View Full Version : England V West Indies / India
Aki Aki Aki
19-07-2007, 07:39 AM
Hoggy out injured is going to make it a lot tougher. I think India have the slight edge in the batting department but their bowling is no better than even a weakened England attack. Monty is in fine form and Sidebottom, Anderson and Broad should hopefully be able bowl well enough in English conditions.
Oddjob
19-07-2007, 08:34 AM
MIL has called in sick so wehave no childcare, day off for OJ, what luck !
India to win series 2-0
East-End Eagle
19-07-2007, 08:54 AM
Two strong batting line ups, against two weak bowling attacks.
Combined with the waether I see some draws coming our way....
SpikeyMatt
19-07-2007, 09:02 AM
Tremlett in for Hoggard, Anderson for Harmison.
Baloo
19-07-2007, 09:13 AM
What does Stuart Broad have to do to get in the Test team? He's been the outstanding bowler in the one-day team for two summers now! Instead we're going to be treated to more wides and half-volleys from Anderson. Grrr.
Look forward to seeing Tremlett's debut, though.
Justy C
19-07-2007, 09:30 AM
Worried about this Test series especially with our lack of experienced firepower.
Trying to put a positive spin (!) on the situation though. Anderson had an awesome Test against India in Mumbai in March 2006, Sidebottom has bowled superbly all summer, Monty is getting better all the time and Tremlett will be eager to impress.
Hmmmm...this will be a tough series.
Oddjob
19-07-2007, 09:32 AM
I honestly can't see that attack bowling India out twice.
Oddjob
19-07-2007, 09:40 AM
England win toss and will bat.
Justy C
19-07-2007, 09:45 AM
I know, I'm just trying to convince myself that we can at least compete against their batting line up.
Interestingly the pressure is mounting on India with each England bowler that gets injured.
Bobby Woodruff
19-07-2007, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by Oddjob
I honestly can't see that attack bowling India out twice.
Is that in one test or the entire series?
kolinkins
19-07-2007, 10:04 AM
Who am I supporting?
Voldo
19-07-2007, 10:25 AM
A nice quickfire 40 off the opening 5 overs from England - we havent started this good in a while
edit: without loss too :lux:
Voldo
19-07-2007, 10:48 AM
....and back to normal
14 from the next 5 overs!
Oddjob
19-07-2007, 11:08 AM
Cook lbw to ging.
Baffled Bob 2
19-07-2007, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by Oddjob
ging.
:D
Oddjob
19-07-2007, 11:51 AM
England in rattling along at over 4 an over shocker !
Absolution
19-07-2007, 12:01 PM
Surprised Broad didn't get a chance today, although I do like Tremlett.
Personally wouldn't have gone for Anderson, don't really like him as a Test bowler. Although I guess the selectors want him to fill in for Hoggy..
Good batting so far, shame Cook went. He was playing some good strokes.
RickyB
19-07-2007, 12:30 PM
Good to see Straussy getting back in the runs again - hope he can really pull a decent knock together here.
maestro
19-07-2007, 02:42 PM
decent enough batting so far but its a bit like watchign paint dry at the moment!
Last session we scored less than 3 runs an over!
Baffled Bob 2
19-07-2007, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by maestro
decent enough batting so far but its a bit like watchign paint dry at the moment!
Last session we scored less than 3 runs an over!
There speaks a Palace fan!
1 wicket down on the first day of the series and nearly 200 on the board by tea. Surely 3 runs an over with no wickets lost is a triumphant session in a test match?
RickyB
19-07-2007, 03:26 PM
Strauss out - he was doing so well as well :(
Adlerhorst
19-07-2007, 05:33 PM
Back on again now. 250 odd for 2. Feel a bit sorry for Strauss.
1f7b
Originally posted by Baffled Bob 2
There speaks a Palace fan!
1 wicket down on the first day of the series and nearly 200 on the board by tea. Surely 3 runs an over with no wickets lost is a triumphant session in a test match? Quite. A few years back 2.5 an over would be considered good. We are in a good position hear to have a decent knock till Tea if the weather holds.
pete eagle
20-07-2007, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by Adlerhorst
Back on again now. 250 odd for 2. Feel a bit sorry for Strauss.
I really don't, it was a complete lapse in judgement, he had been looking rather out of touch and had been rather lucky to still be in. So instead of composing himself and just nudging himself to 100 which would have been a big boost for his confidence, he tried to run down the pitch at Kumble.
bradpitt
20-07-2007, 01:24 PM
England Collapsing
Voldo
20-07-2007, 01:30 PM
Sreesanth double wicket maiden!!!!
Voldo
20-07-2007, 01:52 PM
OMG
30-6 today!
absolutely shocking started the day at 268-4 - within an hour all out for 298!!
oz_da II
20-07-2007, 02:04 PM
Originally posted by Voldo
OMG
30-6 today!
absolutely shocking started the day at 268-4 - within an hour all out for 298!!
Did you expect anything else? :clown:
Absolution
20-07-2007, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by Voldo
OMG
30-6 today!
absolutely shocking started the day at 268-4 - within an hour all out for 298!! England shouldn't have taken the light!
All went wrong after that, killed any momentum there was.
East-End Eagle
20-07-2007, 02:19 PM
WTF was that?
Lambeth Palace
21-07-2007, 11:02 AM
Anderson seems to save his best for India!
Adlerhorst
21-07-2007, 12:39 PM
That was about as well as i have seen an England pace attack bowl since the 2005 ashes
Eddie McGoldrick's tash
21-07-2007, 03:21 PM
2 quick wickets for India now - could still be a contest yet
Shoreditch CPFC
21-07-2007, 04:39 PM
Just heading home from Lords. Very muggy, so I'd they do start again it will favour the bowlers.
Saw Alan Smith on way out.:eek:
embryo eagle
22-07-2007, 01:22 PM
Wonderful hundred from Pietersen. He battled hard for most of it
Adlerhorst
22-07-2007, 02:33 PM
KP gone now. Frankly we ought to have enough now.
oz_da II
22-07-2007, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by Adlerhorst
KP gone now. Frankly we ought to have enough now.
Tendulkar due a big score.
Now would be the time. :p
Adlerhorst
22-07-2007, 02:40 PM
tendulkar averages about 12 at lords. I think we'll be okay.
All out now. India need 380 odd to win.
Adlerhorst
22-07-2007, 02:41 PM
Only thing that concerns me is, well as the pace attack bowled in the first innings, i am not convinced they will do so again.
oz_da II
22-07-2007, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by Adlerhorst
tendulkar averages about 12 at lords. I think we'll be okay.
Very due. :eek:
Adlerhorst
22-07-2007, 02:44 PM
Originally posted by oz_da II
Very due. :eek: He ought to be determined as this is his last ever chance to score runs at the home of cricket.
Adlerhorst
22-07-2007, 03:50 PM
got one.
Adlerhorst
22-07-2007, 04:07 PM
Tremlett gets Dravid.
Lets see how Tendulkar does in his last Lords test innings.
Adlerhorst
22-07-2007, 04:41 PM
Monty beginning to turn the ball an awful long way
Adlerhorst
22-07-2007, 04:50 PM
Tendulkar gone for not many. Told you. As did Bedi who always says get a left arm spinner on against Tendulkar
embryo eagle
22-07-2007, 06:31 PM
It should be a good last day. I hate it when this happens and I have to miss it because of work
Godstone Eagle
22-07-2007, 07:09 PM
Hopefully the rain will hold off tmw, if it does should be a cracking day. England should win, but you never know..
