Timeless Test Continued

1910111214

Comments

  • When, I wonder, was the last time Warner got a pair?

    Last Test pair: Old Trafford, 4th September 2019

    I'd like to claim he obviously has a bit of a weakness against England bowling, but the evidence is... thinner than Boris's grasp of competence and morals?
  • When, I wonder, was the last time Warner got a pair?

    As I was on my way to work on Friday I was listening to Aggers interviewing Tom someone or other about the tour and they were talking about the lack of preparedness, and the lack of red ball cricket being played, not to mention the Rafiq affair and its fallout, and the chap seemed to be talking a certain amount of sense, but I sensed an undercurrent and when Aggers talked to George Dobell afterwards, I realised why.

    Tom Harrison is CEO of the ECB, and has been for SEVEN YEARS. He's presided over this whole mucking fuddle from start to finish, annd now is being wise after the event. Much as I love cricket, I don't think even the lesser known-sport of foot-shooting shoots itself in the foot as often as English cricket...

    :grin:

    Hopefully this innings we remember how to a) catch and b) bowl, and don't let ourselves down badly after a good start.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    We need to go back to neutral officials.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    We need to go back to neutral officials.

    I don't think that's at all justified. Sour grapes?
  • That was a pretty clear no ball I thought, and I have pretended to be fair and balanced throughout the series.

    In any event, Carey was out soon enough, and the innings closed only a little later.

    190 with 9 wickets in hand, time not an issue. Its all there for England.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Ha. How things change - one wicket left and 147 to get... it's basically all over.
  • What a terrible, undisciplined, unforgiveable performance. I can't believe the last three wickets fell with the bowlers trying to hit the ball out of the park.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    They managed to lose while I was typing that...
  • At this rate it's going to be impossible to sell day 4 or 5 tickets for any of the summer tests.

    We seriously need to stop collapsing.
  • Simon Toad wrote: »
    What a terrible, undisciplined, unforgiveable performance. I can't believe the last three wickets fell with the bowlers trying to hit the ball out of the park.

    If you're referring to Robinson! But I give a pass to Woakes and Wood - it was the job of the batters to score the runs and it was still 150 or whatever to win.

    Well played Australia.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Simon Toad wrote: »
    That was a pretty clear no ball I thought, and I have pretended to be fair and balanced throughout the series.

    In any event, Carey was out soon enough, and the innings closed only a little later.

    190 with 9 wickets in hand, time not an issue. Its all there for England.

    All the experts thought it should not be called No ball. I accept that the line could be seen from behind but if the foot is even slightly raised, it will be visible.

    The loss of Bairstow was crucial.
  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Kerygmania Host
    Telford wrote: »
    The loss of Bairstow was crucial.

    I think this is somewhat optimistic. I think the difference between Australia and England was a deal greater than one Bairstow-unit.

    England were actually lucky in this Test match with so many chances going down in their first innings... and then in the second innings Burns' early LBW not out was not reviewed...
  • rhubarbrhubarb Shipmate
    It was wonderful to have a test match played in my home state.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    The loss of Bairstow was crucial.

    I think this is somewhat optimistic. I think the difference between Australia and England was a deal greater than one Bairstow-unit.

    England were actually lucky in this Test match with so many chances going down in their first innings... and then in the second innings Burns' early LBW not out was not reviewed...

    The Bairstow comment was a bit tongue in cheek but he is England's second best batter.

    I keep reading that the coach Silverwood should be sacked. I disagree. The England bowlers have taken plenty of wickets. It's the batters who have consistently failed. The coach is not responsible for a lack of ability
  • TukaiTukai Shipmate
    I agree. The England bowlers (or at least their best two in each match) have performed reasonably well thoughout the series , but the batters have consistently let them down.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    rhubarb wrote: »
    It was wonderful to have a test match played in my home state.

    The stadium is excellent. The ariel views of the surrounds were beautiful.

    The problem it has is that there are 5 bigger stadiums in 5 bigger states
  • rhubarb wrote: »
    It was wonderful to have a test match played in my home state.

    It was, and may there be many more, together with a Tasmanian AFL team. My preference is for Essendon and Carlton to lose their licenses and the players be made available as first picks for a new Tasmanian team.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Boland had a higher batting average than his bowling average so he can Boland bat
  • PigletPiglet All Saints Host, Circus Host
    Telford wrote: »
    ... The coach is not responsible for a lack of ability ...
    Possibly not, but is he not at least in part responsible for choosing the players?
    Telford wrote: »
    Boland had a higher batting average than his bowling average so he can Boland bat
    Shall I fetch your coat for you? :mrgreen:
  • Telford wrote: »
    Boland had a higher batting average than his bowling average so he can Boland bat
    Like!
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Piglet wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    ... The coach is not responsible for a lack of ability ...
    Possibly not, but is he not at least in part responsible for choosing the players?
    Go back 3 months and would many experts have made significant changes to the squad ?

