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

Australia v England, 2nd Test, 4th December 0400

Binxy said:
So theoretically he could bat 10 times and get 7 ducks but that's OK.

What a f***ing attitude to have.🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
I suppose the argument is, that he could play 3 test winning innings, then fail the rest of the series and his average would be ok
The question is - do you want an opener who gets 35 every innings but never goes on, or do you want someone who can fire 150 before lunch to set you up, but then do fuck all the rest of the series?

Ollie Pope is the current example of scenario 2 (in so much as he usually gets a good score at the start of the summer then tails off....)



Jasper said:
What do we reckon, Khawaja dropped (injured)? Head to open?
Click to expand...
Hope not, he looks like a walking wicket.
 

VenisonsMullet said:
I suppose the argument is, that he could play 3 test winning innings, then fail the rest of the series and his average would be ok
The question is - do you want an opener who gets 35 every innings but never goes on, or do you want someone who can fire 150 before lunch to set you up, but then do fuck all the rest of the series?

Ollie Pope is the current example of scenario 2 (in so much as he usually gets a good score at the start of the summer then tails off....)




Hope not, he looks like a walking wicket.
Click to expand...
3 Big scores and 7 failures with a 35 average

Or

A few 50s with a 100 chucked in and a 35 average

2nd option every time as there's no guarantee the big scores would mean a victory.
 
Parkside said:
Individuals are different. It's a forum with widely different opinions. People get upset at supposedly elite cricketers refusing to seek ways to improve their performance.They don't see it as OTT or being over emotional.
They're fully entitled to an opposing viewpoint without being demeaned for it.
Click to expand...
Or they feel their approach is better (i mean its not as if they dont practice). Some argue, myself included, they should play a pink ball practice game. Others have said the conditions etc won't be the same so pointless. The whole, they don't care, only want to play golf, are absolutely shite, a disgrace, never has a set of players been hated more patter is very OTT.

Presume Australia are going to town on their players for what was, a couple of players except, an utterly abysmal performance (certainly as bad as ours, remembering they scored the lowest of all knocks as well).
VenisonsMullet said:
I suppose the argument is, that he could play 3 test winning innings, then fail the rest of the series and his average would be ok
The question is - do you want an opener who gets 35 every innings but never goes on, or do you want someone who can fire 150 before lunch to set you up, but then do fuck all the rest of the series?
Click to expand...
That's exactly how they look at it. I'd want the latter tbh (the latter is three game winning knocks and 7 fails) if choosing between the two. Mind, it doesnt look like he will deliver. Hopefully he does.
 
Last edited:
Binxy said:
3 Big scores and 7 failures with a 35 average

Or

A few 50s with a 100 chucked in and a 35 average

2nd option every time as there's no guarantee the big scores would mean a victory.
Click to expand...

You take the consistent one over the boom or bust option, especially for your opener.
 
dangermows said:
Or they feel their approach is better (i mean its not as if they dont practice). Some argue, myself included, they should play a pink ball practice game. Others have said the conditions etc won't be the same so pointless. The whole, they don't care, only want to play golf, are absolutely shite, a disgrace, never has a set of players been hated more patter is very OTT.
Click to expand...
At face value, the criticism in that last sentence is OTT but equally the fact that they refuse to amend and adapt their approach hardly indicates that they're wholly focused on improving. Nor was the fact that not semblance of an apology to the thousands of traveling supporters was forthcoming but we'll continue as same message offered going to endear them to those supporters. Not surprising that a degree of venom is building which leads to criticism which is perceived as OTT.
They are coming over as an arrogant bunch.
 
Parkside said:
At face value, the criticism in that last sentence is OTT but equally the fact that they refuse to amend and adapt their approach hardly indicates that they're wholly focused on improving.
Click to expand...
Or it suggests, as @dangermows said, merely that they feel their approach is better. In that case it’s not arrogant to refuse to change to a worse approach, it’s sensible.

So there’s a huge amount of entitlement in the presumption that they are “refusing” to change their approach. The refusal to admit just possibly you might be wrong in your assessment of what the best way to prepare for a test match is. Or that even if you are right and they are wrong, they might not still be acting in good faith. That’s where the reactions are OTT.
 
