Custom Bats Cricket Forum

General Cricket => Latest Matches => Topic started by: Manormanic on February 28, 2012, 10:26:28 AM

Title: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on February 28, 2012, 10:26:28 AM
http://www.espncricinfo.com/sri-lanka-v-england-2012/content/current/story/555556.html

May I be the first to say, Tredwell FFS?

I mean, seriously, he isn't in the best ten spinners in England!  Aside from the other three in the party, Rashid and Borthwick should have been their first thoughts, narrowly followed by Kerrigan, Briggs, Parry - even the positively ancient Keedy or pre-pubescent Rafiq are better bets!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Bruce on February 28, 2012, 10:29:19 AM
I can't see him playing infront of Panesar...
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on February 28, 2012, 10:34:38 AM
He shouldn;t be anywhere near the squad!  What is this, take a pity on a one cap wonder week?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on February 28, 2012, 10:44:49 AM
Thats very disappointing. Tredwell and Patel, i Know it says as cover but why not put someone decent in there. Someone young who can learn whilst being with the squad. Briggs etc.

without getting on the whole Ravi thing again, i dont see him deserving his test place. With morgan gone that pretty much gives him the spot though.

cant see the point in Davies either. Not enough faith in him to be in any of the other squads and has he actually picked up a bat in anger recently? Why not give the likes of bairstow, kiesey or buttler a go as reserve keeper. all 3 can bat. all 3 probably scored more runs that davies last year. all 3 would benefit from time around the squad. do we really see Davies being the next england keeper when prior hangs up the gloves?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on February 28, 2012, 10:48:44 AM
I still think Briggs and Borthwick should be in there instead of Patel and Tredwell.
Also would of tried to sneak James Taylor in there somewhere!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on February 28, 2012, 11:28:07 AM
Rashid rather than either Briggs or Borthwick for me.  Especially relevant if they are thinking of a five batsman/five bowler strategy as:

Strauss
Cook
Trott
Pietersen
Bell
Prior
Bresnan
Rashid
Broad
Swann
Anderson (or Finn - controversial this but I don't see the conditions in Sri Lanka helping Jimmy at all)

Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: cheese on February 28, 2012, 05:16:35 PM
If anyone says James Taylor should be in the team they're wrong.
If England rated him he'd be in the squad.
He isn't up to international cricket...
He played Ireland and got 1!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Bruce on February 28, 2012, 05:23:19 PM
You are basing someone in 1 innings as not good enough for International cricket?

Would LOVE to hear your reasons for why he's not good enough
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Alvaro on February 28, 2012, 05:26:30 PM
Rashid has regressed, Borthwick is another leggie who is hyped because of what he bowls without having the nous, yet, to bowl in the subcontinent.
James Taylor is the new Hildreth.
Good squad.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on February 28, 2012, 05:43:33 PM
Rashid would respond well to the responsibility, and is still by a clear distance the most talented all round cricketer England have available to them.  Much, much better than the pie eating darts player from Notts...
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Tumo on February 28, 2012, 05:49:37 PM
If anyone says James Taylor should be in the team they're wrong.
If England rated him he'd be in the squad.
He isn't up to international cricket...
He played Ireland and got 1!
If we're going by that, Marvin Attapatu was dreadful because he scored 1 run in his first 6 Test innings... Don't be so one-eyed! Taylor is class, they've just invested so much time in Bopara that they don't want to discard him. Also, Rashid had a shocker last year, like Alvaro said he's regressed. Patel is much underrated, by some on here as well it seems, as a 2nd spinner/Number 7 batsman, he's perfect. Should be given a go.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: cheese on February 28, 2012, 07:43:48 PM
You are basing someone in 1 innings as not good enough for International cricket?

Would LOVE to hear your reasons for why he's not good enough
Well he may be good enough for the short form of the game but not the test matches.
Has he got any good decent score in the county championship???
It's just my opinion and you have yours buddy :)
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: essexarsenal on February 28, 2012, 07:54:21 PM
Rashid was shocking last year. Hasnt even been in any of the lions squad.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Tumo on February 28, 2012, 07:56:11 PM
Well he may be good enough for the short form of the game but not the test matches.
Has he got any good decent score in the county championship???
It's just my opinion and you have yours buddy :)
Yeah, he's got plenty of good scores, he does average 50 in FC cricket...
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on February 29, 2012, 09:30:10 AM
Rashid was shocking last year. Hasnt even been in any of the lions squad.

All of the Yorkshire side had a poor year but he wasn't that bad all told, and in any event I think his travails are largely down to his having been ready for a promotion for ages and not receiving one.  I really can't think of a player more harshly treated by England than Adil in recent years.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: PedalsMcgrew on February 29, 2012, 10:04:06 AM
I think you guys are missing the real reason they've picked Tredwell!

What are the chances of him playing in any of the games? Slim? Remote?

So why would they take Borthwick, Briggs etc at a time when their counties are well into pre-season, knowing that all they will do is carry drinks around? That's not going to help their development at all...

Tredwell has got a grooved bowling action, he's a lot better than some on here are giving him credit for and a few weeks carrying the drinks and bowling in the nets at the England batsmen isn't going to do his 'development' any harm at all!

Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: The_Bird on February 29, 2012, 10:14:01 AM
Taylor is still only 22 also, 4500 runs in 63 FC games is better than most. I've never understood why players have carried drinks when they could've played in county cricket or lions games to gain form or enhance their reputation for a senior call up. Who do you guys think will open when Strauss goes?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: essexarsenal on February 29, 2012, 10:22:24 AM
Who do you guys think will open when Strauss goes?

Hales or Jason Roy. But thats a good few years away and anything can happen.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: mdl_1979 on February 29, 2012, 10:30:10 AM
Neither Hales nor Jason Roy will play Test cricket.  I think Joe Root will have a good chance of a top order spot.  What would be more likely is that Trott woud move up to open, Bell to number 3 and a new middle order player will come in.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on February 29, 2012, 11:57:17 AM
So why would they take Borthwick, Briggs etc at a time when their counties are well into pre-season, knowing that all they will do is carry drinks around? That's not going to help their development at all...

Rashid had three bloody winters of carrying the drinks!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on February 29, 2012, 11:57:47 AM
Hales or Jason Roy. But thats a good few years away and anything can happen.

More likely Joe Root, Adam Lyth or Daniel Drummond-Bell than either of these two!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Alvaro on February 29, 2012, 12:03:53 PM
Rashid had three bloody winters of carrying the drinks!
#idle conjecture alert#
And a gobby Father who may not have done him any favours...
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on February 29, 2012, 12:04:29 PM
Hmmm...not sure how you figure that!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on February 29, 2012, 10:11:23 PM
My team for the first test would have to be;

Cook
Strauss
Trott
Pietersen
Bell
Patel (Pretty good stats in FC cricket, and I think he could make the step up to test cricket)
Prior
Bresnan
Broad
Swann
Anderson

Although knowing that James Taylor isn't going on the tour, I still think that if he was i'd replace Bell with him.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Alvaro on March 01, 2012, 12:59:08 PM
Cook
Strauss
Trott
Pietersen
Bell
Bopara
Prior
Broad
Swann
Anderson
Monty
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: PedalsMcgrew on March 03, 2012, 06:58:14 PM
Rashid had three bloody winters of carrying the drinks!

And look how well he has developed...........or not. He hardly even gets a mention these days.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 03, 2012, 07:16:56 PM
And look how well he has developed...........or not. He hardly even gets a mention these days.

Wisden had it best in their 2011 issue - "as he develops into an increasingly rounded cricketer, so England's interest in him wanes"

If he played for Slurry, Middlesex or Gileshire, he's have been first choice two years ago.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: PedalsMcgrew on March 03, 2012, 07:41:39 PM
Since when has playing for Yorkshire been a barrier to playing for England?


Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Vic Nicholas on March 12, 2012, 10:15:42 AM
Neither Hales nor Jason Roy will play Test cricket.  I think Joe Root will have a good chance of a top order spot.  What would be more likely is that Trott woud move up to open, Bell to number 3 and a new middle order player will come in.

Oh please!

All this needless speculation fails to grasp what will REALLY happen.

The ECB scouts in Cape Town are as we speak scouting Saffers feverishly to shore up Englands batting as stalwarts start to retire.

No need to concern yourself with the form of young English lads in the ECCC, because there will be a superior Saffer who will have a speck of British DNA in his Afrikaans blood stream that will qualify him ahead of Root, Hildreth, Taylor et al when the time comes.

Fear not, the ECB talent scouts in Cape Town have everything under control!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Johnny on March 12, 2012, 10:23:08 AM
Oh please!

All this needless speculation fails to grasp what will REALLY happen.

The ECB scouts in Cape Town are as we speak scouting Saffers feverishly to shore up Englands batting as stalwarts start to retire.

No need to concern yourself with the form of young English lads in the ECCC, because there will be a superior Saffer who will have a speck of British DNA in his Afrikaans blood stream that will qualify him ahead of Root, Hildreth, Taylor et al when the time comes.

Fear not, the ECB talent scouts in Cape Town have everything under control!

ZZzzz...
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 12, 2012, 11:06:30 AM
Since when has playing for Yorkshire been a barrier to playing for England?

A barrier to playing for England?  Well, the perception of many is that its certainly a hurdle to overcome and that a talented young Yorkshire lad runs the risk of being passed over for a not quite as talented lad playing for one of the South Eastern/London clubs, Nottinghamshire or for Ashley Giles own side.