Godstone Eagle
23-07-2007, 10:19 AM
Good start from England..Ganguly gone 143-4
Godstone Eagle
23-07-2007, 10:31 AM
Karthik gone - 5 down
East-End Eagle
23-07-2007, 10:35 AM
It really is a race against the weather now.
Rain dances being performed in India now...
1f93
pete eagle
23-07-2007, 10:35 AM
Peach of a delivery from Jimmy.
Justy C
23-07-2007, 11:57 AM
202 - 5.
Could it be the weather that saves England rather than India?
pete eagle
23-07-2007, 01:12 PM
Laxman bowled by Tremlett: 231-6
Godstone Eagle
23-07-2007, 01:44 PM
7 down now.
BaldEagle96
23-07-2007, 01:46 PM
Almost there...
Dhoni the only dangerman left.
(hopefully)
Baloo
23-07-2007, 01:51 PM
For those of you watching on tv or listening to commentary, what's the position regarding light and/or rain? Are either going to come to India's rescue?
BaldEagle96
23-07-2007, 02:19 PM
8 down now..
(no idea Baloo as only got it on the BBC feed over the net)
Godstone Eagle
23-07-2007, 02:26 PM
1 more wicket needed
Palaceboy222
23-07-2007, 02:28 PM
Originally posted by Baloo
For those of you watching on tv or listening to commentary, what's the position regarding light and/or rain? Are either going to come to India's rescue? BBC seems to think so:
1522: India 272-9
I can't believe this - Glamour, supposedly protecting the last wicket, suddenly goes on the attack, flaying Vaughan for four to midwicket and then charging him again to smash another over long-on. He then attempts a single off the final ball and scoops the ball inches away from the man at cover. The rain is holding off, but the light is slipping away.
1518: WICKET - Singh b Panesar 0, India 263-9
Monty's done him! Arpy is suckered in by a flighted beauty, aims an insane big swing and is cleaned up. Unbelievable. One wicket needed, rain seconds away, darkness like a coal cellar. Sensational scenes.
Palaceboy222
23-07-2007, 02:32 PM
sounds tence....
1531: India 281-9
Sree survives - but only just, only just... Monts drifts one into his pads, there's a massive appeal and Bucks says no. Looked certain to hit, that one. Sree edges past his pads for four. Bums perched on the very edge of pews.
1528: India 277-9
This is England's chance - Glamour turns down all chances of runs until the final ball of Vaughan's over, which he clumps fine for four. England are delighted - that gives Monty six balls at Sree. Here we go...
Palaceboy222
23-07-2007, 02:36 PM
buggar!
1533: India 282-9
Vaughan toils desperately as fingernails are gnawed all around. Glamour stays put and then steals his single off the very last ball. Hold on - what's this? Taufel has his meter out again, and - yes, he's offered them the light!
Godstone Eagle
23-07-2007, 02:36 PM
Jammy gits!
Palaceboy222
23-07-2007, 02:40 PM
1535: Breaking news - they're taking tea. That means 20 minutes of staring at the skies. They could still come out again afterwards, of course, but the light will have to improve. And that rain hold off...
Micky Droy
23-07-2007, 03:23 PM
Play to start at 4.40 - covers off...
Micky Droy
23-07-2007, 03:32 PM
1629: No we're not - Umps Taufel has just told TMS's Arlo White that the 1640 resumption has gone out of the window because of this drizzle. Aye-yai-yai. It's actually brighter than it was when they came off an hour ago, but they're not going to do anything until it stops raining. The silver lining? It's only just about raining...
Baloo
23-07-2007, 03:38 PM
What a great test match this has been. If we don't get any more play tonight, India will have deserved the draw for their battling spirit yesterday and today. It will set the series up nicely for the next two tests.
Of course, I'm praying the rain stops and stays away long enough for us to squeeze out that last wicket....
Godstone Eagle
23-07-2007, 04:10 PM
Sadly, i dont think they will be back out again. Disagree about India that they deserve a draw...apart from one or two, on the whole theyve batted poorly against an extremely inexperienced bowling attack.
Baloo
23-07-2007, 04:27 PM
You're kidding? The bowling attack may be inexperienced, but they have risen to the occasion. Anderson lost his way a bit today (pressure getting to him again), but prior to that, he has been a completely different bowler to previous form. Sidebottom toiled away with some good left-arm swing and Tremlett has had a good debut, not getting too many wickets, but bowling consistently and with an impressive economy rate.
And the Indian bowlers (except for the first morning, when they were very poor) have made life difficult for England as well, with some inspired spells from RP, Zaheer and Sreesanth
Both sides have had to be patient when batting and eek out the runs.
It has been an absorbing match.
Godstone Eagle
23-07-2007, 05:33 PM
Play abandoned - India escape with a draw.
kolinkins
23-07-2007, 06:11 PM
Hee hee
Absolution
23-07-2007, 09:50 PM
Best test match in ages in my opinion. Shame it ended in a draw after 39 wickets had already fallen!
Considering our attack was very 'inexperienced' I thought they all bowled well. Tremlett was impressive on debut and his figures probably could have been even better if Sidebottom and Anderson hadn't snatched 9 of the wickets in the first innings!
1f98
Absolution
23-07-2007, 09:51 PM
Also it was nice to see every other ball going down the legside as Plunkett and Harmison were both out of the side for the first time in a while.
Must be a Durham thing :)
Timbo
23-07-2007, 10:37 PM
Originally posted by kolinkins
Hee hee
:rolleyes:
kolinkins
24-07-2007, 09:40 AM
Originally posted by Timbo
:rolleyes:
:confused:
Tom's Old Man
27-07-2007, 04:50 PM
England 101-4.
Diggers digs in?
28-07-2007, 01:46 PM
Can't believe the umpire. Monty should have had 2 in his first 2 overs. Taufel would have given them.
embryo eagle
28-07-2007, 05:45 PM
Originally posted by Diggers digs in?
Can't believe the umpire. Monty should have had 2 in his first 2 overs. Taufel would have given them.
He sure should. He bowled really well though. We've got it all to do.
Godstone Eagle
29-07-2007, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by Diggers digs in?
Can't believe the umpire. Monty should have had 2 in his first 2 overs. Taufel would have given them.
Another one this morning... Howell has turned down 4 plumb lbw's, all against England.
Adlerhorst
29-07-2007, 01:01 PM
Not being paying attention to this test really - see we are getting spanked. I suspect Tendulkar though will not be getting paid for his efforts though - trip to the match referee beckons.
Diggers digs in?
29-07-2007, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by Godstone Eagle
Another one this morning... Howell has turned down 4 plumb lbw's, all against England.
What a numpty. We're struggling enough as it is without bad umpiring. Sounds like Taufel felt sorry for us with the Tendulkar lbw though.
embryo eagle
29-07-2007, 01:29 PM
He must of, it was a shocker. We don't really look like getting another one
oz_da II
29-07-2007, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by embryo eagle
He must of, it was a shocker. We don't really look like getting another one
Definitely was a shocker but Sachin shouldn't be leaving those pedestrain pies.
Lambeth Palace
29-07-2007, 01:38 PM
Would rather have been given yesterday's decisions then any Taufel pity today, too late now, Howell is absolutely shite.
embryo eagle
29-07-2007, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by Lambeth Palace
Would rather have been given yesterday's decisions then any Taufel pity today, too late now, Howell is absolutely shite.
