The cricket thread

sev112

I am hoping Anderson gets the first over tomorrow , and bowls a no ball by 2 yards and puts it in short to the opener in return.  

I thought 4 short balls at  number 11 after the 1st one hit his helmet should have been stopped by the Umpire.  And I didn’t believe the numerous no balls were the bowlers accidentally over stepping, that many to me stank of deliberately over stepping in conjunction with the short stuff.
they have 4 good bowlers, if they have to do that to a Number 11 who had scored zero, that is unprofessional and unsporting, and unsporting behaviour IS within the control of the umpires

scrumhalf

It was pretty shameful stuff. Perhaps some equally sporting stuff by our bowlers might not go amiss.

Maybe a word from the match referee as well? 

Heartfeltdawn

sev112 said:

I am hoping Anderson gets the first over tomorrow , and bowls a no ball by 2 yards and puts it in short to the opener in return.  

I thought 4 short balls at  number 11 after the 1st one hit his helmet should have been stopped by the Umpire.  And I didn’t believe the numerous no balls were the bowlers accidentally over stepping, that many to me stank of deliberately over stepping in conjunction with the short stuff.
they have 4 good bowlers, if they have to do that to a Number 11 who had scored zero, that is unprofessional and unsporting, and unsporting behaviour IS within the control of the umpires

At his pace, he might get dispatched. 

I didn't think it was shameful at all. The deck's slow, you had YJB gloving one because he's got through the shot too early. It's an absolute ripper of a bouncer that's taken Anderson by surprise. Credit the bowler there who has put everything into that to get it to rise off of this slight pudding of a pitch. After that, it's balls into the ribs played badly. It's not really intimidatory bowling on display but an intimidated batsman but we're not going to get English pundits or journos or players taking part in this Test coming out saying that Jimmy had a full Code Brown moment at the crease.  

And given that less than two years ago England weren't full of apologies when Archer was warned for consecutive beamers against Anrich Nortje, I don't think we have too many grounds of complaints. Bumrah and no-balls: I dunno about that. He didn't look good in his initial run up in the final session and he's had some fairly well publicised no ball problems in the past. 

Now if it's unprofessional to bounce a number 11 on zero, is there a point where it's fine to bounce him if he's made runs? Do you spare Stuart Broad the bouncer on the basis that he's been a bit shit for a few years despite him having a huge Test ton to his name? I thought the umpires got it pretty spot on today, and I'll say that as a former number 11 who had his own moments of being targeted for being a Hoggard at the crease (limited, sort of gets in the way). 

Heartfeltdawn

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/ian-chappell-if-players-believe-test-cricket-is-the-pinnacle-they-need-to-call-for-a-summit-on-its-future-1273267

"The skills required to excel at Test level need to be acquired at a young age and then honed in tough competition as the player rises through the grades. This can only be achieved if enough countries have a functional development system. If this is the case then Test cricket can remain vibrant, otherwise it will wither on the vine."

Chapelli absolutely on the money here. 

guitars4you

Just looking at some of the stats for Root and 9000 runs - Either his age to get there or how many matches played - Either way and he is in their with a good bunch of players 

Hard to say better/more worthy etc if you do it within a good side, as per a good chunk of R Pointin's career, or recently in  a poor side as per Root

Either way well done Joe

Heartfeltdawn

guitars4you said:

Just looking at some of the stats for Root and 9000 runs - Either his age to get there or how many matches played - Either way and he is in their with a good bunch of players 

Hard to say better/more worthy etc if you do it within a good side, as per a good chunk of R Pointin's career, or recently in  a poor side as per Root

Either way well done Joe

It's Lara versus Tendulkar really. Sachin scored a hat load but had some serious batsmen around him. On Lara, so much rested. On the basis of this series, Root's hitting Lara in Sri Lanka 2001-esque levels of performance. 

https://scroll.in/field/969488/pause-rewind-play-when-laras-688-runs-showed-murali-and-the-world-that-he-was-far-from-finished

crunchman

At his best, I think Lara was the better player, but he was up and down.  Tendulkar was more consistent though and had a far higher floor.

