The cricket thread

octatonic

Dare I dream?

Heartfeltdawn

RandallFlagg said:

What the hell are England going to do when Broad retires or is injured? The Aussie 3 seamer attack is so much stronger than England's

Panic. 

The Australia attack is better managed and prepared and the reserves are better managed and prepared. Unlike England, they've had long term plans going for how to bring Pattinson back into first class cricket after a lengthy time with injury problems, how to keep the like of Starc and Cummins fit, how to get Josh Hazlewood bowling better in England compared to last time out. 

Heartfeltdawn

scrumhalf said:

Our bowling attack isn't good enough. Overton hasn't brought anything, Leach got some tap snd Stokes didn't bowl.

Wil we have one of those far-reaching reviews now? 

No we won't. The priority for the ECB once this summer is over is The Hundred. 

Of the bowling attack, we've selected poorly. Broad has bowled superbly. Archer was well out of sorts in the first innings, perhaps unsurprisingly given the first two Tests he played. Overton came in as a hold up an end seamer and did the job he can do. Stokes being injured is unfortunate and Leech has thus far outbowled the oppo spinner despite having the hardest conditions to bowl in on the first two days and then bowling second time up with England deep in the doodoo after the batsmen fuck up again. 

Our bowlers have consistently gotten the batsmen out of the shit for years. Even going back to 2005, how many times did we bat a side out of the game in the way India or Australia do? 

We haven't had a score of 500+ for two years (August 2017 against Windies - Cook with a double century, Root with a ton). 

In that time, Australia scored 600+ against us twice in Australia and declared just under 500 twice this series. 

guitars4you

Broad has bowled well all this series - Over the last 10 years or so he has had some brilliant moments and at times infuriated us, to the point we think he should be dropped - Then he delivers a magical spell to keep his place - Without Anderson he has stood up well and performed probably the best we've seen from him, for a consistent period

Archer is new with promise - As expected a lot of potential but needs to be more consistent, but don't want that to sound a negative at this stage

Otherwise we have nothing - Woakes, Overton and Leach are just about adequate at best - I've said from day one that Curran should be playing - He offers a good option with the ball and his batting can't be worse than others who are picked above him - Agree that as a pack the Aussie bowling attack is a constant threat that is superior to ours 

Take Smith out of the equation and nothing between us in the batting - I find it hard to excuse Leach for that no ball - How can a spinner who walks to the crease step over the line - Hopefully he will learn from it

I'm a Root fan - I'm a Yorkshire lad - But his captaincy is not as good as it should be - Let him do his job with the bat and give it to someone else - Whilst Stokes might be the obvious answer I don't it it should be him - But I'm not sure who it should be

As for tomorrow I hope Roy + others can do the job - A dream I know - We need that Atherton + Russel partnership 

RandallFlagg

octatonic said:

Dare I dream?

No, I don't think there will be a romantic fairytale bat slashing end for England this time, it will end in the cool autumn Manchester air with the sound of a ball hitting the last batsman's pads, hitting the stumps or being caught by an Australian fielder as England fail to make the runs or defend to the end of play for the draw.

Current odds on Betfair are:

49/1 England to win
9/2 for the draw
1/4 Australia to win

The odds for the draw look a bit short to me.

RandallFlagg

I agree that the England Test bowling attack is at real risk, with Jimmy out and if Broad went there really are no apparent heirs. Jofra is good but needs to develop his stamina for Test cricket. I'm of mixed view on Joe Root as captain, he looks weighed down with it but I'm not sure who could replace him.

This needs some long term player development focus from the ECB if they want to get back a world beating Test team, which is sadly probably not the priority.

Also spending time coaching the bowlers like Jofra how to bat in Test matches and make them more valuable down the order is worth some focus too. He's very much in ODI mode when he bats. Jack Leach gets it and can sensibly at 11, I would bring him up to 8 or 9, I think he's played well in this series, yes he can go for a few runs if it's not turning just like any spinner will.

There is a slim chance this match could be saved and they go to the Oval with all to play for but I really don't expect lightning to strike twice. Australia have outplayed England by having Steve Smith and better seam bowlers and deserve to win. England have fought well to cling on and the Stoke's innings at Headlingley was a once in a lifetime freak event, as wonderful as it was, events like that can't be relied upon time after time.

