Jump to content

Test Cricket is Back


sage

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

I have to say, beyond these two - Stokes and Bairstow - I don't see a lot of runs.

I'm sure they will want 300+ lead. Will they get that much?

One of the two needs to make a decent score, if not both. The Sky % thingy has had England as the most likely winner all morning. Not convinced just yet, but Stokes and Bairstow can snatch a game away pretty rapidly.

On thing's for sure, it's going to be a belting session of test cricket after lunch. Both sides will feel they have an opportunity to make a decisive move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, sage said:

Decent innings needed from Moeen now. Needs to score some but also stay with Stokes for an hour.

An even more decent one needed from him now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

The weather forecast is pretty poor for tomorrow but at the moment Australia would only need 2 sessions of the remaining 4 and a half sessions.

Rain seems likely to intervene but all out before tea or soon after could be a bit close for comfort. I'm not sure I can see the Aussies changing their order but they could have a real go this evening and if the wheels come off fall back on blocking and waiting for the rain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, sage said:

This comes down to that silly declaration. Cost us, probably, net 50 runs. How they would be useful now.

I think that's a bit harsh.  You either buy into the new England way of playing tests or you don't.  It has been very successful thus far and I'm loving it.  You won't win every game but you won't die wondering!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, NottsRam said:

I think that's a bit harsh.  You either buy into the new England way of playing tests or you don't.  It has been very successful thus far and I'm loving it.  You won't win every game but you won't die wondering!

Wow. That is the language of a cult.

I generally like what we are doing, but it doesn't mean i agree with every decision, such as dropping Foakes again.

We gave up 6 overs of batting in good conditions with 2 batsmen well set, to bowl 4 overs in good conditions when you know it will be cloudy the next morning.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, sage said:

Wow. That is the language of a cult.

I generally like what we are doing, but it doesn't mean i agree with every decision, such as dropping Foakes again.

We gave up 6 overs of batting in good conditions with 2 batsmen well set, to bowl 4 overs in good conditions when you know it will be cloudy the next morning.

 

So it didn't come off on this occasion but has done before, personally i am enjoying the way we keep the opposition guessing all the time and mostly things are working well.  Some of the unusual field placings Stokes has employed have been brilliant.  With rain expected tomorrow for good periods of time we have certainly given the game every chance of a result one way or the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, NottsRam said:

I think that's a bit harsh.  You either buy into the new England way of playing tests or you don't.  It has been very successful thus far and I'm loving it.  You won't win every game but you won't die wondering!

Add 50 on to this lead and you’re at 322. Huge difference.

The sun was baking down, the track was doing zilch and Root was slapping it about. We gained nothing from the 4-5 overs we got at them and it was unlikely we were ever going to.

I like the positive cricket but that declaration didn’t increase Englands chances at the expense of a draw, it increased Australias chances at the expense of Englands

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NottsRam said:

So it didn't come off on this occasion but has done before, personally i am enjoying the way we keep the opposition guessing all the time and mostly things are working well.  Some of the unusual field placings Stokes has employed have been brilliant.  With rain expected tomorrow for good periods of time we have certainly given the game every chance of a result one way or the other.

If it was cloudy that evening or sunny the next day, I could see the value of it, but it was an ill-judged gamble. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, nottingram said:

Add 50 on to this lead and you’re at 322. Huge difference.

The sun was baking down, the track was doing zilch and Root was slapping it about. We gained nothing from the 4-5 overs we got at them and it was unlikely we were ever going to.

I like the positive cricket but that declaration didn’t increase Englands chances at the expense of a draw, it increased Australias chances at the expense of Englands

So you think they just did it for effect?  I think they firmly believed they would get at least one of the openers out in the evening, especially with Broad's history against Warner.  It didn't work out on this occasion but if they had been 10-2 at stumps no-one would have criticised the declaration.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NottsRam said:

So you think they just did it for effect?  I think they firmly believed they would get at least one of the openers out in the evening, especially with Broad's history against Warner.  It didn't work out on this occasion but if they had been 10-2 at stumps no-one would have criticised the declaration.  

No I just think it was a bad decision. The pitch wasn’t doing anything and Root was batting with a cigar in his mouth. 

If Broad and Robinson had been in, fine. But the world’s best batsman was out there and they brought him in.

The question is were 4-5 more overs bowling, more valuable than 50 more runs? I can’t think of a single reason it would be. The win predictor has Australia at 56%, what do you think that number would be if they were chasing 330 now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, nottingram said:

No I just think it was a bad decision. The pitch wasn’t doing anything and Root was batting with a cigar in his mouth. 

If Broad and Robinson had been in, fine. But the world’s best batsman was out there and they brought him in.

The question is were 4-5 more overs bowling, more valuable than 50 more runs? I can’t think of a single reason it would be. The win predictor has Australia at 56%, what do you think that number would be if they were chasing 330 now!

I understand where you're coming from, i really do.  But who knows what the match position would be if we had not declared?  Its not a given that we would be 330 ahead, so many factors to consider.  There will be some bad decisions made, especially with England hell bent on making a result out of every game but i am enjoying the unpredicatability of it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...