Is that a fact rather than perception?  Hard to tell, but there is considerable evidence to support the concern.

Lets look at Rashid as an example.  As of today, his first class record shows 280 wickets at 35 and a batting average of 34, including four centuries, all in pressure situations, and he has been the highest wicket taker amongst English spinners in three of the last four seasons.  When representing England, he's performed well - winning a game against Australia with the bat and doing admirably well with the ball as well (with the exception of one day day at altitude in South Africa). 

Accepted, Swann is definitely our number one spinner but the other three under sonsideration don't match up to these figures very well at all - Samit Patel has a better batting average at 40 , but has taken less than half the wickets in nearly twice the time and at an inferior average.  Oh, and he's unwilling to meet even minimal fitness standards (in that, as of this week I, a 35 year old with serious knee problems and no history of watching my weight, can outperform him on the bleep test).  Then there's James Tredwell, with an equivalent bowling average mostly accrued in Division 2, nothing like the strike rate and a batting average fully ten runs a knock lower.

All this would lead me to suspect that the selectors either know very little about what they're doing, or have some inherent bias, yes.

You can go further though - how do Stuart Meaker and Jade Dernach keep getting selected yet someone like Ajmal Shahzad comes in, performs well under pressure than gets shunted aside?  Ah hold on, there could be something in that Saffer theory....
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Kulli on March 12, 2012, 11:49:38 AM
I presume Treadwell was picked as backup to Swann, because he brings the ball into RHB's, all the other bowlers mentioned spin it the same way as Panesar and Patel.

Don't really understand the hate for SP getting picked, there aren't may other options that can bat at 6 and be a second spinner and he's done  well in the ODI side recently.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 12, 2012, 12:02:20 PM
Patel?  Well, aside from the fact that he has still not met the minimum standards set out for an England player in terms of fitness and weight (and I stress, after a bit of a health kick, I've managed them, which anyone who knows me will confirm demonstrates that they're pretty manageable targets) and the obvious fact that he is nowhere near an international standard bowler (I laughed when you claimed he turned it!), there is the additional issue that he ain't an international bat either - I agree he might be, but when a guy, when playing in a Championship decider, is so horribly blown up that he throws a ton away then he probably ain't ready to bat in 30 degrees plus for his country.  I would also love to know why Ian Blackwell, who was smaller than Patel and actually reasonably fit and a decent fielder with it, was deemed too big for international cricket by these standards.

As for the 6 spot, I don't see that Prior at six with either Bresnan at seven as one of the three seamers or indeed Rashid at seven and Bresnan eight would weaken the side at all!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Nickauger on March 12, 2012, 12:26:57 PM
Oh please!

All this needless speculation fails to grasp what will REALLY happen.

The ECB scouts in Cape Town are as we speak scouting Saffers feverishly to shore up Englands batting as stalwarts start to retire.

No need to concern yourself with the form of young English lads in the ECCC, because there will be a superior Saffer who will have a speck of British DNA in his Afrikaans blood stream that will qualify him ahead of Root, Hildreth, Taylor et al when the time comes.

Fear not, the ECB talent scouts in Cape Town have everything under control!
Nothing better to do today Vic? And to think, you started off on this forum with not a bad word to say about anything and some very insightful posts. Such a shame to see you descend into being such a muppet!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: arc1983 on March 12, 2012, 07:12:20 PM
Bit harsh Nick, thought that was a witty post from our Antipodean friend.... with the underlying theme a fair comment. I have always been very critical of NZ / Aus poaching Pacific Islanders in rugby union, and England's use of South Africans (although they have not actively been seeking them) is pretty similar.

On the Patel / Rashid point, unfortunately Rashid did not have a good year last season and that has put him down the pecking order. I'd pick Patel ahead of Rashid as he does one function very well - batting, where as Rashid is neither a top 6 batsmen or a bowler who can be trusted in a 4 man attack. I do believe he has been dealt a bad hand over the last 3-4 years, but the current selection / coaching team have got very little wrong, so I respect their opinions.

Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Nickauger on March 12, 2012, 07:29:34 PM
It's not wit, it's jealousy lol.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Blazer on March 21, 2012, 06:02:26 PM
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-RediI-RWwYA/T2oXaGf-6II/AAAAAAAAATU/CdpA2nzPpNE/s640/143772.jpg)
Notice anything ?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 21, 2012, 06:05:04 PM
Samit Patel was bowling - eff all chance of him beating the bat!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: tushar sehgal on March 21, 2012, 06:13:41 PM
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-RediI-RWwYA/T2oXaGf-6II/AAAAAAAAATU/CdpA2nzPpNE/s640/143772.jpg)
Notice anything ?


His posture/stance is all wrong :p
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: johnnyw on March 21, 2012, 06:15:29 PM
Didnt wear pads because of the heat
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Nickauger on March 21, 2012, 06:21:54 PM
Patel and Bopara didn't do any wonders for their chances did they? 14 and 12 off 36 and 40 odd? Is that right?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: charlie15 on March 22, 2012, 12:37:14 PM
Patel and Bopara didn't do any wonders for their chances did they? 14 and 12 off 36 and 40 odd? Is that right?

I think they made up for it today with 72 and 66 respectively!  Swanny didn't do to bad with 31 from 12 to win it either!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on March 22, 2012, 12:39:15 PM
I think the teams looking pretty good going in to the series, couple of good wins in the warm up matches. Still unsure on whether Patel or Bopara. Seeing as Bopara may not be able to bowl in the series I think that Patel may just take that No. 6 spot.

Also quite like how Prior hasn't bothered wearing Keeping Pads
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Pitbull on March 22, 2012, 12:48:04 PM
The pitches seem even flatter than they did in the UAE, wouldn't be surprised if the series ends in a draw. (I say series but two games is hardly a series)

And I would probably go with Patel at 6 means we can have two spinners plus Bres, Broad and Jimmy rather than dropping one of them for Monty
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: charlie15 on March 22, 2012, 12:50:35 PM
How about KP, his spin used to be really quite handy!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Pitbull on March 22, 2012, 12:52:04 PM
How about KP, his spin used to be really quite handy!

KP will get a bowl at somepoint, always does
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on March 22, 2012, 12:53:05 PM
And I would probably go with Patel at 6 means we can have two spinners plus Bres, Broad and Jimmy rather than dropping one of them for Monty

I'm thinking we'd probably go for the same team then. Can always use Trott and Pietersen as part timers :)
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: uknsaunders on March 22, 2012, 12:57:23 PM
bresnan would my choice if the pitches are going to be flat.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on March 22, 2012, 01:01:07 PM
Strauss
Cook
Trott
Pietersen
Bell (possibly Bopara, depending on what he does in the test)
Prior
Patel
Bresnan
Broad
Swann
Anderson


Was thinking you can always swap Prior and Patel around. But after having a think I reckon Prior above Patel.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: charlie15 on March 22, 2012, 01:05:05 PM
Strauss
Cook
Trott
Pietersen
Bell (possibly Bopara, depending on what he does in the test)
Prior
Patel
Bresnan
Broad
Swann
Anderson


Was thinking you can always swap Prior and Patel around. But after having a think I reckon Prior above Patel.

I'd want Monty in there, he was brilliant in the UAE, plus do we really want someone (Patel) who really has been picked as a Batsmen to be bowling a lot of overs in the heat and humidity?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Outlaw on March 22, 2012, 01:13:47 PM
Just noticed Ravi has ditched GM, using SS bat and GM pads relabelled with an SS logo.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: langer17 on March 22, 2012, 01:18:14 PM
Bell is really struggling ATM. I wouldn't be surprised if he was left out.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on March 22, 2012, 01:20:06 PM
Could you leave Bell out and play Patel?

And then go in with 5 outright bowlers, Anderson, Bresnan, Broad, Swann and Panesar then all rounder spin from Patel?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: The_Bird on March 22, 2012, 01:25:38 PM
Could you leave Bell out and play Patel?

And then go in with 5 outright bowlers, Anderson, Bresnan, Broad, Swann and Panesar then all rounder spin from Patel?

Warm up pitches seem Flatter than a flat thing so could go with that,  it would mean prior or Patel batting at 5 tho....
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: petehosk on March 22, 2012, 01:31:16 PM
I suspect they may go with........

Strauss
Cook
Trott
Pietersen
Bell
Prior
Bresnan
Broad
Swann
Anderson
Monty



Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Buzz on March 22, 2012, 01:33:49 PM
no chance of Bell being dropped for the time being, he has been our best batsman over the last 18 months, Cook and Trott included - apart from the tour to Dubai.

the team for the first test will be
Strauss, Cook, Trott, KP, Bell, Patel (Ravi has got side strain and can't bowl- so effectively rules himself out), Prior, Broad, Swann, Anderson, Panasar.

Sorry Pete - Patel over Bresnan for me, if they need some extra swing, Trott will fill in.
With Finn is ripping the door down to be included...
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on March 22, 2012, 01:36:40 PM
Is it even likely that they will replace Bopara?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: tushar sehgal on March 22, 2012, 01:38:36 PM
Anyone know when Tremlett is coming back?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Joe on March 22, 2012, 01:44:00 PM
Anyone know when Tremlett is coming back?
Never. He won't play another game for England.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: mattw on March 22, 2012, 01:44:22 PM
I'd want Monty in there, he was brilliant in the UAE, plus do we really want someone (Patel) who really has been picked as a Batsmen to be bowling a lot of overs in the heat and humidity?

