The cricket thread

NorthernGooner

scrumhalf said:

Atherton owned up.

Aussie reaction was to say that a big boy did it and ran away. 

and then start crying.............

scrumhalf

Not long now until cricket returns.

There are some covid-specific new rules/laws, most of which make sense. However, I've read that players will no longer be able to hand caps/sweaters to the umpire when they bowl. I'vew not read what they are supposed to do with them. Can other players handle them and put them, say, on the boundary? If they are just put behind the umpire I've not read of a suspension of the five-run penalty we see when the ball hits a fielding helmet behind the keeper.

RandallFlagg

Will there be fake crowd noise like in the football?

guitars4you

Should have been at Headingley tomorrow - 20 - 20 v the Aussies 

Refund on standby as they are still looking at potential fixtures late summer

scrumhalf

Well, at least there are some things you can still depend on...

crunchman

scrumhalf said:

Well, at least there are some things you can still depend on...

Not sure.  When there are no cakes in the TMS box, things are seriously awry!

scrumhalf

He'd better get some runs because watching Rory Burns and his array of twitches at the crease is getting on my thrupennies. 

crunchman

Normal service resumed.

RandallFlagg

It's not the same is it? It's like watching a practice match, the audience seem hard to please by the sound of it, they don't react, just a low continuous murmur, even for a boundary or a wicket. Tough crowd. 

Are the GAK marketing team doing the audio?

sixstringsupplies

so do you think England have enough? I do. Another 10 runs I think 180 will be tough to chase down.
It wouldn't be summer without an England collapse though 

scrumhalf

It's worrying that after the top order ground out a decent score the strokemakers in the middle cocked it up.

It will take a huge effort to skittle out the Windies for less than 200. I don't think that Bess has the guile and variety, and Denly's leggies won't cause any sleepless nights.

It's going to take something special.

sixstringsupplies

I would feel more comfortable knowing bean pole Broad would be bowling tomorrow. 
Yes it was a shame, Stokes batted beautifully but after that, it was bit of a shambles.
I would expect the Windies to come out blazing with the bat given the state of the wicket. The pace of Archer and Wood will help them I think

crunchman

I don't think we quite have enough, but we aren't far short.  If the Archer, Wood, and Anderson can make another 20 runs then it will be a very tough chase.

crunchman

We didn't have enough, or we didn't have enough bearing mind that we need to allow for keeping errors.

For all the talk about about Broad's place, the big problem in that test was Buttler.

If had taken Blackwood on 20, we would have won.  Last time West Indies chased down a good win against us, Buttler missed a stumping that cost us the match.  His keeping is a liability.

He's not even making runs to justify his inclusion. Since 1st May last year, he has been averaging 21.4 in test cricket.  Foakes is capable of averaging better than that.  He would score more runs as well as improve the keeping.

NorthernGooner

crunchman said:

We didn't have enough, or we didn't have enough bearing mind that we need to allow for keeping errors.

For all the talk about about Broad's place, the big problem in that test was Buttler.

If had taken Blackwood on 20, we would have won.  Last time West Indies chased down a good win against us, Buttler missed a stumping that cost us the match.  His keeping is a liability.

He's not even making runs to justify his inclusion. Since 1st May last year, he has been averaging 21.4 in test cricket.  Foakes is capable of averaging better than that.  He would score more runs as well as improve the keeping.

How very true. Foakes by now should have been an established member of the team. 
Both Buttler and Bairstow have failed as test wicketkeeper/batsmen,
It seems an English thing that players never really kick on and become world class players. 
Even the celebrated failed to some extent. Cook should have had more centuries as should Root. 
It's as if they're too comfortable and there's a sense of 'this will do'.

scrumhalf

NorthernGooner said:

Both Buttler and Bairstow have failed as test wicketkeeper/batsmen,
It seems an English thing that players never really kick on and become world class players. 
Even the celebrated failed to some extent. Cook should have had more centuries as should Root. 
It's as if they're too comfortable and there's a sense of 'this will do'.