RandallFlagg

I'm prepared to remain open minded about The 100 but I can't get my head around which team I am supposed to support. When England play, I (pardon the pun) root for them. If I lived in one fo the major league counties I could root for them as my home county team.

When I see David Warner playing alongside Jofra Archer for lets say one of the London teams, who am I supposed to be backing? I don't get it. It's just a  random bunch of cricketers thrown together separated into "teams", how can you have fan loyalty? Is it supposed to be City based and you back the city you live in?

I'm in rural Norfolk, who's my team? The Worzel Gummidge Haystack Rangers?

octatonic

RandallFlagg said:

octatonic said:

Dare I dream?

No, I don't think there will be a romantic fairytale bat slashing end for England this time, it will end in the cool autumn Manchester air with the sound of a ball hitting the last batsman's pads, hitting the stumps or being caught by an Australian fielder as England fail to make the runs or defend to the end of play for the draw.

Current odds on Betfair are:

49/1 England to win
9/2 for the draw
1/4 Australia to win

The odds for the draw look a bit short to me.

So you are saying ‘yes, you should dare to dream’?

RandallFlagg

You dream on...we all have a twinkle of hope and expectation in our bellies but lightning won't strike twice....probably.

This is an excellent summary of where the game is, well written:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/49623542

earwighoney

Heartfeltdawn said:

RandallFlagg said:

What the hell are England going to do when Broad retires or is injured? The Aussie 3 seamer attack is so much stronger than England's

Panic. 

The Australia attack is better managed and prepared and the reserves are better managed and prepared. Unlike England, they've had long term plans going for how to bring Pattinson back into first class cricket after a lengthy time with injury problems, how to keep the like of Starc and Cummins fit, how to get Josh Hazlewood bowling better in England compared to last time out. 

I'd say looking at India and Australia who might not have won the WC but their teams look to have better organisation.  

Ok, maybe Matthew Wade's not had the best summer but at least they used the domestic cricket set up/first class cricket to reward for the player who scored a lot of runs/took a lot of wickets with a place in the test team.  England last year giving Rashid a test place when he'd stopped playing red ball cricket, then picking Jason Roy as an opener are just very odd cricketing decisions, maybe not as much in isolation but there seems to be a record of them in recent years. 

With the 100 looming, it's difficult to think of how players will have enough time to get rhythm into the season for playing red ball cricket. 

RandallFlagg

earwighoney said:

Heartfeltdawn said:

RandallFlagg said:

What the hell are England going to do when Broad retires or is injured? The Aussie 3 seamer attack is so much stronger than England's

Panic. 

The Australia attack is better managed and prepared and the reserves are better managed and prepared. Unlike England, they've had long term plans going for how to bring Pattinson back into first class cricket after a lengthy time with injury problems, how to keep the like of Starc and Cummins fit, how to get Josh Hazlewood bowling better in England compared to last time out. 

I'd say looking at India and Australia who might not have won the WC but their teams look to have better organisation.  

Ok, maybe Matthew Wade's not had the best summer but at least they used the domestic cricket set up/first class cricket to reward for the player who scored a lot of runs/took a lot of wickets with a place in the test team.  England last year giving Rashid a test place when he'd stopped playing red ball cricket, then picking Jason Roy as an opener are just very odd cricketing decisions, maybe not as much in isolation but there seems to be a record of them in recent years. 

With the 100 looming, it's difficult to think of how players will have enough time to get rhythm into the season for playing red ball cricket. 

Do the Test team still have central contracts for players?

earwighoney

RandallFlagg said:

earwighoney said:

Heartfeltdawn said:

RandallFlagg said:

What the hell are England going to do when Broad retires or is injured? The Aussie 3 seamer attack is so much stronger than England's

Panic. 

The Australia attack is better managed and prepared and the reserves are better managed and prepared. Unlike England, they've had long term plans going for how to bring Pattinson back into first class cricket after a lengthy time with injury problems, how to keep the like of Starc and Cummins fit, how to get Josh Hazlewood bowling better in England compared to last time out. 

I'd say looking at India and Australia who might not have won the WC but their teams look to have better organisation.  

Ok, maybe Matthew Wade's not had the best summer but at least they used the domestic cricket set up/first class cricket to reward for the player who scored a lot of runs/took a lot of wickets with a place in the test team.  England last year giving Rashid a test place when he'd stopped playing red ball cricket, then picking Jason Roy as an opener are just very odd cricketing decisions, maybe not as much in isolation but there seems to be a record of them in recent years. 

