Timeless Test Continued

1151618202124

Comments

  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    England crushed in the first one day international by 10 wickets. 4 of the top 6 out for ducks and Number 7 dropped before scoring. England are still the current world champions .
  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Kerygmania Host
    edited July 2022
    Telford wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Jos Butler test stats:
    http://www.howstat.com/cricket/statistics/Players/PlayerPositions.asp?PlayerID=3888

    I just wondered how he might go in this England set up. And positions 1-3 remains the biggest issue. Somewhat obscured by the success of the middle order. I think Pope at 3 is the right choice but time will tell. Similarly, Lees is going well at the moment.

    Don't think it's a simple call but I just wonder.

    AFZ

    I am not convinced by any of the top 3 especially Pope.

    You may be right. At the moment, I would give him a longer run. Bit you may be right.

    Pope has been given 27 tests. He has scored 1,309 runs at an average of less than 30. His average has been boosted by 2 good scores.

    If Root doesn't want to bat at 3, the obvious answer is to have your best 3 openers batting at 1, 2 and 3.

    It's only an obvious answer if you have three good openers! At the moment it's not clear to me that England have even one good opener!
    I specifically said, "best 3 openers"

    Yes you did say that, but what I mean is that it is not a good or obvious solution unless the three openers are good. It's no better to have a bad opener at #3 than to have a bad middle-order batsman there!
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    Jos Butler test stats:
    http://www.howstat.com/cricket/statistics/Players/PlayerPositions.asp?PlayerID=3888

    I just wondered how he might go in this England set up. And positions 1-3 remains the biggest issue. Somewhat obscured by the success of the middle order. I think Pope at 3 is the right choice but time will tell. Similarly, Lees is going well at the moment.

    Don't think it's a simple call but I just wonder.

    AFZ

    I am not convinced by any of the top 3 especially Pope.

    You may be right. At the moment, I would give him a longer run. Bit you may be right.

    Pope has been given 27 tests. He has scored 1,309 runs at an average of less than 30. His average has been boosted by 2 good scores.

    If Root doesn't want to bat at 3, the obvious answer is to have your best 3 openers batting at 1, 2 and 3.

    It's only an obvious answer if you have three good openers! At the moment it's not clear to me that England have even one good opener!
    I specifically said, "best 3 openers"

    Yes you did say that, but what I mean is that it is not a good or obvious solution unless the three openers are good. It's no better to have a bad opener at #3 than to have a bad middle-order batsman there!

    We have plenty of openers who are good. However they are good, not great.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Not a Timeless Test but still cricket. Yesterday was the finals day in the T20 Blast. One of The main cricket days of the summer. 3 excellent games and a thrilling final in which Hampshire were deserving winners.

    So to my Gripe. My team were denied 3 of their best players because they were in the England One day squad. Would it not be sensible to keep these ' friendly international games' well away from T20 Finals day so that all 4 Counties could choose from all their players ?
  • Is everybody keeping a discrete silence? Less than 3 days and losing by an innings and 12 runs.

    At Lord's, yet.
  • Regression to the mean?
  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Kerygmania Host
    To be honest it took me by surprise. I didn't realise there was a Test match happening until yesterday! Looking at the SA team there are few names that are familiar to me. They dealt out a pretty severe walloping though.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    England bowled out South Africa for a reasonable score but got bowled out cheaply twice. Many of the England team are not playing enough cricket. Some of them haven't played since the last test match on 5 July 2022.

    I happy not happy with this 100 cricket. I can't really identify with any of the teams. Welsh fire don't appear to have any welsh players.
  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Kerygmania Host
    OK so this time it was England who won by an innings inside 3 days! Some great performances by Stokes, Foakes et. al.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    An excellent performance by England but I am far from satisfied with the batting
  • agingjbagingjb Shipmate
    Is it just me that likes five day tests with all four results possible in the final session?

