• 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:
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?
Click to expand...
Very selective stats. Like I said, home ashes series 2-2 compared to a 3-1/2-2 possibility. Comparing India and Pakistan away is foolish at best
 

TravellingMackem said:
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.
Click to expand...
Dropped catches and crucial missed stumping and Mark Wood been injured cost us in the first test imo.

And obviously the rain last test, could easily have won 3 tests before this one!

Tbf to you there are points the batting could have been toned down a bit.

But all the evidence and results proves imo this approach suits this team and while we continue to have a great win percentage more than happy to take the rough with the smooth !
TravellingMackem said:
Very selective stats. Like I said, home ashes series 2-2 compared to a 3-1/2-2 possibility. Comparing India and Pakistan away is foolish at best
Click to expand...
It’s simply the stats from when this new regime took over as opposed to stats before it did!

Not selective about it just the facts as they have happened
 
Last edited:
Voice of fair play said:
Dropped catches and crucial missed stumping and Mark Wood been injured cost us in the first test imo.

And obviously the rain last test, could easily have won 3 tests before this one!

Tbf to you there are points the batting could have been toned down a bit.

But all the evidence and results proves imo this approach suits this team and while we continue to have a great win percentage more than happy to take the rough with the smooth !
Click to expand...
The dropped catches didn’t help, but the batting second innings was pretty poor in their main and we should have made a lot more runs and no chance they should have been able to chase. First test is especially crucial in England where you are highly likely to lose a test to rain (see old Trafford) so you are usually looking at winning 3-1 here more than 3-2.

I’m not disagreeing that it suits the team, it obviously does, but at times we need to tone it down a bit and actually leave the ball.

Duckett has only left 9 balls all series - all of which came in his best innings of the series. It’s just too reckless and has ultimately cost us the series
 
That’s not that bad a session relative to the reaction on here. You never really know what a good score is until both teams have batted but if England can get to low 300s I think they will be very much in this game with them batting last.
 
Voice of fair play said:
Dropped catches and crucial missed stumping and Mark Wood been injured cost us in the first test imo.

And obviously the rain last test, could easily have won 3 tests before this one!

Tbf to you there are points the batting could have been toned down a bit.

But all the evidence and results proves imo this approach suits this team and while we continue to have a great win percentage more than happy to take the rough with the smooth !

It’s simply the stats from when this new regime took over as opposed to stats before it did!

Not selective about it just the facts as they have happened
Click to expand...
Of course it’s selective. New manager bounce and all that will have played a part too, and comparing the dying embers of roots reign to the fresh start of stokes isn’t representative, especially when you factor in the opposition difference which is significant. Root had Aussies and India away, stokes has had Pakistan away and a fairly easy home summer.

You’ve got to factor all of that in too, isn’t near as simple as citing that stat to “prove everything”. Root also had a great start I believe to his time as captain, which may be a more relevant comparison
rentaghost said:
That’s not that bad a session relative to the reaction on here. You never really know what a good score is until both teams have batted but if England can get to low 300s I think they will be very much in this game with them batting last.
Click to expand...
If the Aussies could catch we’d be 5 or 6 down mind. We’ve definitely had luck on our side and it could have been worse. That said, the current score is reasonable
 
TravellingMackem said:
Of course it’s selective. New manager bounce and all that will have played a part too, and comparing the dying embers of roots reign to the fresh start of stokes isn’t representative, especially when you factor in the opposition difference which is significant. Root had Aussies and India away, stokes has had Pakistan away and a fairly easy home summer.

You’ve got to factor all of that in too, isn’t near as simple as citing that stat to “prove everything”. Root also had a great start I believe to his time as captain, which may be a more relevant comparison

If the Aussies could catch we’d be 5 or 6 down mind. We’ve definitely had luck on our side and it could have been worse. That said, the current score is reasonable
Click to expand...
Yep no arguments there catching wise. In the early games our catching let us down and now it’s them. I think the Bairstow incident has effected Carey
 
TravellingMackem said:
The dropped catches didn’t help, but the batting second innings was pretty poor in their main and we should have made a lot more runs and no chance they should have been able to chase. First test is especially crucial in England where you are highly likely to lose a test to rain (see old Trafford) so you are usually looking at winning 3-1 here more than 3-2.

