (Warner for Aus and Taylor for NZ) and no fewer than four others making a century (not least Kane Williamson of New Zealand who has so far this series looked all class without a discernible weakness).
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The WACA has certainly been good for quick bowlers but sometimes the pitch is so true that a confident batsmen can score at a good rate.

I don't think it's as quick and true as it used to be though and I doubt we'll see many innings like Roy Fredericks back in 1975 when he put Lillee and Thomson to the sword, back in the days when there were no helmets or restrictions on short-pitched bowling. We get quick scoring nowadays, but a lot of it is attributable to techniques borrowed from T20 and ODIs plus bats like railway sleepers.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
...and Aus-NZ peters out into a draw, and at last Mitch will torment England no longer.

Meanwhile Pakistan are busy binning it in a way normally only done by England.

AG

Wot no sig?

[ 17. November 2015, 12:40: Message edited by: Sandemaniac ]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Pakistan finally make 208, with the last two wickets worth 47. I did enjoy the Cricinfo texter-inner who stated that he'd love to see Mohammed Irfan (all 7'1" of him) come charging up the pitch - enough to make any bowler quail!

Adrian
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
At 102-4, England could yet show Pakistan how to really engineer a collapse...

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Taylor and Buttler did the job for England. I missed Irfan (c 7') standing alongside Taylor (5'4"), which must be quite a sight!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
According to the Beeb, Bell has been dropped for the South Africa tour, Compton and Ballance recalled, and Footitt and Samit Patel in at the expense of Rashid.

I suppose I'm mostly disappointed because despite being a Sunday friendlies only player I still consider myself a member of the leggie's trade union.

AG
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Holy crap! Jos Buttler hits a 46-ball ton as England make 355-5. Only five man have done it faster (Afridi twice), and Jesse Ryder off the same number.

Here's hoping Pakistan make ago of it, and we have a thriller.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I wonder how the ground is set up. Not to take anything away from Jos Buttler (heck, it's a return to form in any case) but I remember Ali Brown making 268 for Surrey in a 50 over game at the Oval, then Glamorgan very nearly made 400-and-a-lot to win. There was however a 55-yard boundary square of the wicket, which I would fancy clearing even now (though I might put my back out).
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
As the old saw goes, we'll know what it's like when both sides have batted!

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
What a good idea!

Away teams often get a raw deal and this might encourage teams to go into games with a balanced team.

[ 25. November 2015, 12:05: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I think Nagpur can fairly be described as a turning wicket after India dismissed South Africa on the second morning for a mere 79! All ten wickets fell to spin.

India had a first innings lead of 136.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The South African side isn't what it used to be. After they had dismissed India for 173 not long before the close they lost one wicket, sent Imran Tahir in a night-watchman whereupon he scored two fours off six balls before getting out leg-before. I don't think he's really nightwatchman material.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
...and I think he did it both innings!

I would agree, not night watchman material at all. He's the type of batsman you need at the tail.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
An entirely predictable win by India after the mess SA made of their first innings - Ashwin Man-of-the-Match for a 12-fer.

The result is that India win the series with a game to go and South Africa lose their 9 year run without losing a series. They did well.

I think their will be comments on the pitch, as there so often are, but both sides have to bat on the same pitch.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Something of a bum-nipper in the after-dark thrash!

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Something of a bum-nipper in the after-dark thrash!

AG

Jos Buttler is either a very lucky man or he's going to be an excellent captain.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
It looks like The Kiwis are guaranteed a first innings lead.

[Big Grin]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
So, what's the point of this day-night Test then?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
It looks like The Kiwis are guaranteed a first innings lead.

[Big Grin]

[Hot and Hormonal]

Well, it looked like it at the time but a wagging tail is always good, I suppose, even when it's an Aussie one!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
So, what's the point of this day-night Test then?

Increase home country broadcast audiences and boost ground attendance too.

Taking a day off work to watch an entire match, such as an ODI or a T20 is not a problem, whereas the five days for a Test are (assuming the match lasts five days).
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
SA don't appear to be able to bat very much at the mo.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
It's a pretty sad reflection on them and a very sad demise of a once great team. Sunil Gavaskar made a nice comment for those who had been critical of the pitches:

quote:
...if you want to play on a pitch that doesn't turn, go and play on the road!
I'm surprised that India aren't enforcing the follow-on but they've chosen no to do so. They start their 2nd innings shortly.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Sunil has a good point. India usually score a good deal more than 334 in a first innings at home and all three innings have been patchy until Kohli and Rahane put their heads down to bat out the last fifty overs of the third day. Only Rahane and Ashwin in the first innings approached that for application.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
If India bat on into the first session in the morning South Africa could easily be faced with a total of 500 or more!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
An amazing example of playing for a draw! Fascinating day of cricket - Test cricket at its finest. Now anxious for tomorrow - of course I want India to win but a draw would be an amazing result for SA.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Yes, could SA do it? 72 off 72 is extraordinary. I was wondering what had happened to batsmen of the calibre of AB and Hashim.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
If they block as well as they did today no problem!
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
It was a little upside down to feel disappointed when a 4 was scored!

Reminiscent of the good ol' days of Paul Collingwood.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
An amazing game and well done South Africa for holding out for so long - a brilliant day of Test cricket. It's sad that someone has to lose a match like that.

Congratulations to India on a 3-0 series win.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The influence of ODIs and T20 has definitely spread. Australia made 583/4 in 114 overs, a bit more than five per over. West Indies are 207/6 and that's just the end of Day 2.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
...though funnily enough the match Wodders mentioned included scoring 143 from 143.1 overs - Boycott must have been wetting himself with excitement over that one. What a contrast!

I notice just a single six in almost 900 runs - I'm guessing that Hobart has big boundaries?

AG
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
Sad to see such a demise of the West Indies. They have been humiliated in Hobart.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
... the match Wodders mentioned included scoring 143 from 143.1 overs - Boycott must have been wetting himself with excitement over that one. ...
AG

It really was completely enthralling - I just love the game! Watching a team fight for a draw like that was incredible - most batsmen are good at the scoring shots but the blocking was just amazing! It will go down in my book as one of the great matches!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
Sad to see such a demise of the West Indies. They have been humiliated in Hobart.

Indeed they have. By an innings and 212 runs in about half the scheduled playing time.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Her we have the Boxing Day test, normally the big event of the cricket year in Australia but it's a mismatch so bad that it's painful to watch. (Especially after the tension of the last NZ text a month or so ago.) Just after tea on day 2, and Australia declare at 3 / 551, with 4 of the top 5 having made a "gift" century, and already the West Indies are 4/ 83 in reply.

How on earth did the WI manage to beat England last year ?

[ 27. December 2015, 05:28: Message edited by: Tukai ]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Because England are painfully inconsistent.

A trend which continued in microcosm in South Africa yesterday. We were 50ish-3 before rallying to 170ish-4 by the close. Compton batted well. Looks a good player to me.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
While the West Indies have definitely unravelled, Sri Lanka aren't doing any better in New Zealand. After losing both tests through the old method of failing to reach 300 in either innings, they lost the first ODI with seven wickets and 29 overs to spare and this morning lost by ten wickets and more than forty overs to spare! Yes, NZ made 118 in 8.2 overs. If Guptill can bat like this reliably they aren't going to miss Brendon McCullum at all.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
I think there's some batting taking place today.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
That wasn't batting. It wasn't slogging either. Or defending. Definitely not defending. I'm not quite sure what it was though.
 
Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on :
 
I think it was the effect of a 20-20 attitude coming to Test Cricket. I don't know if this is a good or bad thing. Probably a bit of both.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
A bit of T20 batting plus SA playing a bowler short on a good pitch. Moreover, three of the four had just six Tests between them and their #1, Dale Steyn is absent.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
I think there's been some more batting taking place.

(Well replied, SA).
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Yes, what a pity it's not a timeless Test, because I'm loving the ebbs and flows of this game. Every time you think all the impossible things have happened, another one comes along. And may Temba Bavuma be the first of many.

AG
 
Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
I notice the 15yr old who scored 1000 not out in an under 16's school cricket match now has official Mumbai city sponsorship. Interesting to see what going up a few grades in cricket will do for him - but the Big Bash concept is now where the international crowd support is greatest. So it looks like he has a career ahead of him if his body holds together.

I cannot imagine what hitting over 300 fours or sixes in a row would do to your shoulders...and then have to line up to keep doing it as a career.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I expect England will do some more fielding practice before the next Test, just to get used to the ball sticking in their mitts - they say that "dropping is catching" and it does become contagious. At least we know that Moeen can contain - it would have been a sound option to blast him once the follow-on looked saved at say 300-3.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Banner Lady:
I notice the 15yr old who scored 1000 not out in an under 16's school cricket match now has official Mumbai city sponsorship.

The commentators on Sky's coverage of the Test were talking about this yesterday. Apparently, the opposition were bowled out for thirty-something. So I'm not sure what that says about the competitiveness of the game. On the one hand, it's an impressive feat regardless of the standard of the bowling. On the other, you're absolutely right that it'll be interesting to see if he can be as good against a more talented attack.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
I think there's been some bowling taking place.

Shame the weather intervened, although Bairstow and the beard had probably done enough (with a few more overs batting).

What next?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Meanwhile, Hashim Amla has resigned the captaincy. Odd timing.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Meanwhile, Hashim Amla has resigned the captaincy. Odd timing.

It must have come to him while he was in the middle for nearly two days. Plenty of time to think.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Clingford:
I think there's been some bowling taking place.

...

What next?

Indeed.

Well done Broad.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
While I'm impressed by Broad's bowling, and enjoying us winning away from home, I can't help feeling that when a game ends in three days I'm being done out of two days listening...

AG
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Now that is amazingly diabolical batting by India. Monumental cock-up.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Clingford:
Now that is amazingly diabolical batting by India. Monumental cock-up.

It takes some special to lose like that even against Australia. Three lions on your shirt are usually required.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
We taught them everything they know?!
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
New Zealand prepared a green top wicket in Wellington to suit their good swing bowlers, but unfortunately for them lost the toss and had to bat first. Result 50/5 after an hour or so of day 1 and all out for 183. After Australia lost two quick wickets , still on day 1, the pitch eased and they kept batting: 463/6 at stumps on day 2. It will take a massive third innings by NZ to save the match, but Wellington has seem a few of those. McCullum made 300 here a year or two back!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
This may seem a bit out of my usual line but I'm really, really pleased that West Indies won the Under 19s World Cup - a resurgence of the Windies canonly be good for the game globally.
 
Posted by Carex (# 9643) on :
 
So do the big three just roll over and go to sleep when they put their pajamas on?
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
I know it's just not cricket, but, bloody hell, England won chasing 230.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I was telling all and sundry here that England had no chance against the Proteas and that I wasn't even bothering to stay up to watch their innings - and I at there spellbound as they did it!

Is Joe Root good or what?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
I was telling all and sundry here that England had no chance against the Proteas and that I wasn't even bothering to stay up to watch their innings - and I at there spellbound as they did it!

Is Joe Root good or what?

Nasser Hussein was on TV this evening proclaiming Root as our best ever, over all three forms. That conveniently ignores the greats of the past. From what I've read Wally Hammond and Denis Compton would have loved ODIs and T20s. There are probably a dozen others besides, but Root is very good.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Peter May would have had fun over the shorter formats, and possibly even Fiery Fred.

Bangladesh made a bit of a pig's ear of it last night, sad about that as my perfect semi-final line-up would be India [of course], Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh with the trophy going to India [of course].

Ah well, one can dream!
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
!
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
That funny smell.... might it have been a nation of over a billion people all bricking themselves at once?

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
England's was a worry but ......
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
It was quite a game, we were on the edges of our seats. How many times has the third umpire been called upon to adjudicate on the last ball of a game? I'm not sure my heart would stand many more finishes as close as that.

The men's game has a day off today so we can all recover a bit.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
And .... England almost snatched defeat from the jaws of victory against Sri Lanka. But we won and will now play New Zealand in the semis. And base on what I've seen so far, that will be as far as we get.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Nail-biter. Our spinners were literally murdered.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Do we have a fifth pace bowler we could put in for Rashid?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
That's what happens. On some pitches slow bowlers are exactly what you need, on others you need more quicks. As far as today's match would Reece Topley have done better than Moeen or Adil Rashid?

What would have helped would have been another bowler able to put it in the blockhole, like Chris Jordan.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Tonight India play Australia with a place in the semis as the prize - could be fun depending on which teams turn up.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Go Afghanistan!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
That was a great match, Go Afghanistan indeed!
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Kohli! Kohli! Kohli!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
...and look at those figures, two sixes and nine fours in 82 off 51 - that's actually pretty old fashioned scoring, yet way over a run a ball.

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Still reeling a bit from last night's result - indeed two amazing games yesterday - very much worth the licence fee for the TV, except there isn't one here.

Today's final Super 10 match between South Africa and Sri Lanka is now quite meaningless but might be entertaining.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
You might not believe it but here in England the first-class season gets underway on Thursday. Yes, that is first-class cricket in March. OK, it's university v county matches but for Pete's sake, cricket in March??
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Fielding might be difficult in wellies, an overcoat and snorkel!
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
And .... England almost snatched defeat from the jaws of victory against Sri Lanka. But we won and will now play New Zealand in the semis. And base on what I've seen so far, that will be as far as we get.

But it wasn't! Great win by England, with overs to spare, against a much-favoured New Zealand team.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
And .... England almost snatched defeat from the jaws of victory against Sri Lanka. But we won and will now play New Zealand in the semis. And base on what I've seen so far, that will be as far as we get.

But it wasn't! Great win by England, with overs to spare, against a much-favoured New Zealand team.
And on to the final. One of the joys of T20 is that in a one-off anything can happen.
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
Dammit. I sacrificed a virgin for NZ, and England decided to play. You know how difficult it is to find a virgin these day? Do you???
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
It's not Proper Cricket™, but it can be quite fun.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
...and tonight's semi-final is India v West Indies - it sounds like fun.

What has happened to England that they have this sudden will to win? Very out of character.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Are New Zealand unlucky? That's two semi-finals they have lost [Frown]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
If it was England who'd lost two semi-finals, we'd be calling them bottlers.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
West Indies play England in the final so now the debate is on as to who I shall be shouting for - or for whom I shall be shouting.

It should be a good match.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Turns out they're not a one-man team.
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
I will be shouting for the Windies... but I can't find any more sacrificial virgins. They will have to win this on their own.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
The Windies managed it okay, it was a good match and if Simmons hadn't been out, twice, to no balls it might have been different - but then it might not - I think the toss actually determined the result.

Sunday I shall just enjoy the match, may the best team win.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I'm sure I'm not the only Shippie cricket fan who can also lip read but it seems to me that all the cricket playing nations have adopted the same expletive for when things go wrong - here, where I live, there are 18 official languages [including English] but still all Indian players scream the same [basically English] word when something goes wrong - so do Pakistanis, Afghans, Sri Lankans and those from other non-English speaking nations.

So, not only did we give the world cricket, but we also passed on the word F**K!!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
I'm sure I'm not the only Shippie cricket fan who can also lip read but it seems to me that all the cricket playing nations have adopted the same expletive for when things go wrong - here, where I live, there are 18 official languages [including English] but still all Indian players scream the same [basically English] word when something goes wrong - so do Pakistanis, Afghans, Sri Lankans and those from other non-English speaking nations.

