The Cricket Thread

theShiznit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2004
Messages
13,018
So i heard Bayliss on the Radio this morning saying Roy has to prove he's worthy of his place in the fifth test...


And just heard he's been dropped, so i can only assume Bayliss is a timelord? (or Anti-Spurs after seeing Roy with his Spurs gear...)
 

JimmyG2

SC Supporter
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Messages
8,938
The whole Aussie team knew about the sandpaper. What did the bowlers think when the ball turned up in their hands, they would've known something had gone on?
What grade of sandpaper was it?
Anything up to ' very fine' should be permissible.
Beyond that a short ban except for 'coarse' which should be a life ban
 
Last edited:

Spurslove

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2012
Messages
1,473
Every team tampers with the ball in someway. Spitting and shining the ball is technically cheating. Most teams use mints or sweets I would guess (including Australia) but sandpapering the ball is taking it a tad further don’t you think?
It’s like comparing murder to shoplifting
Some methods are acceptable and within the law, and every player knows that, but some are not, and are outside the law. If you decide to abuse that law and use a method of affecting the ball in a way which is not legally accepted you are a cheat. Pure and simple and proven by the way those cheats tried initially to lie about their actions. The knew exactly what they were doing and that it would be classed as cheating if discovered, which thank God, they were. Zero sympathy for any of them.

.
 

Spurs_Bear

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
14,304
I think Roy can find himself a little unlucky** to be dumped for the Test on his home ground, but assume this is because with Stokes playing as a batsman only they needed the extra bowler in Curran (who will probably contribute as much as Roy with the bat to be fair).

Doesn't make sense to make such a hoohaa of dropping Woakes for one game and then just bringing him back for Overton but to be honest nothing surprises me with the England selectors. Overton didn't disgrace himself with the bat and took an unflattering 2-100+ with the ball but I'm not sure what he was supposed to contribute having not played much red ball cricket LIKE THE REST OF THE COUNTRY in the last few weeks at least.

**I'm not sure Roy's experiment has been anything other than a failure but I don't really think Buttler or Bairstow have done much to make themselves undroppable either. For me it would have been barbecue one of them, give the other one the gloves and keep Roy in to bat in the top 6. To be honest a top 6 of Burns, Denly, Root, Stokes, Bairstow, Buttler has still got 20/5 written all over it.
 

dondo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
6,173
Some methods are acceptable and within the law, and every player knows that, but some are not, and are outside the law. If you decide to abuse that law and use a method of affecting the ball in a way which is not legally accepted you are a cheat. Pure and simple and proven by the way those cheats tried initially to lie about their actions. The knew exactly what they were doing and that it would be classed as cheating if discovered, which thank God, they were. Zero sympathy for any of them.

.

The law is you are not supposed to tamper with the ball in anyway, it’s not what happens but that is the law.
I agree that shinning the ball with spit and sweat is deemed acceptable and using sandpaper is not but the law needs to be clearer imo
 

dondo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
6,173
I think Roy can find himself a little unlucky** to be dumped for the Test on his home ground, but assume this is because with Stokes playing as a batsman only they needed the extra bowler in Curran (who will probably contribute as much as Roy with the bat to be fair).

Doesn't make sense to make such a hoohaa of dropping Woakes for one game and then just bringing him back for Overton but to be honest nothing surprises me with the England selectors. Overton didn't disgrace himself with the bat and took an unflattering 2-100+ with the ball but I'm not sure what he was supposed to contribute having not played much red ball cricket LIKE THE REST OF THE COUNTRY in the last few weeks at least.

**I'm not sure Roy's experiment has been anything other than a failure but I don't really think Buttler or Bairstow have done much to make themselves undroppable either. For me it would have been barbecue one of them, give the other one the gloves and keep Roy in to bat in the top 6. To be honest a top 6 of Burns, Denly, Root, Stokes, Bairstow, Buttler has still got 20/5 written all over it.

The selectors need to make some tough decisions for the next series.
We can’t keep picking lower order batsman to play in the top 5 and expect to score big runs.
One of Buttler, Bairstow, Curran has to bat at 5 and stokes is at 4. That’s a position or 2 too high for stokes and Buttler, Bairstow and Curran shouldn’t bat higher that 7 imo
 

Spurslove

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2012
Messages
1,473
The law is you are not supposed to tamper with the ball in anyway, it’s not what happens but that is the law.
I agree that shinning the ball with spit and sweat is deemed acceptable and using sandpaper is not but the law needs to be clearer imo
I think the laws of what is and what is not acceptable are clear enough to 99.9% of players and coaches around the world.

.
 

Buggsy61

SC Mums' favourite Member's Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
3,752
We all know that our county game is not fit for purpose, and not sure how to solve that to be honest.
At the test level what we really need to do is pick a nucleus of youth players around the 21/22 age bracket who we really think have got the ability and mentality to make it at test level, coach them hard and stick with them for as long as possible.
I think the longer talented players are left to fester in the county game the more their development will be stunted and they will pick up bad habits.
I really hope we might see some radical changes in the next year, even if that means losing a series or two- we should be building for the long term now and especially the next ashes away.
 
Last edited:

dondo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
6,173
We all know that our county game is not fit for purpose, and not sure how to solve that to be honest.
At the test level what we really need to do is pick a nucleus of you players around the 21/22 age bracket who we really think have got the ability and mentality to make it at test level, coach them hard and stick with them for as long as possible.
I think the longer talented players are left to fester in the county game the more their development will be stunted and they will pick up bad habits.
I really hope we might see some radical changes in the next year, even if that means losing a series or two- we should be building for the long term now and especially the next ashes away.

The Duncan Fletcher method. He picked trescothick, Vaughan, Simon Jones and probably a few more that I can’t remember with very little county cricket experience or form and that worked out ok
 

mpickard2087

On Hiatus.
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
20,481
Yeah as I said the other day, thought they would stick with Roy but sounds like Stokes injury changed that.

That batting lineup now though looks non-existent. Everyone from Burns down is a couple of places too high, and it's now even more lower middle order players. Even if it were to get a result, I'd hope that's not the make up of the team going forward.
 

theShiznit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2004
Messages
13,018
Oh for a Jonathon Trott anchoring that batting order (another Yid ;) )
Wasn't the greatest to watch but rarely gave his wicket away cheaply.

Fair play to Burns though, who would've thought he'd be the best of our top order this summer? Although he's been found out a bit towards the end of the series, we'd be a lot worse off without him.
 

alfie103

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
3,344
Oh for a Jonathon Trott anchoring that batting order (another Yid ;) )
Wasn't the greatest to watch but rarely gave his wicket away cheaply.

Fair play to Burns though, who would've thought he'd be the best of our top order this summer? Although he's been found out a bit towards the end of the series, we'd be a lot worse off without him.
Why do you think he has been found out?
 

theShiznit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2004
Messages
13,018
Why do you think he has been found out?
I did say "a bit"
They have used his weakness against the short ball well, he looks very susceptible to being caught at short leg and although he will always fight his scores and modes of dismissal have worsened. (giving away his wicket more as the series has gone on)
 
Top