Look at that period in 1994 when Lara was absolutely dominant, when he broke the test record score and the first class record score.  With the possible exception of Viv in 1976, I don't think anyone has had that kind of dominance since Bradman.  Then look at some of his other innings like that 153* against Australia - which was a far better innings than both the record scores on an Antigua featherbed.  If you talk about the greatest innings in history, that one is in the discussion.  It's not just that one innings though.  Some people rate the 277 at Sydney even higher.  At his peak, Lara played some of the greatest innings ever played, and he was utterly dominant.  Viv was the only other one in my cricket watching lifetime who was like that.

crunchman

Am I the only one who is worried that we will end up chasing 200ish and collapse utterly to a humiliating loss?

Heartfeltdawn

crunchman said:

At his best, I think Lara was the better player, but he was up and down.  Tendulkar was more consistent though and had a far higher floor.

Look at that period in 1994 when Lara was absolutely dominant, when he broke the test record score and the first class record score.  With the possible exception of Viv in 1976, I don't think anyone has had that kind of dominance since Bradman.  Then look at some of his other innings like that 153* against Australia - which was a far better innings than both the record scores on an Antigua featherbed.  If you talk about the greatest innings in history, that one is in the discussion.  It's not just that one innings though.  Some people rate the 277 at Sydney even higher.  At his peak, Lara played some of the greatest innings ever played, and he was utterly dominant.  Viv was the only other one in my cricket watching lifetime who was like that.

Early 1999, I went over to Barbados to play cricket with a mish-mash part-county part-uni team. I was one of the few not on a county contact. At the time, The West Indies were in South Africa and they got pounded. Everyone I talked to, be it the locals or the Leeward Islands players who were staying in the same hotel as us for a week, were utterly despondent about their chances against Australia in the forthcoming Test series. They were even more despondent after the First Test hammering and being dismissed for 51. 

To come back from that and inspire that team with 213 and then the 153* in the Third Test was something else. 546 runs in the series. The next highest West Indian was Sherwin Campbell with 197 runs in 8 innings. You can see how the Australian batting was performing better than the Windies by the run chart. It was actually a good series for the bowlers on both sides. Ambrose and Walsh got wickets, McGrath was superb, everyone bar Warne was on form, and that Barbados wicket was a good Test wicket: gave up runs 1st knock to Australia, gave help for slows and quicks throughout. 

I've not seen anything better than that 153*. To do that facing an attack of that calibre on a last day wicket when recent history has seen your side collapse with gusto, when you've not exactly got strength around you with the bat (not many talk of Dave Joseph and Adrian Griffith now), and to come out playing like that. When Stokes did at Headingley was marvellous, Kusal Perera's 153* against SA a few years ago was superb, but they weren't facing an attack like that with such dreadful recent performance history behind them. 

Viv was power domination in a time where not many did. Lara didn't have the same power but he had the ability to destroy you in the most elegant way. That glide behind point shot he played so well, the late cuts off the spinners... just wonderful. he wasn't a chanceless batsman, far from it, and that's almost part of him as a whole. You couldn't step away from watching him because you might miss an audacious shot or him giving it away. If Viv was AC/DC, then Lara was more like dramatic art rock, Arcade Fire at their best. 

Yeah, Lara camp all the way here. Not to take anything away from Sachin though. The Indians came to my town in 1990 playing the Minor Counties and it was close to a dream fixture for me. As a young leggie I was desperate to see Kumble bowl and wasn't disappointed. The boy genius in waiting got to bat and delivered. But honestly the guy I most wanted to see was Nick Folland! He played for Exmouth as did my grandfather for a number of years. I used to go down there in the summer holidays, grandfather would umpire in friendly games, and I'd disappear into the nets all day with a stack of balls. Nick was the first club player who really made an impact on me with how he batted and he was also very generous with time and advice for a lot of youngsters down there at games. Bloody good chap all round and I was very happy when he got runs against India. 

Heartfeltdawn

crunchman said:

Am I the only one who is worried that we will end up chasing 200ish and collapse utterly to a humiliating loss?