So, not only did we give the world cricket, but we also passed on the word F**K!!

John Emburey, the Middlesex and England off-spinner, has to take some of the credit. He was heard to say "The f***ing f***er's f***ed" during a game. The phrase got into a movie (Reservoir Dogs?).
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
That sounds so like him! He was quite a star and, of course, played for the finest county in the land!

[Two face]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Nearly time - come on England!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Nearly time - come on England!

West Indies men are going to get such stick from their women's team if they don't do the double!
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Ouch!!!! And I thought England had done it. But then came Brathwaite.

A great, competitive, game deserved a dramatic ending, and it got one. Ben Stokes will just not know where to put himself.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
That was quite a final over! Well done Carlos Brathwaite and poor Ben Stokes!

West Indies Double Champions!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Nearly time - come on England!

West Indies men are going to get such stick from their women's team if they don't do the double!
I'm sure that was in Brathwaite's mind when he faced the final over! Congratulations x 2 to West Indies!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Congratulations times three: They won the U19 men's tournament as well!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
An upsurge in WI cricket has to be good for the global game!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Congratulations times three: They won the U19 men's tournament as well!

If they can sort out cricket administration in the Caribbean, just watch out!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Yes, I have fond memories of watching them in their heyday and it was almost impossible not to like them - and great to see Curtley Ambrose there last night shouting along with the best!

p.s. what were the names of the brothers who played for the side for a while? My memory sort of thinks Benjamin brothers but I can't be certain. Anybody got a better memory than me?

[ 04. April 2016, 12:48: Message edited by: Welease Woderwick ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
Yes, I have fond memories of watching them in their heyday and it was almost impossible not to like them - and great to see Curtley Ambrose there last night shouting along with the best!

p.s. what were the names of the brothers who played for the side for a while? My memory sort of thinks Benjamin brothers but I can't be certain. Anybody got a better memory than me?

At about that time Winston and Kenny Benjamin played for the West Indies, but they, and Joey Benjamin who played for England were unrelated.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Thank you Sioni, you're a star!
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
I've been very much enjoying the IPL, and particularly the Virat Kohli- A B de Villiers show for RCB. The match against the Gujarat Lions contained the most spectacular batting partnership I've ever seen (both players getting centuries, two consecutive overs going for 30 runs, a partnership of over 200, all in 20 overs).

Anyone else been watching?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Oh yes, indeed I have, there's been some good stuff, I agree re Kohli & de Villiers. I think de Villiers is possibly the finest in the world at the moment. As CSK are sitting it out for 2 years I chose to support RCB and after a poor start they seem to be doing a bit better. Our young neighbour V chose to support Gujarat so was not amused by Saturday's result.

Ah well, it's only a game.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Kohli at it again. A century partnership with Chris Gayle, another century for himself (this time off 47 balls) and RCB score 211 in an innings limited to 15 overs. Spectacular batting - not limited over slogging. And apparently he had stitches in his hand from an injury. Looking forward to his next visit to the UK!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
England v Sri Lanka - it's the 1990s all over again! [Help]

AG
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Yes, quite nostalgic, England 50-3, and then 130-5, they always seem to end up at those scores.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Fuck me, that's not like the 1990s though! England score less than 300, and enforce the follow-on, can't have happened many times.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Fuck me, that's not like the 1990s though! England score less than 300, and enforce the follow-on, can't have happened many times.

AG

And just when you think Jimmy can't do it any more, he takes a Michelle. Mind you it's the first test, and at Headingley, so he probably won't do it again.

Truly great knock by Bairstow. One of the very best.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Headingly can be a tough place to bat when the conditions are right for swing bowlers. Which made Bairstow's batting all the more remarkable. And credit to Hales as well.

Anderson is a great bowler, approaching the end of a great international career. Yesterday showed that he can still make the most of favourable conditions, and can have lethal spells. He's still very good to watch in those spells. A real master craftsmen, IMO the best we've had. Probably not for much longer but let's make the most of him while he can still turn it on.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I'm with you on Anderson, but I'm biased as I'm from Lancashire too. I sometimes wonder how many wickets he would have taken had Troy Cooley (and possibly others) not buggered about with his action which took him out of the game for the 2005 and 2006 seasons in England. He'd be on about 500 by now.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
And he got another five-for (I quite like "Michelle") and bowled very well again. I don't think too many of the Sri Lanka team had played in conditions like that before, but the bowler still has to take advantage of that.

Next stop Chester-le-Street (which was where I was born!). Lovely ground, the Riverside ground, and in a good setting. Overlooked by the lovely Lumley Castle. Hope the weather is is kind.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Woo - 8-0-2-38, not bad considering I was bowling very slowly at a good player at the death (got the bugger too!).

I now have 98 wickets for the team (77 since 2012), and four matches in four days on tour coming up next weekend... surely that century will turn up?

AG
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Back to the IPL. Kohli continued his stellar season with a quite wonderful running catch at a vital time. Then led RCB to a vital victory with an excellent unbeaten half century. He's now amassed over 900 runs this year and with at least two more innings in the play offs looks well on course to top 1000 runs. Not sure anyone thought that was possible in a single IPL season. Apart from Kohli that is. He's taken T20 batting to a different level and it's been breathtaking to watch.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
RCB recover from 29 for 5 to win and make the IPL final. A B de Villiers saves the day with a great knock on a difficult pitch. Some weird umpiring decisions added to the tension; another really great game to watch. I am now officially a fan of the IPL!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
ABdV was brilliant last night, great match to watch and I agree that Umpire Chaudhary seemed to have been smoking something odd before going on the pitch but both teams suffered for it so it was sort-of fair - hopefully he will not umpire the final, which could still be between these two teams.

Tonight KKR vs SRH with, I think, the odds slightly in favour of SRH; or is that a geographical bias?

But wasn't Kulkarni's bowling fabulous to watch?
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
My poor Leicestershire.
 
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Clingford:
My poor Leicestershire.

As a proud Worcestershire nationalist, perhaps a better way of looking at it is more that the Pears were outstanding in the second innings with the ball, rather than Leicestershire being that bad.

Joe Leach finished with match figures of 9-109*, and Matt Henry has taken 19 wickets in 4 matches.

*Ok, it's not quite 19-90 but it's good.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
That's very kind. But three runouts!
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:

But wasn't Kulkarni's bowling fabulous to watch?

Absolutely. In any other game, it would have been a match-winning spell. But that's ABdV for you. And yes, the final could do without the umpire wild card!

KKR v SRH is too close to call for me. Nor do I think whoever wins will beat GL, so I'm reckoning on RCB v GL again in the final. And .... we've got grandchildren visiting! So it's going on the recorder and I'll try to avoid the news!
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
SRH, then, more easily than I thought. Mustafizur is a star in T20; remarkable maturity for a 20 year old, excellent "death" bowler. But I reckon GL will beat them.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
We had a violent thunderstorm at the start of the second innings which blocked the satellite signal and lasted long enough to send me off to bed [10 p.m. here] so I only got the result this morning.

Mustafizur is a great prospect for Bangladesh for the future, great bowler.

I also want a GL v. RCB final - but the same result, please!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Decent day for England in what looked like quite bowler-friendly conditions. Hope that swing is still there when we get a go in the field. [Two face]
 
Posted by Carex (# 9643) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
...But I reckon GL will beat them.

You might have to get your reckoning recalibrated...
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Decent day for England in what looked like quite bowler-friendly conditions. Hope that swing is still there when we get a go in the field. [Two face]

Predictions are dangerous but on a grey day at Chester-le-Street 310-6 must be worth 400. People got runs but even Joe Root (who has been able to bat with the proverbial stick'o'rhubarb for the last two years) never looked completely at ease.

The forecast for Saturday is for sunshine later.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Carex:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
...But I reckon GL will beat them.

You might have to get your reckoning recalibrated...
Me and WW. In another brilliant and competitive match, David Warner did for SRH what A B deVillers did for RCB i.e. managed to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, with excellent help from the no 8 (B Sharma, this time who was as good a support as Abdulla was for ABdV).

The final could so easily have been between different teams. I'm hoping it lives up to what has gone before.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
With so much limited overs cricket and batting in first-class matches resembling that in limited overs cricket, I'm not sure the title of this thread is accurate nowadays.

Poor* Sri Lanka will have to pull their socks up if the current test match is to go into the day 4, let alone day 5. So far they have scored 301/28.

*And they were today. Catching, fielding, captaincy and batting were all poor. How the bowlers kept going is a mystery.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
...So far they have scored 301/28...

[Eek!]

ESPNcricinfo.com gives me 91/8 in 40 overs but then Sri Lanka are attempting to play the game in the British equivalent of the Arctic Circle.

We are all geared up for tonight's IPL final and are rather hoping that a thunderstorm doesn't trundle its way in and bugger up the satellite signal - it's not the same watching the score mount on my phone!
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
What happens if there is a rain delay in the final? Is there provision for an extra day, rather than reduced overs or the dreaded Duckworth Lewis rules. It would seem a shame to spoil the final.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
There is an extra day [tomorrow] just in case and if it can't be finished then I think there can be a Super Over Tuesday and if even that isn't possible then RCB get it as they scored better in the league bit.

I think.

Judging by the weather here the last few weeks rain could well play a part BUT Bangalore is a long way away and 3000 feet higher than here.

[ 29. May 2016, 06:57: Message edited by: Welease Woderwick ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
...So far they have scored 301/28...

[Eek!]

ESPNcricinfo.com gives me 91/8 in 40 overs but then Sri Lanka are attempting to play the game in the British equivalent of the Arctic Circle.


That was the cumulative total for almost 3 innings. They now stand on a far more respectable 534/35 in the middle of their second innings of the second test. That's about 15 runs per wicket, but I reckon the loss of some truly great batsmen (Sangakkara, Jayawardene) has affected Sri Lanka more than the weather.

As for the "Arctic Circle", howabout holding tests when it isn't 110F in the shade? Puts the English chaps at a disadvantage what?
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Close IPL final. In the end, the Sunrisers' death bowlers bowled better than the Royal Challengers' did and that made the difference.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Yes, it was a good close match, shame about the result!
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Shane Watson's last over was dreadful; should think he'll have the same sort of nightmares about Cutting which Ben Stokes has about Brathwaite taking him apart.

But it was close. Two more sixes from Chris Gayle or Virat Kohli and RCB would have finally won a final!

But a really great competition and a fine final to end it. Roll on next year!

Now, on the Test Match. For the first time, Sri Lanka are batting like they really mean it and with uncertain weather over the next couple of days, you never know ...

Still odds on England, of course.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Congratulations to Sri Lanka for making a fight of it. The series is gone but with the points system including five ODIs at two points they have hope if they can hold or beat England in the Third Test starting at Lord's a week on Thursday.

Congratulations too to Jimmy Anderson. He was the go-to man in a long innings and despite two dropped catches still took five wickets and for the first time is rated number one test match bowler!
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
The third test has become interesting. England bowled well today, then the top order batted badly again. But for two dropped catches, Sri Lanka might well have been favourites for a turnaround win.

Bad weather forecast for tomorrow.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I think a lead of 250ish would make a very entertaining fourth innings, but probably 300 would be too many for Sri Lanka.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
This might not be available outside the UK but what an amazing catch!

Despite that, England won so that's the ODI series against Sri Lanka to go with the Tests (and the rugby v Australia but not the football against ???).
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Back to depressing normality as England's batsmen show a lack of patience against all bowling to lose a low scoring match in four days. Losing wickets to a decent leg-spinner is one thing but when your top three all go for low scores to a pretty so-so bowler in Rahat Ali you will lose a Test match.

Please guys, keep the batting dull and the bowling tight. Oh, and hold catches.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Pakistan were staring down the barrel at 303/3...

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Meanwhile Virat Kohli scores a maiden double ton in Antigua - West Indies will struggle to follow on after that, I think.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Sorry - I meant [but failed to type] - West Indies will do well to avoid the follow-on after that!

DUH!!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Definitely England's day today. Yasir Shah overbowled because Pakistan are a bowler short and, like England at Lord's, they couldn't hold their catches.

When Pakistan batted they lost four men "tired out".
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I think that's being a bit harsh on England Sioni. I thought they batted very well (Root in particular) and when they came out to bowl they were firey and put the ball in the right place and got it to move a bit. So it was as much them playing well as Pakistan having an unbalanced attack and getting tired.

And those last two overs when there were eight fielders plus keeper and bowler within 20 yards of the bat were brilliant. Proper cricket. You don't see that in Twenty20!!
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Does anybody know why the follow-on is often not enforced these days? Maybe the bowlers are tired, but you would think that 400 ahead would put a spring in their step.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
It's now the following morning and I'm still trying to work out why he didn't enforce the follow-on, it was so much the obvious thing to do whilst the opposition were down and demoralised.

eta: Meanwhile India record their first ever innings defeat of West Indies in the Caribbean. Kohli had enforced the follow-on.

[ 25. July 2016, 04:18: Message edited by: Welease Woderwick ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I can think of a few reasons for not enforcing the follow on: If a side has already bowled 40 overs in a day the bowlers may want a break; the team may not want to bat last on a wearing pitch, as Pakistan could have batted from tea on day 3 to the middle of day five leaving a nasty target of, say, 200 in 50 overs, or maybe they were aware of Ben Stokes' injury and hope it would clear up overnight.

eta: after conceding 173 at nearly 6 an over, I expect Misbah and his team are even more demoralised. A couple of hours chasing the ball knowing that your target is getting further and further out of reach must be very dispiriting.

[ 25. July 2016, 22:53: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on :
 
England with a massive victory, but even though not enforcing the follow-on worked, I still think it was a mistake, if only because the Manchester weather might have intervened. And although Pakistan could have batted for 2 days, scored 500 and left a target of 200, realistically how likely is it?

In the end, the main impact may be on the morale of the Pakistan bowlers, particularly Yasir Shah. Who would have put odds on him taking just 1 wicket in the match for plenty, and being outbowled by Moeen Ali?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
An embarrassment of riches this week as, with two Tests over, Australia are now playing Sri Lanka and today New Zealand will be taking on Zimbabwe. What a shame there isn't a Bangladesh v. South Africa series going on somewhere then all the Test nations* would be playing at one and the same time!

*Yes, I know, 9 nations and one geographical aglomeration but...
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Could this be the match when Australia lose one in Sri Lanka? Currently they need another 127 with 3 wickets remaining.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Yes, yes it is!

But I was hoping this would be the 1000th post!

Congrats Sri Lanka for their second ever win. I feared the weather would save the OZ despite some immense 9th wicket batting.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
O'Keele was amazing, huge respect for that knock.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I don't think there is any way the Windies can win the current Test in Jamaica but Tropical Storm Earl may still hand them a draw.

So frustrating but then that's cricket!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Congratulations to the Windies for pulling off the draw when their backs were well and truly up against the wall. A superb effort.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
It has not happened yet but it looks like first innings lead to Pakistan.

