Jump to content

Test Cricket is Back


sage

Recommended Posts

I think if it wasn't against the Aussies I'd be able to enjoy the spectacle this test match was, a little more than I currently am anyway! Fair play to Cummins and Lyon, hung on in there. Superb test match all round. 

Of course everyone will look to the declaration but it won't be the last one to raise a few eyebrows I'm sure. I'm not fully on board with it but Stokes sticking to his principles is refreshing for the sport, especially in conventional test match cricket. It certainly beats watching Dom Sibley and Rory Burns block the life out of the game. 

Tough gig for us to turn it around now, especially with the Lords test next up where we've won 2 tests since 1934 vs this lot, albeit two in the past two decades. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Anag Ram said:

Let’s not knock attacking, exciting captaincy.

It’s taken us to a place where we can compete with the best. Remember Australia are the best - they’re world champions.

Without the declaration this would have been a bore draw.

I agree but it won't go down well on here. I am more concerned with the wicketkeeper situation than the declaration. Three relatively easy missed dismissals but people will focus on the declaration. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not that bothered about Johnny B (yet), it's the ineffectiveness these pitches are having/potentially going to have on our all-time leading wicket taker. Leading wicket taker in tests at Lords too but is there any point if there's another road awaiting us? 

Can't remember a time when a new ball wouldn't go into the hands of Anderson. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr Tibbs said:

I'm not that bothered about Johnny B (yet), it's the ineffectiveness these pitches are having/potentially going to have on our all-time leading wicket taker. Leading wicket taker in tests at Lords too but is there any point if there's another road awaiting us? 

Can't remember a time when a new ball wouldn't go into the hands of Anderson. 

Think Anderson will be replaced by Wood in the next test and Ali by Woakes. 
Foakes is unlucky but Bairstow hasn’t kept in a while and will be better next time around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Anag Ram said:

..... Bairstow hasn’t kept in a while and will be better next time around.

Absolute cobblers. How many bloody chances does he have to miss?

Bob Taylor would have took that stumping chance stood on one leg with both his eyes closed and he's 81.

Edited by Grumpy Git
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Grumpy Git said:

Absolute cobblers. How many bloody chances does he have to miss?

Bob Taylor would have took that stumping chance stood on one leg with both his eyes closed.

Yeah and Bob Taylor was a terrible batsman. Stokes wants a keeper batsman. I’m not saying that’s right or wrong but so far his hunches have been good ones.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Anag Ram said:

Yeah and Bob Taylor was a terrible batsman. Stokes wants a keeper batsman. I’m not saying that’s right or wrong but so far his hunches have been good ones.

 

Hang on, Stokes didn't even use all his batsmen in the first innings, so what difference does that make?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Anag Ram said:

Yeah and Bob Taylor was a terrible batsman. Stokes wants a keeper batsman. I’m not saying that’s right or wrong but so far his hunches have been good ones.

 

I’d open with Bairstow instead of Crawley and play Foakes who averages 32 in test cricket. Bairstow was never a test standard keeper even  before he broke his leg. Foakes lost his place because other players haven’t done their jobs properly 

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...