Last edited:
Parkside said:
At face value, the criticism in that last sentence is OTT but equally the fact that they refuse to amend and adapt their approach hardly indicates that they're wholly focused on improving. Nor was the fact that not semblance of an apology to the thousands of traveling supporters was forthcoming but we'll continue as same message offered going to endear them to those supporters. Not surprising that a degree of venom is building which leads to criticism which is perceived as OTT.
They are coming over as an arrogant bunch.
Click to expand...
They're not going to apologise if they think that approach gives them the best chance of winning though are they!?

Was it Atherton who said it was more poor execution than it was the approach?
 
Fleagle said:
Or it suggests, as @dangermows said, merely that they feel their approach is better. In that case it’s not arrogant to refuse to change to a worse approach, it’s sensible.

So there’s a huge amount of entitlement in the presumption that they are “refusing” to change their approach. The refusal to admit just possibly you might be wrong in your assessment of what the best way to prepare for a test match is. Or that even if you are right and they are wrong, they might not still be acting in good faith. That’s where the reactions are OTT.
Click to expand...
dangermows said:
They're not going to apologise if they think that approach gives them the best chance of winning though are they!?

Was it Atherton who said it was more poor execution than it was the approach?
Click to expand...
There have been many occasions when the all out bazball approach has resulted in abject failure. I'm arguing that a team should always look to amend and improve. Why should that suggestion be labelled arrogant entitlement@Fleagle? Is the failure to amend blind faith or arrogance?
 
Last edited:
Parkside said:
There have been many occasions when the all out bazball approach has resulted in abject failure. I'm arguing that a team should always look to amend and improve. Why should that suggestion be labelled arrogant entitlement@Fleagle? Is the failure to amend blind faith or arrogance?
Click to expand...
They are arguing the area for improvement is in the execution rather than the approach. Of the first test they felt:

1. Batsmen who looked to occupy the crease struggled most and point to Heads alternative approach as the one that got results. This ties in with Point 2.

2. Our batsmen failed to execute/commit to the shots as well as they could. Suggest the approach itself isn't something they have issue with as they feel that approach offers a better chance of success with our batsmen.

3. They felt the chase they gave Australia was enough. And without Heads blast about they could've gone through them if they bowled like they did in the previous innings.

You can disagree. That's fine. It's about opinions. But it's an opinion. So suggesting they are arrogant to have a different opinion to you could be seen as being arrogant.

Ps. I love a good leave :cool:
 
Last edited:
dangermows said:
You can disagree. That's fine. It's about opinions. But it's an opinion. So suggesting they are arrogant to have a different opinion to you could be seen as being arrogant.

Ps. I love a good leave :cool:
Click to expand...
Wholly agree with that sentiment.
Belittling the critic is certainly arrogant.Posters should always have the right to express concerns without censure.
 
Hetty said:
Everyone knows he's injury prone to take on a tour and not surprised

They went with Chris Woakes all the time to lead up for this Ashes and didn't even pick him

They need to give other bowlers a chance and stick with them
Click to expand...

Wood is still our best (and fastest) bowler in Australian conditions. I think everyone knows he’s probably done after this series but you can’t fault the effort he’s put in over the years despite all the injuries and the impact he has made on series when he has been available
 
Liverpool Beachball said:
Wood is still our best (and fastest) bowler in Australian conditions. I think everyone knows he’s probably done after this series but you can’t fault the effort he’s put in over the years despite all the injuries and the impact he has made on series when he has been available
Click to expand...
Yeah can't fault him, but he's missed a vast amount of this year and then they expect him to run in hard and the knee will take it's toll again. Not sure how many tests they expected him to play him and how many overs and spells
 
Liverpool Beachball said:
Wood is still our best (and fastest) bowler in Australian conditions. I think everyone knows he’s probably done after this series but you can’t fault the effort he’s put in over the years despite all the injuries and the impact he has made on series when he has been available
Click to expand...
That was undoubtedly true at his best. It’s debatable it’s been true this year even when he was fit to play. He took 0-44 at Perth. Only one England bowler returned worse figures and only the first of his four spells looked genuinely threatening. It was a tour too far anyway for me.
 
mackembhoy said:
Well if we're shit again at least the poor will get plenty of free hot dogs etc

#moralvictory

You must be logged on to see media items
Click to expand...

I wonder how short the income was for stadium operator compared to their pre-day 1 forecasts? More than likely still made a handsome amount but 50% down more or less?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top