|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jan 24, 2016 10:52:05 GMT
Tomorrow's morning session will probably decide whether England stay inn the game at all. Root and Cook played beautifully on a wicket that, if it was on an English county ground, would probably have the ECB sparing Cook's misery and awarding him the toss as visitor. If they can remain till lunch and score at their current rate England will have a chance of batting through the day and coming within shouting distance of the South African score. If they fall, and unless Stokes and Bairstow pull off another coup de main - unlikely with the ball often staying low and shooting along at ankle height - we will probably be batting again before the close.As I was saying. When Root and Cook were together the pitch was awkward and the bowling uneven, occasionally challenging but they played it well. Thereafter Rabada came into his own and it is a pleasure to see another young bowler emerge as the leader of a new generation, the more so because the game is now threatened by the dominance of the bat, and sometimes the batsman as well. He bowled magnificently and South Africa now have two, possibly three new stars around whom to rebuild in him, de Kock and maybe Bavuma. Taylor looks like Woakes - goodish, but just not quite up to playing at this level, and he really should have settled himself in on this wicket. 300 looks to be the limit of England's ambitions and if South Africa start again with the same determination that is a long way away. Fascinating to watch though, and to switch from watching the other version of cricket played at Melbourne, to see the ultimate in batting domination. I think it is probably about 2 to 3 years before we see a Rugby Union/Rugby League split between the games with different codes/laws established - but this time with some players switching between the two formats right from the start, and not waiting nearly a century first! |
|
|
|
Post by leedsgull on Jan 24, 2016 14:01:34 GMT
I have just been reading on the White Rose Forum a lot of criticism of Michael Vaughan's performance on TMS. Today he stated that music should be played between overs at home Test matches. The day that happens is the day I quit watching. His desperation to be Mr popular and full of innovation is really grating.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jan 24, 2016 14:39:43 GMT
I have just been reading on the White Rose Forum a lot of criticism of Michael Vaughan's performance on TMS. Today he stated that music should be played between overs at home Test matches. The day that happens is the day I quit watching. His desperation to be Mr popular and full of innovation is really grating. Nicely put. It takes the edge off his many strong critical insights and calls his judgment into question. For a clever man, and a shrewd tactician on the field, he has spent his subsequent media career trying desperately hard to play down his intelligence. For contrast, consider the subsequent career of Michael Atherton. Having said that, the ineffable bloody fool Blofeld was also maundering on about the tunefulness of listening to interminable choruses of Neil Diamond. Mind you, nobody ever made the mistake of thinking that Blofeld understood anything about cricket or that his opinions were worth noting, except as a very English type of joke, mystifying to foreigners, on a par with thinking that Carry On films are funny. |
|
|
|
Post by leedsgull on Jan 24, 2016 15:58:48 GMT
hh Blofeld was in agreement with Vaughan but as he is a buffoon I did not consider it worthy of mention. Quite how long the BBC are going to persist in employing Blofeld I have no idea. As you say he is merely a poor joke.
|
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on Jan 24, 2016 22:41:58 GMT
Biarstow's problem is simple to fix - change that initial movement from left to right, simple. You have to go the side the ball usually goes and it's more important to take catches than to not concede a few runs down the leg side. Why they haven't picked up on this earlier and sorted it I don't know. He could even stay still but he has to stop stepping to the left whatever he does.
As usual, the team who has won the series early is below par in the dead rubber. Fairly interesting though.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jan 25, 2016 8:02:28 GMT
Biarstow's problem is simple to fix - change that initial movement from left to right, simple. You have to go the side the ball usually goes and it's more important to take catches than to not concede a few runs down the leg side. Why they haven't picked up on this earlier and sorted it I don't know. He could even stay still but he has to stop stepping to the left whatever he does. As usual, the team who has won the series early is below par in the dead rubber. Fairly interesting though. How about when the ball doesn't go to the side it "usually goes to"? The trigger movement is important, certainly, and that can be fixed but I think the issue goes beyond that in that he doesn't have a good enough understanding of what a bowler is likely to do to position himself for takes either defensively,stopping byes, or more aggressively, claiming catches and stumpings. The really good wicket-keepers have this understanding and act with the mindset of bowlers rather than batsmen, so that when a length ball has been driven they have a pretty good idea that the bowler is likely to respond with something a little shorter and are not taken by surprise by the new bounce and angle. I think Bairstow still has a batsman's mindset when he goes behind the stumps, and that helps him claim quite a few catches, as any good close fielder would, but he misses the nuance of seeing the game as a bowler would. |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jan 25, 2016 8:31:14 GMT
Rumours of Anderson's demise as a strike bowler appear to have been exaggerated...49/3.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2016 10:39:28 GMT
For once I agree with fraduster. Bairstow will be fine because he has the best wicket-keeping coach in England in Paul Farbrace.
Farbrace is a former keeper himself and I recall when the Pakistanis were playing at Canterbury in 2010 and Farbrace was still Kent coach, Kamran Akmal sought him out after close of play each evening. Farby generously gave him his time, and held a keeping session with him every day of the match, with Pakistani coach Waqar Younis looking on.
I remember it well because I took a photo and joked to Farby that I was going to send it to Flower and Strauss and expose his treachery!
I've seen Frabrace working with Bairstow in this series and it will pay dividends, I'm sure.
Nobody thinks Buttler or Billings are better keepers than Bairstow. I see cricinfo have touted Ben Foakes as an alternative. But when I saw Surrey last season I thnk Foakes was playing as a batsman and Wilson was keeping wicket...
|
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on Jan 25, 2016 13:24:02 GMT
'For once' my arse. Admit it, you always agree - except when I slide on to politics like a dear on a frozen lake.
