A fantastic Test match. It is amazing that well over 500 was scored in both first innings, and yet all 40 wickets fell and there was a decisive result with plenty of time to spare. Jonny Bairstow of course is the unquestioned king despite all those magnificent hundreds earlier in the match.
A fantastic Test match. It is amazing that well over 500 was scored in both first innings, and yet all 40 wickets fell and there was a decisive result with plenty of time to spare. Jonny Bairstow of course is the unquestioned king despite all those magnificent hundreds earlier in the match.
Ahem. Only 35 wickets fell... 40 times in Tests, both teams have scored over 500 first Innings. 32 draws... (according to Andy Zaltzman, TMS).
A fantastic Test match. It is amazing that well over 500 was scored in both first innings, and yet all 40 wickets fell and there was a decisive result with plenty of time to spare. Jonny Bairstow of course is the unquestioned king despite all those magnificent hundreds earlier in the match.
Ahem. Only 35 wickets fell... 40 times in Tests, both teams have scored over 500 first Innings. 32 draws... (according to Andy Zaltzman, TMS).
I think it fair to say that the Dutch have been on the wrong end of a clogging in Amstelveen (England having made a world record 498/4 off 50 overs. I'm following because I've played on that ground, but that's not a contest, is it?
I think it fair to say that the Dutch have been on the wrong end of a clogging in Amstelveen (England having made a world record 498/4 off 50 overs. I'm following because I've played on that ground, but that's not a contest, is it?
I reckon that the spectators were very happy with England batting first. I reckon the team would have prefered to have batted first. They still wouldn't have won but it wouldn't have been so painful.
I think it fair to say that the Dutch have been on the wrong end of a clogging in Amstelveen (England having made a world record 498/4 off 50 overs. I'm following because I've played on that ground, but that's not a contest, is it?
I reckon that the spectators were very happy with England batting first. I reckon the team would have prefered to have batted first. They still wouldn't have won but it wouldn't have been so painful.
I think it fair to say that the Dutch have been on the wrong end of a clogging in Amstelveen (England having made a world record 498/4 off 50 overs. I'm following because I've played on that ground, but that's not a contest, is it?
I reckon that the spectators were very happy with England batting first. I reckon the team would have prefered to have batted first. They still wouldn't have won but it wouldn't have been so painful.
NL won toss.
I know that and I reckon the NL captain was instructed to put them in.
Many years ago, Old Hill CC then one of the best in the country had an annual fixture with West Bromwich Albion. On one occasion the new Old Hill captain invited the Albion captain to go out for the toss. He was told, " We don't need to do that. You bat first, get a good score and declare. You then allow us to get a decent score and lose." The crowd, which was sizeable, saw the football heros and plenty of runs. Everyone was happy.
I think it fair to say that the Dutch have been on the wrong end of a clogging in Amstelveen (England having made a world record 498/4 off 50 overs. I'm following because I've played on that ground, but that's not a contest, is it?
It is not fair to compare....but of course I will. I have keeping track of the score of a Test match between Bangladesh and West Indies. Bangladesh managed only 103 in their first innings. WI got 265. Bangladesh is now 44/2 in their second---so both teams together still have not yet equaled England's ODI tally.
Oh, and yes WI has used waaaaaaaaay more than 50 over. It has a run rate of 2.34, compared to Bangladesh currently sitting on 2.44.
I wanna see Bairstow's batting figures by when he's keeping wicket and when he's just batting.
His Test Match Average of ~30 is not great. I was saying a couple of matches ago that I didn't think he was good enough to be in a just a batsman.
Boy, was I wrong.
AFZ
*stop press*
Bairstow keeping 2nd innings; well, that just confuses my point....
It's a difficult one. If he keeps wicket you can have another batter, another bowler or an allrounder. The question is where would another batter fit in and where would Bairstow bat. He's too good for 7 at the moment.
