UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
- Aug 20, 2003
- 9,252
- 11,280
Got it! Michael Kiwanuka - love & hate
The Cricket Thread
- Thread starter SteveH
- Start date
dimiSpur
There's always next year...
- Aug 9, 2008
- 5,844
- 6,751
Results define matches. It wasn't that bad. There was some bad, of course there was, but not as bad as some are making it out to be.
Plainly, the difference between the two sides was Steve Smith. 144 and 142. He really was extremely good. One of the best Test batsmen of all time. It's actually looking like it's impossible to get him out. Take him out of their side for just one of the two innings and all of a sudden England win or get close to winning.
The other difference was Moeen vs Lyon. A flat, dry pitch doing little for the quicks. Lyon takes 9 in the match, Moeen took the piss. Lyon bowled adequately, not superbly, and took 6 today. Moeen was terrible. That was a huge difference as well.
Losing Anderson didn't help of course either. Positives for me were Burns scoring a good score in a Cook style of playing, grinding it out and staying there for a long time. Broad looked back to his best. Stokes was very quick and did a good job, stepping up for the missing Anderson. Root looked ok at number 3 too. A less fluid approach, of course, however he looked good in that first innings before getting a little unlucky with Siddle's c&b.
Negatives were the way we panicked against Smith after we had them at 122-8 in the first innings, which comes down to poor captaincy from Root effectively. Denley doesn't look up to scratch. All his innings look the same. A few stunning shots before getting out cheaply. Roy as an opener is exactly what I expected. He'll get the odd 70 off 50, but more often than not we'll be 20-1. Ali obviously was shit.
For the next match, we obviously have to keep Roy. Can't give up on him after one "proper" Test. It would be counter-intuitive. Leach has to play too, statistically Smith averages less against left arm off spin. So you have to play to his weaknesses as he's the only player you'd say sets the two teams apart.
So: Burns, Roy, Root, Vince, Stokes, Buttler, Bairstow, Woakes, Archer, Broad, Leach.
Unless we find another opener from somewhere, and move Roy to 4.
Plainly, the difference between the two sides was Steve Smith. 144 and 142. He really was extremely good. One of the best Test batsmen of all time. It's actually looking like it's impossible to get him out. Take him out of their side for just one of the two innings and all of a sudden England win or get close to winning.
The other difference was Moeen vs Lyon. A flat, dry pitch doing little for the quicks. Lyon takes 9 in the match, Moeen took the piss. Lyon bowled adequately, not superbly, and took 6 today. Moeen was terrible. That was a huge difference as well.
Losing Anderson didn't help of course either. Positives for me were Burns scoring a good score in a Cook style of playing, grinding it out and staying there for a long time. Broad looked back to his best. Stokes was very quick and did a good job, stepping up for the missing Anderson. Root looked ok at number 3 too. A less fluid approach, of course, however he looked good in that first innings before getting a little unlucky with Siddle's c&b.
Negatives were the way we panicked against Smith after we had them at 122-8 in the first innings, which comes down to poor captaincy from Root effectively. Denley doesn't look up to scratch. All his innings look the same. A few stunning shots before getting out cheaply. Roy as an opener is exactly what I expected. He'll get the odd 70 off 50, but more often than not we'll be 20-1. Ali obviously was shit.
For the next match, we obviously have to keep Roy. Can't give up on him after one "proper" Test. It would be counter-intuitive. Leach has to play too, statistically Smith averages less against left arm off spin. So you have to play to his weaknesses as he's the only player you'd say sets the two teams apart.
So: Burns, Roy, Root, Vince, Stokes, Buttler, Bairstow, Woakes, Archer, Broad, Leach.
Unless we find another opener from somewhere, and move Roy to 4.
- Feb 1, 2005
- 55,593
- 205,135
- Admin
- #10,403
Three changes for me. Archer for Anderson, Leach for Moeen and Foakes for Bairstow, which won’t happen
dimiSpur
There's always next year...
- Aug 9, 2008
- 5,844
- 6,751
I think the problem with the batting lineup is plain. We lack true top order quality, and we try to promote middle to lower order test batsmen, who are excellent in their respective positions to where they are short.
Buttler is not a number 5. He's a 7. It ought to be between him and Bairstow for that position and the gloves. But there's no one else to come in. So we try and place good middle order batsmen into top order positions, thinking they'll do a better job than the Malan's and the Vince's and the Denley's of the world. I'm not saying it's wrong. Perhaps the aforementioned would be even worse than Buttler & co. But what's for certain is we have a serious lack of test match batting quality.
Stokes is perhaps the most equipped to deal with a higher position in the batting order with his technique, which is pretty sound. But as others have said, his average at 6 is hardly worth promotion.
Needs a long term plan and direction akin to prior to the golden age of our test team.
Buttler is not a number 5. He's a 7. It ought to be between him and Bairstow for that position and the gloves. But there's no one else to come in. So we try and place good middle order batsmen into top order positions, thinking they'll do a better job than the Malan's and the Vince's and the Denley's of the world. I'm not saying it's wrong. Perhaps the aforementioned would be even worse than Buttler & co. But what's for certain is we have a serious lack of test match batting quality.
Stokes is perhaps the most equipped to deal with a higher position in the batting order with his technique, which is pretty sound. But as others have said, his average at 6 is hardly worth promotion.
Needs a long term plan and direction akin to prior to the golden age of our test team.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
- Aug 20, 2003
- 9,252
- 11,280
Leach for Ali and they’ll bring in stone or Curran for Jimmy. Might as well go with a specialist spin bowler seeing as no doubt Root will also bowl himself.
