• 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


scotch said:
Very strange bowling choices with Anderson bowling more than Wood and Woakes combined :neutral: starting to wonder just what is going on from England today
250 is still a lot of runs, especially if this pitch goes on the 5th day. Could do with having them 200-3/4 and 250-5 as 130 runs is a lot at that point.
Click to expand...
Think Anderson decides when he bowls… don't think Ben has any say
 
Ch1982 said:
Who said they aren’t bothered about results? You got a source for it as it sounds wrong?
Click to expand...
Some players have said that. However I think what they mean is that they focus on the process and results will hopefully be a by product of that. The dont think ‘we are going to win the Ashes’ or we want to be ‘world test champions’ - they want to focus on playing an aggressive brand of cricket which plays to the strengths of the players they choose. Results are important because if they continue to lose cricket matches then no one will put up with that.
 
rentaghost said:
Some players have said that. However I think what they mean is that they focus on the process and results will hopefully be a by product of that. The dont think ‘we are going to win the Ashes’ or we want to be ‘world test champions’ - they want to focus on playing an aggressive brand of cricket which plays to the strengths of the players they choose. Results are important because if they continue to lose cricket matches then no one will put up with that.
Click to expand...
Find it difficult to accept that players are saying they aren’t bothered about results but when you put it in that context it’s more acceptable.
 
rentaghost said:
Some players have said that. However I think what they mean is that they focus on the process and results will hopefully be a by product of that. The dont think ‘we are going to win the Ashes’ or we want to be ‘world test champions’ - they want to focus on playing an aggressive brand of cricket which plays to the strengths of the players they choose. Results are important because if they continue to lose cricket matches then no one will put up with that.
Click to expand...
I think what they trying to do is take fear away, we have seen our footballers fail due to wait of expectation on them for many a year.

Creating a environment to just be natural and play your normal game can only be good
 
rentaghost said:
Some players have said that. However I think what they mean is that they focus on the process and results will hopefully be a by product of that. The dont think ‘we are going to win the Ashes’ or we want to be ‘world test champions’ - they want to focus on playing an aggressive brand of cricket which plays to the strengths of the players they choose. Results are important because if they continue to lose cricket matches then no one will put up with that.
Click to expand...
It's a pretty natural extension of a very basic tenet in sports or competitive games that you play in the moment ablnd don't think about the outcome. Not because you don't want to win, but because if you take each shot on its own merits each time that's the best way of winning.

The best batsmen always reduce an innings to just being about the ball they're facing and forget about the score, what's gone before, who's to come etc. Stokes has epitomised it in his legendary knocks.

Also Stokes has had serious MH issues and MH issues tore the previous successful England team to pieces so I think he's very focused on player safety and wellbeing.

The brand is have fun and enjoy the moment and you'll play your best cricket and be in your best condition to keep doing so. While you're winning it's hard to argue with that. If England start to lose more than they win though it will be shot to pieces. The main issue I think is that its seen as not very English, too confident and especially in cricket, not enough about respect and tradition.
 
Last edited:
Church said:
They had to find something to make it better, because most test series were really for the cricket purists and interest was eroding quickly. There needs to be a place for test cricket, but it couldn’t just rely on Ashes series to keep it going. The answer probably lies somewhere near baseball but with a bit more intelligence thrown in - just swinging at everything is not sensible, so in the last 2 matches they seem to have got it right.

And I'm not sure results matter that much when audiences are falling. Traditionally I'd be a bit annoyed at losing the Ashes, but this year it has been utterly entertaining and in reality with a bit more sense early in the season we would have won, but I'm reflecting more on the entertainment than the results.
Click to expand...

I would question Stokes pertaining to the interesting eroding. Some countries have never attracted big audiences for test cricket historically ala Windies. Stokes is just as culpable as anyone for the state of the test game. Why? It was the IPL which started the demise (he has always been happy to pick up his pay check so a bit double standards for me) where other 20/20 leagues have been created on the back of the IPL which has made the problem worse

The underlying issue is the ICC need to ensure money in the game is spread more evenly so the purported weaker nations can compete more. How can Stokes possibly make England vs Windies more appealing if the two sides are woefully mis matched from ball one?

Consider this, IMO the best spinner in world cricket, Sunil Narine, has played 6 test matches in his career but 519 20/20 matches & 172 one day games. If it were not for 20/20 Duckett, Woakes, Jimmy, Ali would not be playing in this series as players who have been lost to the short form would be playing test cricket ala Hales, Buttler and many others

The cricket at times is entertaining, sometimes foolish. If a side plays on 4 flat wickets, picks 3 x 80-85mpg merchants you wont win many games. The one test we did win, the pitch was tailor made for the aforementioned medium/quicks we had selected. One man selection panels ala Silverwood have never worked and still don't as Stokes has proved
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top