Patel may lose a few pounds if he bowls a few overs in that heat.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Pitbull on March 22, 2012, 01:54:34 PM
Strauss
Cook
Trott
Pietersen
Bell (possibly Bopara, depending on what he does in the test)
Prior
Patel
Bresnan
Broad
Swann
Anderson


Was thinking you can always swap Prior and Patel around. But after having a think I reckon Prior above Patel.

Completely agree, depends if Bell manages to cut that invisible string that seems to be tying his feet together again.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: tushar sehgal on March 22, 2012, 01:55:52 PM
Never. He won't play another game for England.

Why is that mate, something happened with him?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Pitbull on March 22, 2012, 01:59:08 PM
Hes had back trouble again, but I can't see him getting ahead of Finn, Broad, Anderson and Bresnan at the moment
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: tushar sehgal on March 22, 2012, 02:01:51 PM
Hes had back trouble again, but I can't see him getting ahead of Finn, Broad, Anderson and Bresnan at the moment

Thats too bad he looked good when he was playing...
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: langer17 on March 22, 2012, 02:29:20 PM
Bell's scores this year (test and FC): 3, 39, 0, 12*, 0, 4, 29, 3, 5, 10, 0, 14, 11.

I'm just saying that I wouldn't be surprised if it happened.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: charlie15 on March 22, 2012, 02:34:45 PM
Patel may lose a few pounds if he bowls a few overs in that heat.

Haha quality, We'll just send him out to Sri Lanka for an extra long net if/when he gets fat again!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Buzz on March 26, 2012, 07:22:20 AM
no chance of Bell being dropped for the time being, he has been our best batsman over the last 18 months, Cook and Trott included - apart from the tour to Dubai.

the team for the first test will be
Strauss, Cook, Trott, KP, Bell, Patel (Ravi has got side strain and can't bowl- so effectively rules himself out), Prior, Broad, Swann, Anderson, Panasar.

Sorry Pete - Patel over Bresnan for me, if they need some extra swing, Trott will fill in.
With Finn is ripping the door down to be included...

so you heard the team news here first and we have taken 3 early wickets, with sl batting first on winning the toss.
now it is the long haul to the second new ball!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: charlie15 on March 26, 2012, 01:06:36 PM
Cracking start, but to drop Jayawardne 4 times, and the two from Monty were shockers!  Although it is nice to see that one part of my game is better (just) than an international players!!!  :D
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: 109notout on March 26, 2012, 08:06:49 PM
Great knock by Jayawardene, although dropping him 4 times as charlie said, not acceptable at that level, we shouldnt have let them get above 200 after being 24-3 or whatever they were...but hey who am I to criticise, Im never going to be as good as them! lol
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on March 27, 2012, 09:27:41 AM
poor from england today. 125 run lead conceeded. If only we could have taken one of the 4 Mahela chances things could be alot different. lets hope monty makes up for his lack of catching skills with a rapid 5fer. even if we get them out for 200 thats still a pretty large target to chase.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Alvaro on March 28, 2012, 11:46:53 AM
Hope springs eternal ...
But then hope is the killer
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 28, 2012, 11:52:30 AM
Quite.  If we'd been chasing 299 I'd actually back us to make it fromhere - the extra 47 that they got post Broad's no ball wicket will be the real killer I fear.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: thedon on March 28, 2012, 12:13:52 PM
Did anyone see swanns appeal for a run out after the no-ball dismissal? I missed it
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Pitbull on March 28, 2012, 12:37:53 PM
I know its easier said than done but today has shown how flat the pitch is, 200 odd to win in 2 days only requires Trott to get stuck in with Pietersen and Bell to play a few shots around him BUT that would be in a perfect world and the way England are playing at the moment I can see us being skittled out by lunch tomorrow
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on March 28, 2012, 12:53:41 PM
I thoroughly believe that if Trott and Pietersen (touches wood) get off to a good start tomorrow that this chance is do able. With Bell looking also looking in pretty good nick too I think there's a possibility!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: charlie15 on March 28, 2012, 03:03:24 PM
From what I've heard and read on TMS (where would those of us who work be without it!) it's the new ball that does the damage even for the spinners, as it gets softer it doesn't do much and all it takes is a bit of application and patience.  The question is do Trott, KP and Bell have that in them, we all know Trott does, but KP seems intent on playing shots that aren't there and not waiting around, while Bell seems to me to be a bit of a walking wicket when he first gets in until he's through the 20's.  The tail has the potential to add another 150 at least so we'll see how it goes.  Lose a couple of wickets tomorrow morning and then it's game over, but if we can get through to Lunch and add around 100 without loss then we'll be well placed for a critical afternoon session where if we bat well (stating the obvious I know) we can win the test.  Like Vaughn said he doesn't see this Sri Lankan attack being able to bowl 10 jaffa's so it's just down to us playing each ball on it's merits.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Buzz on March 28, 2012, 03:18:04 PM
I haven't watched any of the game, but I am getting the impression that in the first innings Strauss was given out on review but hit the ball and the same with Ali cook in the second innings?

Oooh where is hotspot when you need it?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 28, 2012, 05:40:47 PM
I haven't watched any of the game, but I am getting the impression that in the first innings Strauss was given out on review but hit the ball and the same with Ali cook in the second innings?

Oooh where is hotspot when you need it?

Cook was a tad unlucky - if pushed I'd say he *probably* hit it, but such noise as there was was unclear (the bat also caught the ground) and there was no noticeable deviation.  Again, this is where the system fails, because the TV umpire was still guessing.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 28, 2012, 05:41:12 PM
From what I've heard and read on TMS (where would those of us who work be without it!) it's the new ball that does the damage even for the spinners, as it gets softer it doesn't do much and all it takes is a bit of application and patience.  The question is do Trott, KP and Bell have that in them, we all know Trott does, but KP seems intent on playing shots that aren't there and not waiting around, while Bell seems to me to be a bit of a walking wicket when he first gets in until he's through the 20's.  The tail has the potential to add another 150 at least so we'll see how it goes.  Lose a couple of wickets tomorrow morning and then it's game over, but if we can get through to Lunch and add around 100 without loss then we'll be well placed for a critical afternoon session where if we bat well (stating the obvious I know) we can win the test.  Like Vaughn said he doesn't see this Sri Lankan attack being able to bowl 10 jaffa's so it's just down to us playing each ball on it's merits.

To be fair to KP he batted pretty damn well today!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: mdl_1979 on March 29, 2012, 05:52:33 AM
The premeditated sweep shot - grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: iand123 on March 29, 2012, 06:21:38 AM
Rediculous shot from bell, hope his shake of the head as he walked off was at his shot selection as it didn't look like he hit that ball
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Kulli on March 29, 2012, 06:23:49 AM
I haven't watched any of the game, but I am getting the impression that in the first innings Strauss was given out on review but hit the ball and the same with Ali cook in the second innings?

Oooh where is hotspot when you need it?
Cook was given out caught behind, so can't really complain that he hit it!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: tommo256 on March 29, 2012, 06:24:45 AM
The boys just need to meet there batting averages, don't need a special day just an average day at office
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Kulli on March 29, 2012, 06:40:58 AM
A lot easier said than done though, especially on a spinning wicket.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 29, 2012, 06:46:04 AM
Rediculous shot from bell, hope his shake of the head as he walked off was at his shot selection as it didn't look like he hit that ball

Wierd one - my reaction live was that he'd got an under edge on it and his immediate review seemed to substantiate that, as did his reaction as he walked off, which was a real twenty percenter.  But no, I don't think he did hit it...
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on March 29, 2012, 07:51:08 AM
Cook was given out caught behind, so can't really complain that he hit it!

having watched the replays im not really sure he did hit it. there does look like a deflection but the ball rotation didnt change. could just have been a trick of the eye as the bat moved across the line of the ball. either way he didnt look pleased
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: PM7 on March 29, 2012, 08:18:15 AM
This is set up beautifully. every Test team needs a Trott!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Cossie on March 29, 2012, 08:21:36 AM
Great innings from Trott, how unfortunate to lose Prior in that fashion. This is set up perfectly
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 29, 2012, 08:21:52 AM
aye.  Shame Prior has gone to the dreaded sweep tho...mind, not sure he did that much wrong there!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Cossie on March 29, 2012, 08:27:26 AM
Cook was a tad unlucky - if pushed I'd say he *probably* hit it, but such noise as there was was unclear (the bat also caught the ground) and there was no noticeable deviation.  Again, this is where the system fails, because the TV umpire was still guessing.

I don't understand how the UDRS can be used without all the technology, it should be a level playing field and all aspects of technology be available or not used at all.

Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 29, 2012, 08:28:42 AM
I don't understand how the UDRS can be used without all the technology, it should be a level playing field and all aspects of technology be available or not used at all.