  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    agingjb wrote: »
    Is it just me that likes five day tests with all four results possible in the final session?
    Sorry to be pedantic but 5 results are possible
  • What is the fifth - "match abandoned"?
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    What is the fifth - "match abandoned"?
    Match awarded by umpires. It happened in a test match a few years ago when Pakistan refused to play.
  • Telford wrote: »
    What is the fifth - "match abandoned"?
    Match awarded by umpires. It happened in a test match a few years ago when Pakistan refused to play.

    That's not a 5th result, it's a way of arriving at one of the usual 3. Pakistan forfeited the game because they refused to take the field. Whether they were justified in their anger is beside the point. Later the ICC changed the result from an England win to a draw. They then changed their mind a few years later and changed it again. At the time of writing, it is recorded as an England win.

    A match is won, lost, drawn or tied. They have been two ties in the history of Tests.

    AFZ
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    What is the fifth - "match abandoned"?
    Match awarded by umpires. It happened in a test match a few years ago when Pakistan refused to play.

    That's not a 5th result, it's a way of arriving at one of the usual 3. Pakistan forfeited the game because they refused to take the field. Whether they were justified in their anger is beside the point. Later the ICC changed the result from an England win to a draw. They then changed their mind a few years later and changed it again. At the time of writing, it is recorded as an England win.

    A match is won, lost, drawn or tied. They have been two ties in the history of Tests.

    AFZ

    I recommend that you study Law 16 of the Laws of Cricket. which deals with The Result.
    Law 16.3 refers to umpires awarding a match.
  • Telford wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    What is the fifth - "match abandoned"?
    Match awarded by umpires. It happened in a test match a few years ago when Pakistan refused to play.

    That's not a 5th result, it's a way of arriving at one of the usual 3. Pakistan forfeited the game because they refused to take the field. Whether they were justified in their anger is beside the point. Later the ICC changed the result from an England win to a draw. They then changed their mind a few years later and changed it again. At the time of writing, it is recorded as an England win.

    A match is won, lost, drawn or tied. They have been two ties in the history of Tests.

    AFZ

    I recommend that you study Law 16 of the Laws of Cricket. which deals with The Result.
    Law 16.3 refers to umpires awarding a match.
    16.3 Umpires awarding a match

    Regardless of any agreement under Law 13.1.2 (Number of innings),

    16.3.1 a match shall be lost by a side which

    16.3.1.1 concedes defeat

    16.3.1.2 in the opinion of the umpires refuses to play. If so, the umpires shall award the match to the other side.

    Indeed.

  • agingjbagingjb Shipmate
    OK, OK, I'll shut up, but no, I would not warm to a test where match abandoned was remotely likely after tea on the fifth, last, day.

    Far too many tests recently have turned out to be one-sided apparent mismatches. Why?
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    agingjb wrote: »
    OK, OK, I'll shut up, but no, I would not warm to a test where match abandoned was remotely likely after tea on the fifth, last, day.

    Far too many tests recently have turned out to be one-sided apparent mismatches. Why?

    The last two tests in England have boiled down to how well the teams have performed in each game. After the first test, who would have predicted that the second test would be an Engl;and win and a mismatch ?

  • agingjbagingjb Shipmate
    And, I notice that everyone else is only talking about details of the laws, and seem to be happy with the one-sided contests which I find uninteresting.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    agingjb wrote: »
    And, I notice that everyone else is only talking about details of the laws, and seem to be happy with the one-sided contests which I find uninteresting.

    Personally, I want to see 5 days of good cricket, with a close result( ideally a England win) late on the last day.

  • Piglet wrote: »
    Excuse my ignorance (again), but what's the difference between "drawn" and "tied"?

    A drawn match is very common and happens when the innings are not completed at the end of 5 days* and so neither team has won. This can happen when one team is a very long way ahead.

    E.g.
    Team 1 scores 450 in their first innings.
    Team 2 scores 300

    Team 1 then gets 250
    Team 2 then need 401 to win.

    If at the end of 5 days, Team 2 is 300/5 then they are still 100 behind but are not All Out so the match is drawn.