It's almost as though they've been playing a form of the game where buolding an innings comes second to whacking a ball that doesn't move about al over the place.

crunchman

scrumhalf said:

NorthernGooner said:

Both Buttler and Bairstow have failed as test wicketkeeper/batsmen,
It seems an English thing that players never really kick on and become world class players. 
Even the celebrated failed to some extent. Cook should have had more centuries as should Root. 
It's as if they're too comfortable and there's a sense of 'this will do'.

It's almost as though they've been playing a form of the game where buolding an innings comes second to whacking a ball that doesn't move about al over the place.

Bairstow has had more success than Buttler at test level.  Bowlers seem to have worked him out though.

The really annoying thing is that Foakes can bat.  He made a century on his test debut in Sri Lanka.

He can make runs in difficult conditions in England as well. Being a Somerset fan, I remember the Chamionship game against Surrey last year.  It was a low scoring game, and Somerset had Surrey 38-3 after being bowled out for 153.  He made 57 against a good pace attack containing both Overtons.  That turned the game around.  I just don't see Buttler doing that in difficult conditions against decent bowling.

Heartfeltdawn

NorthernGooner said:

How very true. Foakes by now should have been an established member of the team. 
Both Buttler and Bairstow have failed as test wicketkeeper/batsmen,
It seems an English thing that players never really kick on and become world class players. 
Even the celebrated failed to some extent. Cook should have had more centuries as should Root. 
It's as if they're too comfortable and there's a sense of 'this will do'.

It's there in many sides and not just England. Australia had plenty of underachievers mixed in with the world beaters. We don't tend to have too many folk like Vinod Kambli in our history though.  

Said this so many times on this forum and I'll say it again: we got obsessed with having a wicketkeeper-batsman post-Gilchrist and  in the same way Australia got obsessed with having an all-rounder after being pounded by Flintoff in 2005. They took people like Shane Watson and Mitchell Marsh, failed to utilise their positive points, and tried to make them someone they palpably weren't or couldn't be. Both YJB and Buttler showed they had some serious ability with the bat. But both possessed a determination to keep hold of the gloves that hasn't served either of them well at Test cricket. Buttler's departure from Taunton was partly down to him wanting to be the principal gloveman and YJB has clearly had his nose put out of joint when passed up for the Test keeping slot. Someone a long time ago should have told one or both of them to focus on batting. Put down the sodding gloves and focus on batting because both of them have the capability to be 45+ averaging batsmen at Test level. Instead we now have two players who are out of the Test side and people are heralding Zak Crawley on the basis of scoring two half centuries. 

I thought the decision to bat first betrayed England's lack of faith in their batsmen. Fearing batting last on a dry pitch that turns when the opposition spinner is massively average is chickenshit of the highest order. In those conditions with Woakes and Broad in ('cos if you're not going to play Woakes on a wicket like that, when are you?), we'd have rolled them first up. 

But this is all part of the great England dilemma. We bat first on a wicket like that because we're afraid of some pace and a crap spinner who averages over 50 with the ball away from home whilst determining that Jack Leach (better average and SR than Chase) isn't good enough to play as spinner whilst the spinner you have picked has now taken 5 wickets in 3 home Tests and the skipper barely used him on the final day on a turning track...

Oh, and we dropped the guy who was rivalling Pat Cummins last year because we have to build for the future whilst we bring back a guy who is four years older who has barely played over the last year due to injury...

Next Test? Outside of Root, there were no major injury issues. We picked what was considered a side that could win, a side that had won in the winter, and one that also had some building for the future. The talk of Denly being dropped is stupid. Crawley got his chance in the side over the winter due to Burns being injured and showed some promise. Prior to the Southampton Test, he was averaging 27 from four Tests, an average lower than that of Denly now. Showing potential is good and Crawley does show that but Denly has also shown some fight. I'd give him the rest of this series, drop Crawley but put JD on notice that the Pakistan series will see changes if he can't deliver. 

Heartfeltdawn

SO next Test:

Burns
Sibley
Denly
Root
Stokes
Pope
Foakes
Bess
Broad
Archer
Wood

Yes we drop Jimmy. If we're building for the future, we learn nothing from playing him. If we're picking old guys on form, then Broad is ahead of him. 

crunchman

Looks like Broad will be back:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/53419676