Test Cricket is Back

[Carl Sagan]

Was at Lords today. Felt it was utterly shameful, as did everyone there (Aussies included). Never seen anything like it:

Edit: Wasn't in the Long Room. Insted of booing, as that's not done there, I felt the Members should have turned their backs on the Aussies as the antipodeans came through. None of the booing on the video is mine, as I wanted the rest of the "Home of Cricket" to speak for me.

Edited July 2, 2023 by Carl Sagan

[Mr Tibbs]

A shame Stokes couldn't pull off another miracle but that first innings has done us (again). 

2-0 down, time for changes? Stoke's saying it's another close one but take his innings out and it's pretty damning. Some really poor batting.

The batting line up will stay the same with only Dan Lawrence in the squad who could replace someone. Pope and Crawley have been underwhelming but they'll get another bite at it on Thursday. Anderson is having no impact and will surely be rested. Broad to be rested too with such a quick turn around potentially. 

Probably 2 from Potts, Wood, Woakes and Ali. The latter 3 would add some batting to a pretty poor tail. 

[AndyinLiverpool]

14 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said:

Was at Lords today. Felt it was utterly shameful, as did everyone there (Aussies included). Never seen anything like it:

Edit: Wasn't in the Long Room. Insted of booing, as that's not done there, I felt the Members should have turned their backs on the Aussies as the antipodeans came through. None of the booing on the video is mine, as I wanted the rest of the "Home of Cricket" to speak for me.

It was out.

[Carl Sagan]

4 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

It was out.

The over's finished. The batter even gives the wicketkeeper the courtesy of deliberately tapping his foot in the crease to indicate he is in his ground, before going to discuss the next move with Stokes. If I'd tried to claim that was out in school cricket, I would have been put in detention for unsporting behaviour. And it would not have been given out.

[Loughborough Ram]

As most have acknowledged, it was out to the letter of the law but it could have been solved with a bit of strong umpiring in my opinion. If the umpire says that the over was complete, so he wasn't out, that is the end of the story and neither team can argue. 

[RadioactiveWaste]

31 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

Disappointing. Yes, the bazball philosophy was taken too far, yes, we were not clinical, but we could and probably should have won that game. 

As for the Bairstow dismissal, it may be within the rules, but really? History will show this generation of Aussies to be have been a tough group of highly talented players. They'll also be remembered as a group happy to employ any and all means of shenanigans to get their way and possibly the most reviled side since the bodyline series. By and large, they seem a  thoroughly disagreeable collective and I'm praying we can take them down a notch at Headingley.

Thursday will come quick enough and I suspect the crowd is going to be as hostile as any in a long time. one thing that's guaranteed is that the England lads will be smarting and fired up for revenge. This series looks gone to all intents, but the Aussies were creaking at one point and it's fair to say that one side has scope for considerable improvement. These last three tests could get very tasty indeed. 

Love your optimism.

My conclusion from the first 2 tests is that bazball only works if you're already better than the other team.

The frustration is Australia are not *much* better than England, if at all, in English conditions but we've lost two tests we need not have and I don't see the bazball aspects as having really brought us any advantage over "traditional" tactics in cricket.

[AndyinLiverpool]

4 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said:

The over's finished. The batter even gives the wicketkeeper the courtesy of deliberately tapping his foot in the crease to indicate he is in his ground, before going to discuss the next move with Stokes. If I'd tried to claim that was out in school cricket, I would have been put in detention for unsporting behaviour. And it would not have been given out.

School cricket lol. If the umpires at your school had been applying the laws, it would have been given out.

If it's unsporting, the laws should leglislate for it and not trust to the amateur principles of 19th century gentlemen who never had to make a living out of it. Stiff upper lip, old boy. 😀

[littleover ram]

Something I’d expect from Don Revie’s Leeds. Thought cricket was better than that.

Well done Australia, what sad little lives you’ve got.

[Comrade 86]

6 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Love your optimism.

My conclusion from the first 2 tests is that bazball only works if you're already better than the other team.