I'd worry that if we were chasing 100ish let alone 200ish. 

scrumhalf

Viv Richards was, so I have read and heard from those who played with him, not interested in accumulating big scores. He went out to dominate and destroy the opposing bowling attack.

Had he been of a different mind then who knows how many runs he would have scored. Also you have to bear in mind that with the Windies bowling attack he didn't always hsve two full innings in a match. 

earwighoney

Heartfeltdawn said:

crunchman said:

Am I the only one who is worried that we will end up chasing 200ish and collapse utterly to a humiliating loss?

I'd worry that if we were chasing 100ish let alone 200ish. 

I can't see India playing for the win, their batting has been too negative on the 4th day, a run rate of 2 per over isn't attacking enough to win.

India will bat for another session, I can't see India bowling out England on this pitch in two sessions.

Unless something drastically changes tomorrow, I think it's unlikely India will win.

sixstringsupplies

crunchman said:

Am I the only one who is worried that we will end up chasing 200ish and collapse utterly to a humiliating loss?

Very evenly poised but India only need an extra 30-40 runs to make them favourites IMO. England chasing 180+ on the final day, can't see it, though would love to be proved wrong, 30 minutes of Pant to extend the lead, then let rip. But I agree with you, both captains will be afraid to lose, Kohli especially given the position India were in after day 1. I don't think England have the batting line up to chase with confidence....although Root, Bairstow, Buttler, Ali and Curran could do damage to a lowish total.

Lara's 153* was the best innings I have ever seen. Closely followed by Laxman's 281 v AUS in 2001 after following on.
The beauty of playing with the shackles off....bit like the way Cook scored a 50 and a ton in his final test match. It's an easy game when the pressure is off. 

Oh and Stokes at Headingley

crunchman

Gooch's 154* at Headingley has to be up there as one of the greatest innings.  Lara played multiple innings at that kind of level though.  That's what marks him out as really special.

Heartfeltdawn

scrumhalf said:

Viv Richards was, so I have read and heard from those who played with him, not interested in accumulating big scores. He went out to dominate and destroy the opposing bowling attack.

Had he been of a different mind then who knows how many runs he would have scored. Also you have to bear in mind that with the Windies bowling attack he didn't always hsve two full innings in a match. 

 Very true. With the Windies batting lineup Lara had, he was the reverse. 

earwighoney

sixstringsupplies said:

crunchman said:

Am I the only one who is worried that we will end up chasing 200ish and collapse utterly to a humiliating loss?

Very evenly poised but India only need an extra 30-40 runs to make them favourites IMO. England chasing 180+ on the final day, can't see it, though would love to be proved wrong,

Lara's 153* was the best innings I have ever seen. Closely followed by Laxman's 281 v AUS in 2001 after following on.
The beauty of playing with the shackles off....bit like the way Cook scored a 50 and a ton in his final test match. It's an easy game when the pressure is off. 

Oh and Stokes at Headingley

No, it was the Jack Leach innings at Headingley which was the stunner...

Heartfeltdawn

crunchman said:

Gooch's 154* at Headingley has to be up there as one of the greatest innings.  Lara played multiple innings at that kind of level though.  That's what marks him out as really special.

Very much so with Gooch. 1991 was such a good series. England started to move up, he West Indies started to move down. Greenidge had retired earlier in the year, and you had three major names in Viv, Malcolm Marshall, and Dujon leave the Test area after the match at the Oval. 

Ah, 1991. Such a long time ago now. Let's dust off Robin Smith's square cut though. 



In a composite robot batsman, I'm taking Smith's square cut off the quicks and having it programmed in as stock firmware. Ponting for the pull shot, Lara for the late cut, and a special Kapil Dev mode if Eddie Hemmings come on. 

Stuckfast

Always thought Michael Vaughan's pull shot was the best to watch. So elegant.

I wonder how much the Indian tail enders are looking forward to facing Mark Wood tomorrow.

Heartfeltdawn

Definitely elegant on the pull. Cover drive is a long long list. Azharuddin, Graeme Pollock, Gower... on drive and straight down the ground is Tendulkar versus Lee. That first boundary... eh, slashy. The second and third are next level. 

Stuckfast

I'm going to be controversial and say Ian Bell for the late cut.