    Who was left out ?

  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Kerygmania Host
    edited January 17
    Is the coach not responsible for helping players to develop their talent?

    Hameed, Burns, Crawley, Malan, Pope, Buttler - they all have ability. Yes even Burns! The problem is they haven't scored any runs despite their ability!

    Hameed was a teenage prodigy and looks wonderfully orthodox. But he lacks confidence and is now half-going for shots and having a terrible time.

    Burns by contrast has a horrible-looking technique but somehow grafts the runs out (but not in this series). He needs someone to cautiously make him gradually more watertight.

    Crawley and Pope are both talented strokemakers but have dubious judgement and shot-selection in certain areas.

    Buttler I feel sure has some sort of psychological hang-up about Test batting.

    All these talented players I think could be the business. I think the coaching must bear at least some of the blame for the fact that at the moment they're NOT!






  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Is the coach not responsible for helping players to develop their talent?

    Hameed, Burns, Crawley, Malan, Pope, Buttler - they all have ability. Yes even Burns! The problem is they haven't scored any runs despite their ability!

    Hameed was a teenage prodigy and looks wonderfully orthodox. But he lacks confidence and is now half-going for shots and having a terrible time.

    Burns by contrast has a horrible-looking technique but somehow grafts the runs out (but not in this series). He needs someone to cautiously make him gradually more watertight.

    Crawley and Pope are both talented strokemakers but have dubious judgement and shot-selection in certain areas.

    Buttler I feel sure has some sort of psychological hang-up about Test batting.

    All these talented players I think could be the business. I think the coaching must bear at least some of the blame for the fact that at the moment they're NOT!
    England do employ batting Coaches. Perhaps they should be replaced? However, I would not expect an England player selected for their batting to be taught how to bat. They were selected based on their first class records.

  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Kerygmania Host
    I find myself in sympathy with this article by Barney Roday. His thesis - the first-class system is still providing decent batters but they seem to get worse and worse after entering the England set-up. So there is probably something wrong with that set-up.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    I find myself in sympathy with this article by Barney Roday. His thesis - the first-class system is still providing decent batters but they seem to get worse and worse after entering the England set-up. So there is probably something wrong with that set-up.

    I am a big fan of Darren Stevens. The batters that do well in County cricket are not facing teams that have 4/5 current international bowlers in the same game. If they can see off the best opposition bowler they have a far easier time.

    I am going to make a prediction. Yorkshire's Harry Brook to make the test side and a possible future captain.
  • KarlLB wrote: »
    They managed to lose while I was typing that...

    :joy: Magnificent! Love your work.
  • rhubarbrhubarb Shipmate
    Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, Oi, Oi, Oi.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Not a timeless test but England are in action again in Barbados.

    The batters let England down and top scorers batted at 8 and 9.

    Adil Rashid. He needs to be batting more as he used to be a genuine all-rounder. He should also be playing test cricket.
  • HedgehogHedgehog Shipmate
    I had no idea that "in action" was a euphemism for "losing."
  • GalilitGalilit Shipmate
    How do you want it phrased - have some sympathy for the poor Poms:
    Tory government, Boris Johnson himself, covid - and almost unbelievably poor performances in the cricket ... is it all a sign of The End of Days/ Armageddon/ Second Coming/ Rapture perhaps




  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    edited January 23
    Galilit wrote: »
    How do you want it phrased - have some sympathy for the poor Poms:
    Tory government, Boris Johnson himself, covid - and almost unbelievably poor performances in the cricket ... is it all a sign of The End of Days/ Armageddon/ Second Coming/ Rapture perhaps




    Forget not we have a women's tour as well, regardless of where the focus might be. Granted that's not going great either...
  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Kerygmania Host
    Galilit wrote: »
    How do you want it phrased - have some sympathy for the poor Poms:
    Tory government, Boris Johnson himself, covid - and almost unbelievably poor performances in the cricket ... is it all a sign of The End of Days/ Armageddon/ Second Coming/ Rapture perhaps




    For followers of the England cricket team it feels more like "situation normal"... it was very weird in the days of Strauss and Cook and Swann when you nearly expected England to win and quite often they did... it didn't feel like watching England at all...
  • KarlLB wrote: »
    They managed to lose while I was typing that...