The frustration is Australia are not *much* better than England, if at all, in English conditions but we've lost two tests we need not have and I don't see the bazball aspects as having really brought us any advantage over "traditional" tactics in cricket.

I'm relentlessly upbeat mate. A wise man once said, 'when all hope is lost, only misery remains'.*

*Actually I just made that up, but you get my point! 😆

[Comrade 86]

10 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

School cricket lol. If the umpires at your school had been applying the laws, it would have been given out.

If it's unsporting, the laws should leglislate for it and not trust to the amateur principles of 19th century gentlemen who never had to make a living out of it. Stiff upper lip, old boy. 😀

Underplay it all you like, Andy, but as someone I thought would want to see the principles and traditions of the game upheld, surely you see that this is not a great day for cricket. It's certainly a deal more significant than you imply and not just in terms of this test and series.

I still can't actually believe they've done it, but perhaps I'm just getting old fashioned in my middle-age.

[RadioactiveWaste]

They had to that to bairstowe because they'd forgot their sandpaper.

[AndyinLiverpool]

34 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

Underplay it all you like, Andy, but as someone I thought would want to see the principles and traditions of the game upheld, surely you see that this is not a great day for cricket. It's certainly a deal more significant than you imply and not just in terms of this test and series.

I still can't actually believe they've done it, but perhaps I'm just getting old fashioned in my middle-age.

Personally I wouldn't have done it or at least I would have warned Bairstow that if he did it again, I would throw down the stumps. I don't know if the Australians did this. However, the ball wasn't dead, as evidenced by the umpire giving it out, so Bairstow going walkabout was fair game. And Bairstow knows this.

I don't know if there was any suggestion that the apeal be withdrawn. If there was, they would have been wise to withdraw it. However, with yesterday evening's sulk-a-thon by the Australians, a withdrwn appeal was never going to happen.

The principles of the game are clear - if the ball remains live, batters can be out. As for the traditions of the game, there are far too many that absolutely stink. All we can do as individuals is to live by our principles (that's why I wouldn't have broken the stumps) and if others don't, that's really for them to deal with.

[Mick Brolly]

1 hour ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

It was out.

Sport is now win at all cost much like the society we live in today no one has any respect or decency toward others 

Edited July 2, 2023 by Mick Brolly

[Comrade 86]

24 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

Personally I wouldn't have done it or at least I would have warned Bairstow that if he did it again, I would throw down the stumps. I don't know if the Australians did this. However, the ball wasn't dead, as evidenced by the umpire giving it out, so Bairstow going walkabout was fair game. And Bairstow knows this.

I don't know if there was any suggestion that the apeal be withdrawn. If there was, they would have been wise to withdraw it. However, with yesterday evening's sulk-a-thon by the Australians, a withdrwn appeal was never going to happen.

The principles of the game are clear - if the ball remains live, batters can be out. As for the traditions of the game, there are far too many that absolutely stink. All we can do as individuals is to live by our principles (that's why I wouldn't have broken the stumps) and if others don't, that's really for them to deal with.

I think the reason many are annoyed by this is that bairstow is not seeking to gain an advantage, akin to when batters steal yards at the non-striker's end so I don't think the warning point is a valid one. The Aussies made a conscious call that they were more than content to pull a snide one and that's precisely what they did.

Also, the principles of the game are not clear, not in this regard. The rules, absolutely, but the principles are the entire bone of contention. The catch that never was was an umpire's call, not something instigated, let alone planned by the English players. If that's their excuse, it's a very poor one. Alas, it's a moot point now of course and we move on, but I remain surprised that the Aussies felt the need to resort to this when they had a favourite's chance anyway. It shows how rattled they really were, I reckon.

[JakeDCFC]

2 hours ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

Disappointing. Yes, the bazball philosophy was taken too far, yes, we were not clinical, but we could and probably should have won that game. 

As for the Bairstow dismissal, it may be within the rules, but really? History will show this generation of Aussies to be have been a tough group of highly talented players. They'll also be remembered as a group happy to employ any and all means of shenanigans to get their way and possibly the most reviled side since the bodyline series. By and large, they seem a  thoroughly disagreeable collective and I'm praying we can take them down a notch at Headingley.