I agree, Howell doesn't seem to have a clue and he's brought Taufel down to his level
SJ'sLoveMonkey
29-07-2007, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by embryo eagle
I agree, Howell doesn't seem to have a clue and he's brought Taufel down to his level
People say these things even themselves out, but when you have 4 or 5 absolutely nailed on decisions go against you then the whole morale of the team suffers as a consequence. Having said that India have batted very well.
kolinkins
30-07-2007, 09:03 AM
This thread is very quiet. Shocking.
bunghole
30-07-2007, 09:55 AM
Everyone loves a winner Klinx.
pete eagle
30-07-2007, 10:03 AM
I would have gone with it was the weekend, it was sunny and we weren't doing particularly well so no-one bothered watching it that much. Anyways, I did watch some of it and Sidebottom bowled beautifully without any luck at all and Tremlett bowled really well too. India really did benefit from the conditions on the first day, England have to take it session by session now and bat out at least 4 and a half sessions. If they get to India's first innings score or beyond, we could be in for an interesting last few hours tomorrow.
pete eagle
30-07-2007, 10:05 AM
Oh and if anyone saw the arguments between Zaheer Khan and Pietersen yesterday, it was apparently about jellybeans!
pete eagle
30-07-2007, 10:13 AM
So brilliantly, Cook gets himself out lbw to Zaheer straight away, playing across the line again Master Cook.
Absolution
30-07-2007, 10:15 AM
It begins..
Do hope Cook sorts that problem out, although he is young enough to you would think.
pete eagle
30-07-2007, 10:18 AM
I think so, he seems to want to play across even when the ball is pitching outside of off stump, keeps getting him into trouble when the ball swings in from the right hander and jags in from the left hander.
pete eagle
30-07-2007, 12:57 PM
Andrew Strauss should be hanged for playing that shot, 130-2
Godstone Eagle
30-07-2007, 12:58 PM
That was dreadful from Strauss...irresponsible shot.
pete eagle
30-07-2007, 01:05 PM
Completely irresponsible, he'd done so well yesterday at picking which to leave and which to play and to play a shot like that just undid all that good work.
New LP
30-07-2007, 01:06 PM
2071
Originally posted by bunghole
Everyone loves a winner Klinx.
Just shame many of us support Palace and England...:bash:
Justy C
30-07-2007, 01:46 PM
Anyone watching this? I'm at work and able to read about it on the BBC website, this sounds like its getting all a bit aggro out there.
KP gone for 19 by the way, now 178-3.
Godstone Eagle
30-07-2007, 03:18 PM
Vaughan 100..well played!:lux: But vital that he keeps going!
Well played Michael Vaughn, captains innings!
Just might get away with it.
Godstone Eagle
30-07-2007, 03:50 PM
In the lead now, with three wickets down..but the pitch is flat as a pancake, so they need to get at least 200 in front i reckon
pete eagle
30-07-2007, 03:52 PM
I think Monty will be a force if we have to bowl at them again, Kumble has been bowling poorly but Monty's variation in bounce will help on this pitch.
pete eagle
30-07-2007, 03:53 PM
Vaughan gone, 287-4, just when we needed him to go on a bit further. Well played though, Collingwood has to protect Bell from the new ball for a bit.
Godstone Eagle
30-07-2007, 03:53 PM
Vaughan out...really unlucky way to go.
Godstone Eagle
30-07-2007, 03:55 PM
Bell out...game has completely changed now.
Adlerhorst
30-07-2007, 03:57 PM
well that's that then.
pete eagle
30-07-2007, 03:57 PM
Time for the innings of Matt Prior's life please.
Gav The Hamster
30-07-2007, 03:59 PM
Bell is beginning to struggle a tiny bit. Will he be the one to make way when Flintoff is fit ?
Who would you drop if Trescothick were fit as well ?
Godstone Eagle
30-07-2007, 04:00 PM
It will be if Collingwood or Prior get out now.. bugger all to come after them
Me and my big mouth. :clown:
pete eagle
30-07-2007, 04:02 PM
You would think at this moment in time that it would be Bell to make way for Flintoff in the winter if he doesn't make runs soon because Collingwood has proved himself to be highly valuable whether it be his batting, fielding or his ability to take a wicket or two.
kolinkins
30-07-2007, 04:10 PM
It would be shocking to drop Bell and not Colly for Freddy - rather have a classy batsman than a grafter, and besides, poor Bell has been asked to bat at 6, it should be Collingwood to bat there.
pete eagle
30-07-2007, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by kolinkins
It would be shocking to drop Bell and not Colly for Freddy - rather have a classy batsman than a grafter, and besides, poor Bell has been asked to bat at 6, it should be Collingwood to bat there.
Bell wasn't doing too well at the top of the order, hence why he was put at 6 where he did much better last summer against Pakistan. England's problem is that they have too many 'classy' batsman who get themselves into trouble trying to play their shots, Collingwood is exactly what England need, someone who grafts away and frustrates opponents and his double century in Australia shows that he has ability as well and in addition he supplies the captain with a fifth bowler.
Adlerhorst
30-07-2007, 04:33 PM
I'm with Klinks, i'd have Bell every time out of the two.
But realistically i'd have them both and Prior at eight, with Freddie at seven and drop one of the seamers
SJ'sLoveMonkey
30-07-2007, 05:15 PM
Collingwood gone, say goodnight. 329/7
SJ'sLoveMonkey
30-07-2007, 05:16 PM
329/8
where is the bloody rain when you need it
Robson
30-07-2007, 05:34 PM
Bell should - and will - be dropped.
Say hello to Test cricket, Ravi Bopara....
maestro
30-07-2007, 06:15 PM
When freddie is back id drop tremlett and have the batting order as follows
Straus
Cook
Vaughn
KP
Collingwood
Bell
Prior
Freddie
Sidebottom
Anderson
Monti
Chester 76
30-07-2007, 06:21 PM
Originally posted by pete eagle
Bell wasn't doing too well at the top of the order, hence why he was put at 6 where he did much better last summer against Pakistan. England's problem is that they have too many 'classy' batsman who get themselves into trouble trying to play their shots, Collingwood is exactly what England need, someone who grafts away and frustrates opponents and his double century in Australia shows that he has ability as well and in addition he supplies the captain with a fifth bowler. Bell was moved down the order to accomodate Vaughan`s return to the side, the selectors didn`t want to change the Strauss/Cook opening partnership.
Chester 76
30-07-2007, 06:24 PM
Originally posted by Gav The Hamster
Bell is beginning to struggle a tiny bit. Will he be the one to make way when Flintoff is fit ?
Who would you drop if Trescothick were fit as well ?
Before his injuries many were suggesting that Flintoff would be moved down the order.After Prior`s start againt the West Indies some were suggesting that Flintoff should be at 8.
1fca
Diggers digs in?
30-07-2007, 07:12 PM
Originally posted by Adlerhorst
I'm with Klinks, i'd have Bell every time out of the two.
But realistically i'd have them both and Prior at eight, with Freddie at seven and drop one of the seamers
It's feasible that we could drop a seamer for Freddie, but only if he's really back on top of his game. He's not even bowling for lancs yet.
Also, I really can't see why anyone would have Bell over Colly. Maybe Colly is more of a grafter but as has already been said, we've got a hatful of flamboyant batsmen anyway. Still, never mind about the test eh.
KevTheOptimist
31-07-2007, 07:49 AM
Despite Priors good start to test cricket - he is not particularly great against any sort of decent international bowling side. I still have him in there at the moment purely because he can pile runs on when we are on top, he will struggle in 'keep wicket at all costs' situations like yesterday.
Bell is a plank of the highest order, how he justifies selection is a joke. Any sort of pressure and he crumbles - his average is now down to just above 40 (which isn't terrible for a No. 6!) but a lot of his runs came against poor opposition with the exception of the sub continent tours.