I think there are still substantial issues withthe system - it should always be used with all the tech as you say, but they also need to make sure it is a consistent process, because to my mind England have been on the end of a few this winter that have shown up flaws in the system.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on March 29, 2012, 08:28:58 AM
In Trott I feel that South Africa have missed out! :p
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on March 29, 2012, 08:43:27 AM
What was that Trott just had? Looked like a little sachette of calpol!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: pedaloboy on March 29, 2012, 08:52:42 AM
Well it looks like it's gonna be left to Monty and Jimmy to finish the job then!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Burdy on March 29, 2012, 08:53:01 AM
Oh dear! Samit samit samit  >:(

Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on March 29, 2012, 08:53:07 AM
probably be a high energy electrolyte type of liquid. help replenish the fluids and salt/minerals he is losing by batting in that heat
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on March 29, 2012, 08:54:14 AM
80 odd runs for trott, broad, swanny and jimmy to knock off? hopefully monty wont be required at that point
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on March 29, 2012, 08:56:08 AM
probably be a high energy electrolyte type of liquid. help replenish the fluids and salt/minerals he is losing by batting in that heat

I saw it and just thought Calpol! :|
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on March 29, 2012, 09:00:12 AM
NO!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on March 29, 2012, 09:06:04 AM
I saw it and just thought Calpol! :|

i havent seen it just guessing,
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on March 29, 2012, 09:07:17 AM
lets hope broad makes up for his no ball error. those 40 odd runs could be the difference
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on March 29, 2012, 09:08:43 AM
I really do feel that no ball will be costly!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on March 29, 2012, 09:09:08 AM
And SWANN OUT SWEEPING! >:(
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Cossie on March 29, 2012, 09:11:49 AM
I think there are still substantial issues withthe system - it should always be used with all the tech as you say, but they also need to make sure it is a consistent process, because to my mind England have been on the end of a few this winter that have shown up flaws in the system.

Having watched a lot of test cricket this winter, I think there are still a lot of issues with the process. When India refuse to use it and you have test cricket in New Zealand which has all the options available to them, it can't be consistent process without all technology being available to the tv umpire.

In the case of Cook and any other referral for an edge, unless there is significant evidence or an obvious deviation then the tv umpire is guessing. The 3rd umpire is there to access the overall picture and to eradicate any doubt, they surely can't do this in this series.

Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 29, 2012, 09:12:30 AM
Oh dear! Samit samit samit  >:(

thats what happens if you tell the fat kid he won't play till he gets fit then let him play anyway!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on March 29, 2012, 09:25:26 AM
when i was at school i thought unless it was rugby the fat kid always got picked last? how things have changed
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Kulli on March 29, 2012, 09:28:42 AM
80 odd runs for trott, broad, swanny and jimmy to knock off? hopefully monty wont be required at that point
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on March 29, 2012, 09:32:56 AM
can i include monty as our secret weapon? lol stranger things have happened

ignore the above!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Burdy on March 29, 2012, 09:45:31 AM
Losing the last 6 wickets for not very many. Very inept performance batting wise. Failure against spin was the downfall.
I know us English love a moan up when we lose, but this will be my only rant.

I know i am not samit patels biggest fan, but i feel he what is the point of using him in the test squad? Bowled very few overs and not really batted out of this world. Why not use another recognized batsmen, someone with a better temperament? Leave Patel in the 1 day team where he is better suited. We have 2 spinners, monty and swann, and a part time spinner like Kp who can bowl you 10 overs if needed so no need for Patel.
England are not suited to these slow turning pitches abroad, and now feel that all other test playing nations have twigged on to this.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Kulli on March 29, 2012, 09:46:41 AM
Reshuffle required for the next test, one of Patel or Panesar needs to go for Bresnan I think, even on this pitch our seamers troubled them as much as the spinners did.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: joeylough on March 29, 2012, 09:48:02 AM
Anyone else feel that Bopara should have played to give the extra batting option, as that is where we are failing.

Patel bowled few overs. Would Trotts chucks instead of patel made any difference to the run chase?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Burdy on March 29, 2012, 09:51:19 AM
Butcher has now even said England need another batsman. It is not hard to see. England cannot keep thinking the tailenders will grab 50-100 runs, this would be great if they did, but it isnt going to happen every game.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on March 29, 2012, 09:53:34 AM
i dont see the benefit of samit or ravi in the team. ravi isnt fully fit so shouldnt play. samit doesnt offer enough all round to be included. if he bowled double the overs and offered more with the bat then great, but he doesnt. Get in a full time batsman. someone who just bats. if we need some part time stuff we have kp and trott. id rather see prior in the patel roll with a batsman above him than see him as the last recognised batsman.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: mdl_1979 on March 29, 2012, 09:54:22 AM
Changing the personnel isn't necessarily the answer.  The batters just need to bat better.  The bowlers have done their job throughout the winter - time for the batsmen to step up.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Kulli on March 29, 2012, 09:56:17 AM
Changing the personnel isn't necessarily the answer.  The batters just need to bat better.  The bowlers have done their job throughout the winter - time for the batsmen to step up.
I do think we looked a seamer short though, especially in the first dig, when they were struggling against Anderson and Broad.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: uknsaunders on March 29, 2012, 09:59:11 AM
Pick Bresnan (as I suggested pre-test) and you might of chased 30-40 runs less with another fresh seamer and he would of scored more runs than Samit.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Kulli on March 29, 2012, 10:06:40 AM
How about Bresnan in for Monty, arguably Patel can do a job as a defensive spinner who'll take the odd wicket while Swann attacks, and it'd vastly strengthen both the batting and the fielding.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: mdl_1979 on March 29, 2012, 10:11:39 AM
I can see Bresnan for Patel, as it doesn't really weaken the batting too much.  Not Bresnan for Monty though.  You need the 2 frontline spinners out there, and Monty has bowled well throughout the winter.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Kulli on March 29, 2012, 10:22:50 AM
he has, but he still fields and bats like a special, and I'm not sure that's worth putting up with for the level his bowling is at.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: bigboy on March 29, 2012, 10:26:40 AM
Monty would need 5 fors every game to make up for his fielding and batting, he is attrotious.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 29, 2012, 10:31:57 AM
I can see Bresnan for Patel, as it doesn't really weaken the batting too much.  Not Bresnan for Monty though.  You need the 2 frontline spinners out there, and Monty has bowled well throughout the winter.

he has, but with both him and Fat Lad there are issues - one is a decent spinner who cannot bat or field, the other is a moderate batsman who cannot field and has probably taken his only two test wickets already.  Hate to say it but they should have taken Rashid in the first place!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Kulli on March 29, 2012, 10:35:42 AM
Patel's actually looked a pretty good fielder from what I've seen.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Nickauger on March 29, 2012, 10:45:51 AM
Patel's actually looked a pretty good fielder from what I've seen.
But not the best fielder in th eteam. And has not set the world alight with his batting or bowling.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on March 29, 2012, 10:46:07 AM
in my opinion samit patel is fortunate to have had a test debut. there are so many batsman in county cricket that would deserve a place but havent been given the chance. Look at hildreth a few years ago. outscored everyone as captain of the a team/lions and then didnt get a look in. dont get me wrong i dont think his season was anything special for a few years but i would much rather see a talented batsman like him (taylor etc etc) be given a chance.

it seems if your in and around the squads you get noticed for postions in other squads . if your not then you dont
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Pitbull on March 29, 2012, 10:57:22 AM
Would love to see James Taylor in the team at some point in the summer or at least for the tour of India in the Autumn as a option instead of Bell. I think its time that they dropped Bopara, the fact that he has been 12th man for the last 2 years and he hasn't got a look in shows that he isn't good enough, okay ODI player but not a test batsman.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Kulli on March 29, 2012, 11:06:55 AM
I like Taylor a lot, and think he has real potential, but his record for the Lions in Bangladesh was dire, suggests he's another one that plays spin poorly.

I think Patel got the chance because he has a decent Fc record and had done well in the ODI side, much the same as many others in the past.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 29, 2012, 11:11:07 AM
Patel being invited back into the fold was the first crack in England's aura of invincibility and look where its gotten them - until then, the Andy's had made it clear that they had a plan for everything.  Then, all of a sudden, despite him showing scant interest in doing what it took to get himself in condition for international cricket, they decided that his face suddenly fitted.  Not good!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Alvaro on March 29, 2012, 02:25:03 PM
Has anyone seen James Taylor bat? He gets into line like Kim Barnett with a dead leg... Too much to go awry against decent attacks IMO.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on March 29, 2012, 02:47:22 PM
when i mentioned his name earlier i didnt actually mean him as a replacement. just an example of a decent younger guy who could do a job. plenty more in county cricket
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: joeylough on March 29, 2012, 03:26:22 PM
Get one of Lancs spinners over there to sort it out.

*County Champs*
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: mattw on March 29, 2012, 03:31:45 PM
It's not the bowlers we need to change...
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on March 29, 2012, 03:35:25 PM
James Taylor needs to be in there somewhere! :)
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on March 29, 2012, 03:45:39 PM
best average last season for one of the youngsters in CC was alex hales at 51. carberry was at 56. bairstow 46. taylor and hildreth at 38's, kiesey 36
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: mattw on March 29, 2012, 03:47:36 PM
Now carberry is back fit, maybe it's time he got a chance. Solid player.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on March 29, 2012, 03:48:18 PM
yeah good in the field. experience of a few years in county cricket
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: bigboy on March 29, 2012, 10:28:41 PM
Patel being invited back into the fold was the first crack in England's aura of invincibility and look where its gotten them - until then, the Andy's had made it clear that they had a plan for everything.  Then, all of a sudden, despite him showing scant interest in doing what it took to get himself in condition for international cricket, they decided that his face suddenly fitted.  Not good!
Aura of invincibility?   

