• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

5th test the oval


Voice of fair play said:
Who are better?

Should we go back to Hameed and Sibley opening the batting?

The players you mentioned above who in this country is better?

Easy to pick holes harder to suggest alternatives
Click to expand...
Better than Crawley? Considering his championship average is 28, I’d suggest just about every opener in the championship first division on that evidence. Sorry but the lads had enough chances, time to call stumps and move on.

Foakes should be in the side, Bairstow at 3 and a new opener in as a minimum.

It isn’t just about ability, it’s about their inability to think for themselves. Comms are even suggesting similar - they asked if batsmen even think or if it’s just from the dressing room now. You see a pitch like today and you cannot bat at 6 an over and you cannot drive everything. Brook has been dropped once and edged twice already driving, yet is still continuing to drive, for instance. Absolutely brain dead cricket and he’ll be gone before lunch no doubt.

Funnily enough the one time Crawley did actually think in the last year and bat properly he made 150 in the last game. Then straight back to driving a moving ball and caught in the slips within an hour.
 
TravellingMackem said:
Is the only option to play everything or play nothing? Is there no compromise possible depending on the pitch? No adaptation? Do we have to accept Sunderland being in the championship forever because 4 years ago we were in league one and therefore should be grateful?


Aussies were there to beat this series and we’ve fucked it up monumentally
Click to expand...
If Sunderland had been shit for years, losing loads of games, than got a new manager who got us to playing exciting football and winning loads of games which is more less what has happened with the England test side, I would be over the moon.

And if we lost a couple of close games against Newcastle would not want us to change the approach that had us both winning games and entertaining people.

Our win percentage since this new regime and new approach took over destroys our win percentage before them.

That the bottom line for me
 
Ghfd said:
For the life of me , I don’t understand captains that leave a gap to third man , through the slips and it happens numerous times and then they don’t fill it and four runs are the result

all captains do this and I can remember old bob willis having a rant about this many a time

so they have a fielder in the covers for a good shot that saves 1 but none for a bad shot that scores four

shot brook

ton up
Click to expand...
I hate that as well.

Never mind it being a 'moral victory' for the bowler. The batsman has played a false shot and is effectively rewarded for it.

Save the boundary so that he only gets a single for it then gets to stew on it at the non-strikers end.
 
Voice of fair play said:
Well exactly when they played exactly the same way last week, posters saying it was measured and not reckless.

Yet this test and others playing exactly the same way we reckless and getting out to shit shots!

I honestly think some posters want us to score quick runs and win games by not playing any shots!

Doesn’t work that way
Click to expand...
There is an element that struggle with change... Its the same on PF with 'the model' not sure why...they can't all be inbred yackers
 
Just watching Brook here, it appears that his bat turns a lot on the shot . It looks like sometimes his grip loosens and that turns the bat slightly and he squirts the ball out square , both sides of the wicket

I wonder if his gloves don’t have enough grip on them ?

just an observation and probably totally wrong but keep an eye out for it
 
Voice of fair play said:
If Sunderland had been shit for years, losing loads of games, than got a new manager who got us to playing exciting football and winning loads of games which is more less what has happened with the England test side, I would be over the moon.

And if we lost a couple of close games against Newcastle would not want us to change the approach that had us both winning games and entertaining people.

Our win percentage since this new regime and new approach took over destroys our win percentage before them.

That the bottom line for me
Click to expand...
Right so because a team was previously shit gives them carte Blanche to do whatever they want and play recklessly cos it was shit before anyway?
 
TravellingMackem said:
Better than Crawley? Considering his championship average is 28, I’d suggest just about every opener in the championship first division on that evidence. Sorry but the lads had enough chances, time to call stumps and move on.

Foakes should be in the side, Bairstow at 3 and a new opener in as a minimum.

It isn’t just about ability, it’s about their inability to think for themselves. Comms are even suggesting similar - they asked if batsmen even think or if it’s just from the dressing room now. You see a pitch like today and you cannot bat at 6 an over and you cannot drive everything. Brook has been dropped once and edged twice already driving, yet is still continuing to drive, for instance. Absolutely brain dead cricket and he’ll be gone before lunch no doubt.

Funnily enough the one time Crawley did actually think in the last year and bat properly he made 150 in the last game. Then straight back to driving a moving ball and caught in the slips within an hour.
Click to expand...
I get what you saying to a point of course I do.

As cricket (all cricket) is about adapting accordingly to game situation and conditions.

And of course at teams including this one could do that better and at times this series occasions this time could do that better.

But the players we have in the side are in the main undoubtably the best players to be selected.

For example even though you have a go at them,Brook and Bsirstow clearly better middle order players than anyone out there in county cricket.

And undoubtedly looking at the bigger picture would rather the England side was too attacking that too defensive as results have proved without a shadow of a doubt over this last 18 months is the better way to go,

Previously we were far too defensive minded and risk averse and were losing tests 1 win in 17 as opposed to now something like 13 in 15.

The stats prove this approach better!
 
That's a proper big high old fashioned knee-in-the-air hook. Probably my favourite shot, and so hard to nail it like that.
 
Last edited:
TravellingMackem said:
Right so because a team was previously shit gives them carte Blanche to do whatever they want and play recklessly cos it was shit before anyway?
Click to expand...
If the results back it up which they have done?

If they were losing more than winning your point what hold more.

But it’s the opposite

What’s better winning 13 out of 15 tests playing too attacking?

Or winning 1 in 17 playing too defensive?
 
Last edited:
DonaldDownTheWing said:
Brooooky.

The pitch is so that they’re going to get us out eventually, so we’re at least getting some decent runs on the board.
Click to expand...
300 min needed to be in the game, 350 is advantage England imo
Taken from Zaltzman
Of all spells of four overs or more in England since 2006, Cummins' spell saw 66% false shots played against him. That is the highest of any bowling spell in that time.
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
I get what you saying to a point of course I do.

As cricket (all cricket) is about adapting accordingly to game situation and conditions.

And of course at teams including this one could do that better and at times this series occasions this time could do that better.

But the players we have in the side are in the main undoubtably the best players to be selected.

For example even though you have a go at them,Brook and Bsirstow clearly better middle order players than anyone out there in county cricket.

And undoubtedly looking at the bigger picture would rather the England side was too attacking that too defensive as results have proved without a shadow of a doubt over this last 18 months is the better way to go,

Previously we were far too defensive minded and risk averse and were losing tests 1 win in 17 as opposed to now something like 13 in 15.

The stats prove this approach better!
Click to expand...
Funny cos the last ashes series was 2-2, which is still the best we can hope for here. There’s one stat that disagrees with your theory.

I’m not saying it isn’t better than the tripe root served up, but that doesn’t give total freedom to be reckless. This team should have won this series. No two ways about it. And haven’t largely because of poor batting at points in the first two games, as well as other factors obviously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top