The England Cricket Thread
- Thread starter robfosters
- Start date
Nah, you're virtually guaranteed at least 2 wins. The MCG and SCG are typically good pitches for England.
Not much better as a fielding side either in this match. So many dropped catches
Horrendous conditions to bat on, but Stokes has once again shown what the basics of test batting are. Minimise the risk of getting out by not playing silly shots. Have a solid defensive game to minimise the chances of getting out to a good ball. And finally, be capable of scoring when the ball is there to be hit, and of rotating the strike.
Within that, there's some flex - some players will have a slightly different risk profile. But to be a good test player you need all three. This England team has leaned far too far towards picking players who can score without considering whether they can hang around in tough conditions.
Within that, there's some flex - some players will have a slightly different risk profile. But to be a good test player you need all three. This England team has leaned far too far towards picking players who can score without considering whether they can hang around in tough conditions.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,717
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
Ironic Brook getting out playing sensibly
I fear that too many are not able to hang around long enough that they can only really do ok by going for it and on one occasion in 10 they end up so on top of the bowlers that they then look great
No point asking players to play a game they cannot. Whats better facing 35 balls and scoring 35, or facing 100 and scoring 15.
Aus with no shadow of doubt have managed to time who is batting and bowling when to perfection.
I bet they couldn't believe it when England held on just long enough to see day 1 out when the best chance England probably had would have been to bowl at them for an hour with a brand new ball under the lights.
Problem is by then the England boys will be cooked, and Aus will only need a draw so they can play for a draw (Assuming we are 2:0 to Aus at that point), allow England to play for the win and if the opportunity arises then they go for the throat.
I fear that too many are not able to hang around long enough that they can only really do ok by going for it and on one occasion in 10 they end up so on top of the bowlers that they then look great
No point asking players to play a game they cannot. Whats better facing 35 balls and scoring 35, or facing 100 and scoring 15.
Aus with no shadow of doubt have managed to time who is batting and bowling when to perfection.
I bet they couldn't believe it when England held on just long enough to see day 1 out when the best chance England probably had would have been to bowl at them for an hour with a brand new ball under the lights.
Problem is by then the England boys will be cooked, and Aus will only need a draw so they can play for a draw (Assuming we are 2:0 to Aus at that point), allow England to play for the win and if the opportunity arises then they go for the throat.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,717
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
Not really, in fact a lot of the English chances they gave were playing at balls they really didn't need to.
What England struggle with at times is the art of the leave. So Aus bowl a couple at the stumps then move wide and our players carry on trying to play every ball.
Of course it could be that they can't read them so have to play at everything in case its actually aimed at the stumps.
You can't bowl every ball at the stumps (unless they are VERY good balls) as many modern cricketers would be more than able to punish every ball in that narrow window.
Speak for yourself, my missus is an aussi
Horrendous conditions that allowed each Aussie player to reach double figures and an end score of over 500?
Or am I missing your irony or something?
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,385
- Location
- Billericay, UK
This is so depressing, this was our best chance to win the Ashes in Australia for years with their bowling attack reduced to a B team and we still messed it up.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2004
- Posts
- 17,127
- Location
- Shepley
This is not a very good England team. The India series showed that because as exciting as it was, a better and more clinical team would have won it comfortably.
Playing under the lights with the dew makes a huge difference. Did you watch it? The ball was hooping everywhere by the later stages of yesterday.
As I've said, there's no excuse for how some of the batsmen got out. If Crawley and Pope in particular had stuck around while conditions were less bad, we could have been looking at another 100 plus runs. But Duckett, Root, Brook and Smith didn't do a huge amount wrong.
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,366
This aged well.
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,366
I know we’ve had a lot of denial in this thread but the writing has been on the wall for a while.
Bazball needs to go along with much of this team.
Bazball needs to go along with much of this team.
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,366
Yeah I don’t know where this idea that it’s the best team since 2010 has come from. That team had actual brains in it.
Just to review the 2010 squad:
How can anyone with a straight face say the squad now is anything like that squad?
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,366
Sigma has gone oddly quiet.
I largely agree, but I do think the current bowling attack is better suited as a unit to Australia. Obviously Broad was generally fantastic in the Ashes, but Australian conditions never suited Jimmy's skillset. We lack a spinner now but again I'm not sure that matters for this series.
All that said, the batting in the 2010 squad is head and shoulders above our current line up. As you say, it was a team of thinkers.
Edit: that said, our failure to knock over their tail hugely affected this test. If the deficit was 100 less, their 4th innings would have been very edgy.
Last edited:
Oof. They were looking good, though.