I still think Colly is a good enough batsmen to warrent the batter only title but dont really see him as a No. 5 which is where our problem will lie when Freddie comes back, ideally we need tresco back with Freddie for a formidible line up of:
Cook
Tresco
Strauss
Vaughan
Pietersen
Colly
Prior
Freddie
Sidders
Harmy
Panaseer
pete eagle
31-07-2007, 08:23 AM
Originally posted by Chester 76
Bell was moved down the order to accomodate Vaughan`s return to the side, the selectors didn`t want to change the Strauss/Cook opening partnership.
Bell was at no.6 last summer, long before Michael Vaughan's return.
Gav The Hamster
31-07-2007, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by KevTheOptimist
Despite Priors good start to test cricket - he is not particularly great against any sort of decent international bowling side.
Lol, how do you come to that conclusion ? The guy averages around 40 in 1st class cricket and already averages around 50 in Test cricket.
How do you know he isn't any good against "any sort of decent international bowling side" when he hasnt played against any of them ?
SJ'sLoveMonkey
31-07-2007, 11:01 AM
Are they all out yet! :D
KevTheOptimist
31-07-2007, 11:41 AM
Prior averages 38.83 in first class cricket.
Scores vrs West Indies:
126 NO
21
75
40
0
62
1
Against India:
1
42
11
7
Quite a difference although you're right, you can't judge until after playing the sub continent, SA and Australia but I predict he will be no more prolific or consistant than GO Jones. My point about him was that he is never going to dig in and bat out a gritty session like we will quite often need.
I like Prior though, he's aggressive and has the ability to take a game away from the oppo a la Gilcrest in his prime.
Gav The Hamster
31-07-2007, 11:47 AM
The same Jones who averages 24 in test cricket ?
Prior is a better player than Jones and considering he has potentially 10 years of Test cricket ahead of him, I think he will definately get better
KevTheOptimist
31-07-2007, 12:00 PM
Yes the same Jones that began his career with scores of:
38
10 NO
46
100
22
27
4
74
Against weak opposition to go on and get scores like:
2
24
73
13
38
2
13
Against stronger attacks, or even scores like:
14
52
5
1
3
Against India! See the similarity?
I'm not digging out Prior, he's got years ahead of him and will get better and should be stuck with for the next 4 or 5 test series at least.
My point remains that he will be a batter that scores heavily when the going is good but when it's time to dig in and forma rear guard - I don't think it'll work.
Justy C
31-07-2007, 12:00 PM
Well done to India, no doubt, they deserved to win this Test match. The 3rd and final Test at The Oval should be a cracker.
Collingwood over Bell for me as well. Mentally tougher plus he can sit in there and grind it out, Bell just doesn't seem to be able to do that.
Having been dropped, didn't Bell then come back into the side (at no.6) and score 3 or 4 consecutive Test 100s last summer against Sri Lanka and Pakistan? (or something superb like that). Maybe he needs that kick up the arse again.
As for the current England team, for the 3rd Test I'd go (if fit):
Cook
Strauss
Vaughan
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Prior
Sidebottom
Hoggard
Harmison
Panesar
With Bell, Shah, Anderson, Plunkett and Broad waiting in the wings.
pete eagle
31-07-2007, 12:04 PM
Flintoff and Harmison won't be fit so it will be as you were with the only decision being who Matthew Hoggard will replace if anyone. I think Anderson will make way because Hoggard has more control and alongside Sidebottom, Tremlett and Panesar, England will be able to create more pressure on what is always a good batting surface at the Oval.
ozeagle
31-07-2007, 12:12 PM
are you kidding me?
england should NEVER play that gutless mummy's boy Harmison ever again.
Robson
31-07-2007, 12:35 PM
Ravi Bopara might come in for Bell, but otherwise England will remain unchanged.
Anyone who thinks Freddie is the answer to our batting problems is obviously still in a drunken stupor after 2005. He's injured and even before that he was hopelessly out of form.
Even if fit, he wouldn't deserve a place in the side on merit.
KevTheOptimist
31-07-2007, 01:02 PM
Freddie is comfortably our best pace bowler. He should be in the side as a bowler that can bat a bit. No.7.
1f99
kolinkins
31-07-2007, 01:13 PM
If everyone is fit, I'd go for:
Tresco
Cook
Vaughan
KP
Bell
Bopara
Freddy
Foster/Davies (get rid of Prior ASAP)
Hoggard
Harmison (or Broad/Tremlett is they start to develop)
Monty
East-End Eagle
31-07-2007, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by KevTheOptimist
Freddie is comfortably our best pace bowler. He should be in the side as a bowler that can bat a bit. No.7.
Exactly how I and many others I speak to feel, however, Flintoff still only this week described himself as a batsman that can bowl a bit.
Trying to bat him too low down may lead to some discontent?
pete eagle
31-07-2007, 01:21 PM
Originally posted by kolinkins
If everyone is fit, I'd go for:
Tresco
Cook
Vaughan
KP
Bell
Bopara
Freddy
Foster/Davies (get rid of Prior ASAP)
Hoggard
Harmison (or Broad/Tremlett is they start to develop)
Monty
Ok so you said that you'd rather have Bell for Collingwood and that's a point I can understand but why the inclusion of Bopara? What has he done to justify selection ahead of Collingwood?
maestro
31-07-2007, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by kolinkins
If everyone is fit, I'd go for:
Tresco
Cook
Vaughan
KP
Bell
Bopara
Freddy
Foster/Davies (get rid of Prior ASAP)
Hoggard
Harmison (or Broad/Tremlett is they start to develop)
Monty
Hoe can you drop sidebottom? he's been Englands best bowler this summer, what has harmison done recently to warrant a place?
maestro
31-07-2007, 01:31 PM
Originally posted by East-End Eagle
Exactly how I and many others I speak to feel, however, Flintoff still only this week described himself as a batsman that can bowl a bit.
Trying to bat him too low down may lead to some discontent?
I think he says that because maybe he knows eith his injuries his days of bowling 90+ mph maybe over.
East-End Eagle
31-07-2007, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by maestro
I think he says that because maybe he knows eith his injuries his days of bowling 90+ mph maybe over.
A sad day for england if true, but if that is the case no-one can guarentee him of a place in the side.
kolinkins
31-07-2007, 02:45 PM
Originally posted by pete eagle
...why the inclusion of Bopara? What has he done to justify selection ahead of Collingwood?
Ethnic quota of course....
pete eagle
31-07-2007, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by kolinkins
Ethnic quota of course....
:moo:
Although in cricketing terms he hasn't done enough to displace Collingwood.
Robson
31-07-2007, 04:12 PM
Originally posted by pete eagle
:moo:
Although in cricketing terms he hasn't done enough to displace Collingwood.
No, that's why he should replace Bell.
pete eagle
31-07-2007, 04:13 PM
Originally posted by Robson
No, that's why he should replace Bell.
Or Bell, his batting in the championship this season hasn't been outstanding and to throw him in for a test debut in a match we need to win would be irresponsible.
KevTheOptimist
31-07-2007, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by maestro
Hoe can you drop sidebottom? he's been Englands best bowler this summer, what has harmison done recently to warrant a place?
Siders has done an excellent job coming into the side at short notice and doing the business. I would however drop in in a flash should either Hoggy, Freddie, Harmy or S jones become fit again as he simply is never going to trouble the Aussies the way that the other 4 could if fit and bowling to their potential.
Note the bowling to their potential bit when replying to say Harmy this Harmy that, Harmy is world class when on fire and will be back to his best soon.
pete eagle
31-07-2007, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by ozeagle
are you kidding me?
england should NEVER play that gutless mummy's boy Harmison ever again.
Yeah imagine not showing faith in a talented bowler who's just lost confidence, Australia wouldn't do anything so crass would they?
oz_da II
31-07-2007, 04:27 PM
Originally posted by pete eagle
Yeah imagine not showing faith in a talented bowler who's just lost confidence, Australia wouldn't do anything so crass would they?