Come on, 2 countries over the last 40 years have had an Aura and England is not one. Four bad losses on the trot can't be blamed on Patel either, the batting has been dismal.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Vic Nicholas on March 30, 2012, 02:04:53 AM
Nothing better to do today Vic? And to think, you started off on this forum with not a bad word to say about anything and some very insightful posts. Such a shame to see you descend into being such a muppet!

1/ You clearly lack a sense of humour.

2/ What part of that tongue in cheek post is untrue?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Nickauger on March 30, 2012, 06:50:05 AM
Haha, there are 15 or 20 posts after mine, and you chose to pick up on that, again without adding anything to the debate! I applaud you!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Blazer on March 30, 2012, 08:07:08 AM
Is it just me or anyone else ? I find Russel Arnold's commentary grating !
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 30, 2012, 08:35:10 AM
Aura of invincibility?   

Come on, 2 countries over the last 40 years have had an Aura and England is not one. Four bad losses on the trot can't be blamed on Patel either, the batting has been dismal.

Slightly tounge in cheek, but I'll stand by it - winning the Ashes so convincingly down under, mullering India at home on the back of previous acheivements, it all looked so "strong" - the West Indies appeared invincible because they battered you with pace, Australia because Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath would dig them out of just about anything, with England it was the meticulous planning, arduous fitness regime and will to compete..  But when they started going back on decisions like insisting Patel meet minimum fitness standards, it got very easy for other sides to lose respect for them.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: joeylough on March 30, 2012, 09:37:24 AM
Can anyone inform me if Monty is still using a blank bat? As if his bats are sponsored they must get the least amount of TV time. Monty's run chase!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Kulli on March 30, 2012, 09:39:20 AM
he used a GN Scoop
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 30, 2012, 09:39:54 AM
not that it did hima lot of good!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Vic Nicholas on March 30, 2012, 01:46:15 PM
Haha, there are 15 or 20 posts after mine, and you chose to pick up on that, again without adding anything to the debate! I applaud you!

I haven't been on the site for a couple weeks, so started reading from the start of thread again...then I answered your post before reading any further posts.

Your point is what exactly?

So we can see that you not only lack a sense of humour, you have a chip on your shoulder as well.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Alvaro on March 30, 2012, 01:54:37 PM
Hi Vic,
Welcome back :)
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Vic Nicholas on March 30, 2012, 02:26:38 PM
Slightly tounge in cheek, but I'll stand by it - winning the Ashes so convincingly down under, mullering India at home on the back of previous acheivements, it all looked so "strong" - the West Indies appeared invincible because they battered you with pace, Australia because Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath would dig them out of just about anything, with England it was the meticulous planning, arduous fitness regime and will to compete..  But when they started going back on decisions like insisting Patel meet minimum fitness standards, it got very easy for other sides to lose respect for them.

It seems that you also fell for the "we will dominate world cricket for the next twenty years" that was being peddled around here.

England beat an awful Australia that needed (and still need) a full rebuild. Then England crushed an insipid India that couldn't fight their way through a wet paper bag...and their subsequent series against the Windies and Oz bore out how far they had fallen.

So, England had an outstanding six months where even modest players filled their boots with easy runs and easy wickets against insipid Australian and Indian teams.

Much is now being made of the fact that "we just don't play well on spinning decks", and while this is true to a degree, there is a deeper problem that will be exposed by an outstanding South African pace attack this northern summer. Namely that some England batsmen like Strauss and Pietersen are past their best, others like Bell and Cook are hot and cold and the number six position has no obvious candidate.

Anderson is a good bowler, but he is hardly in the class of Steyn and Philander. Broad is overrated, Tremlett IS a very good bowler, but at 31 is injury prone and already is approaching the sunset. The fat man must come in, as much for his lower order batting as his excellent seam up bowling. A bowling attack or Anderson, Tremlett, Bresnan and Swann is very, very good.

The batting needs to be strengthened and whether it be one of the young guns like Taylor or Root, or some Saffer than none of us has heard of as yet, only time will tell.

All I know is that I will be watching the test series closely this summer between England and South Africa to get a true gauge of where England is at.

Win that series comfortably, then you are onto something. Lose, and your achievements in that golden six months will be put into perspective.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Vic Nicholas on March 30, 2012, 02:27:35 PM
Hi Vic,
Welcome back :)

Thanks Alvy!

Good to see ya!  :)
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Buzz on March 30, 2012, 03:40:27 PM
I have to say that if there was a record for the worst number one rated team in cricket history - the fight between Eng and India would be pretty close... :(

Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 30, 2012, 04:17:26 PM
Much is now being made of the fact that "we just don't play well on spinning decks", and while this is true to a degree, there is a deeper problem that will be exposed by an outstanding South African pace attack this northern summer. Namely that some England batsmen like Strauss and Pietersen are past their best, others like Bell and Cook are hot and cold and the number six position has no obvious candidate.

Anderson is a good bowler, but he is hardly in the class of Steyn and Philander. Broad is overrated, Tremlett IS a very good bowler, but at 31 is injury prone and already is approaching the sunset. The fat man must come in, as much for his lower order batting as his excellent seam up bowling. A bowling attack or Anderson, Tremlett, Bresnan and Swann is very, very good.

The batting needs to be strengthened and whether it be one of the young guns like Taylor or Root, or some Saffer than none of us has heard of as yet, only time will tell.

All I know is that I will be watching the test series closely this summer between England and South Africa to get a true gauge of where England is at.

Win that series comfortably, then you are onto something. Lose, and your achievements in that golden six months will be put into perspective.

Odd that you disagreed with me when I said precisely teh sam about our batting some four months ago Vic!  I'm not convinced KP is past it in the way that Strauss maybe is, but there are certainly two to three slots up for grabs in the top six.  My theory is that England are hoping to stretch it out until the end of the Summer with most of what they have now with a view to then blooding Ben Stokes as a number 6/7 who can also get through a share of overs as a third seamer.

Where I disagree is in your assessment of the relative merits of the England and Yarpie attacks.  Anderson is nearly as good as Steyn and certainly better than Philander who, electric start notwithstanding, is very good rather than future great.  Broad, if he pitches it up, is probably just about worth a slot alongside Bresnan and of course Finn and Tremlett give depth.  Far greater depth than SA have presently - De Lange is their fourth seamer and he is definitely uninispiring at this stage!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Buzz on March 30, 2012, 04:27:13 PM
All I know is that I will be watching the test series closely this summer between England and South Africa to get a true gauge of where England is at.

Win that series comfortably, then you are onto something. Lose, and your achievements in that golden six months will be put into perspective.

It wont come as any surprise to you that I don't agree with much of what you have said, especially about the merits of our bowling attach which if the batsmen had scored proper totals this winter would have looked even better.

However:
I aggree with the last be - in that all cricket fans will be looking at next summer to guage how good the SA and Eng teams are.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Jagminder on March 30, 2012, 04:38:42 PM
I have to say that if there was a record for the worst number one rated team in cricket history - the fight between Eng and India would be pretty close... :(

I second that. LOL
Don't see a single team winning around all over the world.
Most teams are great with home advantage.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 30, 2012, 05:54:53 PM
Quite true.  Be interesting to see combined away records of all teams over the past four years.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Vic Nicholas on March 31, 2012, 12:25:44 PM
Odd that you disagreed with me when I said precisely teh sam about our batting some four months ago Vic!  I'm not convinced KP is past it in the way that Strauss maybe is, but there are certainly two to three slots up for grabs in the top six.  My theory is that England are hoping to stretch it out until the end of the Summer with most of what they have now with a view to then blooding Ben Stokes as a number 6/7 who can also get through a share of overs as a third seamer.

Where I disagree is in your assessment of the relative merits of the England and Yarpie attacks.  Anderson is nearly as good as Steyn and certainly better than Philander who, electric start notwithstanding, is very good rather than future great.  Broad, if he pitches it up, is probably just about worth a slot alongside Bresnan and of course Finn and Tremlett give depth.  Far greater depth than SA have presently - De Lange is their fourth seamer and he is definitely uninispiring at this stage!

Last Northern summer I was still of the belief that Pietersen was one of the best five batsmen in the world who was just going through an unsually long tough patch. Now, I am starting to think that his best days are behind him, and while he can still produce the odd magic innings still, he is unlikely to sustain it for a whole series.

Strauss is 36 - so no shame that he is reaching the end of an excellent career. Age catches up to everyone.

On your point of de Lange being "uninspiring", you clearly have never seen him bowl, or you are an extremely tough judge of young talent. We are talking about a 21 year old who took a 7 for on debut FFS! I *did* watch him bowl, and he looks to have all the tools. Height - check. Pace - check. Accuracy - check. He is easily as good as Finn and not too far behind Tremlett who is a decade older.

Anderson as good as Steyn? Not in my - or anyone elses - universe. Steyn stands alone as the best fast bowler in the world BAR NONE in the last six years. A bowling average of 23 in a batsman friendly era puts him up there with the all time greats of the game. Anderson is not in the same class. Will not be considered up there with the great English fast bowlers let alone the all time greats.

Philander will do very well in English conditions with his line, length and movement both ways off the pitch. He is indeed a VERY good bowler and his stats back that up. Is he better than Anderson? Only time will tell I guess.

Kallis is better than either Broad or Bresnan - no contest there as Kallis is up there with Sobers as the best allrounder of all time.

Morne Morkel is good...in the same catagory as Broad.