Thursday will come quick enough and I suspect the crowd is going to be as hostile as any in a long time. one thing that's guaranteed is that the England lads will be smarting and fired up for revenge. This series looks gone to all intents, but the Aussies were creaking at one point and it's fair to say that one side has scope for considerable improvement. These last three tests could get very tasty indeed. 

Personally I like the idea of trying to win at all costs as long as it stays within the rules, it's quite entertaining to me and I think it's something that a lot of teams should try to do instead of following the "unwritten rules" as a lot of baseball fans hear in the states refer to similar situations but in baseball instead. 

[ariotofmyown]

34 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

I think the reason many are annoyed by this is that bairstow is not seeking to gain an advantage, akin to when batters steal yards at the non-striker's end so I don't think the warning point is a valid one. The Aussies made a conscious call that they were more than content to pull a snide one and that's precisely what they did.

Also, the principles of the game are not clear, not in this regard. The rules, absolutely, but the principles are the entire bone of contention. The catch that never was was an umpire's call, not something instigated, let alone planned by the English players. If that's their excuse, it's a very poor one. Alas, it's a moot point now of course and we move on, but I remain surprised that the Aussies felt the need to resort to this when they had a favourite's chance anyway. It shows how rattled they really were, I reckon.

Chatting to my brother and he says it happens all the time in test cricket. Like it's an unwritten rule that no one would try a run out in that situation. If anything, Bairstow is trying to get the game moving quicker.

Also, if I was in the Aussie team and had been banned for blatant ball tampering, cried on tv about how bad I'd felt and talking about the mental health ramifications of what I had done...I might have piped up and said something. Smith looked a mess when he dropped that simple catch not long after.

And I saw that Starc catch today. What a joke. When would that have ever been allowed as a catch in the history of cricket? Preposterous.

[AndyinLiverpool]

On another note, we gave them 35 more extras than they gave us. Not far off the margin of victory.

We gave them 27 byes, which is more runs than Bairstow scored. So wandering out of his crease with the ball live wasn't the only thing he was guilty of.

[nottingram]

10 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

On another note, we gave them 35 more extras than they gave us. Not far off the margin of victory.

We gave them 27 byes, which is more runs than Bairstow scored. So wandering out of his crease with the ball live wasn't the only thing he was guilty of.

Today’s nonsense aside, Carey is an excellent keeper. It’s a shame we don’t bother picking ours. I think Bairstow’s keeping has probably cost getting on for 150 runs in the two tests so far. Given he averages 5 more than Foakes with the bat it hardly feels worth it.

[TuffLuff]

From what I saw and what I’ve listened to post game, I think Cummins has been short term smart (getting Bairstow out probably won them the game) but long term stupid in that they will now have two tests away from Lords where the atmosphere will be a lot more hostile than today, especially with such a short turnover. It’s hypothetical I guess but maybe going to Headingley with a bit of good grace and you make your job a little easier. It’s also worth remembering that it’s currently unlikely Lyon won’t be playing too.

I do think the Aussies are getting a bit cocky, they are a great side without doubt and arrogance isn’t a bad thing in any sport, but you have to manage it and I’m not sure they were in control of it today. For as good as Stokes batting was, the Australian bowlers had a proper wobble after the Bairstow dismissal. It showed a weakness to me that England could have exploited more if they had managed the first innings better.

England aren’t too far behind Australia here, like the first test I think England have made too many individual errors and a couple of key players need to step up before the series is gone. Don’t like singling out players at the best of times but it could be argued that Bairstow has cost them in both tests at pivotal moments. I’m loving the entertainment, I just don’t want us to be so close and feel this series is what could have been. 

[Grumpy Git]

30 minutes ago, nottingram said:

Today’s nonsense aside, Carey is an excellent keeper. It’s a shame we don’t bother picking ours. I think Bairstow’s keeping has probably cost getting on for 150 runs in the two tests so far. Given he averages 5 more than Foakes with the bat it hardly feels worth it.

Yeh, but hes Stokes' mate......