An excellent test series has finished. This might sound a bit daft but although I accept that England deserved to win 3-0, New Zealand did not deserve to lose 0-3
Agreed, they put up a good fight, both batting and bowling. Entertaining stuff all round.
Finishing early, not to mention today's delayed start, has allowed more exposure of the women's match against SA, which is also going quite nicely.
Yes, I am pleased to see that TMS and the BBC's text live feed are both covering that fully now. It's been an interesting series, but good that we're attacking more.
Is there a reason (other than tradition) that the women's test is only 4 days rather than 5? England-SA was shaping up for a good chance at getting a result in 4 days, but rain has now made that seem far less likely.
Phil Long, the BBC Test Match Special statistician reports:
The last women's Test that ended in a positive result was when Australia beat England in Canterbury in 2019. Ellyse Perry had a pretty good day out there...
Since 1979 England have played 32 Tests at home, drawn 24, lost six and won just two.
24 out of 32 were draws? Ummmmmmmm, maybe they should play a little longer? Like, oh, 5 days?
This was being discussed on TMS today. The total number of overs isn't that different between the 4 day women's and 5 day men's, apparently, *but* any stoppage for rain has a bigger impact.
FWIW I'd prefer both teams play the same format - number of days, overs per day. Clearly the draw rate is far too high.
Having said that, one problem that has been cited is that the women's team is not entirely professional; some members have day jobs as it were.
This was being discussed on TMS today. The total number of overs isn't that different between the 4 day women's and 5 day men's, apparently, *but* any stoppage for rain has a bigger impact.
FWIW I'd prefer both teams play the same format - number of days, overs per day. Clearly the draw rate is far too high.
Having said that, one problem that has been cited is that the women's team is not entirely professional; some members have day jobs as it were.
If we say that Test Cricket is the most important form of the game, it should be played over 450 overs unless a result is achieved before
The men could learn something from the women about over rate. And yes, in this world of equality and central contracts, they should be able to do 5 day tests.
Bairstow is having a good summer as the last day do or die attitude suits his short form skills.
It'll be interesting to see how we do when we bat first and don't have the run chase.
All results still possible but India have to be favourite.
I had this called for England by 5pm yesterday when the pundits were still favouring India slightly. It was obvious that Root and Bairstow weren't going to be readily dislodged, as has been the case frequently this Summer.
All results still possible but India have to be favourite.
I had this called for England by 5pm yesterday when the pundits were still favouring India slightly. It was obvious that Root and Bairstow weren't going to be readily dislodged, as has been the case frequently this Summer.
I have been too pessimistic this match but I am thrilled about the result.
England great to watch at the moment. Do think Jos Butler belongs in this test side though...
I like Joss, but I can't find a place for him in the top 6. His first class average and his test average are in the very low 30s.
He has the potential to bat at 7. He will occasionally get a really good score but he is unreliable. What's his competion?
Foakes and Billings.
Foakes is 2 years younger but has played more first class games. He has a first class average of nearly 40. Pundits rate him as the best keeper.
Billings is 31 years old, the same age as Buttler but has only played 77 first class games. His first class average is a bit better than Buttler.
You could give the gloves back to Bairstow, if there was a really good allrounder available to come in at 7 or a quality batter who was happy to bat at 7 ( as long as Stokes was playing )
My conclusion is that I would play Buttler only if Foakes wasn't available.
England great to watch at the moment. Do think Jos Butler belongs in this test side though...
I like Joss, but I can't find a place for him in the top 6. His first class average and his test average are in the very low 30s.
He has the potential to bat at 7. He will occasionally get a really good score but he is unreliable. What's his competion?
Foakes and Billings.
Foakes is 2 years younger but has played more first class games. He has a first class average of nearly 40. Pundits rate him as the best keeper.
Billings is 31 years old, the same age as Buttler but has only played 77 first class games. His first class average is a bit better than Buttler.
You could give the gloves back to Bairstow, if there was a really good allrounder available to come in at 7 or a quality batter who was happy to bat at 7 ( as long as Stokes was playing )
My conclusion is that I would play Buttler only if Foakes wasn't available.