Only in the spin bowling department do England have the decisive advantage with Swann and Panesar being better than anything the Saffers can throw up.

England have the better batsman keeper as well.

It is certainly going to be an interesting series!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: A-Swing-And-A-Miss on March 31, 2012, 12:58:00 PM
Strauss isn't doing too badly tbh. He hasn't got any big scores in a long while, but he has put in lots of consistent 20's and 30's, much better than Cook who will get one massive score then get tons of very low scores before getting another giant score(He has scored single figure scores in 5 of his last 8 innings'..)

Anderson doesn't have the same explosiveness as Steyn, but I think it would be harsh not to put Anderson up with some of the greatest England fast bowlers as he is an excellent fast bowler and has led our attack very well for many years. Haven't seen enough of Philander or de Lange to really comment on either of them.

It is difficult to compare Kallis to Broad and Bresnan, as Broad and Bresnan are bowlers who are capable with the bat, whereas Kallis is a batsmen who is capable with the ball. Broad is slightly better than Kallis in terms of bowling, but Kallis is far superior with the bat which makes him overall a better all rounder.

England have better spinners than South Africa, but(as we have proved recently against Sri Lanka and Pakistan) South Africa are better at playing spin than England which balances it out.

Should be a great series, and will be interesting to see how the South African 2nd XI deal with the main South African team in English conditions  ;)
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Vic Nicholas on March 31, 2012, 01:29:46 PM
Strauss isn't doing too badly tbh. He hasn't got any big scores in a long while, but he has put in lots of consistent 20's and 30's, much better than Cook who will get one massive score then get tons of very low scores before getting another giant score(He has scored single figure scores in 5 of his last 8 innings'..)

Anderson doesn't have the same explosiveness as Steyn, but I think it would be harsh not to put Anderson up with some of the greatest England fast bowlers as he is an excellent fast bowler and has led our attack very well for many years. Haven't seen enough of Philander or de Lange to really comment on either of them.

It is difficult to compare Kallis to Broad and Bresnan, as Broad and Bresnan are bowlers who are capable with the bat, whereas Kallis is a batsmen who is capable with the ball. Broad is slightly better than Kallis in terms of bowling, but Kallis is far superior with the bat which makes him overall a better all rounder.

England have better spinners than South Africa, but(as we have proved recently against Sri Lanka and Pakistan) South Africa are better at playing spin than England which balances it out.

Should be a great series, and will be interesting to see how the South African 2nd XI deal with the main South African team in English conditions  ;)

If Anderson ends up being rated an all time great English bowler with an average in the 30's, then we can truly say that English fans embrace mediocrity as their best friend.

Flintoff averaged 33 with the ball and took only three five fors, yet, is considered one of the greats of the English game. 

Maybe we have different expectations in Australia, but for a fast bowler, I would consider a final career average of under 24 to be "great", between 24-28 as "serviceable" and 28 and above as "mediocre".

Brett Lee has lower bowling average than Anderson, and he is not considered in anyones universe in Oz as a "great" In fact, he is considered a run of the mill fast bowler who never really hit the heights expected of him in test cricket.

Mitch Johnson who will probably never play test crocket again, also has a lower average than Anderson...and he is considered a major disappointment.

Both Siddle and Hilfenhaus average around 28 with the ball, but no one would seriously consider them as anything other than serviceable workhorses.

Different standards, I guess, but I will never be able to get my head around a fast bowler averaging 30 plus being called a "great".
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Alvaro on March 31, 2012, 05:22:47 PM
I think English fans who know that cricket existed before 2005 do not consider Flintoff to be great.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on March 31, 2012, 06:35:32 PM
On your point of de Lange being "uninspiring", you clearly have never seen him bowl, or you are an extremely tough judge of young talent. We are talking about a 21 year old who took a 7 for on debut FFS! I *did* watch him bowl, and he looks to have all the tools. Height - check. Pace - check. Accuracy - check. He is easily as good as Finn and not too far behind Tremlett who is a decade older.

Anderson as good as Steyn? Not in my - or anyone elses - universe. Steyn stands alone as the best fast bowler in the world BAR NONE in the last six years. A bowling average of 23 in a batsman friendly era puts him up there with the all time greats of the game. Anderson is not in the same class. Will not be considered up there with the great English fast bowlers let alone the all time greats.

It is certainly going to be an interesting series!

On De Lange, I fear the seven wicket bag was decieving.  He looks promising, yes, but as has been demonstrated evry other time apart from that one innings, he is not yet quite good enough for Test cricket.  Sure, in five years time he will be, but for now I stick by my judgement.

As for Anderson vs Steyn, you'll note I said that Jimmikins was close behind, no more than that.  I don't know whether he will be listed as an all time great here or anywhere - too soon to tell on that, and I personally think that there are far too many intangibles in that description to assess in advance - but I do think it fair to say that his overall career record is deceptive in terms of his ability in his peak years - which are those around now.  Bear in mind that his first eighty or so wickets came at over 40 each when he was young, poorly fast tracked and then messed up by bad coaching!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: A-Swing-And-A-Miss on March 31, 2012, 07:35:32 PM
If Anderson ends up being rated an all time great English bowler with an average in the 30's, then we can truly say that English fans embrace mediocrity as their best friend.

Flintoff averaged 33 with the ball and took only three five fors, yet, is considered one of the greats of the English game. 

Maybe we have different expectations in Australia, but for a fast bowler, I would consider a final career average of under 24 to be "great", between 24-28 as "serviceable" and 28 and above as "mediocre".

Brett Lee has lower bowling average than Anderson, and he is not considered in anyones universe in Oz as a "great" In fact, he is considered a run of the mill fast bowler who never really hit the heights expected of him in test cricket.

Mitch Johnson who will probably never play test crocket again, also has a lower average than Anderson...and he is considered a major disappointment.

Both Siddle and Hilfenhaus average around 28 with the ball, but no one would seriously consider them as anything other than serviceable workhorses.

Different standards, I guess, but I will never be able to get my head around a fast bowler averaging 30 plus being called a "great".

Firstly, nobody ever claimed Flintoff was one of the greatest bowlers we have ever had, he certainly had the ability to be up there when he wanted and was a fantastic impact player(As proven in the 2005 Ashes) but was never consistent or reliable enough to be one of the best.

Secondly, Anderson has an average of 30.25 which is better than both Brett Lee and Mitchell Johnson so I have no idea what you are talking about there..

I guess it depends on what you class as great really, I mean there is no point comparing him to bowlers of 30-40 years ago because as you said yourself, this is a batsmen friendly era. But when compared to other England fast bowlers of the last 10 years or so, he has a good average. And there is ofcourse the point that Manormanic made in that his stats are effected by being poorly managed when he was younger.

Maybe he isn't a "great", but he has certainly done a fantastic job for his country and I doubt that England would have gotten anywhere near No. 1 if he wasn't leading the attack.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: kaustav on April 01, 2012, 04:56:54 AM
Quite true.  Be interesting to see combined away records of all teams over the past four years.

So you do agree that India, albeit the poor team that they have been the last one year, is not England's 'sloppy seconds' like you claimed in another thread?

I think all of us are quite startled by the insipid performances from the last two number 1 teams...lol.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on April 01, 2012, 10:05:18 AM
So you do agree that India, albeit the poor team that they have been the last one year, is not England's 'sloppy seconds' like you claimed in another thread?

Oh, I think that Australia beating India is definitely them taking our sloppies.  Thats a dig at Australia rather than India tho!  :D
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Dan W on April 01, 2012, 10:51:43 AM
I think English fans who know that cricket existed before 2005 do not consider Flintoff to be great.

Massively.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: roco on April 01, 2012, 11:32:38 AM
Having over 500 international wickets makes kallis a very good bowler in his own right let alone the 25,000 international runs and is 2nd only to sobers as greatest ever all rounder so no Englishman of modern times comes close

Steyn is better than jimmy but in England will be fun to see the battle with the swing

It's time for Strauss to go I think as cook is more than capable of skippering and will be the first Englishman past 10,000 test runs for me

Freddie was more than stats as he was a talisman who inspired teammates but only really in latter parts of his career
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on April 01, 2012, 12:04:57 PM
Question is, if Strauss was to go, who'd replace him at the top of the order? :)
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Vic Nicholas on April 01, 2012, 03:36:35 PM
Oh, I think that Australia beating India is definitely them taking our sloppies.  Thats a dig at Australia rather than India tho!  :D

A dig at Australia?

When did Australia in it's period of being #1 did they lose four tests on the trot?

Actually, can you tell me when Australia last lost four tests on the trot from any ranking position?

Absolutely amazing some of you blokes...
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: S Taylor3 on April 01, 2012, 03:42:27 PM
A dig at Australia?

When did Australia in it's period of being #1 did they lose four tests on the trot?

Actually, can you tell me when Australia last lost four tests on the trot from any ranking position?

Absolutely amazing some of you blokes...

Now now Vic the boys play nicely when you post your skewed pro Australia opinions so show them the same respect by allowing them theirs.

I've watched this forum for a few years and it is amazing how certain characters only seem to come out of the woodwork soon after certain events.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on April 01, 2012, 04:34:21 PM
Massively.

Inspirational, yes, great, no.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on April 01, 2012, 04:36:14 PM
A dig at Australia?

When did Australia in it's period of being #1 did they lose four tests on the trot?