    :joy: Magnificent! Love your work.

    Bloody cheek... but I'd use the old :killing me: smiley if I could! :lol:
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    edited January 23
    One is reminded by misattribution of cause here of the story of Bono stopping in the middle of a U2 gig and clapping his hands once every second or so.

    "Every time I clap my hands an African child dies of hunger" he worthily intoned.

    "Then stop clapping you stupid bastard!" a voice calls out from the audience.

  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    England win by 1 run. Good job that West Indies top order failed.
  • HedgehogHedgehog Shipmate
    Okay, that was my blunder. I stopped paying attention when WI was 98/7 after 15 overs, trailing by 73 runs. I figured it was all over (reinforced by noticing that the first ball of the 16th over resulted in a wicket as I was clicking off). I should have remembered. It's cricket.
  • Yes, it was quite a listen (when I eventually found Talkspurt 2... but that's another story!)!
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    England lose by 20 odd runs but do manage to score more than 200 runs.
    Fast bowlers Garton( who I can't understand why he's in the squad) and Mills were very disappointing. Only Topley and the ever reliable Rashid bowled well. Captain Ali scores a duck but is crafty enough to restrict himself to just one over.
  • The English ladies started well, but just like the men, they let Australia off the hook rather today.

    Given they are playing in Canberra, I think it's only the Northern Territory that hasn't had a test match in the last 18 months.
  • HedgehogHedgehog Shipmate
    Whoa. Heather Knight: 168no.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Why do they give the women only one Test and that four days?
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Well done to Moeen Ali. Sucessful captain and man of the match.

    The big issue for the deciding game must be the quick bowling. No Mills or Garton please.
  • KarlLB wrote: »
    Why do they give the women only one Test and that four days?

    The women's game is pretty much focused on one day cricket. So playing a Test is very out of the ordinary to start with. I believe it's only England, Australia and India who have played them in the recent past.
  • HedgehogHedgehog Shipmate
    Still, that leaves open the question: why only 4 days?

    The current Australia-England match is almost certainly going to be a draw...but if they had a fifth day, there might well be a winner (and, honestly, I couldn't predict WHICH side would be the winner). But, because it is only 4 days (and admittedly, because there were weather delays) the current Test will be a draw. And both sides deserve better.
  • It was a draw in the end, but a real bum-nipper of one. Women's cricket deserves more.
  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Kerygmania Host
    Draws like that are what Test cricket is all about - I'd say such a result is brilliant for women's Test cricket!

    I'd suggest perhaps what we need is for men's Tests to go down to 4 days. There aren't enough draws these days...
  • Hedgehog wrote: »
    Still, that leaves open the question: why only 4 days?

    The focus in women's cricket on limited over formats seems, until very recently, to have reduced the capacity for the players to have the necessary focussed and patient play for the longer fomat. A few years ago I watched (on TV) a women's Test Match played at Canterbury (UK). It lasted, I seem to remember, only two days (or perhaps a fraction longer). The players were playing essentially in the same way as in limited overs, which meant that the batters did not last very long, even if they scored a few quick runs.

    More Test Matches for women now would seem to be in order, and should be scheduled for five days. Remember part of the original logic for five-day Test Matches (for men) was to guarantee play (under most circumstances) for three full playing days, with the extra time allowed for disruption by bad weather (uncovered pitches and inferior drainage meant rain delays were much longer than they are today).
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    England quick bowling not good enough. Batting not dependable. West Indies deserved a series win.
  • TukaiTukai Shipmate
    The women's test match turned into a cliffhanger in the end. With 3 or 4 overs to go, any of the 4 results was possible! And certainly some of the batters proved able to bat long, notably Heather Knight (the England captain) who made 168 n.o. in the first innings, with only one of her teammates passing 20, thus changing the complexion of the match from a certain England loss to a possible win, as the weather turned out perfect for the English swing bowlers. And in their second innings, as the sun came out, England went for what would have been a record run chase and nearly got there, thanks again to Knight making a further 50.
    Eager to persuade Cricket Australia to put on more first class matches in Canberra, I actually went live to one session - it was good value, and though under covid restrictions it was safe enough as the ground was only at 10% of full capacity.
  • Draws like that are what Test cricket is all about - I'd say such a result is brilliant for women's Test cricket!

    I agree utterly - I should have been clearer above, what I meant was that women's cricket deserves more tests! That result was cracking for the game.

    Last night's T20result may not have gone England's way, but that was some final over.

Sign In or Register to comment.