Would like to see Foakes in for Bairstow but that won’t happen and absolutely anyone in for Denly.
I’d be amazed if they bought archer in for the second test because I think jimmy is done for the series and with Wood out as well we’re short on pace as it is and they can’t afford for Archer to break down as well.
I wouldn’t be surprised if jimmy retires with tours to NZ and SA upcoming as well, he’s been carrying England far too long now.
Would like to see Foakes in for Bairstow but that won’t happen and absolutely anyone in for Denly.
I’d be amazed if they bought archer in for the second test because I think jimmy is done for the series and with Wood out as well we’re short on pace as it is and they can’t afford for Archer to break down as well.
I wouldn’t be surprised if jimmy retires with tours to NZ and SA upcoming as well, he’s been carrying England far too long now.
mpickard2087
Patient Zero
- Jun 13, 2008
- 21,889
- 32,561
The way the test team is now, I feel more and more bad for ever criticising the Strauss-Cook-Trott-Pietersen-Bell-Collingwood-Prior side. I'd kill for a team like that now, all averaging over 40, all capable of getting centuries and racking up big totals, and a mix of grit and flair.
I think some of the bowling attacks have improved since the late 00's/early10's, but really the standards and ability and consistency (in the test arena at least) have fallen off a cliff.
I think some of the bowling attacks have improved since the late 00's/early10's, but really the standards and ability and consistency (in the test arena at least) have fallen off a cliff.
aussiespursguy
Well-Known Member
- Mar 21, 2015
- 3,445
- 6,703
A bit of luck, a bit of grind, a bit of brilliance.
Luck- Certainly helped our cause with Anderson being out. Whilst not as quick as he used to be he is still quality. I think winning the toss helped as well.
Grind - Both the bowlers and in the mains the batsmen (openers excluded) put in shifts. Heady looking good and like he belongs there.
Brilliance - Steve Smith. Nuff said.
Still expect us to make at least 2 changes for the next one. Expect Starc and Hazelwood to come back if fully fit for Siddle and Pattinson. Not sure if Bancroft keeps his spot or Harris comes in. Expect him given another match.
Luck- Certainly helped our cause with Anderson being out. Whilst not as quick as he used to be he is still quality. I think winning the toss helped as well.
Grind - Both the bowlers and in the mains the batsmen (openers excluded) put in shifts. Heady looking good and like he belongs there.
Brilliance - Steve Smith. Nuff said.
Still expect us to make at least 2 changes for the next one. Expect Starc and Hazelwood to come back if fully fit for Siddle and Pattinson. Not sure if Bancroft keeps his spot or Harris comes in. Expect him given another match.
Wsussexspur
Well-Known Member
- Oct 2, 2007
- 8,918
- 10,176
Wouldn’t be upset by those changes..
Sadly though sounds like Joe Root has already pretty much said changes won’t be made.. wouldn’t want to upset his mates after all by dropping them! Such as happened with Bairstow when he was dropped for Foakes as soon as Foakes had one bad test in the Caribbean last winter they were very quick to reinstate Bairstow. Who by accounts had a massive temper tantrum first about the fact he wanted to keep wicket and not just be a pure batsman in the team and then secondly when he was dropped.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/aug/05/joe-root-england-kneejerk-australia-first-test-defeat
Embarrassing that he dresses the reason as not wanting to make knee jerk reactions. It’s not knee jerk reaction though given the fact Bairstow averages less than 20 with the bat over past 12 months in test cricket and Ali has clearly lost all confidence with bat and ball.
jazz15c
SC Supporter
- Jul 29, 2010
- 1,419
- 2,219
Moeen looks an absolute shell of a cricketer right now. A break from the team might actually do him some good. Leach has to play. Apart from anything, if Smith wants to turn Leach to leg then it'll need to be against the turn, which will give him something to think about.
The attack looked very military medium pace at times, as the majority predicted it would be, but we have to allow some leeway with Anderson missing.
Leach and Archer in for Moeen and Anderson. I'd be tempted to switch Denly and Roy around too.
The attack looked very military medium pace at times, as the majority predicted it would be, but we have to allow some leeway with Anderson missing.
Leach and Archer in for Moeen and Anderson. I'd be tempted to switch Denly and Roy around too.
Teemu
Pretty fly for a Tanguy
- Jan 12, 2006
- 3,499
- 5,406
Agree with all the above but what’s the point of having Denly in the side? Absolutely nothing suggests he’s got the ability to score the weight of runs we need either at the top or in the middle of the order.
He doesn’t seem to have any glaring technical weakness but gives so many chances to the bowling side. Unfortunately I just don’t think he’s a test batsman.
Spurs_Bear
Well-Known Member
- Jan 7, 2009
- 17,094
- 22,286
Archer has annihilated the oppo while playing for Sussex 2's no surprise...
jazz15c
SC Supporter
- Jul 29, 2010
- 1,419
- 2,219
Quite honestly...lack of viable options. Sibley from Warwickshire sounds worth a look.
So disappointed with Bairstow at the moment, seems to get out playing a big expansive drive to a straight ball too often. BLOCK THE FUCKING THING!
SargeantMeatCurtains
Your least favourite poster
- Jan 5, 2013
- 11,765
- 61,763
D
Deleted member 27995
#archer4captain
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
- Aug 20, 2003
- 9,252
- 11,280