Not sure any of the Australian bowlers would run back to the mummy's milk and cookies instead of representing his country and helping out his teammates.
Chester 76
31-07-2007, 06:07 PM
Originally posted by pete eagle
Bell was at no.6 last summer, long before Michael Vaughan's return. During the winter tour Bell was at 3, he was moved when Vaughan returned.
Steve in Phoenix
31-07-2007, 10:11 PM
I was really disappointed Broad didnt get to play and his batting certainly would have been more useful than Tremlett's. Tremlett did reward the selectors, I cant complain about that.
Sidebottom is average, I'd drop him for Broad and keep Tremlett. Those two have the potential to develop into top class fast bowlers. Harmison and Hoggard's best days are over. I like Bopara too but he needs to gain experience in the one dayers. Only when he's outperforming Collingwood there, he can have his spot in the Test team.
Strauss
Cook
Vaughan
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Prior
Broad
Tremlett
Jones or Hoggard
Panesar
One thing I like about this group of cricketers is that they're developing a nice pool of options..
Bats not in the team - Trescothick, Shah, Bell, possibly Trott
All rounders - Bopara, Bresnan,
Bowlers - Broad, Tremlett, Plunkett, Lewis, Sidebottom all new options
222e
Adlerhorst
01-08-2007, 08:08 AM
Originally posted by East-End Eagle
A sad day for england if true, but if that is the case no-one can guarentee him of a place in the side. Absolutely totally agree. If Flintoff cannot bowl at full tilt, or cannot bowl more than ten overs a day then how can he justify his place in the side. He is not a top six batsman, everyone knows that. If he cannot perform as a bowler, then he is a good slip fielder who can bat a bit and who can bowl a bit. We seem to refuse to pick a keeper who could bat in the top six, so the keeper has to play at seven, which means there are only four bowling places so no place for Freddie.
As for the rest of the furore around the last test. Well this kind of thing does goes on (jellybabies) but overstepping the crease by a yard when bowling a bouncer, and bowling beamers is all a bit naughty - I cannot think anyone could possibly believe that those incidents were accidental. No one ever hurt anyone with jellybabies.
Jules
01-08-2007, 08:44 AM
What is the significance of the jellybeans? Is it meant to suggest the batsman is a bit of a baby, or something else?
Adlerhorst
01-08-2007, 11:12 AM
Originally posted by Jules
What is the significance of the jellybeans? Is it meant to suggest the batsman is a bit of a baby, or something else? Jellybeans have a soft centre.
KevTheOptimist
01-08-2007, 11:26 AM
I don't really understand Bopra as an 'all rounder'. His bowling wouldn't trouble anyone more than say Vaughan's bowling or Colly's bowling so unless he can score heavily with the bat, his introduction is pointless.
crystaljim
01-08-2007, 11:53 PM
Originally posted by Adlerhorst
Jellybeans have a soft centre.
I think you are making the mistake of attributing intelligence behind the actions. Jelly beans have a high glucose content and are often used to boost awareness for long days in the field. They just had them in their pocket and had a brain explosion.
East-End Eagle
02-08-2007, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by KevTheOptimist
I don't really understand Bopra as an 'all rounder'. His bowling wouldn't trouble anyone more than say Vaughan's bowling or Colly's bowling so unless he can score heavily with the bat, his introduction is pointless.
I tend to agree somewhat, and I am an Essex fan so a bit biased.
however, I think he should be a cert in the one day side
kolinkins
02-08-2007, 01:24 PM
Good writing by CMJ:
Christopher Martin-Jenkins, Chief Cricket Correspondent
As The Times revealed last week, applications have been invited for the job of managing director of England cricket, “accountable to the ECB’s chief executive for all aspects of performances and administration of the England team”. Given all the other England posts this one really should not be necessary, but the unacceptable face of modern international cricket, as displayed in the context of a Nottingham Test that maintained its high level of interest and excitement to the end, unfortunately confirms the view that it is.
For the moment, responsibility rests squarely with two men: the coach – or, to give him his official title, the England team director, Peter Moores – and, even more certainly Michael Vaughan, the captain. The first paragraph in the long and detailed laws of cricket make it absolutely clear: “the major responsibility for ensuring the spirit of fair play rests with the captains.” In many ways Vaughan is an outstanding leader, but England’s occasionally graceless behaviour and their tendency towards excessive aggression – predating both Moores and Vaughan himself in that the approach was the same under Duncan Fletcher and Nasser Hussain – has certainly not been discouraged during the five years of his captaincy.
The best reason for having a managing director, other than clearer accountability, is to have someone broad-minded enough to see the game as the world sees it, not only from within the inevitably confined bubble of the dressing-room. It was probably just a jolly jape that misfired, but it was not sufficient for Moores to say publicly that the jellybean incident “got a bit out of hand and I hope everyone will have learned from it”. Internally no doubt, he has made the point much more forcibly but England should issue an immediate, genuine and unequivocal apology to Zaheer Khan for the behaviour of the fielder who scattered sweets near the crease, whether or not it was an attempt to distract the batsman.
There “jellygate” should and would end, although it is a rather depressing fact of life that all this controversy brings attention to the game. Switching on Radio 5 Live on the way to the Test yesterday it was not, for once, football that was under discussion but jellybeans. There is always a place for genuine humour in the game but none for calculated gamesmanship of any kind, which makes several other aspects of the Trent Bridge Test more serious.
There is the question, for example, of whether it is legitimate for players to suck sweets, as they have in professional cricket and the higher echelons of the club game for many years, with the ulterior motive of sugar-coating the ball with saliva to help to maintain its shine on one side.
The line between this means of encouraging swing and physical roughing up of one side of the ball to enhance reverse movement is blurred, but “artificial substances” are expressly forbidden by Law 42, just as much as interference with the seams or the surface.
What really offended during this match was the overt aggression, including chat designed to distract the batsman, chuntering at close quarters from disgruntled fast bowlers, and, in the case of Shantha Sreesanth, a beamer to Kevin Pietersen and a bouncer bowled by the same bowler to Paul Collingwood from round the wicket and a yard beyond the popping crease.
Sreesanth lost half his match fee for a petty little tilt at Vaughan’s shoulder as he walked past him, but he should have lost the rest of it for that deliberate no-ball and if the senior India players believe the beamer to have been deliberate, he should not play any more Test cricket until they are sure that he has learnt the lesson.
Test cricket is tough: always has been, certainly always will be when so much money as well as personal and national pride is at stake. To play it cricketers have to be strong in mind as well as in body, a lesson now clearly absorbed by the impressive Chris Tremlett, whose shortened run and sharper focus have transformed him from meek failure in Perth last winter to imposing success here. But he has not had to rant and rave to take more wickets.
Accuracy is the first essential, and in any case silent menace has always been more chilling than brash aggression, with the possible exception of Dennis Lillee. When it comes to calculated aggression, as opposed to genuine anger of the kind that Allan Donald displayed against Mike Atherton at Trent Bridge in 1998, players demean themselves and break the law.
“I’m driving a Porsche Carrera; what’s your car?” was one question picked up by the stump microphone this week when England were trying to unsettle an India batsman. That sort of tactic is not only not clever, or acceptable; it is also an illegal attempt to distract the batsman.
The next time an umpire hears the like he should issue a firm warning. If the remarks continue he should apply a five-run penalty to the batting side; then, if necessary, another five-run penalty. It would soon stop the nonsense, always provided that the umpire is supported by the ICC.
1f70
Chester 76
02-08-2007, 06:30 PM
Originally posted by kolinkins
always provided that the umpire is supported by the ICC. Therein lies the big problem.