Jos can open.
Bairstow's average before this series was not sufficient. Aside from Root, the averages of England's top 6 are not great.
Conversely the management team clearly think there's something special about Crawley and he has just had a fantastic innings under pressure.
England great to watch at the moment. Do think Jos Butler belongs in this test side though...
I like Joss, but I can't find a place for him in the top 6. His first class average and his test average are in the very low 30s.
He has the potential to bat at 7. He will occasionally get a really good score but he is unreliable. What's his competion?
Foakes and Billings.
Foakes is 2 years younger but has played more first class games. He has a first class average of nearly 40. Pundits rate him as the best keeper.
Billings is 31 years old, the same age as Buttler but has only played 77 first class games. His first class average is a bit better than Buttler.
You could give the gloves back to Bairstow, if there was a really good allrounder available to come in at 7 or a quality batter who was happy to bat at 7 ( as long as Stokes was playing )
My conclusion is that I would play Buttler only if Foakes wasn't available.
Jos can open.
Bairstow's average before this series was not sufficient. Aside from Root, the averages of England's top 6 are not great.
Conversely the management team clearly think there's something special about Crawley and he has just had a fantastic innings under pressure.
AFZ
I do agree with the BIB.
Of course Jos can open. Anyone can open if they go in first. Many years ago on a tour of Devon, I pestered the captain to go in first. He consented and I ran myself out without scoring.
Jos could easily open in a white ball game but I don't see him having the defensive game for an opener in test cricket. Has he ever opened for Somerset or Lancashire in a first class game ?
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.
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.
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.
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.
An exciting game at Trent Bridge today. Topley was worthy of man of the match but I would have gone for Yadav who was really excellent for India. He had little support from his team.
I was not happy with Buttler. I accept that he had to find 4 overs from the slow bowlers but Ali is the experienced international bowler. He should have bowled Ali before giving the ball to Livingstone and if Ali had gone OK, he could have just kept him on.
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!
On a completely different tack - has anyone else noticed that Matthew Potts emits a very loud grunt/cry as he delivers the ball, rather like some tennis players? If I were batting I would definitely find this annoying and distracting. If I were umpiring I would wonder whether I should do something about it. Does anyone know what the laws in this regard are?
On a completely different tack - has anyone else noticed that Matthew Potts emits a very loud grunt/cry as he delivers the ball, rather like some tennis players? If I were batting I would definitely find this annoying and distracting. If I were umpiring I would wonder whether I should do something about it. Does anyone know what the laws in this regard are?
This would be for the umpires to determine whether it constitutes "unfair play" within the terms of Law 41.
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!
On a completely different tack - has anyone else noticed that Matthew Potts emits a very loud grunt/cry as he delivers the ball, rather like some tennis players? If I were batting I would definitely find this annoying and distracting. If I were umpiring I would wonder whether I should do something about it. Does anyone know what the laws in this regard are?
If this was a problem contrary to law 41, he should never have got as far as international cricket. It should have been sorted out long before.
Comments
Proper test cricket. England deserve to be 2-0 up but New Zealand are unlucky to be 0-2 down
Ahem. Only 35 wickets fell... 40 times in Tests, both teams have scored over 500 first Innings. 32 draws... (according to Andy Zaltzman, TMS).
AFZ
Oh yes... only 35 wickets... (blush) ...
https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/aus-in-eng-2018-1119525/england-vs-australia-3rd-odi-1119539/full-scorecard
I reckon that the spectators were very happy with England batting first. I reckon the team would have prefered to have batted first. They still wouldn't have won but it wouldn't have been so painful.
NL won toss.
Many years ago, Old Hill CC then one of the best in the country had an annual fixture with West Bromwich Albion. On one occasion the new Old Hill captain invited the Albion captain to go out for the toss. He was told, " We don't need to do that. You bat first, get a good score and declare. You then allow us to get a decent score and lose." The crowd, which was sizeable, saw the football heros and plenty of runs. Everyone was happy.