    The oddity in cricket is how teams a long way behind may still draw. I.e. in the above example, Team 2 needing 401 will draw the match if they are 110/9 at the close.

    Draws are particularly common in rain-affected matches.

    This is the last tied test:
    https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/australia-tour-of-india-1986-87-61426/india-vs-australia-1st-test-63438/full-scorecard

    A tie simply means that the team batting in the forth innings is all out when the scores are level. In the Test in 1986, India needed 348 to win and were all out on 347.

    For the purpose of series results etc., a tie counts the same as a draw.

    AFZ

    *5 days of 90 Overs is the current regulation for Tests. Regulations vary for different 2-innings matches. I.e. The County championship (English domestic) is played over 4 days.
  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Kerygmania Host
    Telford wrote: »
    agingjb wrote: »
    And, I notice that everyone else is only talking about details of the laws, and seem to be happy with the one-sided contests which I find uninteresting.

    Personally, I want to see 5 days of good cricket, with a close result( ideally a England win) late on the last day.

    I do not mind a certain number of one-sided contests as long as I don't know in advance that they're going to be like that or which side will dominate. If all the matches are one-sided that of course is a bore.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Piglet wrote: »
    Excuse my ignorance (again), but what's the difference between "drawn" and "tied"?

    A drawn match is very common and happens when the innings are not completed at the end of 5 days* and so neither team has won. This can happen when one team is a very long way ahead.

    E.g.
    Team 1 scores 450 in their first innings.
    Team 2 scores 300

    Team 1 then gets 250
    Team 2 then need 401 to win.

    If at the end of 5 days, Team 2 is 300/5 then they are still 100 behind but are not All Out so the match is drawn.

    The oddity in cricket is how teams a long way behind may still draw. I.e. in the above example, Team 2 needing 401 will draw the match if they are 110/9 at the close.
    In league cricket they get round this by having a winning draw and a losing draw. 8 points for a winning draw( the best scoring rate) and 2 points for a losing draw. However if the side batting last do not achieve at least 75% of the runs of the other side they do not get any points for a draw and the other side gets all 10 points. Both sides can get batting and bowling points.
    Telford wrote: »
    agingjb wrote: »
    And, I notice that everyone else is only talking about details of the laws, and seem to be happy with the one-sided contests which I find uninteresting.

    Personally, I want to see 5 days of good cricket, with a close result( ideally a England win) late on the last day.

    I do not mind a certain number of one-sided contests as long as I don't know in advance that they're going to be like that or which side will dominate. If all the matches are one-sided that of course is a bore.
    Between 1989 and 2004 England were not expected to win any Ashes Tests but they still played in front of full stadiums. Sometimes one is content to witness the skills of the very best players

  • PigletPiglet All Saints Host, Circus Host
    Thanks again chaps! :)
  • Weather permitting England will win the test match tomorrow morning this will make it 6 wins out of 7 this summer. In this latest game all credit must go to the bowlers.
  • I am answering the urge to mention Darren Stevens who has played his last game for Kent CC todays in a Trophy winning side. A great servant to the game at the age of 46. My advice to players is to play on as long as they can. I stopped playing when I was 48 and started umpiring full time. It was a hobby with generous expenses but I never had the joy of being on the winning side.
  • In leagues where winning and losing draws are possible results, "match drawn with the scores level" (so the same number of runs, but with the team batting second not being all out) is technically a different result to both "match drawn" and "match tied".

    It's not a tie, because the side batting second wasn't all out, but it's not a "normal" draw because the league points are divided equally between the teams.
  • Enjoyed the result between Lancs and Essex. At one point in the 2nd innings, Lancs were 7 for 6, but incredibly won the game. The scores are still available online.
  • In leagues where winning and losing draws are possible results, "match drawn with the scores level" (so the same number of runs, but with the team batting second not being all out) is technically a different result to both "match drawn" and "match tied".