And I think the Aussies are due a could do better report card, just like me in my schooldays half a century ago.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
England have had a pretty good day so far against Pakistan. and Jimmy Anderson has another wicket which goes down as "bowled" while the batsman has actually played on. Has any other bowler taken so many wickets this way?

But now he's been barred from bowling for running on the pitch, which will only be to Yasir's benefit anyway.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
Could this be the match when Australia lose one in Sri Lanka? Currently they need another 127 with 3 wickets remaining.

This one too. At the end of an action-packed day Australia need the thick end of 400 runs and have lost three wickets. Sri Lanka have shown their intent by opening with their slow bowlers: I like to see slow bowlers with a new ball, they can do amazing things if they get any grip on it, like bowl a "throat ball" at openers who take them on!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Day 3, session 2 and Australia need 239 runs with 2 wickets remaining - I reckon they'll be lucky to make tea break!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
...and a win by 229 runs with Australia batting just 84 overs in their 2 innings! There will be a few instances of drunkenness on the Island tonight...

...or this afternoon!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
...and a win by 229 runs with Australia batting just 84 overs in their 2 innings! There will be a few instances of drunkenness on the Island tonight...

...or this afternoon!

Quite a turnaround from a dismal soggy spring against England. Then again only six of the Sri Lanka players in the first Test of that series played in this Test.

CricInfo reports that this is Australia's eighth straight Test Match loss in Asia. C'mon Aussie, that's the sort of thing England do!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
New Zealand did a tour to the subcontinent a year or three ago and returned having lost every match they played!

Quite an impressive record and unusual for a team that normally plays above its strength.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Most unlikely win by England. A few overs of reverse swing, a few really good deliveries, and suddenly a Pakistan collapse. A probable draw became an England win. Unusually, all five mainline bowlers take two wickets each.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Most unlikely win by England. A few overs of reverse swing, a few really good deliveries, and suddenly a Pakistan collapse. A probable draw became an England win. Unusually, all five mainline bowlers take two wickets each.

Definitely a Game of Two Halves. Until lunch on day 3 it was all Pakistan (they were 336-5). From then on, it was all England.

I feel that if Pakistan want to win at the Oval they need a fifth bowler to dismiss England twice, because England have sorted out Yasir Khan and their four-bowler attack looked knackered in the England second innings.
 
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on :
 
England and Pakistan appear to be trying to recreate the Edgbaston test, with a very similar sort of day and score on the first day. I wonder how this will unfold?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The first session on Day 2 has definitely been Pakistan's, as it was in the last Test. England have helped them immensely by dropping not one, not two but three catches! 97-2 is much better than, say, 70-5.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Pakistan dropped a few when we batted too, so I guess we're about even.

Mind you, what does it take for England to put two performances together? Still so inconsistent.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
From an English perspective that was a disappointing end to a very good series. I think 2-2 was a reasonable reflection of the teams, although both played some superb cricket at times. Just think what they'd be like if they managed to find a bit of consistency!
 
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :
 
I'm with Michael Vaughan on this on - "what a pity there isn't a 5th test"....
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
From an English perspective that was a disappointing end to a very good series. I think 2-2 was a reasonable reflection of the teams, although both played some superb cricket at times. Just think what they'd be like if they managed to find a bit of consistency!

We are consistent! With the exception of Root and Cook our top order doesn't deliver while 6, 7 and 8 do!
 
Posted by shamwari (# 15556) on :
 
England wont get far without another opening bat and a spinner who can bowl as well as bat.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
England wont get far without another opening bat and a spinner who can bowl as well as bat.

Yes and maybe. Nobody had a good word for Ashley Giles for years, but he did a decent job without setting the world alight. Remember the Aussie jibes about the "King of Spain"? We also need at least one more top-order batsman in place of Vince and/or Ballance.
 
Posted by agingjb (# 16555) on :
 
In hindsight Rashid would have been a better pick than Vince for the Oval test. Should the selectors have had sufficient foresight?
 
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
England wont get far without another opening bat and a spinner who can bowl as well as bat.

Yes and maybe. Nobody had a good word for Ashley Giles for years, but he did a decent job without setting the world alight. Remember the Aussie jibes about the "King of Spain"? We also need at least one more top-order batsman in place of Vince and/or Ballance.
Slightly controversially, I'd be tempted to stick with Ballance for now - he's not performed against Pakistan, but he has done enough in the past to warrant a bit of faith I think. Vince on the other hand should be making plans for a long holiday this winter.

Moeen Ali is a funny one - he's not a world class spinner, but as Sir Geoffrey says, he does have an irritating (to his legions of knockers) habit of taking wickets despite this. He's also pretty handy with the bat. If it came to a Moeen v Rashid contest, I'd unhesitatingly stick with Moeen - and not just because he plays for Worcestershire. I
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Given that (IIRC) we're touring Bangladesh and India this winter, might Moeen and Rashid both play?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Given that (IIRC) we're touring Bangladesh and India this winter, might Moeen and Rashid both play?

I hope so, if only on the basis that they are competent batsmen and England struggle to find four top-order batsmen let alone five (or six) I would play both, plus Stokes, Woakes, Broad and Anderson, with Bairstow at five.

Goodness who else should be selected to keep Cook and Root company.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Cook, Root, Bairstow, plus the six bowlers you mention gives two slots free (probably at 2 and 4). Personally, I wouldn't take Vince if there is anyone even half in the running to replace him. Hales is a difficult one though, and not just because the journalists I've read seem to suggest that there's nobody champing at the bit to take his place. The selectors could give him the Bangladesh series as a free hit. But if he fails, throwing a newbie in at the deep end in India might not be a risk that we want to take.

Tricky.
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
Well, that was some innings! England just broke the world record for the highest score ever in a One Day International, just beating the Sri Lankan's previous record by 1, with a nice Nelson total of 444.

Now, anyone remember the 12th of March 2006, when Australia broke the world record by batting first?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
Well, that was some innings! England just broke the world record for the highest score ever in a One Day International, just beating the Sri Lankan's previous record by 1, with a nice Nelson total of 444.

Now, anyone remember the 12th of March 2006, when Australia broke the world record by batting first?

Yes, it did them no good at all! South Africa came out and chased down the total.
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
I'd be willing to stake a fiver on Pakistan not emulating the feat.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
So, the laptop boys in the dressing room are looking smug with an 82.16% chance of victory then?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Having played at the previous holder, I must confess to a twinge of sadness at Trent Bridge taking the record for most runs in an ODI innings. What an absolutely gobsmacking match, though.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
After the feast of runs at Trent Bridge that old curmudgeon Angus Fraser has described batting dominated limited overs cricket as boring.

I'm old enough to remember the early days of limited overs cricket, when Pakistan's score (275) would probably win two-thirds of the time.

Gus must have forgotten that with most counties fielding a bowling "attack" of five trundlers, or one West Indian and four trundlers, bowling on a typically sodden or tired English pitch with few fielding restrictions, it was a real struggle for batsmen to get in, stay in and score quickly. Bowlers placed the ball outside off stump, short of a length, seam up, and waited for wickets. They didn't have to wait long. Now that was boring.

OK, not all the changes have been beneficial (short boundaries, excessive restrictions on fielders) but batsmen can generally be braver now with helmets and most have learnt a lot about pacing an innings and innovating from T20.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I think the short boundaries and ridiculously thick bats are the two crucial things. Proper Cricket™, both bowling and batting, are about knowing exactly how much to risk. Due to those two changes, a batsman can make a mistake (i.e., get an edge) and score a six. In that sense, there's now no risk to attacking. On the other hand, the bowlers can't risk anything because they're already going at fifty an over* just trying to be defensive. I agree with Gus in the sense that turning cricket into a competition for who can hit the ball furthest is pretty boring. But I'm also not advocating a return to the Seventies. Just a tweak in the balance of power so that bowlers have a chance and batsmen have to think about what they're doing.


* Or whatever.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
A different kind of ODI, but England win again! Gus Fraser's point that lower scores make for better matches is true, but England kept their composure after being 72-4 but finishing is much easier when you don't have a "tail" - all eleven in the team today have a first-class century to their name.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
England's selections for the Bangladesh tour are sensible, giving some newcomers that inclusion with the squad, valuable in itself, plus the likelihood of playing. There's nothing worse than being selected as a travelling reserve and net bowler. Hameed is sure to start as the only opener other than Captain Cook while Duckett and Balance appear to be in a straight fight for the #3 spot. I've less idea about the bowling but Wood, rather than Finn, ought to play if Anderson or Broad don't deliver.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I'm a bit nonplussed by the inclusion of Gareth Batty. Is there really no young finger spinner we could have taken instead? Surely experience playing on the Subcontinent would be invaluable for them?!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
I'm a bit nonplussed by the inclusion of Gareth Batty. Is there really no young finger spinner we could have taken instead? Surely experience playing on the Subcontinent would be invaluable for them?!

Maybe the selectors are thinking back to Shaun Udal and Ian Blackwell and possibly even Mike Watkinson. None of them played many tests but they were all good, solid, experienced county pros who wouldn't worry about batsmen lashing them over midwicket.

Then again, I'm not sure Batty fits that bill: does he have the temperament for five hot sticky days in Chittagong.

[ 19. September 2016, 11:47: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Is that the cricketing equivalent of "yeah, but can he do it on a wet, windy, Wednesday night in Stoke?"??!!

[Killing me]
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
It's looking like a gripping last day of the county championship. Much as I'd like to see Yorkshire win a third straight Div 1 title, wouldn't it be a great tribute to Trescothick if Somerset won? And Middlesex still in the hunt...

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Meanwhile, at the other end of the table, it looks like Warwickshire will beat Lancashire, so I have to hope Durham don't lose to Hampshire.

At the top I'm hoping for a draw at Lord's so Somerset win.

[ 23. September 2016, 09:25: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
No draw at Lord's, but Middlesex won in dramatic fashion with a hat-trick! Somerset must be sick but it wasn't the first "contrived finish" this season. Durham beat Hampshire so Lancashire survive, despite not winning since May!

My award for courage goes to James Hildreth for batting for four hours and making a hundred with the aid of painkillers and a runner, despite what turned out to be a broken ankle. There are pictures of his bruised ankle on Cricinfo - you've been warned.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Although I don't much follow county cricket these days I'm a bit chuffed that Middlesex won the title. It seems to have been a great game.

Meanwhile India look set fair to win in Kanpur - last time the Kiwis were over here they toured Bangladesh then India and went home having not won a match, I rather hope they can do better this time. Yes, I want India to win but...
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
...and in a somewhat surreal end to the season my team made 258-7 in 35 overs having been 9-5. We then bowled the opposition out for under 100 with one bowler taking five for six - all wides, no runs off the bat - and I weighed in at the other end with a career-best 5-46. I've played when the guy at the other end took all ten, but I'm pretty certain that I've never played in a game where two bowlers both took five-fors.

AG
(I won't mention the duck...)
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
NZ vs India.
The kiwis look to be getting rolled in the first test at Kanpur. They played well in that after a lost toss restricting India to around 300 in first innings but then were bowled out 63 behind. India capitalised on exhausted NZ bowlers to get over 300 ahead and facing day 5 NZ is 4 down for not a lot.
Victory for India looming (sigh).
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
...(I won't mention the duck...)

A l'orange?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Titter ye not, that sort of thing has been served up as a voodoo offering when batting form has deserted me (only ever happens on Sundays ending in Y).

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
So the Kiwis need 376 to win with 5 and a bit sessions to go which is 50 or so more than anyone has ever made in the 4th innings at Eden Gardens.

It all sounds like excellent fun.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
So the Kiwis need 376 to win with 5 and a bit sessions to go which is 50 or so more than anyone has ever made in the 4th innings at Eden Gardens.

It all sounds like excellent fun.

And they do not have their best player. And the pitch is dodgy. Be a cricketing miracle for them to even draw let alone win
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
It's all over with a day to spare and India move to Number One in the Test rankings!
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
I would trade the all blacks losing for a bit of cricketing satisfaction.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Early on Session 2 of Day 2 of the Third Test against New Zealand and India have just got to 400/3 with Kohli on 170 and Rahane on 145.

It's the first ever Test at Indore and it's looking good.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Why, oh why didn't India enforce the follow-on against New Zealand or are they just after a bit more batting practice, or are they trying to extend the match to the full five days?

You've just got the opposition out for 299 leaving you with a lead of 258 so why bat again? It all seems nonsense to me.

Plus they have had 2 players warned for running on the pitch, which doesn't win them any friends and, I'm glad to say, cost them 5 penalty runs.

It's still the best game in the world [AND the only game played in Heaven] but sometimes...
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
The match still didn't last 5 days, India won by 321 runs on the 4th afternoon. Ashington got 13 of the 20 Kiwi wickets. Now it is on to the ODI series that starts Sunday in Dharamsala, where it is guaranteed to be a bit cooler.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Congratulations!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
I would trade the all blacks losing for a bit of cricketing satisfaction.

None for you today, I'm afraid, Jamat - India won with 101 balls to spare!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
...but tonight New Zealand have won by 6 runs - they fought wonderfully hard to get there - a real classic of a game.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Tight as a whelk's arse in Chittagong at the moment. Some very good bowling by Stokes and Rashid this morning seemed to put England on top, but Bangladesh have also bowled superbly and I think it's right back in the balance again. Nailbiter!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
England now 46/4! Just 91 runs ahead with 6 wickets to go.

YIKES!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Tight as a whelk's arse

Thank you. I am now just looking for a conversation I can slip that into!
[Killing me]

AG

(108-5, looking a bit better but still...)
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I think I have to acknowledge Douglas Adams for that one (although a quick google doesn't give me the exact reference). It's not my own work, anyway. [Biased]

Still, Johnny Bairstow and Ben Stokes, having been two of the most involved players while England were fielding, are scoring all the runs as well. We're giving ourselves half a chance, if we bowl well.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Has umpire Dharmasena had all the tricky decisions to make or is he really such an awful umpire? I've not seen any coverage but he has had six decisions overturned on review.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
228/8 means a lead of 273 - it is probably enough already but there are 2 more days to go so I think England will want to score a few more tomorrow morning to make themselves feel a bit more secure.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
228/8 means a lead of 273 - it is probably enough already but there are 2 more days to go so I think England will want to score a few more tomorrow morning to make themselves feel a bit more secure.

That is true, but with reviews being overturned at a rate of more than three per innings who knows what will happen.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Has umpire Dharmasena had all the tricky decisions to make or is he really such an awful umpire? I've not seen any coverage but he has had six decisions overturned on review.

On a pitch turning square, I think it's reasonable to have sympathy for the umpires. (I also think it's reasonable to have scepticism about the ball tracking technology, but that's another story). I reckon they've got quite a few tricky ones right as well.

Anyway, I don't have statistics for which have had the worse decisions to make, although at one point late on today, I noticed the Sky commentators saying that he had had a better day today than yesterday.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
It was a great day's cricket on a difficult pitch. Could still be close today. But England have the edge now,

.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Bangladesh four down needing another 150 to win. If this pair hang on it could be tasty. Plus I believe the Tigers have taken twenty wickets against England for the first time in a test. Much more enjoyable than handing out a thrashing to a minnow, let's have a tight finish!