Brett
02-08-2007, 10:54 PM
The huge promise of Tremlett could well mean that Syan ends up as a one season wonder. If Harmy's back for SL, then you'd quite fancy a bowling attack of Flintoff, Tremlett, Harmison, Panesar and Hoggard out in those conditions.
The key for me is whether Syan can turn in another Trent Bridge style performance at The Oval - that may just sway the selectors to keep him in ahead of Broad should either of the two H's struggle for fitness.
They must stick with Tremlett. He looks far more assured than Plunkett or Mahmood and looks to have more bottle than Anderson (who has been better but still goes to pieces if he has one bad over).
kolinkins
02-08-2007, 11:19 PM
I agree with Brett - Tremlett has looked good, a natural replacement for Harmison when all involved have had enough
johnbush
02-08-2007, 11:20 PM
Originally posted by KevTheOptimist
Siders has done an excellent job coming into the side at short notice and doing the business. I would however drop in in a flash should either Hoggy, Freddie, Harmy or S jones become fit again as he simply is never going to trouble the Aussies the way that the other 4 could if fit and bowling to their potential.
Note the bowling to their potential bit when replying to say Harmy this Harmy that, Harmy is world class when on fire and will be back to his best soon.
What's all this Hoggy, Siders, Colly, Harmy nonsense? - sounds like an under fives team. 'No you can't have the red jelly beans - Mattie wants to throw them at that nasty man with a beard.'
I expect S.Jones is quite pleased he's not part of it.
pete eagle
03-08-2007, 11:29 AM
Originally posted by Brett
The huge promise of Tremlett could well mean that Syan ends up as a one season wonder. If Harmy's back for SL, then you'd quite fancy a bowling attack of Flintoff, Tremlett, Harmison, Panesar and Hoggard out in those conditions.
The key for me is whether Syan can turn in another Trent Bridge style performance at The Oval - that may just sway the selectors to keep him in ahead of Broad should either of the two H's struggle for fitness.
They must stick with Tremlett. He looks far more assured than Plunkett or Mahmood and looks to have more bottle than Anderson (who has been better but still goes to pieces if he has one bad over).
They'll take and probably play two spinners I would have thought.
Oddjob
03-08-2007, 11:31 AM
Anyone going to the Oval test? will be there on Day 2 in Block 6
Brett
03-08-2007, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by pete eagle
They'll take and probably play two spinners I would have thought.
I reckon so too but whether they have the gumption to play two is a different matter. Probably too soon for Rashid but Schofield and Swann might get a look in if they carry their good form into the latter stages of the season.
KevTheOptimist
03-08-2007, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by johnbush
What's all this Hoggy, Siders, Colly, Harmy nonsense? - sounds like an under fives team. 'No you can't have the red jelly beans - Mattie wants to throw them at that nasty man with a beard.'
I expect S.Jones is quite pleased he's not part of it.
Rather than write out their whole names, I gave them abbreviations like Siders instead of Sidebottom and Harmy instead of Harmison?
You numpty, how could you not know that?
:moo:
Absolution
03-08-2007, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by Brett
I reckon so too but whether they have the gumption to play two is a different matter. Probably too soon for Rashid but Schofield and Swann might get a look in if they carry their good form into the latter stages of the season. It will be Rashid I feel, even if it is mainly just to give him a taste of going on tour. A side from practice games he probably wouldn't get ahead of Panesar anyway as England probably won't go for two spinners in the same side.
Can't see Schofield or Swann getting in ahead of him, Swann seems to be doing ok this year.. Schofield has taken under 10 wickets.
Absolution
03-08-2007, 12:07 PM
Originally posted by Brett
The huge promise of Tremlett could well mean that Syan ends up as a one season wonder. If Harmy's back for SL, then you'd quite fancy a bowling attack of Flintoff, Tremlett, Harmison, Panesar and Hoggard out in those conditions.
The key for me is whether Syan can turn in another Trent Bridge style performance at The Oval - that may just sway the selectors to keep him in ahead of Broad should either of the two H's struggle for fitness.
They must stick with Tremlett. He looks far more assured than Plunkett or Mahmood and looks to have more bottle than Anderson (who has been better but still goes to pieces if he has one bad over). Tremlett has been quite impressive, and quite unlucky in that first India innings (same as Sidebottom).
Glad he got a chance in the Test side, it seems a lot of bowlers seem to go through a selection process of ODI's then Tests if they have done well in the ODI's.. as he isn't particularly brilliant with the white ball (no different than Hoggard, Harmison or Jones) it probably held him back a tiny bit more than Plunkett, Mahmood etc.
Lambeth Palace
03-08-2007, 12:16 PM
Originally posted by Oddjob
Anyone going to the Oval test? will be there on Day 2 in Block 6
Day 4, block 16
pete eagle
03-08-2007, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by Brett
I reckon so too but whether they have the gumption to play two is a different matter. Probably too soon for Rashid but Schofield and Swann might get a look in if they carry their good form into the latter stages of the season.
There has been talk of taking 3 spinners from CMJ in the Times and playing two so I'd expect Rashid to go as the third choice for the experience and probably someone like Swann, Gary Keedy has done well too but he can't hold a bat, something which may count in Rashid's favour.
johnbush
03-08-2007, 05:02 PM
1f78
Originally posted by KevTheOptimist
Rather than write out their whole names, I gave them abbreviations like Siders instead of Sidebottom and Harmy instead of Harmison?
You numpty, how could you not know that?
:moo:
Must have saved you a lot of energy.
Steve in Phoenix
04-08-2007, 10:41 AM
Not when it comes to Jonesy.
Baloo
09-08-2007, 10:49 AM
Final test is underway. Anderson failed to bowl a ball which threatens the stumps in his opening three overs (the last two of which conceded 19 runs) and is already replaced by Tremlett.
Stuart Broad, taking hatfuls of wickets this season and looking the best bowler in our one day team (on the few occasions he has been given the chance), must be sick to the bone.
KevTheOptimist
09-08-2007, 11:01 AM
Not at all a fan of Jimmy Anderson had enough chances and hasn't had a memorable performance as far as I can remember.
More than happy to try new bowlers instead of him.
We really needed to win the toss this morning and I fear that failing to win it has probably cost us the win......
Justy C
09-08-2007, 11:08 AM
Originally posted by KevTheOptimist
Not at all a fan of Jimmy Anderson had enough chances and hasn't had a memorable performance as far as I can remember.
More than happy to try new bowlers instead of him.
We really needed to win the toss this morning and I fear that failing to win it has probably cost us the win......
A tad harsh on Anderson, I think he got 5-42 in the 1st Test at Lord's.
Early days still but losing the toss was a blow and you would have thought India will go on and post a large score now.
pete eagle
09-08-2007, 11:14 AM
Jaffer gone, India 62-1
Justy C
09-08-2007, 11:16 AM
And Jimmy gets Jaffer.
India 62-1.
KevTheOptimist
09-08-2007, 12:05 PM
The ball he got Jaffer with was terrible and the batsman must have the right hump about getting out to it lol
England bowling is terrible at the moment.
stevek
09-08-2007, 12:17 PM
Not looking great, is it? Hopefully we'll make a great fightback when I'm there tomorrow :)
Ruskin Old Boy
09-08-2007, 01:27 PM
Winning the toss at the Oval is always crucial
Diggers digs in?
09-08-2007, 01:34 PM
Originally posted by KevTheOptimist
Not at all a fan of Jimmy Anderson had enough chances and hasn't had a memorable performance as far as I can remember.
More than happy to try new bowlers instead of him.
We really needed to win the toss this morning and I fear that failing to win it has probably cost us the win......
