Jump to content

England vs New Zealand

Curtains

By Curtains
in Other Sport

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply
eddie

eddie

Posted
Posted

Maybe we should drop one of the batsmen and play an extra bowler. I'm not sure Anderson and broad can play another seven tests this summer, looks like they play too many games. 

In order to win a test match, you need to take 20 wickets. We do really have 5 (or even 6 with Root) bowlers already in the side if you include Moeen Ali, and if 5 cannot take 20, 6 probably won't either. My argument against the current England line-up is that the seam bowling attack is just too 'samey'. Anderson is still a world-class opening bowler and Stuart Broad is still worth his place as a bowler, and, it can be argued, Ben Stokes is way ahead of where Flintoff was at the same stage in his career, but all three are barely on the medium side of fast for the most part. Of the three, only Anderson seems to have that ability to blow a side away, and he is only likely to be around for another two years at the most. Toss Mark Wood in and you have four right-arm medium quicks - there is very little variation although Wood and Stokes can crank it up to 90+ on occasion.

Oh for a left-arm quick (even an Alan Mullally from 15-20 years ago), and oh for a decent spin bowler.

The great (for 2 years) Vaughan-led side had four totally different seam bowlers:

Simon Jones, who was getting on for the best exponent of reverse swing in world cricket at the time, and he did it at nearly 90 MPH

Harmy, a guy who like Dev was more often than not just too nice to be a really aggressive fast bowler but get him riled and he would occasionally blow teams away with searing pace and bounce.

Hoggy, who was utterly deadly against left handers with his late swing

Fred, who was a man on a mission in 2005 and in order to beat England you had to do it over his dead body. He was simply magnificent with both bat and ball that series.

Throw in the King of Spain, who chipped in with ten wickets himself and you had a bowling attack that was really well balanced and complimented each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PistoldPete2

PistoldPete2

Posted
Posted

In order to win a test match, you need to take 20 wickets. We do really have 5 (or even 6 with Root) bowlers already in the side if you include Moeen Ali, and if 5 cannot take 20, 6 probably won't either. My argument against the current England line-up is that the seam bowling attack is just too 'samey'. Anderson is still a world-class opening bowler and Stuart Broad is still worth his place as a bowler, and, it can be argued, Ben Stokes is way ahead of where Flintoff was at the same stage in his career, but all three are barely on the medium side of fast for the most part. Of the three, only Anderson seems to have that ability to blow a side away, and he is only likely to be around for another two years at the most. Toss Mark Wood in and you have four right-arm medium quicks - there is very little variation although Wood and Stokes can crank it up to 90+ on occasion.

Oh for a left-arm quick (even an Alan Mullally from 15-20 years ago), and oh for a decent spin bowler.

The great (for 2 years) Vaughan-led side had four totally different seam bowlers:

Simon Jones, who was getting on for the best exponent of reverse swing in world cricket at the time, and he did it at nearly 90 MPH

Harmy, a guy who like Dev was more often than not just too nice to be a really aggressive fast bowler but get him riled and he would occasionally blow teams away with searing pace and bounce.

Hoggy, who was utterly deadly against left handers with his late swing

Fred, who was a man on a mission in 2005 and in order to beat England you had to do it over his dead body. He was simply magnificent with both bat and ball that series.

Throw in the King of Spain, who chipped in with ten wickets himself and you had a bowling attack that was really well balanced and complimented each other.

Well pretty much the same attack from 2005 got battered in the 2006/07 tour of oz. I agree Anderson and broad are still quality but we need to give them more of a rest. What I think we miss more than anything is Swann... With him at his best we could bowl teams out in the fourth innings. Without decent spinners we won't do that often. I wouldn't rule out our top order now that Cook has found his form again. Give the yorkshire lads a chance, ballance had a bad test match but he will be back. Bells form is worrying tho. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eddie

eddie

Posted
Posted

Well pretty much the same attack from 2005 got battered in the 2006/07 tour of oz. I agree Anderson and broad are still quality but we need to give them more of a rest. What I think we miss more than anything is Swann... With him at his best we could bowl teams out in the fourth innings. Without decent spinners we won't do that often. I wouldn't rule out our top order now that Cook has found his form again. Give the yorkshire lads a chance, ballance had a bad test match but he will be back. Bells form is worrying tho. 

​Fundamental reason for the walloping down under, well to be strictly accurate the four reasons, were that

a) Michael Vaughan had retired and Flintoff was a terrible replacement as captain

b) Simon Jones never made it back from injury

c) England's seam attack was massively unsuited to the drier conditions

d) Most of England's players were still drunk from 2005

 

No doubt that Swann, the only world-class 'proper' finger spinner of the last decade, is a huge loss. To be fair to Moeen Ali, he does give the ball a hell of a rip now and again, but he needs to develop the ability to bowl maidens. Maidens build pressure.

 

Totally agree about Balance, and of course Cook has now bagged two tons in successive tests. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ovis aries

Ovis aries

Posted
Posted

Will England bat too long  ? , history says they should not , no team has chased down more than 301 at Lords.

When teams have lost though it has taken at least 90 over to get them out , England now have less overs than that and New Zealand need307 as I write .

Come on Cook take a risk .

PS Cook has not scored this morning yet , what's going on . ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eddie

eddie

Posted
Posted

Will England bat too long  ? , history says they should not , no team has chased down more than 301 at Lords.

When teams have lost though it has taken at least 90 over to get them out , England now have less overs than that and New Zealand need307 as I write .

Come on Cook take a risk .

PS Cook has not scored this morning yet , what's going on . ?

​England added another 49 this morning in 11 overs - their intent to press on was there to see in the manner of the dismissals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eddie

eddie

Posted
Posted

Could Stokes be the new Flintoff ?

 

​At the moment, he is absolutely miles ahead of where Flintoff was at the same stage of their respective test careers.

After 10 test matches, Fred had scored 255 runs at 16, and taken 7 wickets at 66.

After 10 test matches, Stokes has scored 648 runs at 36, and taken 28 wickets at 40.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eddie

eddie

Posted
Posted

​Soothsayer.

​Wha impressed me today was a side of Cook I never thought existed from a captaincy perspective. I have accused him of being over-cautious and reactive, but today his captaincy was superb, and his field positioning as successful as it was unorthodox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ramblur

ramblur

Posted
Posted

​Wha impressed me today was a side of Cook I never thought existed from a captaincy perspective. I have accused him of being over-cautious and reactive, but today his captaincy was superb, and his field positioning as successful as it was unorthodox.

​I'd agree,and there seemed to be a new found vibrancy about the team.Hope Belly hits form soon- I think Balance will come good again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...