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Lowish scoring games on a pitch with a bit in it for the bowlers are the best.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
... and now on a knife edge ...
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
33 runs OR 2 wickets for victory - is that tight enough for you? It sounds brilliant to me.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I watched almost the whole day, and I don't think I was comfortable for a single second. Absorbing stuff, and well done Bangladesh.

And I tell you what else: unless we can both bowl better and bat better, I reckon India are going to murder us.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
I watched almost the whole day, and I don't think I was comfortable for a single second. Absorbing stuff, and well done Bangladesh.

And I tell you what else: unless we can both bowl better and bat better, I reckon India are going to murder us.

Early call tomorrow (5am in UK). I'm not missing this.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
33 runs OR 2 wickets for victory - is that tight enough for you? It sounds brilliant to me.

Tight as s whelks arse! Wow!

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
India continued the demolition of the Kiwis today, after the hiccough (hiccup?) on Thursday. But I think England might be a tougher nut to crack.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
All over in a little over 20 minutes, Bangladesh fought well but England are the ones who scraped home.

Please, ICC, don't reduce Tests to 4 days!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Great game! Very well played Bangladesh, and well done to England too.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
... and unpucker!

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
India win in Vishakapatnam by a fair-sized margin so take the ODI series against the Kiwis 3-2, having previously swept the Test series. But NZ must be pleased that they have done a lot better and been far more competitive than the team that previously India a few years ago.

As for the England match in Dhaka, it is beginning to look interesting, tomorrow could be a fascinating day's play.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
About half an hour to go until lunch in Dhaka and Bangladesh are 232/4 in their second innings, a lead of 208 - so from now on I reckon the pressure is really on England who only got 244 in their first innings and the pitch, although good, is bound to wear a bit - and there are still 8 sessions to go!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
To quote Alistair Cook:

quote:
It's not easy for me to say, but it's a good win for Bangladesh cricket. Maybe some things are bigger than one game.
England now have to travel across the border to India where the First Test in the next series starts in Rajkot on 9th November - different country, very different climate and conditions! It should be fun.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Just checking in from a departure lounge in an airport in Pakistan's adopted home to say well done to Bangladesh. Very impressive, thoroughly deserved, and I hope this does great things for the game in that country.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Southern hemisphere test matches resumed today at the WACA. Mitchell Starc and Dave Warner of Australia gave master-classes in how to bowl and bat respectively at the WACA. I doubt if Dale Steyn of South Africa will bowl so loosely again in the rest of this series; he knows how to adapt to conditions and has 400 test wickets to show it.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Come day 2, and it seems that the rest of Australia's batters were not paying attention during Warner's masterclass of day 1. So they reverted to their subcontinental practice and staged a collapse. From 0/150 , Australia went to be all out for 244.

But I was half-right about Steyn. Not only will he not bowl so loosely again this series, but he won't bowl at all, having broken a bone in his shoulder.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Talking about a Master Class J-P Duminy has just made his hundred. SA now 217 ahead with 8 wickets in hand and just over 8 sessions to go.

eta: sorry, just over 7 sessions to go!

[Hot and Hormonal]

[ 05. November 2016, 04:44: Message edited by: Welease Woderwick ]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
...and at stumps on Day 3 SA lead by 388 with 4 wickets remaining and the pitch deteriorating a bit. The next two days could be fascinating.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
I would trade the all blacks losing for a bit of cricketing satisfaction.

Well, you are halfway there...

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
SA win the First Test against Australia in Perth by 177 runs and Rabada gets a five-fer.

Man of the Match not yet announced but I reckon it has to go to either Duminy or Rabada - perhaps they could share it.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
SA win the First Test against Australia in Perth by 177 runs and Rabada gets a five-fer.

Man of the Match not yet announced but I reckon it has to go to either Duminy or Rabada - perhaps they could share it.

Woo hoo yay. And with Dale Steyn injured. Should be a great series. SA doggedness and refusal to go away pays off.
They were 5for 81 batting first. That has got to be some kind of cricketing miracle to win from there.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
SA win the First Test against Australia in Perth by 177 runs and Rabada gets a five-fer.

Man of the Match not yet announced but I reckon it has to go to either Duminy or Rabada - perhaps they could share it.

Woo hoo yay. And with Dale Steyn injured. Should be a great series. SA doggedness and refusal to go away pays off.
They were 5for 81 batting first. That has got to be some kind of cricketing miracle to win from there.

I'd call it SA doggedness too, but in the final innings four Australia batsmen got starts, making more than twenty but not then reaching fifty. Had a couple of them gone on, then Australia might well have kept going for another three hours and saved the game. It makes that amazing run out even more important!

Faf duPlessis deserves a lot of credit for keeping his bowlers going. 120 overs with three-and-a-half bowlers is good.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
England did far better than just about anyone expected - well done them. Joe Root was his usual amazing self and Hameed had a good debut - let's hope Ali gets at least one more run tomorrow.

Of course I still hope for an India victory but what I really love is a damned good match!
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
We want far more than one run from Moeen tomorrow. Would ideally like to see him carry his bat until at least tea, so that England can declare and have half an hour to bowl at India at the end of the day.

Yet to see Root's wicket, but from several text descriptions of it, it sounded distinctly dodgy.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
537 all out within a few minutes after tea - that is pretty firm foundation. What can India make of this now?

If England can get a couple of early wickets it could be very interesting.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Haven't been able to see any of the game. Is it a flat track or did England bat particularly well?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Rajkot is always a good batting pitch for the first 2 or 3 days but it can deteriorate towards the end, sometimes dramatically.
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
I heard chatter on TMS this morning about an expectation that the pitch may "blow up" towards the end and that you wouldn't want to bat last.

i.e. India will dig in, aim to bat for almost 2 more days and give England a day + 45 minutes to get something like 150.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Sounds like a plan.

Rajkot is in the north west, part of Gujarat these days and is very hot and dry. Awful conditions for playing cricket!
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Haven't been able to see any of the game. Is it a flat track or did England bat particularly well?

The latter, 3 hundreds from Root,Stokes and the guy with the big beard (Moeen Ali). Broad got a bit of tap at end of the day. India 40for 0 at close of play. Good batting track but commentators expect it to start turning. India currently are 111/1 after 39 overs.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
162/1 after 50 overs at lunch.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
2 wickets in the last 4 balls of the day and India close on 319/4 - not even avoided the follow-on yet!
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
This could yet be interesting. If the pitch is becoming a minefield and England get a 1st innings lead of 70+ then India may be facing a battle against turn and uneven bounce on the last day.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
This could yet be interesting. If the pitch is becoming a minefield and England get a 1st innings lead of 70+ then India may be facing a battle against turn and uneven bounce on the last day.

Close. England's lead was 49 and the pitch is turning more, but England's openers are still there. I don't expect anything other than a draw and England may as well try to wear down the Indian bowlers with another Test starting in three days.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I agree with Sioni, I think a draw is inevitable - Cook won't want to declare too soon and give India a chance
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Sometimes Cook's safety first attitude annoys me a bit, but in this case, I think it's well warranted. In the first game of a potentially very difficult five match series, a draw is a good result. I'd happily take that. There will be time for risks later in the series, I hope.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
That was getting a bit close! I'll settle for a draw and I'm sure Kohli will, too.

In the end the pitch wasn't too bad, I expected it to deteriorate a lot more than that.

Now on to Vizag on Monday, I shall be away but will induce one of the hotel staff to instruct me in the use of the TV in my room.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Yeah, I thought it was a good game. England will be very happy with their performance and the result. They've definitely 'put down a marker' as Beefy kept repeating.

And what a player our new opening batter is! So much potential.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
The BBC has run a poll for England's best captain and it can't be much of a surprise that Mike Brearley, probably the most intelligent man to captain England, and possibly play for England, came out on top.

More surprising is that Michael Vaughan was second. Clearly people have forgotten that the 2005 series was a very close run thing, with England winning the two matches that Glenn McGrath missed, and one of those by just three runs. I go with those who reckon Nasser Hussein was better: a good, tough captain, who dragged England up from no-hopers and handed a generally functional outfit to Vaughan and Strauss.

FWIW, I rated Douglas Jardine second: not a nice man by some accounts but an excellent batsman and close fielder and a very effective captain.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Australia decided to stage a replica of Trent Bridge at Hobart. Hobart is the wettest and coldest city (cricket ground) in Australia, and the ground sits in a pretty location above a river.

So the Aussie cricket team decided Hobart was a suitable place to re-enact their last performance from Trent Bridge, though this time against South Africa: on day 1 they collapsed to be all out for 85 and on day 3 of play they collapsed again to be all out for 161, thus losing by an innings.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

[snip]
FWIW, I rated Douglas Jardine second: not a nice man by some accounts but an excellent batsman and close fielder and a very effective captain.

Has anyone, except perhaps his mother, ever described Jardine as "nice"?

Even Larwood was so disgusted by the treatmemt he got from Jardine back in England that he (Larwood) migrated to Australia ! And as for the views of anyone from Australia....
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I don't think it was so much Jardine - who I think actually Larwood had a lot of respect for (and certainly much respect the other way round)- so much as the MCC and the cricketing establishment that did for Larwood's career.

Meanwhile, India sit pretty thanks to Pujara and Kohli.

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I was talking to a guy on the train the other night and he thought the Test at Vizag would be a matter of win the toss - win the game but I hope it gets more exciting than that.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Batting first would appear to help - I've heard that the groundsman reckoned the pitch would start to "do something" after lunch on Day 2, which is at least four sessions too soon.

Meanwhile, it seems that Hameed has been run out (Root). Is Root taking running lessons from G Boycott?

India by an innings I fear.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
England 103/5 at stumps so you may be right Sioni, and the run out of Hameed was a disaster. And the pitch is deteriorating as we watch - however expensive England make the last 5 wickets they still have to bat at the end which will we a pretty daunting prospect!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
It's oddly comforting to have the Real England™ back.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
It's some crumb of comfort for Australia. The next Ashes series (2017-2018 I think) could well be for 4th place behind SA, India and Pakistan.
 
Posted by TurquoiseTastic (# 8978) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
I don't think it was so much Jardine - who I think actually Larwood had a lot of respect for (and certainly much respect the other way round

Oh yes indeed - Larwood admired Jardine intensely. There's a nice extract at this link.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
As an aside II noticed today thatthe average age of the Barmy Army is now distinctly getting on a bit.

Ah well, it comes to us all in time - and I am no longer the svelte 21 year old I once was...

...and thank God for that!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I don't know about the Barmy Army, but England's batsmen could definitely do with a second lease of life. Two rather disappointing collapses in conditions that were tough and required application, but weren't ridiculously treacherous.

<sigh>
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Is Ben Duckett waving goodbye to his England career? Poor lad, Ravichandran Ashwin seems to completely over-awe him.

And now on to Mohali which may be a kinder pitch all round - but then we don't want a stale draw.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
A kinder pitch? Well, I'm not sure England would agree after they lost 4 wickets before lunch on Day 1 after they won the toss and decided to bat! Most of those were the fault of the batsmen rather than the pitch - Hameed being the exception there who seems to have been a tad unfortunate.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
268/8 after the 90 overs in the day - Rashid and Batty batting with Jimmy Anderson still to come...

...but India can still bowl even with Broad out of the team.

This could get interesting.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
On a knife-edge. [Smile]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
A bit over the edge now, I feel - 4 wickets down in the England 2nd innings and still 56 runs behind. Can England make a fight or a fist out of it?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Another cracking debut by an English opener. Perhaps young Hameed is going to have a fight on to get his place back?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Another cracking debut by an English opener. Perhaps young Hameed is going to have a fight on to get his place back?

When I look at the rest of the talent available I'm sure there is room for Hameed and Jennings. England have had openers at #3 before, such as on the 1970-71 tour of Australia when Luckhurst, Edrich and Boycott were all openers and I'm sure at least two of them batted at #3, doing reasonably well too.

Overall, not a bad day. Best since the First Test, anyway.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
That's a good shout. Let Root move back down to 4, and Moeen can drop down the order too.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Can I now predict a draw in Mumbai?

With two days left to play on what seems to be a reasonable pitch a win by either side seems hugely unlikely. Even if India declare overnight England are in deficit so have to score 50+ to go ahead and then some to challenge India and there just ain't the time.

Series to India?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
Can I now predict a draw in Mumbai?

No. Most likely match to India. They will bat through so as to get a lead of at least a hundred
quote:


With two days left to play on what seems to be a reasonable pitch a win by either side seems hugely unlikely. Even if India declare overnight England are in deficit so have to score 50+ to go ahead and then some to challenge India and there just ain't the time.

Series to India?

Very probably series to India. It isn't that good a pitch. England's spinners are getting turn and India's spinners are better. To win the match England will need to get India out again but also get enough runs. That means another innings of approaching four hundred (if India get a 100 lead) and they will have to get them by lunchtime on day five to give their bowlers time to get India out. FWIW I think Cook will order his men to go for it but the odds will be long because a) two of England's batsmen will have to get in and do something special and b) England's bowlers will need a day of days. My money is staying in my pocket!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
This probably shows what a Bad Person I am but I enjoy it when the statisticians say that X team has never, or always, won or lost under Y circumstances and then suddenly it all changes and the statisticians retreat into a corner...

...until the next time!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
You have been proved right, Sioni Sais, and I withdraw my comments of last night - I even wonder if India will need to bat again!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
You have been proved right, Sioni Sais, and I withdraw my comments of last night - I even wonder if India will need to bat again!

They didn't, and now it looks like Captain Cook's voyage may be coming to an end. Hardly fair IMHO as plenty of other batsmen have achieved less and his bowlers have fallen a long way short. It can't be ignored that India are a very good side.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
A good day for England, let's hope they can maintain the momentum to go home having at least won a game.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Meanwhile in Australia, instead of the now customary collapse by Australia, we have had one by Pakistan.

At the end of day 2 at the Gabba, Pakistan are 8/97 in reply to Australia's 400+ (which included centuries from Steve Smith - as one might expect- but also from new boy Peter Handscomb, who has fully justified his selection).

Hanscomb's 3 test innings so far are 64 and 2 n.o. (against SA) and 104 against Pakistan. But his equally new team-mate Nick Maddison has 0 and 1, which is not so promising. Like England's Hameed, Handscomb looks at home and unflustered at this level, and is a steady rather than spectacular scorer.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
It's been quite a turnaround by Australia thanks in part to some ruthlessness by Cricket Australia. I can't imagine the England & Wales Cricket Board doing that even after a six-month investigation.

Handscomb does look the real deal and Renshaw too, who is doing the trickier job of opening the innings. There are some very promising new batsmen around at the moment. I hope they realise that they won't always succeed.
 
Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
I'm quite surprised by the ruthlessness of the change in the Australian team. Not normal. Seems to be working but.

Plenty of complaints about the day night test stuff. Apparently that is the reason for the Pakistani collapse. [Paranoid]

Pakistan is fourth on the ICC ladder but apparently don't do well overseas.

Not so keen on watching one sided cricket, but hey, at least I'm finally watching Cricket again. yay summer! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
England 447/10 - but is it enough?

India 60/0 after 20 overs so run rate not exciting but under the circumstances probably okay.