Anderson is the most consistently average player we have. I assume the only reason he plays is because he's consistent. It's a shame he's just so average.
KevTheOptimist
09-08-2007, 01:57 PM
They knew from an early age he had a big problem with his action that meant he would always lack consistancy. When they tried to correct it he got worse and lost pace.
You've got to say that our bowling attack for this test (and the last for that matter) is the most inexperienced and average we've had for a long long time.
Had the following been fit it would be a differnt ball game:
Freddie
Harmy
Hoggy
KevTheOptimist
09-08-2007, 02:08 PM
Ok, going to put on my optimist hat here and set out the best case scenario:
We take 4 more wickets before the end of play leaving India languishing on 300 ish for 6.
Nip out the last 4 early doors for a total of 350 tops. We bat past that comfortably taking a lead of 200 with 2 days play remaining and we bowl them out leaving a run chase of around 100 after lunch on Monday in the blazing sushine on a flat track.
KevTheOptimist
09-08-2007, 02:09 PM
Carlsberg don't play cricket, but if they did.......
pete eagle
09-08-2007, 02:17 PM
Dravid Gone! Pearler from Anderson.
189-2
MasterYoda
09-08-2007, 02:23 PM
3 down! 199-3, Karthik out on 91
pete eagle
09-08-2007, 03:57 PM
Prior just dropped Tendulkar, got two hands to it as well, oh deary me.
Eddie McGoldrick's tash
09-08-2007, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by pete eagle
Prior just dropped Tendulkar, got two hands to it as well, oh deary me.
Read in?
PauLo
09-08-2007, 04:49 PM
wow, talk about lucky! that was never out!
SJ'sLoveMonkey
09-08-2007, 04:55 PM
Originally posted by PauLo
wow, talk about lucky! that was never out!
It wasn't even a thin inside edge, he walloped it! :D
Diggers digs in?
09-08-2007, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by Eddie McGoldrick's tash
Read in?
Yes please.
kolinkins
10-08-2007, 10:45 AM
Sidebottom to Laxman, FOUR, dropped, and it's Prior again, Laxman prods hard at one that is angling across him and gets a thick edge, the ball flies at a comfortable height towards Strauss who is waiting at first slip, the ball is nearly in his hands when Prior dives to his right and gloves the ball away, the ball runs down to the boundary as well
1f47
SJ'sLoveMonkey
10-08-2007, 10:59 AM
354/5 Laxman gone and Prior finally holds on to one!
Absolution
10-08-2007, 11:14 AM
Originally posted by Diggers digs in?
Yes please. His batting will be the major issue, as it was before.
Prior's 100 against the Windies has probably made people think he is better than he is, his average is slipping down a tad as well.
KevTheOptimist
10-08-2007, 11:31 AM
The similarities between Prior and GO Jones grow eh Gav!
So then, would you rather a keeper that averages 20 but will take a lot of catches i..e. out and out keeper or a keeper come slogger who may average more with the bat but may let a few catches go down?
Me, I'd go with the out and out keeper all day long.
pete eagle
10-08-2007, 11:35 AM
How is Tim Ambrose doing though? He's pretty decent with the bat or was last season anyway.
KevTheOptimist
10-08-2007, 11:42 AM
Bring back superr Jack Russell!
Only joking, Prior is defo worth sticking with - but he needs to sort out his catching otherwise it could cost us like GO Jones' drops cost us.
kolinkins
10-08-2007, 01:47 PM
Post when you're winning, you only post when you're winning....
...where are all the posters from the last 24 months?
pete eagle
10-08-2007, 01:49 PM
Dhoni's gone for 92, but that raised a question in my mind, how many series have been won by a team for which no player has scored a century. India haven't had one yet in this series.
GUCCI Eagle
10-08-2007, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by pete eagle
Dhoni's gone for 92, but that raised a question in my mind, how many series have been won by a team for which no player has scored a century. India haven't had one yet in this series.
Problem being that every single batsman in this innings has a score or a very good start. With 7 wickets down I can still see them getting 700.
Absolution
10-08-2007, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by KevTheOptimist
The similarities between Prior and GO Jones grow eh Gav!
So then, would you rather a keeper that averages 20 but will take a lot of catches i..e. out and out keeper or a keeper come slogger who may average more with the bat but may let a few catches go down?
Me, I'd go with the out and out keeper all day long. It will be interesting to see how the balance of the tail pans out.
With Flintoff to come back in at some point (purely on bowling ability may I add) we may end up with a situation with him back at #6 in the order, unless Moore actually puts him down to #7/#8 with the keeper which would probably be more realistic.
I quite like Read down to his keeping ability, and would go for him down to this.. but unless in the next year or so Rashid/Broad/Plunkett were to establish themselves in the Test side as a good solid #8, due to their potential with the bat we will be in need of a Batsman/Wicketkeeper over a specialist I think.
pete eagle
10-08-2007, 02:03 PM
They have, something which has taught England's batters, especially the lower order a lesson in when to leave the ball and when to play.
New LP
10-08-2007, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by kolinkins
Post when you're winning, you only post when you're winning....
...where are all the posters from the last 24 months?
Where those of us posting during the Ashes whitewash and the world cup only posting 'when we were winning'?
oz_da II
10-08-2007, 04:12 PM
Well batted Kumble! :p
Memories of Gillespie vs Bangladesh, let's see if Anil can get a double ton.
SJ'sLoveMonkey
10-08-2007, 04:32 PM
664 all out. Well batted Kumble, well batted India
Justy C
10-08-2007, 04:37 PM
Originally posted by kolinkins
Post when you're winning, you only post when you're winning....
...where are all the posters from the last 24 months?
I'm here. But deflated.
India have been ruthless with the bat.
Adlerhorst
10-08-2007, 05:10 PM
I'm in Coventry - pleased for Kumble.
But disappointed i was right about the series result and was right abour Prior
Diggers digs in?
10-08-2007, 06:25 PM
Originally posted by Absolution
His batting will be the major issue, as it was before.
Prior's 100 against the Windies has probably made people think he is better than he is, his average is slipping down a tad as well.
I remember hearing or reading somehwhere that keepers also being excellent with the bat is an exception rather than the rule, eg Gilchrist. I'd rather have someone who is 100% safe behind the stumps with a lesser average than someone who can bat (although I'm still not convinced by Prior, and nauseous about Jones). Maybe proir needs more time but I'd hate to see the situation a la Jones where he couldn't bat OR catch and was just an utter waste of space.
west country boy
10-08-2007, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by New LP
Where those of us posting during the Ashes whitewash and the world cup only posting 'when we were winning'? Exactltly.
Also, Prior is a louse, Nixon is a dope and Jones, G is unspeakable. I do like Read but am not sure he is the answer.
Oisin
11-08-2007, 03:53 AM
I have a ticket for Sunday but as I'll just have got off a 14 hour plane journey with a toddler and the forecast is rain I might just let it go. I wanted to see the Indian greats bat but I can't see them coming to the crease again.
1f66
Godstone Eagle
11-08-2007, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by kolinkins
Post when you're winning, you only post when you're winning....
...where are all the posters from the last 24 months?
All still here if you bothered reading through the posts
As soon as India won the toss, that was it..game over. Last two tosses have been crucial. Having said that, was pleased for Kumble to see him get a hundred. Very good innings, and totally well deserved. India have batted very well on a pitch which is perfect for batting. England's depleted bowling attack has been shown up, not suprising against the quality of the Indian batters.