Actually, can you tell me when Australia last lost four tests on the trot from any ranking position?

Absolutely amazing some of you blokes...

To answer your earlier question, suspect the answer to be 1971.  Shame there weren't two more Tests down under last winter or you'd have managed it then, ven with home advantage  :D
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: golders on April 01, 2012, 04:36:57 PM
Would love to see Carberry have another crack at opening after his solitary test, but looking at espncricinfo, apparantly can't take long hall flights after his blood clot to his lung.. I think Cook is ready to take over now, but if Strauss's form continues past the SA series, that could be his last. Opening spot and number six crucial for me, Bell's class will come again and Pieterson's record is still very good. Tough tough decisions for the selectors.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on April 01, 2012, 04:40:45 PM
If it were me, and if Strauss were to go, I'd look at the following:

Cook
Root
Trott
Bell
Pietersen
Taylor/Rashid depending on conditions
Prior
Bresnan
Broad
Swann
Anderson

Root is the best bet for the opening spot - probably not the best available batsman, maybe needs a season to tell one way or t'other on that, but a natural opener which the others are not.  Taylor should starta t six and work up - Rashid is included because there should be circumstances where five bowlers play and he is quality.  The "spares" would, for me, be Finn with the ball, Bairstow the gloves and either Hildreth or Chopra the bat.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: golders on April 01, 2012, 04:44:45 PM
Flintoff is massively overated, living off the glory of the Ashes and his bleary-eyed performance at the open-bus parade in '05, such a good lad etc etc. Good player and bloke who played a couple of great series, as Michael Atherton said.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: golders on April 01, 2012, 04:50:29 PM
Just had a look at Rashid's stats, averages pretty much 34 with bat and ball. Bowls too many bad balls for me. Monty is much improved, bowling  average is lower and has double the amount of five fors
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Buzz on April 01, 2012, 04:55:26 PM
just seen the team selection for the game tomorrow... panasar and broad out, bresnan and Finn in.

Strauss,
cook,
trott,
Kp,
bell,
patel
prior
bresnan
swann
Anderson
Finn.

can bresser make it 11 out of 11? I really hope so.
way harsh on monty, but this is the only way to keep the balance of the team...
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Cover_Drive on April 01, 2012, 05:05:18 PM
One spinner in Sri Lankan pitches?

Patel and KP would have to bowl some overs too!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: arc1983 on April 01, 2012, 05:44:41 PM
As per all tests this winter, think our bowlers will do the job.... just need our batsmen to perform!!

Would like to see Patel bat 6 & Prior 7. Patel is a batsmen who bowls, and Prior has a lot of success at 7.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on April 01, 2012, 08:40:51 PM
Just had a look at Rashid's stats, averages pretty much 34 with bat and ball. Bowls too many bad balls for me. Monty is much improved, bowling  average is lower and has double the amount of five fors
But with a false statistical set given that he has played almost twice as many matches and may second division games.  Rashid, I've said before, is England's best second spinner.  He can bat seven and score hundreds, is a superb fielder, and is a top spinner to boot.  Consider this - who is the top wicket taking English spinner in first class cricket over the last four years? 
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: kaustav on April 04, 2012, 08:34:55 AM
Good start from the openers. If England can take a first innings lead of about 120-130, I think they might be well on their way to winning this one.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: charlie15 on April 04, 2012, 11:44:59 AM
I'm going to stick my neck out here, but England are not a bad team and that some of the comments on here have actually been out of line.  The bowlers have been outstanding and have managed to take 20 wickets in all of the tests we've played this winter, all on pitches that are apparently flat tracks and haven't offered any help to the bowlers.  Anderson, Broad, Swann, Bresnan and Tremlett are all match winners and can turn a game on it's head in an instant.  Jimmy v Steyn this summer will be fascinating as whoever comes top of that tussle will deserve to be called the best bowler in the world.  Added to that three of the above five can all contribute with the bat gives a good amount of bite to our tail.  If you also through the likes of Monty and Onions into the mix then there is something that England haven't had for years (I don't follow enough County Cricket to name too many more)!

Where criticism is due is the batsmen almost believing the press that England cannot win on the sub continent.  This hasn't made them bad players overnight, they just need to get over this apparent mental block.  As Strauss and Cook demonstraded this morning and play patiently you can accumulate a good score and put your self in a good position.  Yes there probably is an argument to blood some new players, especially at 6 where I feel Bopara has been given more lives than a very lucky cat, but Strauss let us remember has led this team to back to back Ashes wins and to No 1 in the test rankings, Cook, Trott, KP and Bell have all proved themselves time after time and don't deserve to be dropped because of 4 dodgy matches.  You also have to say barring KP, who apart from those on the county circuit and in the know had heard of the other 5 before they made their debuts?

Lets face it, at the end of the day if we were all selectors there would never be any continuity in the side, and if we left it to the press, well I rest my case!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on April 04, 2012, 12:54:58 PM
You're not wrong Charlie - actually, you make a lot of sense.  There are two ways of looking at England's winter - you can either say that it has been conclusive proof that they're actually a bit rubbish, or you could say that they've not been far from winning most games, just missing out on margin calls and confidence.  Which way does it go?  Probably in the middle really - I think they do need to freshen the side a little and think about future direction more. 
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: charlie15 on April 04, 2012, 01:14:59 PM
You're not wrong Charlie - actually, you make a lot of sense.  There are two ways of looking at England's winter - you can either say that it has been conclusive proof that they're actually a bit rubbish, or you could say that they've not been far from winning most games, just missing out on margin calls and confidence.  Which way does it go?  Probably in the middle really - I think they do need to freshen the side a little and think about future direction more.

See I don't understand this freshening up of the side.  You wouldn't replace any of the bowlers, although Tremelett and Onions have probably fallen down the pecking order a fair amount.  As I said the top 5 have all had their ups and downs, but have proven themselves time and time again.  Case in point would be Cook who couldn't buy a run before the last Ashes series, then made a scratchy ton against Pakistan and I'm sure we don't need reminding of how he played after that!  Of the top 5 I'd say KP and Bell are probably more at risk of being replaced.  I think the number 6 spot should go to someone new (unless Patel performs a miracle in this test), and Prior's place barring an absolute shocker of match fixing magnitude has his place sealed in cement!

The only way I see us freshening up the side is saying to the likes of KP and Bell, ok boys sit out the WI series and be ready for the Saffa's.  Other than that there is only that No 6 spot up for grabs!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Manormanic on April 04, 2012, 02:09:41 PM
Nah - aside from the number six issue, I think it would be good for everyone's mindset if one of the established players were dropped - much like happened to Ian Bell after the 51 all out debacle.  That would allow the side to look at two new faces against the West Indies and the dropped player to prove themselves anew in county cricket. 

The qwho is the problem I guess.  For me, Root and Taylor perhaps?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on April 04, 2012, 02:21:36 PM
In England, I'd expect them to ditch Patel and give Taylor a go against WI. I'd like them to give him a go ahead of SA. I feel that 3 man seam attack out of; Finn, Broad, Anderson and Bresnan and then the Spin of Swann in English conditions will be enough. Like the comment before I'd possibly give a test each to Root and Taylor against the WI.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: mattw on April 04, 2012, 02:26:39 PM
I'd like to see Taylor/Carberry or someone come in for the odd test. However I do not think that Root is ready for International cricket yet.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: charlie15 on April 04, 2012, 03:07:03 PM
Trouble is who do you leave out for Root, Strauss who could probably do with being involved in the WI series or Cook?  I can't see Root playing to be honest, I think it's probably a season to soon for him, and I really don't see someone like Carberry coming in as that would go against what this England team want to do by building for the future.  I just can't see any of the top 3 being told to make way for someone new.  Strauss isn't even playing badly right now, he just seems to be making bad decisions that gets him out.

I would hand a new cap out at 6 and maybe say to KP, look you've been at the IPL, play a couple of championship matches for Surrey to get back into the longer format of the game and we'll see you for SA.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: stevat on April 04, 2012, 11:52:18 PM
Ben Stokes is almost certain to be there or thereabouts if he can avoid injury this season, at least for the ODI team.  Test cricket probably too far at the minute, but he is a fantastic talent.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Cover_Drive on April 05, 2012, 05:56:36 AM
Cook was all set for his 20th Test hundred and he fully deserved it! Unlucky!!  >:( >:(
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: roco on April 05, 2012, 08:41:21 AM
All kicking off here could be fun
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Nickauger on April 05, 2012, 08:43:02 AM
What a knock!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: roco on April 05, 2012, 08:44:47 AM
Are the commentators blind as they are saying he did not switch hands for the 100 but his left hand was at bottom so he switched
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: StandUpKeeps on April 05, 2012, 08:47:58 AM
Are the commentators blind as they are saying he did not switch hands for the 100 but his left hand was at bottom so he switched
Exactly What I Thought :/
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on April 05, 2012, 08:50:06 AM
switch hit is fine. dont know why dilshan pulls up. get on with it!

good to see the top order firing. been so long since that last happened. 450-500 before the end of the day? with plenty of wickets in hand no reason we cant up the rate a bit. then gives us 2 days to bowl them out.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: roco on April 05, 2012, 08:50:16 AM
Disgraceful for me if it's right and umps have warned him for time wasting as he is not stopping play dilshan is by not bowling