I’m not disagreeing that it suits the team, it obviously does, but at times we need to tone it down a bit and actually leave the ball.

Duckett has only left 9 balls all series - all of which came in his best innings of the series. It’s just too reckless and has ultimately cost us the series
Click to expand...
Personally I think you want everything perfect and cricket doesn’t work that way.

There is no guarantee been less attacking would have scored more runs as previous England sides have proved.

Again what would we rather have Duckett only leaving 9 balls or Sibley leaving 99 balls.

If Duckett ultimately scores more runs than Sibley.

This is the bigger picture I am trying to get across.

Yes this team takes more risks and yes this team approach is a high risk strategy.

And with that you have more chance of losing games, which will happen along the way, but you also have a hell of a lot more chance of winning games, especially if rain is about, even last test with the rain we could afforded a full day off for rain and still won, it’s very rare even in this country to lose nearly two full days for rain.

Meaning this team and this approach will always give a higher percentage to win games as draw taking out the equation most times

And while this team is winning more than they losing which they are easily are the approach is more than justified imo.
 
Last edited:
rentaghost said:
That’s not that bad a session relative to the reaction on here. You never really know what a good score is until both teams have batted but if England can get to low 300s I think they will be very much in this game with them batting last.
Click to expand...
300 gives you a score, especially if it ends up being a 4 day game, keeps England in the test till the 3rd day at least
 
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...
McGrath just been in saying how he thinks Brook is top drawer and things he will be superb in Australia. I’m not really sure what you are after. He’s averaging 70, his knock under intense pressure at Headingley was superb. He’s still learning. He’s a shot player, he takes risks and sometimes he will get it wrong. There isn’t a player in the world that doesn’t.
 
rentaghost said:
McGrath just been in saying how he thinks Brook is top drawer and things he will be superb in Australia. I’m not really sure what you are after. He’s averaging 70, his knock under intense pressure at Headingley was superb. He’s still learning. He’s a shot player, he takes risks and sometimes he will get it wrong. There isn’t a player in the world that doesn’t.
Click to expand...
What gets me mind about this poster is he only seems to arrive and post negative comments when we granted do play some risky shots.

Very rarely see him praising our team or method even when we winning and playing brilliant cricket
 
rentaghost said:
McGrath just been in saying how he thinks Brook is top drawer and things he will be superb in Australia. I’m not really sure what you are after. He’s averaging 70, his knock under intense pressure at Headingley was superb. He’s still learning. He’s a shot player, he takes risks and sometimes he will get it wrong. There isn’t a player in the world that doesn’t.
Click to expand...
I agree he will come good, but he’s a little way off at the minute. Just todays knock he could have been out 4 times. Needs to be more sensible in England and he’d be a massive improved player.
Voice of fair play said:
Personally I think you want everything perfect and cricket doesn’t work that way.

There is no guarantee been less attacking would have scored more runs as previous England sides have proved.

Again what would we rather have Duckett only leaving 9 balls or Sibley leaving 99 balls.

If Duckett ultimately scores more runs than Sibley.

This is the bigger picture I am trying to get across.

Yes this team takes more risks and yes this team approach is a high risk strategy.

And with that you have more chance of losing games, which will happen along the way, but you also have a hell of a lot more chance of winning games, especially if rain is about, even last test with the rain we could afforded a full day off for rain and still won, it’s very rare even in this country to lose nearly two full days for rain.

Meaning this team and this approach will always give a higher percentage to win games as draw taking out the equation most times

And while this team is winning more than they losing which they are easily are the approach is more than justified imo.
Click to expand...
You aren’t wrong, just want to see the approach change relative to the situation more than it is. I’ve got nothing against playing this way on pitches like old Trafford where it isn’t moving, then yes go for it and we did exceptionally well last week. But we’ve got to reign it in at the right times - and it doesn’t have to be all innings - if you wait 20-30 overs it becomes easier and does less, if you get in you’ll find it easier to play shots. Just about giving themselves the best chance they can imo which they aren’t always doing
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top