With the 100 looming, it's difficult to think of how players will have enough time to get rhythm into the season for playing red ball cricket. 

Do the Test team still have central contracts for players?

Yes.  I think aside from Australia they are the best paid test team in the world.  

RandallFlagg

If Roy & Denly are still in and batting like this at 6:50 this evening I will be happy

Heartfeltdawn

guitars4you said:

Take Smith out of the equation and nothing between us in the batting - I find it hard to excuse Leach for that no ball - How can a spinner who walks to the crease step over the line - Hopefully he will learn from it

The same way a batsman ( no run up at all) can place the front foot forward, not realise that his back foot isn't over the crease and get given out stumped. Small misjudgements yet I don't see people saying that being stumped like that is inexcusable. 

RandallFlagg

Roy lasted an hour, if every batsman can last an hour we're home and hosed.

Heartfeltdawn

RandallFlagg said:

If Roy & Denly are still in and batting like this at 6:50 this evening I will be happy

You have been saved from that cheerful fate then. 

guitars4you

RandallFlagg said:

Roy lasted an hour, if every batsman can last an hour we're home and hosed.

I just said the same thing

Forgot that Punter and co lasted all but 2 overs in 2005 - Let's beat that

guitars4you

Heartfeltdawn said:

guitars4you said:

Take Smith out of the equation and nothing between us in the batting - I find it hard to excuse Leach for that no ball - How can a spinner who walks to the crease step over the line - Hopefully he will learn from it

The same way a batsman ( no run up at all) can place the front foot forward, not realise that his back foot isn't over the crease and get given out stumped. Small misjudgements yet I don't see people saying that being stumped like that is inexcusable. 

point taken, but the difference with a bowler is that he has a defined routine that is, or should be set in stone - Can understand a pace bowler straining and busting a gut to maximise his energy into a delivery - But this is a casual stroll forward - Back off 2 or 3" on the run up and it won't happen - I'm sure hell learn from it - He won't make as big an error again - Or he shouldn't, especially with such a big scalp in the biggest  TEST of them all

Heartfeltdawn

guitars4you said:

point taken, but the difference with a bowler is that he has a defined routine that is, or should be set in stone - Can understand a pace bowler straining and busting a gut to maximise his energy into a delivery - But this is a casual stroll forward - Back off 2 or 3" on the run up and it won't happen - I'm sure hell learn from it - He won't make as big an error again - Or he shouldn't, especially with such a big scalp in the biggest  TEST of them all

And a batsman has a defined routine right down to trigger points for picking the bat up. The routine is arguably even more ingrained than the bowling run up and action. So why is it blasphemy for a slow bowler to very occasionally bowl a no ball yet a batsman taking no run up at all will be relatively immune to gibberish like this from Neil Squires of the Express:

"Any no-ball from a spinner is a super-sized unforced error. A no-ball after a delivery which has just removed the world’s best batsman is the stuff of nightmares."

It is analagous to the foot fault when serving in tennis. Squires is also talking out of his arse. As the delivery was ruled a no-ball, at no point did it remove the world's best batsman as the final decision on dismissal is down to the umpire. 

I was in this situation when I was 16. I was actually playing against Surrey at youth level and had a guy caught to cover off a no ball. I was a spinner, I was really down about it, and the guy at the other end was Ben Hollioake. People couldn't understand how it happened but it did so don't keep going on about it. Instead, let me get it sorted. I'd had some no ball problems that year after suffering a knee injury. I bowled leg spin off of nine paces. One game I ended up with 3 for 30 from 15 overs: 14 of these were no balls. I moved the run up back, across, sideways, all over the place. Turned out I was subconsciously protecting the left knee that had been damaged so I wasn't triggering my run up properly nor was I getting through the delivery stride properly. I got my father to film me bowling, looked at what was wrong, and made changes. I think I bowled one no ball the rest of that season and didn't have a problem after that. 

RandallFlagg

This is too tough a grind for England, the bowling is too good, it comes in waves and bursts of excellence, they will scrape to lunch but wickets will fall through the afternoon.

Atherton's body language at the lunch summary on Sky says it all. Impending inevitability against a superb bowling attack.