It is anybody's game so far but tomorrow will, I hope, set the direction a bit better. A repeat of Mumbai is always possible but we'll have to wait and see.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
When your opponents make 759/7 no, 477 is nowhere near enough! Moreover, India have made them quickly enough to give themselves a chance of winning the game.

Elsewhere, Pakistan ran Australia closer than they anticipated and Steve Smith looked a worried and confused man at times.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Yes, I think we can now be confident that England won't win the game but that either a win for India or a draw are posibilities.

Turning your maiden Test century into a triple must be a very satisfying feeling, poor lad must be knackered!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
Yes, I think we can now be confident that England won't win the game but that either a win for India or a draw are posibilities.

Turning your maiden Test century into a triple must be a very satisfying feeling, poor lad must be knackered!

I was impressed with the way he pressed on after reaching his hundred and then two hundred, knowing that India's best chance of forcing a win was to bat once.

For England it was very disappointing. At lunch the game looked like a draw. At tea a draw still looked a strong possibility but afterwards it seemed like England couldn't be on the plane home soon enough.

Apart from England's bowling woes the batting was underpowered. It's fair to say that enough hundreds were made, but they weren't what Graham Gooch called "Daddy" hundreds of 150 or 200 plus. India had some of those, and that gave them the big first innings totals that batted England out of the game. I'm not sure what captains and coaches can do about that.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Back in Melbourne for the Boxing Day Test. Roughly one session lost to rain on each of days 1 to 4 (it is Melbourne, famous for having 4 seasons in one day!). Neverthless Pak batted patiently for the first 2-1/2 days for ~440, with Azhar (a classical opener) making 248 n.o. Aust made even more (with centuries to Smith (n.o) and Kawaja making 97 again) Warner and , but didn't declare until just before lunch on day 5. So clearly a good batting strip even up to day 5. After which Pak collapsed so quickly that Australia won by an innings!

Some commentators are left wondering "what price Pakistan?". Another (in the Guardian) made the memorable summation:
"The French modernist architect Le Corbusier was famed for his theory that houses were machines for living in. Its doubtful he ever perused the pages of Wisden, but if he could do so now he’d conclude that cricket stadiums around the world were machines for Steve Smith to bat in."
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
A good, possibly great win by Australia. A demonstration of positive, purposeful cricket. Just shows how much sport is played between the ears.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
As you say, "between the ears" - but I think especially the Pakistani ears.
Many Pakistan sides have been notorious for being "confidence" players; once things start to go wrong they rapidly get worse and they no longer expect to win or even to hold out.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Indeed Pakistani confidence hit a new low , as they lost the third and last test by 200 runs and the series 3-0.

One bright spot for them was the form of Azhar Ali, a classical test opener, who rarely looks troubled, and indeed batted right through one of their innings, making a big century in the process. A big weakness was the form and captaincy of Misbah ul Haq. in each of his 6 innings he fell for low scores (HS 30) to impulsive shots unsuited to the state of play. And his field settings for his bowlers (especially Yasir Shah) were far too defensive and limited their effectiveness (though too much looseness from the bowlers, though mixed with good balls, didn't help!). Although his man management seems to have stopped the team degenerating into factions over the years, and he has been a good batter in the past, it is surely time now for him to retire gracefully, the more so as he is 42 y.o. And it's likewise time to go for their other "old hand", Younis Khan, who had only one substantial innings in the series.

The Australians were made to look good, though to be fair Warner, Smith, Handscomb and Hazelwood (to name a few) were in excellent form. We shall see how they cope with the much more severe test of India in India later this year.
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
In the first ODI match at Pune, England has once again managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory

Those of us watching at home were pleased.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Joe Root is quoted in the Guardian this evening suggesting that England need a better plan to deal with Kohli.

This is why he's captain material.

[Roll Eyes] [Ultra confused] [Help]
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
In case NZ is forgotten. The Bangladeshis scored 596/8 declared batting first, bowled NZ out about 100 behind and LOST!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Bangladesh really stuffed up in their second innings and Williamson proved his star quality [as if he needed to] in the NZ second innings.

It is sad that Mushfiqur will have to miss the second test at Christchurch.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
Joe Root is quoted in the Guardian this evening suggesting that England need a better plan to deal with Kohli.

This is why he's captain material.

[Roll Eyes] [Ultra confused] [Help]

Sometimes you just have to tip your hat to exceptional talent. Currently, I think Kohli is the best Test batsman in the world, the best ODI batsman in the world and the best T20 batsman in the world. And one of the best batsmen I've ever seen. He's special. I suppose this best in the world status isn't yet proven under all conditions, but that is just a matter of time.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Crossposted from the Death Pool thread as it's relevant here - Rachel Heyhoe-Flint has died aged 77.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
This time England got Kohli out cheaply, but Yuvraj and the old master, M S Dhoni dismantled England's bowling.

What really won it for India however was that they made 120 runs in the last ten overs. You don't often get that in T20s. I think a Plan B is needed when England are in the field.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
England got pretty close and there was definitely some tension here towards the end.

Roll on Sunday to see if England can redeem themselves a bit and then next week the three T20 matches.

Exciting times.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
England Won A Match last night and no England supporter here has written in to acknowledge the fact - not even UnclePete who was hoping they'd win as they must feel dispirited having won nothing all tour except a 50 over tour match against India A.

Now we await the T20 series starting on Sunday.

I was chatting to 19 year old Neighbour Boy last night and he was saying he was disappointed as he wanted India to win every game they played - Welcome to the World of the Cricket Supporter of whatever nation! I am sure that amongst Shippies we have a wealth of experience of disappointment!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
England Won A Match last night and no England supporter here has written in to acknowledge the fact - not even UnclePete who was hoping they'd win as they must feel dispirited having won nothing all tour except a 50 over tour match against India A.

Now we await the T20 series starting on Sunday.

I was chatting to 19 year old Neighbour Boy last night and he was saying he was disappointed as he wanted India to win every game they played - Welcome to the World of the Cricket Supporter of whatever nation! I am sure that amongst Shippies we have a wealth of experience of disappointment!

Given the result of the second match it seems to me that with more self-belief England could have won that. And with only slightly better bowling they would have stood a chance in the first match. It's no coincidence that Ben Stokes played a crucial role for England and he could teach Ian Botham a thing or two about self-belief.

It's a bit like the "dramatic turnaround" in England's rugby fortunes. Get it right in the head and it'll be right on the field.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
A convincing win by England tonight - India just failed to click when batting.

Today was Kanpur, Sunday is Nagpur and the final match of the series is in Bangalore next Wednesday. If India manage a better performance on Sunday and win it will make the Bangalore match far more exciting.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
A convincing win by England tonight - India just failed to click when batting.

Today was Kanpur, Sunday is Nagpur and the final match of the series is in Bangalore next Wednesday. If India manage a better performance on Sunday and win it will make the Bangalore match far more exciting.

For once our bowlers delivered! India got exactly no partnerships while England got off to a flyer (albeit, one that was soon over) followed by one between Root and Morgan that made the most of batting second.
 
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
I am sure that amongst Shippies we have a wealth of experience of disappointment!

Try being 7 in 1987 and starting your England supportership then. Misery for nearly 2 decades:

- Atherton's great, he's just let down by the rest of them
- Hussein's laying the groundwork for success in 5 years' time
- Gough and Caddick are a world class pace attack
- Jack Russell might not be able to do anything but keep wicket, but he's brilliant at keeping wicket
- Graeme Hick's been picked again...and dropped...and picked....and dropped....and picked...
- Alec Stewart's captaining, keeping wicket and opening the batting; we don't think it's a good idea either but there's no one else (in fairness, he was quite good at pulling the trick off)
- The first coming of Ryan Sidebottom
- 1992, "come on, you can beat Zimbabwe". Oh.
- we've discovered English cricket's new hope; he's called.....Mark Ramprakash
- Alan Wells....Joey Benjamin.....

How any of us fans (or the players, frankly) have got to 2017 without extensive counselling is a complete mystery.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
I am sure that amongst Shippies we have a wealth of experience of disappointment!

Try being 7 in 1987 and starting your England supportership then. Misery for nearly 2 decades:

<litany of False Dawns>

How any of us fans (or the players, frankly) have got to 2017 without extensive counselling is a complete mystery.

Consider yourself lucky. My teens and early twenties were to a backdrop of Lillie'n'Thomson, and terrifying West Indies pace attack plus Sir Viv to murder our bowlers.

We weren't actually bad, but we were consistently second-best.

[ 26. January 2017, 21:24: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
How any of us fans (or the players, frankly) have got to 2017 without extensive counselling is a complete mystery.

I am one year younger than you, and I find that the experience you share (and also supporting the England rugby team at the same time) have had a noticeable effect on how I feel about sport in general. More recently, I have come to support Chelsea Football Club, and it's a very strange sensation to be supporting a team that actually has a chance of winning things on a regular basis. Last season, when Mourinho imploded and we finished 10th in the league, many other supporters were wailing and gnashing their teeth and I was like "well, it's not that bad..."

So perhaps in lieu of extensive counselling, my self-healing has been to set inexorably low expectations for sporting success. [Help]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
India won by the skin of their teeth last night so Wednesday's match will for England to win a Series or for India to sweep the three titles - it could be a tense finish.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
England were behind the run rate in today's match but ensured defeat in what must be a record collapse!

Eight wickets for eight runs!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
"A nice partnership from Root and Morgan but it was a catastrophe after that."

Isa Guha gets it about right. Even in the dark days of the 1990s...

AG
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
The day has arrived. Alastair Cook has stepped down as England Test captain.

Ready for the coronation of Root?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
The day has arrived. Alastair Cook has stepped down as England Test captain.

And he's done well, all things considered. The team is ageing and those who won series against Australia, South Africa and India so recently aren't there or at height of their powers now.
quote:


Ready for the coronation of Root?

In the absence of anyone else, I suppose so. I hope Cook stays around while a new generation of top order players are developed. Now that he's not captain he might feel less inhibited as a batsman.
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
The coronation is complete.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I think it is well-deserved and also that there can have been few others in with a chance - it is almost as if it is his destiny.

In other news India unsurprisingly won the one-off test against Bangladesh by a comfortable margin BUT Bangla in no way disgraced themselves, they are heading towards the formidable.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
I think we will see a result in teh test at Pune. First day: Australia all out for 261 (actually 256/9 overnight). Day 2: India all out for 105! (with Kohli making a duck, and O'Keefe , a spinner who rarely gets a game for Australia taking 6 wickets.) !)
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Suddenly the supposedly wonderful Indian team that hammered England is looking a bit sorry for itself.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
Suddenly the supposedly wonderful Indian team that hammered England is looking a bit sorry for itself.

India lost their last seven wickets for 11 runs. Clearly they have picked something up from England!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I live in India, I love India and I heartily support India...

BUT...

...it is always good to see hubris punished.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
So India need 441 for victory with seven and a half sessions left which, on recent form, doesn't seem too unreasonable but...
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
... 16/2 and blowing both reviews inside 6 overs ain't clever.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
And, I'm spent. That didn't take long, said the actress...
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
That's what India get for offering a pitch that spun so hard after about 6 overs on day 1 that the Aussie batters could leave balls to spin harmlessly past them. A decisive and surprising win, but well deserved on the way the play went.

But the question still remains: why is Mitch Marsh (an "all rounder" who didn't bowl a single over) still in the side at the expense of one of the Australian batters most in form over the southern summer , namely Khawaja?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Possibly the nicest Yorkshireman of my lifetime has died. John Hampshire, a very stylish batsman who never got enough opportunities to play for England. Even my mum liked him and she was even more Red Rose than me.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Yes, he was a distinctive man and a great umpite - I think I saw him play for Yorkshire against a Windies XI at the Scarborough Cricket Festival sometime back in the Dark Ages when I was but of a slip of a lad in my 20s.

* * * *

Invincible India!

What a sick joke that is!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I can't wait for England to pitch up in Australia... [Help]
 
Posted by agingjb (# 16555) on :
 
I see that http://cricketarchive.com/ now has a paywall. I shall not pay. I wonder if the hidden site is advert free.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
In the third test at Ranchi, Australia almost imitated one of England's recent matches, making 450 on the first innings, only to see India bat right past that to declare at 600/9, of which Pujara made a slow but chanceless 200. But then, unlike England, Australia averted a collapse on the last day and held on for a draw.

So with 1 win apiece so far, it should be interesting in the fourth and last test, with bragging rights very much in play. .
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Sure enough , at the end of day 2 in the fourth and last test of the series between India and Australia still looks evenly poised, and with it the series as a whole.

Australia collapsed from 130/1 at lunch on the first day to be all out for 300, but India have also struggled to make a big score and are now 248/6.

And I must say that although the ground at Dharamsala may not have anything like the seating capacity of Eden Park (Calcutta) it is certainly more picturesque - with a beautiful backdrop comparable to that of Worcester. (See photo.)
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Unfortunately Australia collapsed on day 3, with Smith unable on this occasion to make more than one century in the match, and none of the other batters contributing much. So India won the match by lunchtime on day 4, and with it the series. But they did feel that Australia had pushed them harder at home than most of their recent opponents (naming no names).
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
A quote from the middle:

In an IPL match last night Pant and Samson shared a blitzkrieg partnership of 143 [for Delhi Daredevils] and, apparently, when Samson was thinking of slowing down a bit after scoring back to back sixes Pant met him mid-pitch and said:

quote:
Brother, don't think too much, just keep hitting!
Delhi Daredevils went on to chase down Gujarat Lions 208, finishing on 214.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Anyone paying any attention to the Champion's Trophy? Apparently it starts today.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
I'm keeping half an eye on it - at least in part to see how many players England can injure. But it's not The Real Thing.

Mind you, my boss has India vs Pakistan already committed to memory.

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Here's hoping India v Pakistan is a blinder today.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
It's looking good so far - India 162/1 after 30 overs.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Now I'm not so sure, they'll have to keep their bowling tight when Pakistan are in.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
And do something to appease the rain gods!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well if you will schedule tournaments in the monsoon season (for the uninitiated, the monsoon in England runs from January 1st to December 31st, with peaks on Bank Holiday Mondays).

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Very sad to see Pakistan collapse so ignominiously but delighted with an Indian victory.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
England looked pretty good in beating New Zealand yesterday. And the game provided more evidence that one day cricket is much more engaging when there is a bit in the pitch for the bowlers.

And next, bring on the Aussies. It would be wonderful to dump them out of the tournament!
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
I live quite near Sophia Gardens. To be honest, the weather conditions must have played their part in yesterday's match: it rained for most of the morning and was very blustery all day.

I guess the England players are more used to that then the Kiwis!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
South Africa did themselves no favours and have allowed me to be pleased that Pakistan have got themselves some points [but not too many!] and now we have Indian v the Lankans - Heaven alone knows how this will resolve itself; Lanka is not the most predictable team on the planet!
 
Posted by Carex (# 9643) on :
 
They were, and what an interesting state that makes of the points table for group B.

Meanwhile in Group A, the Aussies are in second place without winning a game...
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Bangladesh were a bit of a surprise last night - when they were 33/4 I decided it was a foregone conclusion and went to bed and it seems I missed a bit of a show...

...and they had 2.4 overs left!

