• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Any changes for the 5th Test


Fleagle said:
Dead rubber is a tennis term from the now obsolete Davis cup format, for matches that were played under the different rules to the live rubber matches and that no one cared about at all. It has crept fairy fairly recently into cricket. I don’t think it’s appropriate to the tradition of test cricket.

The Sydney test will be played to exactly the same rules and count in exactly the same way. as the other four. It will be included when it comes to the cumulative numbers in England Australia win loss stats. Without an asterisk. It will count exactly the same as the other four when it comes to the individual batting and bowling averages. It will count exactly the same as the other four when they print the series results score line in the history books. It will count exactly the same as the other four, for those that care about such things, when it comes to having 12 WTC points at stake.

It is obviously true that once a series winner is settled there is a tendency by the winning side to take the foot off the gas. Although one of the things that marks the recent Australians is that they still win. But it has never been true that the test matches that happen after a series is settled have any formal reduced value. I doubt if even the most nerdy former player could tell you how many of their runs or wickets were achieved in matches where a series was alive and how many weren’t. A test match is a test match is a test match. And a test match isn’t a rubber.
Click to expand...
the generally accepted dictionary definition is
Dead rubber is a term used in sporting parlance to describe a match in a series where the series result has already been decided by earlier matches. The dead rubber match therefore has no effect on the winner and loser of the series, other than the total number of matches won and lost. The term is use in... international cricket...
They can then serve a useful purpose by giving a useful introduction to less experienced players in what is usually a less intense atmosphere.
Ideal opportunity to give an up and coming spinner and opener experience -pity we sent such players back home a few weeks ago. The chance of such an opportunity should have been foreseen.
 
Fleagle said:
Dead rubber is a tennis term from the now obsolete Davis cup format, for matches that were played under the different rules to the live rubber matches and that no one cared about at all. It has crept fairy fairly recently into cricket. I don’t think it’s appropriate to the tradition of test cricket.

The Sydney test will be played to exactly the same rules and count in exactly the same way. as the other four. It will be included when it comes to the cumulative numbers in England Australia win loss stats. Without an asterisk. It will count exactly the same as the other four when it comes to the individual batting and bowling averages. It will count exactly the same as the other four when they print the series results score line in the history books. It will count exactly the same as the other four, for those that care about such things, when it comes to having 12 WTC points at stake.

It is obviously true that once a series winner is settled there is a tendency by the winning side to take the foot off the gas. Although one of the things that marks the recent Australians is that they still win. But it has never been true that the test matches that happen after a series is settled have any formal reduced value. I doubt if even the most nerdy former player could tell you how many of their runs or wickets were achieved in matches where a series was alive and how many weren’t. A test match is a test match is a test match. And a test match isn’t a rubber.
Click to expand...
Alwats thought it was one of those used condoms you'd find floating in Seaham harbour back in the day.
 
Fleagle said:
Dead rubber is a tennis term from the now obsolete Davis cup format, for matches that were played under the different rules to the live rubber matches and that no one cared about at all. It has crept fairy fairly recently into cricket. I don’t think it’s appropriate to the tradition of test cricket.

The Sydney test will be played to exactly the same rules and count in exactly the same way. as the other four. It will be included when it comes to the cumulative numbers in England Australia win loss stats. Without an asterisk. It will count exactly the same as the other four when it comes to the individual batting and bowling averages. It will count exactly the same as the other four when they print the series results score line in the history books. It will count exactly the same as the other four, for those that care about such things, when it comes to having 12 WTC points at stake.

It is obviously true that once a series winner is settled there is a tendency by the winning side to take the foot off the gas. Although one of the things that marks the recent Australians is that they still win. But it has never been true that the test matches that happen after a series is settled have any formal reduced value. I doubt if even the most nerdy former player could tell you how many of their runs or wickets were achieved in matches where a series was alive and how many weren’t. A test match is a test match is a test match. And a test match isn’t a rubber.
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
Something like this:

Crawley
Duckett
Bethell
Root
Brook
Stokes (c)
Smith (+)
Jacks
Carse
Potts
Tongue

They should really pick Shoaib at Sydney, or his position is untenable, but I don't think they will.
 
smoker said:
Something like this:

Crawley
Duckett
Bethell
Root
Brook
Stokes (c)
Smith (+)
Jacks
Carse
Potts
Tongue

They should really pick Shoaib at Sydney, or his position is untenable, but I don't think they will.
Click to expand...

Yep. The faith put in Bashir for this series and the removal of Leach altogether in the build up will appear utterly absurd if he doesn’t play a single test.

