|
Post by flashblade on Oct 17, 2015 7:16:19 GMT
What a fascinating fifth day it could be. If England pile on 250 runs in the morning session, it could be a tough two sessions for Pakistan to hold out. Alternatively, Cook may declare so that Pakistan can set England a chaseable total over 40 overs. All in all, it should have all cricket fans on the edge of their seats all day We really do need that "Irony" button. or a suitable emoticon?
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Oct 17, 2015 14:41:20 GMT
What a fascinating fifth day it could be. If England pile on 250 runs in the morning session, it could be a tough two sessions for Pakistan to hold out. Alternatively, Cook may declare so that Pakistan can set England a chaseable total over 40 overs. All in all, it should have all cricket fans on the edge of their seats all day Apologies for implying that you were being deliberately ironic earlier, philh. While neither of your scenarios quite came about, the last 2-3 hours of this otherwise interminable match were genuinely thrilling and raised all sorts of questions....what if the pitch had started to wear yesterday and England had fallen short of the Pakistan score, would we have been trying to hold out for a draw while Zulfiqar Babar and Shoaib Malik buzzed little bombs off the pitch? What if we had scored 20 or 30 more yesterday and only had about 60 to get? What if Misbah hadn't had a rush of blood to the brain and precipitated the mass panic, would Pakistan have been 220-5 when hands were shaken at 5pm? And, of course, what if a little more grass had been shaved by the groundsman, how would day 3 have played out, and would there have been much cricket beyond that? Not a great Test, but a good reminder of what pleasures the long-form version of the game can produce, even when it seems most unlikely. And the paradox there being that the end of the match was played as a T20. Anyway, do you have any tips for the remaining Tests? Or the winner of any classic races in the next few months, or the next big thing to hit global stock-markets? It seems you're the man to go to.
|
|
|
Post by leedsgull on Oct 17, 2015 15:00:08 GMT
If the required number of overs had been bowled on each of the previous days then this match would have had a natural ending. It is time to address this issue and ensure that the minimum number of overs are always bowled in a day.
|
|
|
Post by philh on Oct 17, 2015 16:17:55 GMT
What a fascinating fifth day it could be. If England pile on 250 runs in the morning session, it could be a tough two sessions for Pakistan to hold out. Alternatively, Cook may declare so that Pakistan can set England a chaseable total over 40 overs. All in all, it should have all cricket fans on the edge of their seats all day Apologies for implying that you were being deliberately ironic earlier, philh. While neither of your scenarios quite came about, the last 2-3 hours of this otherwise interminable match were genuinely thrilling and raised all sorts of questions....what if the pitch had started to wear yesterday and England had fallen short of the Pakistan score, would we have been trying to hold out for a draw while Zulfiqar Babar and Shoaib Malik buzzed little bombs off the pitch? What if we had scored 20 or 30 more yesterday and only had about 60 to get? What if Misbah hadn't had a rush of blood to the brain and precipitated the mass panic, would Pakistan have been 220-5 when hands were shaken at 5pm? And, of course, what if a little more grass had been shaved by the groundsman, how would day 3 have played out, and would there have been much cricket beyond that? Not a great Test, but a good reminder of what pleasures the long-form version of the game can produce, even when it seems most unlikely. And the paradox there being that the end of the match was played as a T20. Anyway, do you have any tips for the remaining Tests? Or the winner of any classic races in the next few months, or the next big thing to hit global stock-markets? It seems you're the man to go to. Goodness me. I am offended some people thinking that I would use a touch of irony in my posts. Anyway, to give you my next prediction, I suggest you put 5 shillings on Robinson's Jam in the 2.30 at Uttoxeter.
|
|
|
Post by deepfineleg on Oct 17, 2015 18:44:11 GMT
If the required number of overs had been bowled on each of the previous days then this match would have had a natural ending. It is time to address this issue and ensure that the minimum number of overs are always bowled in a day. Quite right. Perhaps play 450 over tests with play going into a 6th day to make it up. Would players speed up so as not to lose their day off.