Today's game should be interesting - if it was being held here, where it is set fair to rain all day, Australia would already be out of it.

[ 10. June 2017, 06:48: Message edited by: Welease Woderwick ]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I know England don't need to win today's game but 33/2 after 5.2 overs?!?!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Australia lost after a great fight by England and then the rains came and then much celebrating in Bangladesh as they enter the semifinals.

I felt it was a very T S Eliot type ending for the Aussies - not with a bang but a whimper!

Can Smith's captaincy survive?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
C'mon South Africa, you can do better than 191 all out in 44.3 overs! Mind you India have to bat yet but still...
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
...then India win in just 38 overs for the loss of 2 wickets. There have been precious few tight finishes this time.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
England were put in to bat and were 211 all out!

Let's see what Pakistan can do about this.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
What a woeful display by England!

If things run to form today the final looks like being India v. Pakistan - but will they run to form?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Oh, England. Bottled it again. But well played Pakistan - head and shoulders the better team and they fully deserved it.

I can't imagine that India will be so casual about their game today though...
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I can't believe how casual India are being!

Ah well, it's only a game...

...but dropped catches don't help!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Well, after India won by 9 wickets I suppose I should stop worrying about these things. So the final on Sunday will be India v. Pakistan - but I make no predictions, I just hope it is a good match...

...and India win!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Well, Pakistan made an excellent 338/4 in their 50 overs, now we have to see if India can match that - I believe this is the highest ODI run chase attempted at The Oval.

Should be fun!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
India lost by a LOT!

180 runs but Pakistan so deserve it and they played some great cricket at The Oval this afternoon.

Can I go to bed now, please?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Cricket, eh? Bloody hell!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
A great innings by Joe Root but he has had a bit of luck, including not out from a stumping off a no ball!

It has been a tale of two captains: everything has gone right for Root but Dean Elgar has had a 'mare: missed catches, poor ground fielding, weird bowling changes, a general end-of-tour attitude and hasn't even got the overs in. I can think of Saffie captains who would have their teams running laps round the ground at 7am for that. I hope they don't let Mike Proctor near this bunch.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Another somewhat bizarre days play. England collapse early, made respectable by Stuart Borad and, of all things, a six from the Burnley Lara who has hit a mere 3 of them in 169 innings!

Then SA struggle to 214-5... and one of their bowlers picks up a suspension for telling Stokes to Eff off! I guess it could have been worse, could have been a bunch of fives...

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
...And quite right too. It's a crying shame that poor, delicate little Ben Stokes should have to encounter such frightful language! I just hope he doesn't follow that beastly example and start using those words himself in the future!

But seriously, I think cricket needs to grow up about stuff like that. Rabada had just got out one of the most abrasive characters in the world game, and someone who he has a bit of history with. I think a quick "fuck off" is quite understandable in the circumstances and isn't to the detriment of the game.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I've read that Michael Vaughan (who can be a numpty) say that he can't recall a quick bowler who didn't swear at him. These stump microphones must have changed the game. The Saffies will have to learn to cuss in Afrikaans.

He reckons the pathetic over rate is far more of a problem and I agree.

[ 08. July 2017, 10:48: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Hooray! A wicket! Something has happened.

That said Gary Balance replaces Keaton Jennings. Move along, nothing to see.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I'm trying to work out the most likely way for England to stuff this one up. Any good ideas, or is just the obvious bat too slow, bowl in the wrong areas, stagger across the line for a draw scenario?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I would suggest that South Africa could actually win this if England fail to score another 200 runs, leaving the better SA batsmen, especially Amla and De Cock to make hay.

I don't think a draw is on.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
What a day it has been! England lose nine wickets for 114 (including 7-63 before lunch) and South Africa are now 28-4. Although SA need 300 runs it's far from over though as de Kock is still there.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
An exhilarating day, for sure. I'm a bit disappointed that the South Africans didn't put up more of a fight with the bat. Some of the commentators were saying that this is credit to the English top three for making it look easy, but I'm not so sure it's as simple as that. SA really need du Plessis back.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Cricket Novice here, and I could use a little help on understanding something.

The match in question was Sri Lanka v. Zimbabwe.
Sri Lanka 203-8 (50.0 overs)
Zimbabwe 204-7 (38.1 overs)

Okay, I get it that Zimbabwe won. I assume that, for this particular match, the maximum number of overs was 50 (because Sri Lanka was not "all out"). So, in 50 overs Sri Lanka scored 203 runs and had 8 men put out. By contrast, Zimbabwe scored 204 runs in only 38.1 overs (and, obviously, no need to play further) and had 7 men put out.

All of that I can grasp. What throws me is that the news summaries state that Zimbabwe "won by 3 wickets."

I am not sure where that number is coming from. I have a theory that it just means that, because they only had 7 out, they still had 3 men remaining before being "all out" and those are the "3 wickets." My problem with that theory is that it is not as if Sri Lanka was all out. If they had not used up the maximum numbers of overs they still had "2 wickets" left over themselves.

So, have patience with a newbie: what exactly is meant by "won by 3 wickets" in this situation?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Yeah, you got it right - it means they had three wickets left when they got to the required score.

The only thing that matters for a game like this is how many runs the two teams have. So Sri Lanka could have been 203-0 or 203-9 but if Zimbabwe got to 204 then they win. In that sense, comparison of how many wickets the two teams had lost is meaningless.

The nomenclature goes back to The Olden Days™ when cricket did not have over limits. It is supposed to indicate how close the winning team was to not getting the runs. These days, perhaps a more useful number would be how many overs the team batting second had left, but for some reason, cricket has decided not to do that.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Thank you. It's nice to know I puzzled that out correctly.

Now a strategy question. So there is a Championship going on between Gloucestershire and Worcestershire (hereinafter "G" and "W"). So, 4 days set aside. Day 1, in their first innings, G scores 383-all out. That's fine. I understand that. Day 2, W's first innings, they get to "300-9 dec."

Now I have researched it enough to know that a team can "declare" an end to their batting "for strategic reasons." In this particular case, W was still trailing by 83 runs. And, okay, it seemed unlikely that they were going to get 83 more runs with one wicket left, but every little bit helps, right? So what was the strategic reason for foregoing their last wicket?

My guess is this: By declaring, apparently W made G start its second innings on Day 2. Not sure why, but I guess there was still daytime left to play some more? So was the theory that G would be tired after having been in the field all day and, if you made them start their second innings, you might be able to put some of them out easier than if they came back the next day all rested? I can't think of any other reason why W would declare while still behind by 83 runs.

If that was the theory, it seems to have failed spectacularly, as G went 20-0 before play was called on Day 2.

And how do they decide when to call play? Is there a pre-set time or is it just in the discretion of the match officials to say "We're tired. Stop now."?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
That seems a fair guess to me, Hedgehog. Partly to give G an awkward forty minutes or so batting in the hope that W's bowlers can take a few wickets. The weather conditions may also have played a part - if it looked like suiting W's bowlers, for example, they might declare. Again, in the hope of getting a few wickets.

The other possibility is- kidology, if they know they are already ahead, then G might not try so hard to score runs.

As for the close of play... I think it's usually by time, there are supposed to be so many overs bowled in a day but, at least in Test matches, that doesn't happen very often.

AG
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I think Sandemaniac is most likely right, but there is one rather boring explanation - if one of W's players was injured and couldn't bat, then I think that technically they would have to declare to end the innings.

But a more adventurous possibility is that W might also have been thinking about the total time left in the game. They would need to bowl G out and score enough runs to win the game with only two days left. If there was rain the weather forecast, this

This was a really rather risky move by W though, but looking at the Div 2 table, W really needed a win to keep the pressure up on Notts. So they were probably a bit more willing than normal to roll the dice.

As it turns out, G declared on 286-4, leaving W with a rear guard action to force the draw. They managed successfully (which, being a G supporter, makes me quite disappointed!) In some ways, this is one good thing about County cricket - in an international match, the captains would never be adventurous enough to do something like that.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
I think Sandemaniac is most likely right, but there is one rather boring explanation - if one of W's players was injured and couldn't bat, then I think that technically they would have to declare to end the innings.


There is also the possibility that the last one or two batsmen really aren't very good at batting*. They are usually specialist bowlers. It is often worth declaring late in the day so that a side that has been fielding all day has to bat against bowlers who have been resting all day.

*I can think of a few!
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
As it turns out, G declared on 286-4, leaving W with a rear guard action to force the draw. They managed successfully (which, being a G supporter, makes me quite disappointed!)

And this brings me to my next newbie question. What are the rules for a draw in that sort of situation? When the draw was announced or agreed to, W was still some runs behind. Was it a timing thing: that G recognized that they were not going to get W all out before the day ended? Or that the day, in fact, ended, before W could finish?
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Yeah, it's just timing. If they get to the end of day four with no winner then the game is a draw. This often means that the side batting fourth is batting "to save the game", i.e. to play out time and secure a draw. England end up doing this *a lot*. [Biased]
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Speaking of timing, it has been several hours now. Seriously, you all are going to make me start this conversation??? Ooooooookay.

England. Went from 199-6 to 205-all out. I know very little about cricket, but even I can tell that that is absolute garbage. Anybody care to offer comments, remembering that this is The Circus and not Hell?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
Speaking of timing, it has been several hours now. Seriously, you all are going to make me start this conversation??? Ooooooookay.

England. Went from 199-6 to 205-all out. I know very little about cricket, but even I can tell that that is absolute garbage. Anybody care to offer comments, remembering that this is The Circus and not Hell?

Yes, it is a bad show even when you note that the poorer batters go in at the end of the order. Above all it shows the impact of Joe Root - once he was out England's chance of getting to 300 vanished while the South Africans looked so much sharper, especially Morris & Maharaj, who hadn't looked much good before.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well, that was embarrassing...

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Quite. Another lower order collapse but the damage was done at the top where two batsmen, ironically from South Africa and Zimbabwe, had feet of clay and 5,6 and 7 look like one-day sloggers.

I suppose we should be grateful that our bowling and fielding isn't too shabby, but we need one more specialist batsman, as well as a couple of replacements.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
At what point can the Proteas call the Brits Chokers?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
At what point can the Proteas call the Brits Chokers?

We didn't get within a mile of that. You have to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory to be called chokers.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Like the Indian women?

Bloody hell! The England women did it!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I was a bit disappointed but can sort of take comfort that it was a fairly close game.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
England vs SA
Pass mark for England day 1. 162/4
Real gutsy innings by Cook 82N/O?
Unbelievable movement on the wicket though. Looked almost unplayBle at times.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
India look to be in a comfortable position against Sri Lanka in Galle - will they enforce the follow on?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Never mind the scores: South Africa bowled 20 overs in the first hour and a half today. Even the West Indies with a nothing-but-pace attack in the seventies did better.

I don't think fines are enough. The only way to solve this is to affect the outcome of the match, eg, by adding runs to a batting side's total or removing batsmen before the innings at the other sides request. That would hurt!

I don't like it, but if they went about a proper job like this, they wouldn't be there long. It isn't even a hot day. And Maharaj has had a bowl.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Question time again. So the BBC report has this:
quote:
Roland-Jones then ripped through the South Africa top order as the Proteas slumped to 61-7 before closing on 126-8, still 28 runs shy of the follow-on target.
What is meant by a "follow-on target"?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
The follow-on is one of the quirks of the game. Ina game of two innings per side, if a side batting first score heavily and the side batting second is bowled out for not many runs, the follow-on can be enforced.

What that means is that the side who batted first can choose to make their opponents bat again, immediately after their first innings has ended. When it can be enforced depends on the length of the game - in a test match, lasting five days, a team can be made to follow on if they do not get within 200 of their opponents. So today, where England made 353, South Africa must make at least 154 to ensure that England bat again.

However, enforcing the follow-on is optional - if Engalnd feel that the weather has changed to make batting easier, for example, or think their bowlers need a rest, they can choose not to enforce it, and just bat again. Just to really confuse, if the side following on overtake the other side's score, the opposition can bat again to try to win the game.

It's an odd and confusing thing that I'm not sure I've explained clearly! However, it's usually the death knell for a team - matches have been drawn when a team has followed on, but a side made to follow on has won just three times in test match history.

Here's the official version.

AG
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Thanks. I found your explanation clear enough to follow.

I can see where this would be something that the team that batted first (and ran up an admirable numbers of runs) would do to prevent a draw by making the opposing team do both its innings without the first team using up valuable time with its own second innings (and having to decide whether to declare to save time).
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
South Africa may not have to follow on but good for England if they can get last 2 wickets within the next 26 runs. I think they should do it. It has become unfashionable of late to enforce it of course but English have a great attack ATM on this pitch which may well flatten out later. They have barely raised a sweat. Big raps to Stokes and Cook. Really gutsy batting.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Sri Lanka, in their second innings, now need to make 458 runs with 8 wickets remaining and just under 5 sessions to go - it is possible but, I think, HUGELY unlikely!
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
Sri Lanka, in their second innings, now need to make 458 runs with 8 wickets remaining and just under 5 sessions to go - it is possible but, I think, HUGELY unlikely!

I agree. Not sure why India played so conservatively. If SL can salvage a draw it will be as good as a win now.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
South Africa may not have to follow on but good for England if they can get last 2 wickets within the next 26 runs.

That may depend on how many runs big Vern has left! He's third top scorer for SA after the first two tests, but how is he physically?

AG
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
India won by over 300 runs in the end - why has enforcing the follow-on fallen out of fashion?
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
Have made it to The Oval. Currently sat in row 6 of the OCS stand, with a bag of chocolate biscuits, wine gums and a couple of scotch eggs. Currently reading Spike Milligan while I wait for the final day's play to begin. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
You might need to eat and read fairly quickly, if you are to finish before the match does.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
You might need to eat and read fairly quickly, if you are to finish before the match does.

What a way to finish! A hatrick by Moeen Ali.
Congratulations England!
My hero in this is Cook, with the battling innings of 88 on the first day, but certainly this was a team effort.
Stokes is probably the player of the match!
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Yeah, I think ex-Captain Cook's innings has been somewhat forgotten in the hubbub of what happened after. It was a very good knock indeed.

The next question is whether England will be hot or cold come Friday...
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
... depends if Cook stays in.

And if nos 2/3 can bat...
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
Honours even on day 1 at Manchester?
England 260/6
Great Yorker in penultimate over to dismiss Stokes for 58 give RSA the edge perhaps?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Honours even on day 1 at Manchester?
England 260/6
Great Yorker in penultimate over to dismiss Stokes for 58 give RSA the edge perhaps?

Yes, narrow advantage South Africa, even though they are missing their top bowler.
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
It would be nice to have a really tight game, the advantage swinging from one team to the other. Proper Test cricket!
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
It would be nice to have a really tight game, the advantage swinging from one team to the other. Proper Test cricket!

Absolutely..as long as it swings the right way in the end!
Seriously though with 2 even teams like this, could go either way. I'm kinda missing Dale Steyn.

[ 05. August 2017, 00:08: Message edited by: Jamat ]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
India actually enforce the follow-on in the 2nd Test at the SSC in Colombo - with a first innings lead of 400+ I think they should be okay.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
At the end of Day 3 Sri Lanka trail by 230 with 8 wickets left - but India, of course, have the chance to bat again if required. I still think/hope it won't be necessary, but...
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
There is something so satisfying about a victory of An innings and... - as long as it is occasional rather than the norm.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
There is something so satisfying about a victory of An innings and... - as long as it is occasional rather than the norm.