    It's not a tie, because the side batting second wasn't all out, but it's not a "normal" draw because the league points are divided equally between the teams.

    All true but it's different when you get Duckworth Lewis involved
    Enjoyed the result between Lancs and Essex. At one point in the 2nd innings, Lancs were 7 for 6, but incredibly won the game. The scores are still available online.
    I anticipate a pitch inspection.

  • How did Pakistan score 200 runs without losing a wicket yesterday and then fall so far short today? I love the unpredictability of the game.
  • The Rogue wrote: »
    How did Pakistan score 200 runs without losing a wicket yesterday and then fall so far short today? I love the unpredictability of the game.

    Today they had to score at a much faster rate. Yesterday, they batted really well but only won with 3 balls to spare

  • I believe England's batting today merits a mention.
  • Gobsmacking, was it not?
  • A veritable collapse from England, to finish on just 657, Pakistan meanwhile untroubled on 83-0.

    In other news, December 2nd 2022 is the 90th anniversary of the opening of the Bodyline series.
  • I'm enjoying the current tests between Australia and the West Indies. It seems such a long time since the glory days of previous matches.
  • Pakistan nailed on for the win!?

    Definitely a declaration that wouldn't have happened under previous captains.
  • Traditionally captains calculate declarations on the number of runs they need vs overs remaining to feel comfortable.

    England have just done number of overs they want to have a good chance of taking 10wkts.

    We shall all see if it pays off.

    AFZ
  • And it pays off! That had draw written all over it until after lunch on the final day, but divine intervention from Pope starts the wickets falling!
  • Amazing win by England! Good decision re their declaration – I doubted very much that they’d be able to bowl Pakistan out on such a favourable batting wicket, but I was wrong. Mind you, the pitch did seem to give the bowlers more help at time went on.
  • MPaulMPaul Shipmate
    How many test wins in a row for England now?
    NZ coach and NZ born skipper. Interesting dynamic for Britannia rulz.
    Barmy armeee!
  • MPaulMPaul Shipmate
    Amazing win by England! Good decision re their declaration – I doubted very much that they’d be able to bowl Pakistan out on such a favourable batting wicket, but I was wrong. Mind you, the pitch did seem to give the bowlers more help at time went on.
    Indeed, a fantastic performance of captaincy here by Stokes. He declared at a total he knew Pakistan would chase and relied on spin. Leach bowled really well but keeping the old ball that was reversing for his quicks was his best decision.
    I felt sorry for Pakistan though to lose at home after playing really well.

  • PigletPiglet All Saints Host, Circus Host
    ... divine intervention from Pope starts the wickets falling!
    I didn't know he played cricket! :mrgreen:
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Does he understand LBW?
  • SandemaniacSandemaniac Shipmate
    edited December 2022
    Gee D wrote: »
    Does he understand LBW?

    Does anyone? It's cricket's offside rule. I know I need to look it up for when the ball pitches outside off. Unfortunately as a leggie it's not often I pitch it outside off and get it to turn back far enough to hit the pad, even when I get the googly right.

    Would anyone like me to post an English translation?
  • PigletPiglet All Saints Host, Circus Host
    Yes please! :mrgreen:
  • MPaulMPaul Shipmate
    I think the principle is that you cannot defend with your body only with your bat. To be given out, you have to stop the ball hitting the stumps with your body. The exception is if the ball first pitched
    , (hit the ground) outside the line of the leg stump; then the batter is not out.

  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Kerygmania Host
    Ah no no no - there are other exceptions too - the off-side LBW law is even more complicated and can involve the umpire having to decide whether there was an intention to hit the ball with the bat. It is a very well-crafted rule though and I think has just about the right balance between bat and ball!

    As others have said an astounding win by England and great captaincy by Stokes. I wish more people in the UK were still sufficiently interested in Test cricket to appreciate it!
  • Well, if the ECB hadn't chosen to take the money and put it on dedicated sports channels rather than on the BBC, it might still be popular ....
Sign In or Register to comment.