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on Oct 18, 2015 14:39:44 GMT
Well that might solve the second slip catching problem Unfortunately it won't solve the spin bowling problem. Inept rubbish from Moeen Ali and Adil Rashid. No wicket for 217 between them so far, and they're being milked at 4 to 4.5 per over, double what the seamers are going for. All the talk was that you "have to" play two spinners on such wickets. But if they're as bad as that, there is actually no point in playing one, let alone two. And seven wickets between them in the second. A match winning performance from Rashid, if it wasn't for the farce of going off for bad light when the lights are on. Anyone who criticises a spinner after the first innings is a fool - and many did. He'll have to learn to contain a bit better in first innings but a spinner's there to win matches on fourth/fifth day pitches, as a rule. Shocking match though.
|
|
|
Post by leedsgull on Oct 21, 2015 6:31:50 GMT
This thread is not over active perhaps reflecting the lack of interest in the series. However it is the only "live" cricket that we have. For tomorrows game I would replace Wood with Plunkett. I think Plunkett's extra zip and aggressive attitude might be needed. I also would include Taylor. I suspect that might have to be at Bairstow's expense but I would be more radical and give Bairstow the gloves and drop Buttler. He has not looked like a test batsman for ages, possibly not since his innings v Sri Lanka at Headingley last year. Bairstow keeps giving tantalising glimpses of his county form so I would persist with him.
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Oct 21, 2015 7:19:44 GMT
This thread is not over active perhaps reflecting the lack of interest in the series. However it is the only "live" cricket that we have. For tomorrows game I would replace Wood with Plunkett. I think Plunkett's extra zip and aggressive attitude might be needed. I also would include Taylor. I suspect that might have to be at Bairstow's expense but I would be more radical and give Bairstow the gloves and drop Buttler. He has not looked like a test batsman for ages, possibly not since his innings v Sri Lanka at Headingley last year. Bairstow keeps giving tantalising glimpses of his county form so I would persist with him. Several good points in that post leedsgull. Oddly, although the volume of postings has dropped the number of visitors to the site remains quite high, so perhaps there is more of an appetite for reading about cricket than writing! Taking your second point first I agree that Buttler's form is negligible and his wicket-keeping just about passable, which in Test terms means he is a liability for it is the ability to transcend everyday form, particularly in the field, that should make Test players and Test matches special. The last time I saw him keep Bairstow didn't seem very much better, but that is probably his best, and final, opportunity at this level. Taylor's phlegmatic nurdling could be ideal on another billiard table, as early reports of the pitch seem to confirm it will be, and his ability to shrug off misses and treat each ball on it's own terms could be inavaluable as Yasir will return and Pakistan may play Bilal Asif, another off-spinner. As for Wood and Plunkett, it very much depends on the pitch. If it is so flat then there won't be much opportunity for zip to make an impact. Wood hasn't impressed one way or the other, but I don't think he is to blame for that. If there were to be a change in the bowling I would play Jordan on the basis that the two or theree outstanding slip catches he would bring would more than compensate for the 20 overs of unrewarded labour bowling.
|
|
|
Post by leedsgull on Oct 21, 2015 9:10:08 GMT
hh The slip fielding issue may well be the most important of all those mentioned above. It should be obvious to all that Bell must never field in the slips again. Graeme Swann keeps making the point on TMS that Bell is a confidence player and his batting suffers when he drops catches. He has clearly observed this first hand so his view should be respected.
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Oct 21, 2015 13:16:13 GMT
An interesting twist ( www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/34590503 ): Ben Stokes may not be fit. Should we play Samit Patel on the grounds that he is a sort of left-arm spinner, even though his batting has been ineffectual? In fact, their records as batsmen are almost identical: Plunkett 238 runs at 15.86 in 20 innings, highest score 55 not out Patel 109 runs at 15.57 in 7 innings, highest score 33.
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on Oct 21, 2015 14:04:40 GMT
Oh, some posts. Has the next one started, or has the previous one not finished yet?