Indeed, India superior in all departments but great centuries at the top of SL order. Makes you think the bowling is the biggie.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
England crush RSA after a great fighting knock by Hasem Amla. Quite a few parallels wth what India did to SL.

[ 07. August 2017, 18:15: Message edited by: Jamat ]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Yes, it was a good victory.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
Yes, it was a good victory.

India v Sri Lanka was, but that was match between two teams that can bat. Neither England nor South Africa can do that very well. You could dream up a combined top six from England and South Africa that would be fortunate to pass 60.

[ 08. August 2017, 15:29: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
I think that's a bit harsh Sioni. As the @51AllOut twitter account put it the other day, get England four down and you're into the batsmen! [Biased]
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I suppose 134/0 by lunch on the first day is not too bad!
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
329/6 is not quite as good as I would have hoped/expected at Stumps on Day 1 but it is what it is.

Meanwhile India U19 are not doing so well against England U19: 185/3 after 34 overs but I have no idea how good the England team are these days.
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
India U19 finished their 50 overs on 327/7, so not too bad after all.

Now what can England do in reply?
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
Erm, not a lot seemed to be the answer. India seem to be whitewashing the England U19 team...

...and in the Test series Sri Lanka seem to be heading the same way - SL all out for 135 [in under a day] in reply to 480+ - surely a good case for the follow on, again.


eta: India look to have enforced the follow on - now we need to get a wicket or two before stumps!

[ 13. August 2017, 11:19: Message edited by: Welease Woderwick ]
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
Are you enjoying the trouncing, Wodders, or is it a bit boring being so one-sided? (I mean the test, but the U19s series ain't much cop either, indeed!).
 
Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :
 
I nthink the Indian team has done well BUT it needs a challenge if it is to improve and Sri Lanka aren't offering any of that. Winning this way is fun but I really prefer something less one sided.

[ 14. August 2017, 14:26: Message edited by: Welease Woderwick ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Welease Woderwick:
I nthink the Indian team has done well BUT it needs a challenge if it is to improve and Sri Lanka aren't offering any of that. Winning this way is fun but I really prefer something less one sided.

I'm wondering who can provide that. Probably England in England, where the ball moves around or Australia if they get four quick bowlers fit and some fast pitches.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
The last time India visited Oz, Oz won but India have improved since then though Aussie pitches do somewhat negate a spin attack.
An England vs India in England ATM would be interesting. Indian batting may not be so great on seaming wickets. India have already shown that they are unbeatable at home.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
As I type, Cook is at 183.

Which raises a question: what are the most runs that a single batsman has run up in a test match?
 
Posted by agingjb (# 16555) on :
 
Highest single test innings is Lara's 400. I believe that Gooch's 333 +123 is the highest total in a test match.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
England too good for windies. No wonder when most of their best players are back in Caribbean playing 20/20!
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Even as an England supporter, I find that a bit embarrassing.

I too think Gooch may well have the record for most runs in a single test match. I'm pretty sure that he's the only batsman to follow a triple century in the first innings with a ton in the second.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Well you tell me: Have the West Indies improved or were England dreadful? My opinion is that England had this of thing coming - they can't rely on the middle order getting them out of trouble and they were lucky that the West Indies dropped so many chances because they could have been out for less than 150. At least the West Indies bowling looked better, with Shannon Gabriel dangerous and Kemar Roach far better in a supporting role than leading the attack.
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
Please let England be dreadful. I'm looking forward to the Ashes this summer, and two-day bloodbaths are my preferred outcome. Also, we are no great shakes at the moment, although team unity should be high after the recent industrial win.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
I don't know about the rest of you, but I am quite looking forward to Day 4 of England-West Indies.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
I don't know about the rest of you, but I am quite looking forward to Day 4 of England-West Indies.

Day 3 was supposed to be decisive but I think Day 4 really will be. And the weather looks set fair which on a Bank Holiday in Yorkshire is unusual.
It all hinges on who is batting at the teatime break (4 hours more play) If the West Indies are in then they ought to win, but if England are still in, they should. I can't believe England will bowl so badly again and 200 won't be an easy target.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Two words for you today:
Moeen. Ali.

(Okay, you can have Root and Joe as well if you really insist!)

What a performance!
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
Whatever, it is great to see this game progressing to Day 4. Well done on a fightback with the bat by England.
I cannot help thinking that Root was lucky not to be given out LBW early on day 3 when he was 23 or so but I guess you ride your luck with the technology as well.
Day 3 was England's day.
I guess when a test match goes into day 4 and 5 it is who is less fatigued.
I'd love to see the Windies make a go of it.
England really need to be made to pay for that pathetic 1st innings.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Whatever, it is great to see this game progressing to Day 4. Well done on a fightback with the bat by England.
I cannot help thinking that Root was lucky not to be given out LBW early on day 3 when he was 23 or so but I guess you ride your luck with the technology as well.
Day 3 was England's day.
I guess when a test match goes into day 4 and 5 it is who is less fatigued.
I'd love to see the Windies make a go of it.
England really need to be made to pay for that pathetic 1st innings.

England have been left off the hook by some pretty ordinary captaincy by Jason Holder (mostly the wrong bowlers at the wrong time) plus woeful catching. I thing the West Indies dropped or missed nine chances, probably the extent of England's lead.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
I'd love to see the Windies make a go of it.

All things considered, I think we can say that they made a go of it.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
I'd love to see the Windies make a go of it.

All things considered, I think we can say that they made a go of it.
Indeed!
Many things to be said about some of English tactics.
Were they arrogant?
Declaration? Why not bat on, it was only day 3.
Alistair Cook..hero to zero..2 drops
England bowled well but what happened to the catchers?Broad and Anderson will be justifiably angry after that.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Declaration? Why not bat on, it was only day 3.

[Confused] I believe the declaration was made late on Day 4. According to the BBC:
quote:
Captain Joe Root declared with England on 490-8 in their second innings late on day four, giving West Indies six tricky overs to negotiate before the close.
Declaring made sense to me at the time. If you were confident that you could put the Windies down (and, based on the 19-wickets-in-one-day of the first test match, there was reason to think so), it decreased the chance of a draw. Of course, as it turned out, England would have welcomed a draw. The miscalculation was in thinking that the West Indies were Hope-less.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Congratulations to the West Indies on the win and especially to Stuart Law and the coaching team for turning the players round after the pounding they took at Edgbaston.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Declaration? Why not bat on, it was only day 3.

[Confused] I believe the declaration was made late on Day 4. According to the BBC:
quote:
Captain Joe Root declared with England on 490-8 in their second innings late on day four, giving West Indies six tricky overs to negotiate before the close.
Declaring made sense to me at the time. If you were confident that you could put the Windies down (and, based on the 19-wickets-in-one-day of the first test match, there was reason to think so), it decreased the chance of a draw. Of course, as it turned out, England would have welcomed a draw. The miscalculation was in thinking that the West Indies were Hope-less.

Sorry, my mistake, got days wrong. The expert commentators backed Root in the declaration so obviously it was an OK decision. It was certainly a great run chase.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Test cricket is a wonderful thing! Hot on the heels of the West Indies beating England in a calm run chase featuring a young batsman, who was the first *ever* to score a hundred in both innings of any first class match at Headingley*, Bangladesh beat Australia! I know Australia haven't had to look far for trouble recently and they have an ordinary record in the sub-continent, but this makes me wonder if England and Australia will be playing for the wooden spoon rather than the Ashes.

*There have been over 500 first-class matches at Headingley and an awful lot of very good players have played a lot of cricket there. The pitch and conditions haven't always been as batting-friendly as this week, but Hope and Brathwaite won this match with proper Test match batting.
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
Of all the things that should never happen on the field of play, the firing of arrows is one I never expected to be outraged by. Glad that no one appears to be hurt, though it'll bugger up the buses in the area so will make for a slow commute home tonight.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
Well, anyone with tickets for the Sunday at Lords might as well ask for a refund now! If the weather at Lords was anything like in Oxfordshire (grey and humid), the ball will have been going round corners.

Meanwhile it looks as though the top of the table clash between Essex & Lancs will be a draw, which will suit Essex no end. I'm desperate for them to win the title, but it will tear me apart because the person I want to chew it over with most isn't here to do so any more. [Frown]

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Well, anyone with tickets for the Sunday at Lords might as well ask for a refund now! If the weather at Lords was anything like in Oxfordshire (grey and humid), the ball will have been going round corners.

AG

That's what Ben Stokes was doing for a while - at about 85 mph, swinging in, pitch middle, cut away to hit off. How do you play that? TRJ wasn't far behind and Broad looked decidedly mediocre alongside those two and Anderson.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
And we've done it - first county championship since 1992!

[Yipee] [Yipee] [Yipee] [Yipee] [Yipee] and a little tear for Dad [Tear]

AG

[ 15. September 2017, 21:05: Message edited by: Sandemaniac ]
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Congrats!
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Looks like England's Ben Stokes is trying to overtake Australia's David Warner and New Zealand's Jesse Ryder as the World most unstable cricketer.

Stokes has a track record for this sort of thing, having been sent home from an England Lions tour.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
Well, some papers are reporting that he and Alex Hales stepped in to help two men who were being assaulted. I have no idea if that's true, but maybe there are two sides to the story?

A bigger question might be why he (and apparently a whole bunch of the England team) were out in the small hours during the middle of a series.
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
Has England fielded a player with a criminal record before? What about organising for him to serve part of his time in Australian jails, so he can play in the tests on day release? We could open up a few of the old convict prisons for him [Smile]

In all seriousness, I hope England does sully itself and pick him. I don't want any excuses.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Ashes!

Any thoughts, predictions, feelings of dread disaster?
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by simontoad:
Has England fielded a player with a criminal record before?

I'm sure some Aussies may say that Stuart Broad is a bit criminal.

Verdict on the day: fairly even. Nobody's won it on the first day; nobody's lost it.

The Australian bowling attack didn't make the best of the pitch and were generally lacklustre compared to some of the lineups over the last 20 years or so, only producing a handful of good balls in the whole day.

England will be disappointed not to have made a bit more hay. Cook got a good ball which all openers get from time to time with the new cherry.

Australia's target for tomorrow should be to get England all out for less than 320 and then bat out the rest of the day for the loss of no more than 2 wickets.

England should look to push on to around 400 and then see if they can pick up 3 quick wickets at the end of the day.

Anything in between and it'll still be up for grabs.
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
C'mon Aussie C'mon. I've just seen 3 wickets fall in quick succession and the Barmy Army has gone quiet.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
I don't know about the England selection, but Australia's has been controversial. For wicket-keeper , they picked Tim Paine, who was the next big thing about 5 years ago but then got badly injured, and is now not even first-choice keeper for his state. Sceptics noted that he dropped the first chance he got, off Lyon on day 1. The other weird pick was to give Sean Marsh his eight-th (yes, 8th!) recall to test cricket, as his bad or mediocre performances are at least well known, and only Bancroft (who will open the batting) responded well to the selectors call for batsman to make runs in the Sheffield Shield and pick themselves.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
That would be the Bancroft who is out for five. But hopefully he improves.

I am surprised England capitulated so easily after a good start. 302 is not going to get it done.

Still, if anyone can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, Aus can. So let's see how our lads manage.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
End of day 2, in which Bancroft (in excellent form domestically) was out cheaply but Marsh (Batting at #6) is still there on a patiently accumulated 44.

Meanwhile Maxwell (one of the 2 batters dropped from the team of the previous test) has today made 200 in an interstate game. If he's done that in the previous Shield game, he would have been in the test team.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Day 5. Australia needs 56 runs. So, how many minutes is this day going to run?

As you know, I'm a novice. But about Cook: two innings, nine runs. And he is the first batsman! Aren't you supposed to put a decent batter in the first spot...or am I missing the strategy here?
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Annnnnnnd, we're done.
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
I just love the cricket, except when we lose, when it feels more like a bad addiction.

My feeling is that England lost a session, maybe two, and that was it. It was a critical fail, but only a brief one. From an Australian perspective, I felt like we were under significant pressure for most of the Test. Maybe that's just my personality.

Anyway, I think it is going to be a wonderful series, and I am booking my tickets for day two or three at the G for the Boxing Day Test.
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
Two out of three times you bat. The third time you look at the pitch, check out the weather, think about all the circumstances and bat.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
I haven't seen any of it, just followed via apps. Marsh seems in my memory to have had an uneven career, so it is nice to see he has found some form.

What is up with the Poms? This is their first eleven, right? There hasn't been some terrible mistake?
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:

As you know, I'm a novice. But about Cook: two innings, nine runs. And he is the first batsman! Aren't you supposed to put a decent batter in the first spot...or am I missing the strategy here?

Since no one else responded...

Yes, a decent batsman is ideal. Cook may not be in form now, but he has had a really great career with the bat. He is good at something other than looking quite a bit like Henry Cavill.

The opener often has a tough job, as the shiny new ball is difficult to play. Particularly with a quality express or at least fast bowler steaming in and hurling it at you on a decent length. The opener has done their job when they take the shine off the ball by thumping it around a bit. But it does often mean that they don't stay around at the crease very long - the job requires them to strike, and as explained, the new ball isn't that easy to strike safely.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
To add to Dark Knight's explanation of the task of the opening bat, I would say that almost all batters are vulnerable to the first few balls they receive because they have to "get their eye in", i.e. adjust to how high and how fast the ball is bouncing off the wicket [which varies with each wicket and with weather] , and (often) to the extent to which the bowler is able to make the ball move sideways [ditto]. For this reason, bowlers used to reckon that (e.g.) for a great batter like Brian Lara, if you didn't get him out before he scored 10 runs, you wouldn't get a chance until he had scored at least 100. This adjustment is even harder for the first batter in an innings, as he has not had the chance to watch any other batters in action.

And in a comment on the state of the Test Match, one has to admire Steve Smith's sporting [foolish?] gesture to not enforce the follow on, and thus give the England bowlers a chance to make use of the ideal bowling conditions of the evening session on day 3. Result: Australia were 4 down for about 50 overnight, and look unlikely to make 150 in their second innings. But that would still leave England to make a record-breaking 350+ in their second innings to win the match.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
You are not wrong, Tukai. Good Lord, the Aus team fell like flies spread with Mortein this arvo. [Ultra confused]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
You are not wrong, Tukai. Good Lord, the Aus team fell like flies spread with Mortein this arvo. [Ultra confused]

And that despite eight batsmen getting into double figures and facing 25+ balls. To me that shows a combination of good persistent bowling an a pitch that isn't to be trusted.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Root is key. If we can get him out, anything is possible. If he stays, ENG are in with a chance.

[ 06. December 2017, 02:44: Message edited by: Dark Knight ]
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
But as it happened:
(1) Root dismissed without adding to his overnight score.
(2) England lost the test before 'lunch' by more than 100 runs.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Wow, through Day 3 and Australia is still in its first innings?