It is not fair to compare....but of course I will. I have keeping track of the score of a Test match between Bangladesh and West Indies. Bangladesh managed only 103 in their first innings. WI got 265. Bangladesh is now 44/2 in their second---so both teams together still have not yet equaled England's ODI tally.
Oh, and yes WI has used waaaaaaaaay more than 50 over. It has a run rate of 2.34, compared to Bangladesh currently sitting on 2.44.
His Test Match Average of ~30 is not great. I was saying a couple of matches ago that I didn't think he was good enough to be in a just a batsman.
Boy, was I wrong.
AFZ
*stop press*
Bairstow keeping 2nd innings; well, that just confuses my point....
It's a difficult one. If he keeps wicket you can have another batter, another bowler or an allrounder. The question is where would another batter fit in and where would Bairstow bat. He's too good for 7 at the moment.
Finishing early, not to mention today's delayed start, has allowed more exposure of the women's match against SA, which is also going quite nicely.
Yes, I am pleased to see that TMS and the BBC's text live feed are both covering that fully now. It's been an interesting series, but good that we're attacking more.
Phil Long, the BBC Test Match Special statistician reports: 24 out of 32 were draws? Ummmmmmmm, maybe they should play a little longer? Like, oh, 5 days?
FWIW I'd prefer both teams play the same format - number of days, overs per day. Clearly the draw rate is far too high.
Having said that, one problem that has been cited is that the women's team is not entirely professional; some members have day jobs as it were.
If we say that Test Cricket is the most important form of the game, it should be played over 450 overs unless a result is achieved before
and the next game at Taunton is on 3rd July.
Just because he was man of the match in his last test, it does not merit Leach batting at number 6.
All results still possible but India have to be favourite.
No longer the case but we shall see. I am not convinced by Pope. Not reliable and his stats are nowhere near good enough
Bairstow is having a good summer as the last day do or die attitude suits his short form skills.
It'll be interesting to see how we do when we bat first and don't have the run chase.
I had this called for England by 5pm yesterday when the pundits were still favouring India slightly. It was obvious that Root and Bairstow weren't going to be readily dislodged, as has been the case frequently this Summer.
Yorkshire !!! Yorkshire !!!.
My only issue is when did YJB last play for Yorkshire ?
I like Joss, but I can't find a place for him in the top 6. His first class average and his test average are in the very low 30s.
He has the potential to bat at 7. He will occasionally get a really good score but he is unreliable. What's his competion?
Foakes and Billings.
Foakes is 2 years younger but has played more first class games. He has a first class average of nearly 40. Pundits rate him as the best keeper.
Billings is 31 years old, the same age as Buttler but has only played 77 first class games. His first class average is a bit better than Buttler.
You could give the gloves back to Bairstow, if there was a really good allrounder available to come in at 7 or a quality batter who was happy to bat at 7 ( as long as Stokes was playing )
My conclusion is that I would play Buttler only if Foakes wasn't available.
Jos can open.
Bairstow's average before this series was not sufficient. Aside from Root, the averages of England's top 6 are not great.
Conversely the management team clearly think there's something special about Crawley and he has just had a fantastic innings under pressure.
AFZ
Of course Jos can open. Anyone can open if they go in first. Many years ago on a tour of Devon, I pestered the captain to go in first. He consented and I ran myself out without scoring.
Jos could easily open in a white ball game but I don't see him having the defensive game for an opener in test cricket. Has he ever opened for Somerset or Lancashire in a first class game ?
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.
I was not happy with Buttler. I accept that he had to find 4 overs from the slow bowlers but Ali is the experienced international bowler. He should have bowled Ali before giving the ball to Livingstone and if Ali had gone OK, he could have just kept him on.
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!
This would be for the umpires to determine whether it constitutes "unfair play" within the terms of Law 41.
If this was a problem contrary to law 41, he should never have got as far as international cricket. It should have been sorted out long before.