That's all folks
Night everybody
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Oct 22, 2015 6:44:28 GMT
After the speculation, the reality: no changes of any kind, Bell standing at 2nd slip, the pitch looking like a strip of cement and another toss to Pakistan, with Yasir Shah to bowl especially in the 4th innings. And fewer than 100 spectators. Still, wait till the 5th day then cancel all arrangements.
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Oct 23, 2015 13:53:51 GMT
This is looking much more interesting, with England 182-3 after Pakistan's 378 and 3 days to play, albeit three short-ration days. There is more life in the pitch than at Abu Dhabi, and quicker turn already. England's bowling was keen and generally well-managed. It looks as if Cook is feeling more confident as a captain under this coaching regime, and certainly it has returned his batting to heights he hasn't reached since India 3 years ago. Yasir Shah is quite a fast leg-spinner, although he doesn't seem to have anything other than the basic leg-break, but he has been very well played by Cook and Root, and even by Bairstow towards the end of the day. I was very fearful when Cook was out that the innings would crumble, and it still might, but if Bairstow can build a big innings here not only would it be the making of him, more importantly it would give England a solidity that we need. All we have to do is find a No 3 for the rest of this series, and an opener to take to South Africa.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2015 17:36:32 GMT
I was very fearful when Cook was out that the innings would crumble, and it still might, but if Bairstow can build a big innings here not only would it be the making of him, more importantly it would give England a solidity that we need. All we have to do is find a No 3 for the rest of this series, and an opener to take to South Africa. The England batting is totally reliant on Cook and Root. If one of them fails, you know we're going to be up against it. And the biggest issue is finding an opening partner for Cook. You can't help thinking that Lyth, Compton, Robson and Carberry would all have scored more runs on these shirtfront Arabic wickets than Moeen Ali. If England persist with him opening in South Africa, Steyn and Morkel will surely have him for breakfast. The current England batting stats are actually quite scary. Cook has 28 centuries and a Test avge of 47. Root should tomorrow complete his 9th century and has a test avge of 55. After that there is the "enigmatic" Bell, who has a great record overall (22 centuries and a Test avge of 43) but has only made two centuries in the last five series. But then it gets alarmingly thin in terms of achievement as opposed to the tantalising chimera called 'promise' : Ali 1 century avge 29 Bairstow no centuries avge 25 Stokes 2 centures avge 31 Buttler no centuries avge 32 They are all brilliant one day sloggers, but the harsh truth is that England's entire Test match middle-order from 5-8 has three Test centuries between them (or only two if you have Rashid at number 8 and leave Ali as Cook's 97th opening partner, or whatever the number is). I'll exempt Stokes because he's clearly a genuine all-rounder in the Botham/Flintoff mould and seems to be improving in both departments with every game. But for the rest the stark reality is that England are still looking for quality replacements for Strauss, Trott, Pietersen and Prior. Despite winning the Ashes last summer, you couldn't really say we're any closer to finding any of them. In particular, Buttler is rapidly becoming a major liability at number seven.I recall Geraint Jones losing his Test place because his runs dried up and I can see Jos going the same way. The problem is Bairstow doesn't seem like a Test batsman either and the gauche brashness of Sam Billings is nowhere near Test quality either as a batsman or a keeper. So who? Keiswetter has retired due to injury, Davies has given up the gloves for some reason, Foster and Read are too old. It's odd, because one of the areas in which the county game seems rich is wicketkeeper-batsmen. Yet few of them seem capable of stepping up to the next level...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2015 7:20:41 GMT
So on a perfect batting wicket, Ali, Bell, Stokes, Buttler and Rashid manage nine runs between the five of them.
The golden middle-order turns to rust so often and Buttler in particular doesn't look like he knows where the next run is going to come from. As said above, he reminds me of when Geraint Jones had to be dropped in 2006/7 - and Jones was a better keeper.
Bairstow's 46 is modest enough on that pitch but stellar in comparison to the rest of the middle order. Time to give him the gloves and an extended run to see if he can emerge as the successor to Prior which Buttler has proved not to be?
|
|