I may be misunderstanding the rules, but if the match doesn't finish by the close of business on Day 5, it is a draw, right? And I suppose Australia might try to run up a few runs, then declare and hope to put England out without giving up the lead before the end of Day 5...but surely that is not all that likely, is it?

Oh, and it was rude of me not to thank Dark Knight and Tukai for their explanations of the situation of the opening batsman. Very instructive and understandable. It bears a mild resemblance to a good lead-off hitter in baseball (who should try to work a long count so that the rest of the team gets to see what stuff the pitcher has before they get to bat).

I'm still working out the rules on the whole "new ball" thing. When does that happen? I know it is not on request, so I assume a certain number of overs must go by before you get a new ball? Or is it based on the number of runs scored?
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
Wow, through Day 3 and Australia is still in its first innings?

(1)I may be misunderstanding the rules, but if the match doesn't finish by the close of business on Day 5, it is a draw, right?
(2) And I suppose Australia might try to run up a few runs, then declare and hope to put England out without giving up the lead before the end of Day 5...but surely that is not all that likely, is it?

(3) Oh, and it was rude of me not to thank Dark Knight and Tukai for their explanations of the situation of the opening batsman. Very instructive and understandable. It bears a mild resemblance to a good lead-off hitter in baseball (who should try to work a long count so that the rest of the team gets to see what stuff the pitcher has before they get to bat).

(4) I'm still working out the rules on the whole "new ball" thing. When does that happen? I know it is not on request, so I assume a certain number of overs must go by before you get a new ball? Or is it based on the number of runs scored?

Here are my answers to your perfectly sensible questions.
(1) yes, it's a draw if neither side has not won by the end of day 5. It used to happen quite often in test cricket, especially in places where it rains a lot, so that a whole day of play could lost (e.g. Manchester).
(2) It looks very like Australia is doing what you said, i.e. aiming to make more runs in one innings than England make in two. If that happens, Australia are said to "win by an innings".
(3) Our pleasure.
(4) The new ball can be taken after 80 overs, and usually is. Occasionally if the bowlers are going very well with the old ball (more common if they have two very good slow bowlers, which most teams do not) , the bowling side can keep going with the old ball. The choice is up to them.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
England vsAustralia Ashes 3
Very disappointed in England's bowlers. Aussie fron liners have 10k on em. That's the difference.!
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
Not to mention that England batting leaves something to be desired. Certainly none of them look to be in the same class as Steve Smith. Cook in particular is starting to look like Ponting in his last year: fine at county level but with his reactions slowed down just enough to make him vulnerable to top-level bowling, which unfortunately for him is what Australia are offering this year. Moeen also looks below his best, but England have few alternatives to him. Broad is also no longer a force batting (and worse) bowling anywhere other than in England.

A consolation may be that some of the younger players are coming on nicely. Bairstow is worth a place on his batting alone; maybe they should play someone else as wicketkeeper to free him up a bit more. Overton has tried hard and not looked out of place at this level; his injury is bad luck. Malan, Stoneman, and Vince (who cannot be blamed for dismissal to a freak ball from Starc) have all showed reasonable form.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
Agree Cook has lost his mojo. Broad needs dropping but the big worry for England is captaincy. Root is not handling both. His batting has fallen away and he looks out of his depth as a captain.
I think they are missing Stokes but also one more express bowler. TBH Aussie got the rub of the green on day 5. Play should not have started because of pitch conditions.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Congratulations to Australia. They really did keep the foot down on England's throat.

On the subject of Steve Smith being better than any of England's batsmen he does on one hand not have to face Hazlewood, Cummins & co but right now he is as good a batsman as I have seen. Ever. He certainly looks better than Ponting and he is (IMHO) a better captain because he doesn't have the same supporting cast (Langer, Hayden, Gilchrist, and two of the all-time great bowlers). Smith plus a decent bowling attack is carrying that side and he is doing so pretty easily.
 
Posted by Mr Clingford (# 7961) on :
 
It's very disappointing. OZ are just outplaying us.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
TBH Aussie got the rub of the green on day 5. Play should not have started because of pitch conditions.

After sitting up for an hour reading, with rapt attention, live updates on the BBC page concerning people watching grass dry, I finally went to bed thinking that they would either not start at all, or start so late that a draw would be a certainty.

Which just goes to show that I still have a LOT to learn.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
I have to admit, it was raining cats and dogs on Sunday, so I was surprised they got back on the pitch at all. Obviously it would have been better for England had they not.
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
Did someone say the word 'Ashes'? [Yipee]
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
Did someone say the word 'Ashes'? [Yipee]

In our mouths if an English supporter.
Funny how cricket always favours home turf advantage.
Everyone plays better on their patch.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
Did someone say the word 'Ashes'? [Yipee]

In our mouths if an English supporter.
Funny how cricket always favours home turf advantage.
Everyone plays better on their patch.

Just as importantly, with their own ball. India use a ball made there while England use the Duke ball which retains its seam far longer than Australia's Kookaburra. It also has a bigger seam and (IIRC) takes a shine better and for longer which explains why Jimmy Anderson is twice the bowler in England than elsewhere and why England doesn't produce so many outright fast bowlers.
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
Jamat, I love that you went for the traditional English sacrificial lamb - the captain. [Razz] I think Australians go for the manager first.

I'm going to day three in Melbourne. I used to go to Boxing Day religiously, but I'm a bit too old for the Cricketers Arms "drink as much as you can before 10", and they don't have Bay 13 anymore. So these days I avoid the crowds, get my trannie and my binocs and sit in the shade.

I take along a mate in a wheelchair and we sink water and soft-drink all day long. The re-vamped G is great for the wheelchair-bound, with beautiful seats near the vendors, and a telly for the replays. This suits my mate down to the ground, as he would prefer to watch the cricket on telly. The bloke who sold me the tickets reckons we will have a view over the bowler's arm.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by simontoad:
Jamat, I love that you went for the traditional English sacrificial lamb - the captain. [Razz] I think Australians go for the manager first.

I'm going to day three in Melbourne. I used to go to Boxing Day religiously, but I'm a bit too old for the Cricketers Arms "drink as much as you can before 10", and they don't have Bay 13 anymore. So these days I avoid the crowds, get my trannie and my binocs and sit in the shade.

I take along a mate in a wheelchair and we sink water and soft-drink all day long. The re-vamped G is great for the wheelchair-bound, with beautiful seats near the vendors, and a telly for the replays. This suits my mate down to the ground, as he would prefer to watch the cricket on telly. The bloke who sold me the tickets reckons we will have a view over the bowler's arm.

Good stuffSimontoad!
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Boxing Day!

Warner is being Warner so far today.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
Boxing Day!

Warner is being Warner so far today.

Indeed, Commentators are interesting. They are bemoaning conservative English field placing.
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
Here's an article on the morning of Boxing Day from the cricket journalist and author Catherine McGregor, who spied the Speaker of the House of Representatives lining up with the hoi poloi to get into the MCG. Ahh, Australia. Your egalitarianism sometimes brings tears to my eyes. (I'm sure both the Speaker and McGregor were lining up to get into the members [Smile] )

Catherine McGregor on the Boxing Day Test
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Good grief. I turn my head for half an hour, and Oz loses five wickets.

Keeping in mind my personal prejudice, as I think he's a tool - but is J Anderson anything other than the mostly spent force he appears to be in this series?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
Good grief. I turn my head for half an hour, and Oz loses five wickets.

Keeping in mind my personal prejudice, as I think he's a tool - but is J Anderson anything other than the mostly spent force he appears to be in this series?

Five hundred and twenty-one wickets must tell some kind of a story. He got his first five-wicket haul in Australia a couple of weeks ago. He also had nearly two years out of Test cricket thanks to an injury sustained as a result of England's then coach trying to change his action.
He might be getting on a bit and I doubt he'll manage more than another year, but he has this annoying habit of taking wickets by sheer bloody-mindedness.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
[QUOTE]
Is J Anderson anything other than the mostly spent force he appears to be in this series?

Five hundred and twenty-one wickets must tell some kind of a story.
[QUOTE]

Wondered about this too. He seems to perform when conditions suit him. Can get swing and moves ball off seam consistently.

Good innings by Cook.

I think losing Stark could hurt Aussies.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
SS - his record is really not the point, as my question is about his current form. The recent five-for is more relevant.

Certainly one can be a total knob and a great bowler at the same time. Just look at Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath.

Good to see Cook find some form. I have always quite liked him.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Tukai:
Not to mention that England batting leaves something to be desired. Certainly none of them look to be in the same class as Steve Smith. Cook in particular is starting to look like Ponting in his last year: fine at county level but with his reactions slowed down just enough to make him vulnerable to top-level bowling, which unfortunately for him is what Australia are offering this year. [SNIP}

Looks like the verdict of myself (and most commentators) about Cook was a trifle premature, now that he's batted right through day 3 and scored 244 not out. Steve Smith looked set for yet another a chanceless century himself as he made batting look easy, until he uncharacteristically got out to a bad ball. The pitch is still a road , so he may make up for that lapse in the Australian second innings - and it looks as though he may need to do so if Australia are to avoid defeat.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Nah, this is heading for a draw, and was when you posted, Tukai. Rain has likely thwarted any chance of a face-saving English victory in this test.

Warner looks to have been replaced by a cautious, plodding clone of himself. But at least he is still in. He and Smith have kept things steady, when it wasn't raining.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
B***r

A couple of quick wickets give England some hope then it rains!
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
Probably a draw. 4-14 presently. On Cook, the pitch is docile, but that didn't help most of his teammates.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
Draw is a fair outcome.
Smith batted superbly to save match.
Geoff Boycott..old cricketing ‘grinch’ that he is, commented that England lack a fit for purpose spinner.
Inclined to agree.
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
One thing I noticed for the first time was people booing the achievements of the other side. England milestones, Cook achievements, there was an audible minority booing in the Southern Stand. Terrible business. If the player had made some sort of immoral decision, such as standing their ground when the umpire made a clear error then yes, boo away for the rest of the innings. Otherwise, honour the achievement.
 
Posted by Cod (# 2643) on :
 
Anderson has taken his wickets at an average of about 16 this year. Hardly a spent force, and if the rest of England's bowlers had matched his efforts England wouldn't be 3 down.

They'd also not be 3 down if Stokes was playing. Seriously, how long does it really take to decide whether to charge a person with assault?
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Cod:
Seriously, how long does it really take to decide whether to charge a person with assault?

As long as it's taking. SWMBO works for the police, she will confirm that. I think if the Crown Prosecution Service work to their target time, the decision will be due mid-January. You are talking services understaffed at all levels trying to work to targets, where the person dealing with it first - PC Plod - has to fit completing their paperwork in around their shifts, and anything else that comes up on that shift as well, so it was probably all over the intertubes long before the paperwork even reached an admin staffer's desk.

AG
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
It's official, the MCG pitch was poor.

The BBC's report says that the ground authorities have two weeks to respond, which is about the time it would take for the pitch to deteriorate.

The proposed sanctions look useful: I'd like to see them applied at Lord's which has some sort of divine right to host test matches. FFS, the ground has a slope that wouldn't be tolerated anywhere else. Even the square slopes.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
I was just about to post that England were doing well so far in the SCG Test. Checked the app. All out for 346! They must have tumbled like skittles this morning. [Eek!]

Still, 346 is 346 - let us see if they can make a match of it.

Re Anderson - as SS pointed out, he has had one very good match in this series. Otherwise, he has displayed advanced powers of mediocrity. So no, Cod, if England had several Andersons they would probably not be any better off.

I have to say, and I may be wrong, that ISTM really Smitty is the difference between the sides. People continue to make stupid comparisons to the most dominant athlete in any sport through the twentieth century - Donald Bradman - and I continue to scrunch up my face in irritation when they do it. There is, as always, no comparison. What is evident is that he is the only transcendent player either side have at the moment. If England had one of him, they would not be down 3-0.

ETF writing a bit.

[ 05. January 2018, 02:47: Message edited by: Dark Knight ]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
At last, it's over. That last innings was gruesome, and not just for Root's stomach. Still, there's only pyjama cricket to follow although it would be a pleasant surprise for our performance to be any better.

While Smith is the big difference, if you select a composite XI you can only make a solid case for two England players making it: Cook for Bancroft (although that has almost as much to do with Bancroft as with Cook) and Bairstow for Paine. Anderson is a possible for Hazlewood, but he would need to be having a good day.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Yes, that is fair.
 
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :
 
Meanwhile NZ flamed Pakistan in pyjama cricket - again. The soft pitch and outfield seems so far to be bewildering the Pakistanis. Wilkinson didn't altogether fire this time (went down to a blinder of a catch though) and Munro sank without a trace, but Guptill is back bigly and Taylor is looking good.
 
Posted by aliehs (# 18878) on :
 
What you blokes need is a good cooling gallon of Pimms. Now, I know nothing about it, but...Our[Australia} commentators were of the opinion that the English side had been selected badly in terms of diversity of bowlers. I just love cricket, its' the only game I know where you can take your book , and read while nothing is happening except the fatuous commentary of the radio broadcasters on insider jokes. But when they say: He's bowling from the Cathedral end, they don't have to tell me it's Adelaide. Now those were the days. [Yipee]
 
Posted by Barnabas Aus (# 15869) on :
 
An interesting statistical analysis of Steve Smith's comparative ranking here ABC News
 
Posted by Sipech (# 16870) on :
 
Well, that went a lot better than the Ashes did.
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Maybe for you.

I'm happy for whoever wins pyjama cricket. Noone cares about it. Unless there is a World Cup on. Sometimes not even then.
 
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:

I'm happy for whoever wins pyjama cricket. Noone cares about it. Unless there is a World Cup on. Sometimes not even then.

I'd interpret that as sore losing, if it didn't sum up my view so well. It's better than no cricket at all, but it ain't the Real Thing.

AG
 
Posted by aliehs (# 18878) on :
 
One day tests don't count. But I suppose England need some crumbs from the victors' table.
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
Maybe Australia was being magnanimous in allowing the visitors a win. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Two important factors:

- A batsman scored 180: you won't win many ODI's if someone does that, especially batting second.

- The extra restrictions on short-pitched bowling negate the faster Australian bowlers.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
Maybe Australia was being magnanimous in allowing the visitors a win. [Big Grin]

Unthinkable.. The Aussies were overconfident. May this be the beginning of Root's revenge!
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
I don't watch or follow Pajama Cricket, but I am happy that it happens. Its an entry point to the game for the kids in a crowded field of summer sport and it assists in building up the treasure chest of the game.

Good luck to whoever might be playing this year.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
I dunno, maybe pajama cricket isn't so bad after all!
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
Oh dear, maybe some players need to change their pyjamas or maybe their game. [Hot and Hormonal]
 
Posted by aliehs (# 18878) on :
 
Even the dogs may eat the crumbs that fall from the Master's table....

Said before: one day matches don't count. But if it makes the Barmy Army happy, who am I to deny them their simple pleasures?

Any one for tennis?
 
Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :
 
Anyone for a tennis match that lasts as long as a Test?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Australia win one, chasing down 197 with three wickets to spare. England did pretty well to recover from 8-5 to make 196 although it does seem to have been a bowlers pitch and, let's face it, Australia's bowlers are better.
 


© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0