There is no rule against switch hit so umps on field should not be allowed to stop a batsmen playing a shot unless it's against rules as if this is the case the reverse sweep should be banned as its a switch hit with less power
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: steyn92 on April 05, 2012, 08:56:09 AM
A bigger concern is bell can't score a run to save his life atm..
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: PedalsMcgrew on April 05, 2012, 08:56:53 AM
Wonder why Bell is trudging off smiling to himself as if he has just been the victim of the greatest catch ever seen? You hit it straight at him at shoulder height!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on April 05, 2012, 08:57:07 AM
but now hes gone it gives prior the chance to come in and score at a decent rate.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: roco on April 05, 2012, 08:57:28 AM
Bell out so sorted that ;)

A mate just put this on twitter

 Dilshan who plays the DIL-SCOOP is unhappy with someone entertaining the crowd and playing an unorthodox shot ... hmmm!!!
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: steyn92 on April 05, 2012, 08:59:45 AM
Kp's proved he's the best batsman in the team with this knock :)
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: PedalsMcgrew on April 05, 2012, 09:02:39 AM
I'd put Cook and Trott ahead of him to be honest....more reliable... ;)
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: steyn92 on April 05, 2012, 09:04:00 AM
Yeah they're a bit more reliable, but KP takes attacks apart. Cook and Trott don't do that, my opinion he's the most talented of the England batting order :)
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: roco on April 05, 2012, 09:05:15 AM
Different type of players which you need

Trout and cook blunted the attack then kp destroys it perfect situation for all of them really

You could not have a team of trotts as you would put people to sleep but equally you can't have a team full of kp's as could get 500 in a day or all out for 50

Good balance
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on April 05, 2012, 09:06:05 AM
Bell out so sorted that ;)

A mate just put this on twitter

 Dilshan who plays the DIL-SCOOP is unhappy with someone entertaining the crowd and playing an unorthodox shot ... hmmm!!!

my theory is that if a bowler sees a batsman coming he has time to adjust so why cant dilshan adjust what he is going to bowl when kp decides to become a leftie for a ball? i think the umpires are wrong to warn kp for time wasting. at the end of the day its dilshans choice to stop and start again. its not as if Kp is actually pulling away as if he has something in his eye or the crowd behind the arm are moving. Kp is ready to receive the delivery so get on with it! lol
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: roco on April 05, 2012, 09:09:57 AM
Exactly

So if I see someone coming down track at me do I pull out repeatedly will the umps stop them doing it or same if they sweep if so I'll do it as takes a fair few shots away from the batsmen
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: steyn92 on April 05, 2012, 09:12:50 AM
Only thing with Trott is against the short ball...
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: johnnyw on April 05, 2012, 09:45:34 AM
I dont see the problem with the switch hit. Bowlers can bowl balls that turn the other way ie googly and doosra so there should be no problem with a batsman changing his stance slightly
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: tim2000s on April 05, 2012, 09:52:03 AM
I think it's a bit of a farce. If the batsman changes position before the bowler has completed his run up, the bowler is perfectly entitled to stop and mention to the umpire that the batsman is now left handed so he would like to change his field. He can do this for as long as the batsman does the same. In this case I can understand where the bowler's complaint of time wasting comes from.

If the batsman changes after ball release, then, well, that's innovation and not really an issue.

If he does it before the ball is released, and the bowler doesn't stop, as in this case, then I'd argue that it is a cse of sour grapes from the bowler, and it's his own fault for not stopping. It's not like Dilshan is bowling with his head down so can't see it happening...
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Simmy on April 05, 2012, 10:03:36 AM
then u might as well say bowler cant change angle of his run up or he cant change the way he holds the ball mid run up etc.

end of day i cant see a problem with it and he should be allowed to do it.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: roco on April 05, 2012, 10:09:10 AM
If there going to limit the batsmen shots like this then why not make the bowler declare which way he will turn it as an off spinner bowling a doosra is unfair to me then
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: tim2000s on April 05, 2012, 10:09:17 AM
then u might as well say bowler cant change angle of his run up or he cant change the way he holds the ball mid run up etc.

end of day i cant see a problem with it and he should be allowed to do it.
It's an interesting one with regard to field setting. With three fielders on the leg side and the remainder on the off, if the bowler is bowling to his field, swapping to left handed means that you have 3 offside fielders but crucially the ball will be coming on to your leg side where all the fielders are.

The question is, if the bowler bowls to the field, does he get called for a wide if the ball goes too far down leg in the switched position? And can the batsman gain with having 5 fielders on the leg side now, especially if it is speared in on the leg stump? Additionally, as the batsman has switched, if you pitch it outside the (original) off stump and hit the pads in front of the stumps, is there a possibility of LBW? Or do you need to bowl a different line to allow for that?

This is why the bowler gets very annoyed.

I don't think there is anything wrong with switching in delivery stride/post delivery, however during the run up is more of an issue. It doesn't change the fact that Dilshan should have stopped if he thought it was unfair.

The MCC interpretation that was just read out on TMS is that "switching in delivery stride/post delivery" is fine, or the batsman must be set before the bowler starts his run up, but during the run up is not allowed.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: steyn92 on April 05, 2012, 10:21:51 AM
Statement from MCC taken from BBC sport live feed:
"Law 42.10 states that a batsman should be ready to take strike once the bowler is ready to start his run up (which Pietersen clearly was). If he is not then the umpire should warn him as the first and final warning. If he isn't ready again then the umpire should award five penalty runs to the fielding side."
"If the bowler has entered his delivery stride i.e. his back foot has landed, then, according to the Laws, the batsman is within his rights to change his grip. Of course, the bowler, on seeing the change of grip or stance, may still want to bowl at the striker - he may feel his chances of taking a wicket are increased and that he should not be prevented from delivering the ball. The umpires should allow him to have this option.

"In summary, therefore, MCC's interpretation is that a batsman is still entitled to play the switch-hit stroke but he is only allowed to alter from one stance or grip to another once the bowler has entered his delivery stride."
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: tim2000s on April 05, 2012, 10:28:16 AM
Statement from MCC taken from BBC sport live feed:
"Law 42.10 states that a batsman should be ready to take strike once the bowler is ready to start his run up (which Pietersen clearly was). If he is not then the umpire should warn him as the first and final warning. If he isn't ready again then the umpire should award five penalty runs to the fielding side."
"If the bowler has entered his delivery stride i.e. his back foot has landed, then, according to the Laws, the batsman is within his rights to change his grip. Of course, the bowler, on seeing the change of grip or stance, may still want to bowl at the striker - he may feel his chances of taking a wicket are increased and that he should not be prevented from delivering the ball. The umpires should allow him to have this option.

"In summary, therefore, MCC's interpretation is that a batsman is still entitled to play the switch-hit stroke but he is only allowed to alter from one stance or grip to another once the bowler has entered his delivery stride."
Fair in my view. A bowler is not allowed to swap from right to left handed without informing the umpire, which is the nearest similar thing.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Number4 on April 05, 2012, 11:49:36 AM
The top four batted brilliantly... Luckily... The rest were terrible
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: The_Bird on April 05, 2012, 04:54:12 PM
Just to add how refreshing to see the Umpires give a full and frank explanation of what was discussed and their interpretation of today's events. Football should take note as so often do refs disappear lol also no hotspot is a bigger issue for me, it should all be the same or not at all.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: Lions Pride on April 05, 2012, 09:59:50 PM
If you were batting and a bowler who had been bowling right-arm over for a few overs suddenly decided he would run in and bowl left-arm over (without telling you or the umpire) which then bowled you I'm sure you wouldn't be happy. It's exactly the same with the switch-hit, if you take stance as a right hander you shouldn't be able to decide half way through a bowler's delivery stride you want to take stance as a left hander.

The 'leg-spinners are allowed to bowl googlies' argument isn't valid either, there's nothing in the rule book that says a leg-spinner has to spin the ball away from a right handed batsman, whereas someone who says they're going to bowl right-arm over HAS to bowl right-arm over.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: roco on April 06, 2012, 06:55:55 AM
If a person suddenly started bowling with other arm I'd say bring it on as more likely some pies thrown up

Nothing in the laws against switch hit just a directive so until mcc (the law makers) meet in may its fine kp was just doing it too early on the 1 occasion but other 2 occasions dilshan was in delivery stride so fault was his as per the mcc directive
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: The_Bird on April 06, 2012, 07:48:31 AM
DRS is turning this game into a farce, it's embarrassing. 10 minutes for a descision and hotspot would've taken 10 seconds. I'm not surprised Dilshan is fuming
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: roco on April 06, 2012, 07:59:31 AM
Dilshan needs to vent frustration at his board then as they are the ones who won't pay for it

If they can't afford it fair enough but I agree with commentators either use all drs tools or none of it

Plus I think icc should fund it not the host boards
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: charlie15 on April 06, 2012, 05:50:11 PM
I think the ICC needs to take the lead on this one.  There needs to be a vote by the test play AND associate nations on whether DRS should be allowed in all formats of the game.  The ICC will then have to pay for it.  Trouble is as long as India don't want DRS the ICC won't do anything about it.
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: roco on April 07, 2012, 09:08:14 AM
Top finish from kp little harsh leaving cook on 49* but team first and he really wanted to smash dilshan
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: johnnyw on April 07, 2012, 09:12:02 AM
Is it 11 or 12 wins now for Bresnan?
Title: Re: England In Sri Lanka
Post by: legger123 on April 07, 2012, 09:13:06 AM
11 now!