When the ball doesn't go to the side it usually does, HH, you go against your momentum and try to stop the leg side four. It's better to miss that than Amla on five or Cook on 47, or whatever. And if the bowler has a moan tell the tit to bowl better. The fact of the matter is, England only use batsmen/keepers. He's never gonna be brilliant but he can be better with a simple tweak which I'm surprised Farbrace hasn't already done, especially as he's the best keeper coach in England, I hear.
The rest of the stuff you said HH is right, cos he ain't a proper top class keeper and never will be. Boucher was I believe - what's his batting average? What was Healy's? Bairstow's will be in the 40s.
Astonished and bored by SA's tactics since lunch. They're still only four down by tea, lead of 356, and they've been crawling along all afternoon. They should be 400 ahead by now, who cares how many wickets down, and declaring. Imagine 'new' England in that position. Or even the old one.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jan 25, 2016 21:10:08 GMT
Astonished and bored by SA's tactics since lunch. They're still only four down by tea, lead of 356, and they've been crawling along all afternoon. They should be 400 ahead by now, who cares how many wickets down, and declaring. Imagine 'new' England in that position. Or even the old one. Probably they weren't going to take any chances on Abbot's fitness and just wanted to accumulate while they could, and also let the pitch wear itself still further apart. Looks as if they got it right too. |
|
|
|
Post by leedsgull on Jan 26, 2016 10:20:51 GMT
Let me be the first to say that this morning was totally unacceptable. It was gutless against a team with only 2½ bowlers. England collapse far too often for it to be just dismissed as "one of those things". In other circumstances and if their name began with a P then dark mutterings would be heard.
Do they all go out on the lash after winning a series so are unable to play the final test?
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Jan 26, 2016 10:39:31 GMT
Let me be the first to say that this morning was totally unacceptable. It was gutless against a team with only 2½ bowlers. England collapse far too often for it to be just dismissed as "one of those things". In other circumstances and if their name began with a P then dark mutterings would be heard. Do they all go out on the lash after winning a series so are unable to play the final test? I agree, leedsgull. That was a totally unprofessional performance this morning - it looked as if they'd given up before they started. Unfair on the travelling supporters. The excuse seems to be "we like to bat positively" - huh! Shameful display.  |
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on Jan 26, 2016 10:47:08 GMT
Astonished and bored by SA's tactics since lunch. They're still only four down by tea, lead of 356, and they've been crawling along all afternoon. They should be 400 ahead by now, who cares how many wickets down, and declaring. Imagine 'new' England in that position. Or even the old one. Probably they weren't going to take any chances on Abbot's fitness and just wanted to accumulate while they could, and also let the pitch wear itself still further apart. Looks as if they got it right too. They didn't. There's no good reason to take time out of the game when you're ahead and in need of a win - even if it does only take you two hours to bowl a side out. With a big lead and wickets in hand they had to accelerate between lunch and tea yesterday. Baffling to anyone, even you in reality young HH, no doubt. Yes that was soft today, excessively so. It's thrown my plans for the day all over the shop. The overriding feeling among the 'experts' is that it is forgivable given the rest of the series. I think it's forgivable for most of the players but not for one or two others. That was an important innings for Taylor, he blew it. Not convinced by Taylor, Compton or Hales, like everyone I imagine, and Woakes is just not Test level. I predict by the summer that Bell and Ballance will be back and Compton will be opening. Not keen on Compton myself, his review was criminal, but he's possibly an adequate stopgap while Harry Finch or Phil Salt develop as a Sussex opener under management willing to use division 2 status wisely and develop youth. Hmm. Someone anyway. Great series anyway. England are very good to watch these days - today aside. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2016 11:20:45 GMT
The reason for South Africa taking time out of the game yesterday was presumably that they wanted to set the run rate sufficiently high that if England got off to a good start and then began thinking about a run chase, the asking rate would be demanding enough for SA to exert scoreboard pressure and for England to come unstuck. Over cautious, perhaps, and it turned out to be unecessary. But understandable.
England are now in the strange position of having won a major series overseas handsomely but going into the next series with only two of the top five sure of their places. Agree with fraudster that Ballance will probably return. But can't see Bell coming back; I read his appointment to the Warwickshire captaincy as acceptance that his Test career is over. But I could be wrong.
When SA get Steyn and Philander back alongside Morkel and Rabada, they will surely have the best quartet of seamers in world cricket.
|
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on Jan 26, 2016 14:20:20 GMT
I don't think so Borderman.
SA's four are no better than our strongest four, maybe equal and very similar but not better. And as an attack shouldn't be just made up of seamers, which there's would be, ours is better because we can add a spinner to that attack - making our attack better. That is arguable of course.
I'm so confident of a Bell return that I'm going to stake a bet on it. He will score a shed-load of runs in county cricket, is only 33 odd and is a proven run scorer at international level. They will have to recall him to that fragile batting line-up. That is arguable too, of course.
What better way to set a sufficiently high run rate than to score fast runs? They had six wickets left, were 280 odd ahead and England were all out of ideas. They had the opportunity to set the rate higher than it turned out and to buy themselves an extra 15 odd overs but were pointlessly and un-understandably negative. Clear to anyone who saw it and who knows the game of cricket because I don't mean suddenly going T20 on our arses, I mean upping the pace at a controlled rate. They didn't do that at all in the afternoon session. Actually I think the run rate may have even gone down slightly from lunch to tea. I'm not sure of that but I am sure there was little in it. Non arguable that one I'm afraid. Pointless and detrimental.
|
|