I don’t see how he can though. Atkinson’s injury probably ended any chance. The fact he offers something with the bat probably meant Jacks could have been replaced with Bashir but Potts isn’t going to offer that.
 
smoker said:
Something like this:

Crawley
Duckett
Bethell
Root
Brook
Stokes (c)
Smith (+)
Jacks
Carse
Potts
Tongue

They should really pick Shoaib at Sydney, or his position is untenable, but I don't think they will.
Click to expand...
Think they must have to look elsewhere next summer after how he's been death with. He's got bags of ability and needs to go and develop, but one thing he did have was the backing of the England set up.. obviously not. The treatment of Somerset over those pitches wouldn't have helped him either.
 
Sea to Shining Sea said:
Yep. The faith put in Bashir for this series and the removal of Leach altogether in the build up will appear utterly absurd if he doesn’t play a single test.

I don’t see how he can though. Atkinson’s injury probably ended any chance. The fact he offers something with the bat probably meant Jacks could have been replaced with Bashir but Potts isn’t going to offer that.
Click to expand...
Matty is a decent batsman, just not shown it yet for England.

Shoaib's not a bad bowler, but his fielding and batting are crap, and that makes him a luxury pick outside the sub-continent. Leach is the same, although he does have a good defensive game which makes him useful as a nightwatchman.

I feel they should really have persevered with Tom Hartley but they presumably wanted a right armer.
 
smoker said:
Matty is a decent batsman, just not shown it yet for England.

Shoaib's not a bad bowler, but his fielding and batting are crap, and that makes him a luxury pick outside the sub-continent. Leach is the same, although he does have a good defensive game which makes him useful as a nightwatchman.

I feel they should really have persevered with Tom Hartley but they presumably wanted a right armer.
Click to expand...
His last four first class innings have been a golden duck, 34no, 0, 31, so he's due a duck and a 30 if he plays, which is about what Atkinson offers!
 
Last edited:
hank evans said:
Bring Jamie Overton in, bowling 92mph this morning.

Sure his last test was about 80mph
Click to expand...
That’s been the difference between the quick bowlers in this series. England’s can bowl a brief full pace spell before needing a day off (or in Wood’s case a few months). Australia’s come back and do it again. We don’t need another like that. It’s already failed.
 
Fleagle said:
That’s been the difference between the quick bowlers in this series. England’s can bowl a brief full pace spell before needing a day off (or in Wood’s case a few months). Australia’s come back and do it again. We don’t need another like that. It’s already failed.
Click to expand...
Yeah I doubt he’s bowling 92mph rib ticklers in the 3rd session at 260/4

I doubt the Aussies would if theyd been kept in thr field for more than 2.hours without putting their feet up for most of the series
 
Fleagle said:
That’s been the difference between the quick bowlers in this series. England’s can bowl a brief full pace spell before needing a day off (or in Wood’s case a few months). Australia’s come back and do it again. We don’t need another like that. It’s already failed.
Click to expand...
Aussie frontline pace. Bowlers have missed most of the series. Doggett and Boland are trundlers by comparison. Even they proved injury prone in English conditions.Certainly think climate has an effect on fast bowlers' fitness.
 
Fleagle said:
That’s been the difference between the quick bowlers in this series. England’s can bowl a brief full pace spell before needing a day off (or in Wood’s case a few months). Australia’s come back and do it again. We don’t need another like that. It’s already failed.
Click to expand...
Cos they have non-express bowlers like Neser and Doggett to give Starc a break and keep him fresh. We just rotated one knackered fast bowler for another.

The arrogance and naivety to think you could just select four express bowlers and blow Australia away on their home turf.
 
smoker said:
Cos they have non-express bowlers like Neser and Doggett to give Starc a break and keep him fresh. We just rotated one knackered fast bowler for another.

The arrogance and naivety to think you could just select four express bowlers and blow Australia away on their home turf.
Click to expand...
The old fashioned term was stock bowler. Totally agree about the arrogance thing like, Bolland has been fantastic and he's very much fast-medium and right under their noses and chose to ignore his style of bowling. Using Brydon like that instead of a strike bowler was a mistake we have mentioned before ;)
 
hank evans said:
Yeah I doubt he’s bowling 92mph rib ticklers in the 3rd session at 260/4

I doubt the Aussies would if theyd been kept in thr field for more than 2.hours without putting their feet up for most of the series
Click to expand...
I can’t argue that wouldn’t help. But on the flip side there weren’t that many long Aussie innings either to wear them out in the first place. There was some stat after the end of the third test (so including the one that went five days) that suggested it was the fewest overs the frontline English bowlers have bowled in years after three tests of an Ashes tour.

Certainly in the one obvious like for like comparison, the contrast between Starc’s bowling in our second innings at Perth, after a similarly brief Aussie batting innings when they conceded the first innings lead, and our pacers’ bowling in their second innings, couldn’t be more marked.
 
Olly Stone for a shout to be around the test setup this year as the pace option to cover Archer (Provide either can stay fit).

Wonder if they will go back and look at Peddington (SP)
Khwaja retiring after this test, expected tbf, pretty decent career he's ended up with.
88 tests at around 45 average
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top