Yes, Englands tail batting wise has been poor to put it kindly, but with the bowlers dropping out left, right and centre before the series, cant say that im too suprised. India have a very solid and settled looking team. If England were able to put out their best XI, the result would be very different IMO.
oz_da II
11-08-2007, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by Godstone Eagle
If England were able to put out their best XII, the result would be very different IMO.
Not even 12 men would have helped England in these past two tests.
Godstone Eagle
11-08-2007, 10:29 AM
Originally posted by kolinkins
Post when you're winning, you only post when you're winning....
...where are all the posters from the last 24 months?
Where were you during the 1st test...until the weather came to the rescue for India and as if by magic, you appeared.
Absolution
11-08-2007, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by Godstone Eagle
Where were you during the 1st test...until the weather came to the rescue for India and as if by magic, you appeared. Panesar had trapped the last man lbw as well :(
It has been an unlucky series.
Brett
11-08-2007, 11:03 AM
Still waiting for the luck to even itself out in this series...
kolinkins
11-08-2007, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by Godstone Eagle
Where were you during the 1st test...until the weather came to the rescue for India and as if by magic, you appeared.
I dont support India, so I had no real need to be here. My post was mainly down to the fact that these threads are usually good entertainment, this one hasnt been because it has been pretty quiet.
kolinkins
11-08-2007, 11:12 AM
Originally posted by Godstone Eagle
If England were able to put out their best XI, the result would be very different IMO.
Cant any team say that about any series? If Pakistan had their best XI here last summer, the results would have been very different. You can only play with what you've got.
Justy C
11-08-2007, 11:26 AM
Originally posted by kolinkins
I dont support India, so I had no real need to be here. My post was mainly down to the fact that these threads are usually good entertainment, this one hasnt been because it has been pretty quiet.
Hmmmm....I think you were trying to stir things up (and succeeded).
PalaceSi
11-08-2007, 11:31 AM
Englands bowling attack is pale shadow of what it was a couple of years ago, unless its swinging they're toothless.
Prior boobed but even top class keepers do that with regularity. Test keepers must bat well and you don't need a tail that starts at 7, I say stick with him.
The thing that really galls me is that in the first test we were 211 for 2 in a match that was obviously going to be badly shortened by rain and we went off for bad light. The batsmen were untroubled at the time so should have stayed out knowing that they were in a good position and the biggest threat to their strong position in the match was the weather. As it turned out the lost overs cost us the match, shades of when the Aussies did the same in the 5th test at the Oval. Quite apart from the sell out audience deprived of some entertainment they threw the match away and this has now cost them the series aswell as the luck and more specifically the crucial tosses have gone with the Indians since.
Also the Oval groundsman is an arse for producing a pitch that almost guaranteed that the side winning the toss couldn't lose the game. When you produce a pitch like that it is such a major advantage to bat first that it ceases to become a level playing field and frankly spoils the contest. You would have thought that even the most braindead of groundsman would realise that.
Adlerhorst
11-08-2007, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by kolinkins
I dont support India, so I had no real need to be here. My post was mainly down to the fact that these threads are usually good entertainment, this one hasnt been because it has been pretty quiet. You've seen the England under 19 vs Pakistan under 19 score then ;)
kolinkins
11-08-2007, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by Adlerhorst
You've seen the England under 19 vs Pakistan under 19 score then ;)
I like the look of our centurian....
bradpitt
11-08-2007, 01:02 PM
Our batsmen can't cope with the swing
Adlerhorst
11-08-2007, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by kolinkins
I like the look of our centurian.... Are we selectively using our dual nationality again. ;)
kolinkins
11-08-2007, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by Adlerhorst
Are we selectively using our dual nationality again. ;)
not this time, I was thinking of the last test. :)
SJ'sLoveMonkey
11-08-2007, 04:26 PM
Collingwood has just got another shocker off of Howell, this bloke is a total clown
SJ'sLoveMonkey
11-08-2007, 04:32 PM
297/6
SJ'sLoveMonkey
11-08-2007, 04:47 PM
303/7 Bell gone to a pony shot!
1d16
SJ'sLoveMonkey
11-08-2007, 04:50 PM
305/8!
SJ'sLoveMonkey
12-08-2007, 11:44 AM
Need to get Ganguly
Diggers digs in?
12-08-2007, 11:48 AM
Is sidebottom injured?
embryo eagle
12-08-2007, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by Diggers digs in?
Is sidebottom injured?
Yeah he is. It's going to be difficult to finish them off.
embryo eagle
12-08-2007, 12:41 PM
Like Nasser and Athers have just been saying on TV, it would be so much better if this was a 5 test series.
Adlerhorst
12-08-2007, 12:54 PM
Can someone please explain to me the difference between Prior's shot yesterday and the one Read played that lost him his place?
Godstone Eagle
12-08-2007, 12:55 PM
Another plumb lbw turned down by Howell :bash: :bash:
Adlerhorst
12-08-2007, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by Godstone Eagle
Another plumb lbw turned down by Howell :bash: :bash: As i understand it he only gives them when there is little to no chance of the ball hitting the stumps
HTH
maestro
12-08-2007, 01:05 PM
The sooner technology is bought in for LBW's the better imo.
Diggers digs in?
12-08-2007, 01:19 PM
Howell is the worst umpire I've seen in many a long old day.
Super-Ste-Cious
12-08-2007, 01:21 PM
Originally posted by Diggers digs in?
Howell is the worst umpire I've seen in many a long old day.
He is bloody attrocious. Never seen a more inept person in my life. How he is a test umpire is beyond me.
Adlerhorst
12-08-2007, 01:34 PM
Ganguly gone
Adlerhorst
12-08-2007, 01:35 PM
One more wicket and Collingwood would have taken as many wickets in this test as he had in the rest of his career
Adlerhorst
12-08-2007, 01:57 PM
Well feck me that's three wickets in a test for Collingwood
Adlerhorst
12-08-2007, 03:50 PM
So 500 win then
SJ'sLoveMonkey
12-08-2007, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by Adlerhorst
So 500 win then
We haven't lost a wicket yet! :D
SJ'sLoveMonkey
12-08-2007, 04:36 PM
Only 480 to get!
Diggers digs in?
12-08-2007, 05:04 PM
Originally posted by Adlerhorst
One more wicket and Collingwood would have taken as many wickets in this test as he had in the rest of his career
It's not his fault he hardly ever gets a bowl. He's an effective if unspectacular bowler.
Godstone Eagle
12-08-2007, 05:28 PM
Only 444 more runs to win tmw..no probs:D
Adlerhorst
12-08-2007, 05:35 PM
Originally posted by Diggers digs in?
It's not his fault he hardly ever gets a bowl. He's an effective if unspectacular bowler. Sorry but that is not true - he held the record for the most deliveries in test cricket without taking a wicket.
He is an unspectacular bowler. I would never say effective
pete eagle
12-08-2007, 11:59 PM
As Jonathan Agnew says, if England get to lunch tomorrow say only one down for 160ish and then tea at 320ish with wickets in hand then we could be in for a fascinating final session. The key is to bat sensibly but positively, I don't think it will happen as England have a horrible record in such circumstances but I think I'd rather see them go down fighting than just spending the day blocking.
calne eagle
13-08-2007, 12:07 AM
We're going to win.
But then I've believed Palace were going up for the last 38 seasons*
:D
Hey, I was right a few times......
* Not in the top league - I'm not that daft. Hmmmmm...
waddoneagle
13-08-2007, 09:27 AM
England to Win:D
Halfwayline
13-08-2007, 09:37 AM
I am sure I saw Terry Byfield at the 4th day's play at the Oval, Bedser Upper tier.
Godstone Eagle
13-08-2007, 10:59 AM
Strauss out...just 24 runs from the first hour. Its not looking good:D
vBulletin v3.5.3, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
0